Research impacts and impact on research in biodiversity conservation: The influence of stakeholder engagement

Catherine, J; Wesselink, A. J.

doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2012.06.012

Cited by 80 publications

(67 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The complexity of biodiversity issues and the continuing loss of biodiversity calls for more inclusive and holistic methods for knowledge production at the science-policy interface (Jolibert & Wesselink 2012). The approach used in this study is a first step to enhance practitioner, decision-maker involvement in shaping research in a post-socialist county, where the legacy of participatory mechanisms are weak, and biodiversity governance is still heavily influenced by the top-down approach of the past (Kluvánková-Oravská et al 2009, Kluvánková-Oravská et a.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bridging the research-practice gap: Conservation research priorities in a Central and Eastern European country

Mihók

Kovács

Balázs

et al. 2015

Journal for Nature Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Halting biodiversity loss is a critical aim for the forthcoming decades, but is hindered by the gap between research and practice. Bridging this gap is a significant challenge in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, where, compared to Western European countries, biodiversity is higher but the research budget is lower. Approaches to address bridging this gap include participatory research prioritizing exercises. These demand-driven collaborative ranking processes have proven to be a useful tool in providing a research agenda derived from a review of critical challenges based on stakeholder engagement. However, for research agendas to be effectively realized, they are best developed and implemented at the operative level of research financing and implementation. This paper shows the process and the outcome of an exercise conducted in Hungary aiming to compile the most important conservation research questions at the country-level and outlines a set of further measures and tools required for dissemination and advocacy for the research agenda. During the process 792 research questions were collated from conservation practitioners and natural resource managers based on interviews and via an online questionnaire; the final 50 most important questions were identified by practitioners and policy makers during an expert workshop. Questions are embedded in global and EU biodiversity targets and imply a pragmatic approach with the aim of identifying research that supports policy-and decision-making regarding habitat management, landuse and regional development, while also focussing on conflicting issues. The outcome of the process includes the potential for lobbying, therefore post-publication activities and dissemination strategies are outlined as an integrated part of the exercise.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bridging the research-practice gap: Conservation research priorities in a Central and Eastern European country

Mihók

Kovács

Balázs

et al. 2015

Journal for Nature Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The need for crossdisciplinary collaboration between scientists from different disciplines and between scientists, policy-makers, and members of society is widely recognized in earth systems sustainability research (Hackmann and St. Clair, 2012;Mooney et al, 2013;Pahl-Wostl et al, 2013). The growing move toward transdisciplinary research (Thompson Klein, 2004;Spruijt et al, 2014) is well-recognized in the environmental field (Pohl, 2005;Hirsch Hadorn et al, 2006;Jolibert and Wesselink, 2012;Sutherland et al, 2012b;Bremer and Glavovic, 2013;Lawton and Rudd, 2013;Pennington et al, 2013) and will likely become increasingly important as scientists are called on to provide various types of science advice (Singh et al, 2014;Spruijt et al, 2014) that help address society's most pressing and complex problems (Lubchenco, 1998;Defries et al, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scientists' perspectives on global ocean research priorities

Rudd

2014

Front. Mar. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Diverse natural and social science research is needed to support policies to recover and sustain healthy oceans. While a wide variety of expert-led prioritization initiatives have identified research themes and priorities at national and regional scale, over the past several years there has also been a surge in the number of scanning exercises that have identified important environmental research questions and issues "from the bottom-up." From those questions, winnowed from thousands of contributions by scientists and policy-makers around the world who participated in terrestrial, aquatic and domain-specific horizon scanning and big question exercises, I identified 657 research questions potentially important for informing decisions regarding ocean governance and sustainability. These were distilled to a short list of 67 distinctive research questions that, in an internet survey, were ranked by 2179 scientists from 94 countries. Five of the top 10 research priorities were shared by respondents globally. Despite significant differences between physical and ecological scientists' priorities regarding specific research questions, they shared seven common priorities among their top 10. Social scientists' priorities were, however, much different, highlighting their research focus on managerial solutions to ocean challenges and questions regarding the role of human behavior and values in attaining ocean sustainability. The results from this survey provide a comprehensive and timely assessment of current ocean research priorities among research-active scientists but highlight potential challenges in stimulating crossdisciplinary research. As ocean and coastal research necessarily becomes more transdisciplinary to address complex ocean challenges, it will be critical for scientists and research funders to understand how scientists from different disciplines and regions might collaborate and strengthen the overall evidence base for ocean governance.

show abstract

“…Stakeholder engagement, by considering more comprehensive information inputs (Reed, 2008), is recognized as essential for developing effective, equitable, sustainable and conflict-free environmental management strategies (Grimble and Wellard, 1997;Jolibert and Wesselink, 2012;Colvin et al, 2016). Therefore, by placing stakeholders at the centre of the development and implementation of the decision process dealing with conflicts of interest in alien species, our framework provides a workable and effective approach to reduce the risk of failing to implement alien species management strategies.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A framework for engaging stakeholders on the management of alien species

Novoa

Shackleton

Canavan

et al. 2018

Journal of Environmental Management

159

134

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tAlien species can have major ecological and socioeconomic impacts in their novel ranges and so effective management actions are needed. However, management can be contentious and create conflicts, especially when stakeholders who benefit from alien species are different from those who incur costs. Such conflicts of interests mean that management strategies can often not be implemented. There is, therefore, increasing interest in engaging stakeholders affected by alien species or by their management. Through a facilitated workshop and consultation process including academics and managers working on a variety of organisms and in different areas (urban and rural) and ecosystems (terrestrial and aquatic), we developed a framework for engaging stakeholders in the management of alien species. The proposed framework for stakeholder engagement consists of 12 steps: (1) identify stakeholders; (2) select key stakeholders for engagement; (3) explore key stakeholders' perceptions and develop initial aims for management; (4) engage key stakeholders in the development of a draft management strategy; (5) reexplore key stakeholders' perceptions and revise the aims of the strategy; (6) co-design general aims, management objectives and time frames with key stakeholders; (7) co-design a management strategy; (8) facilitate stakeholders' ownership of the strategy and adapt as required; and (9) implement the strategy and monitor management actions to evaluate the need for additional or future actions. In case additional management is needed after these actions take place, some extra steps should be taken: (10) identify any new stakeholders, benefits, and costs; (11) monitor engagement; and (12) revise management strategy. Overall, we believe that our framework provides an effective approach to minimize the impact of conflicts created by alien species management.

show abstract

Research impacts and impact on research in biodiversity conservation: The influence of stakeholder engagement

Cited by 80 publications

References 25 publications

Bridging the research-practice gap: Conservation research priorities in a Central and Eastern European country

Bridging the research-practice gap: Conservation research priorities in a Central and Eastern European country

Scientists' perspectives on global ocean research priorities

A framework for engaging stakeholders on the management of alien species

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About