The Network of Knowledge approach: improving the science and society dialogue on biodiversity and ecosystem services in Europe

Neßhöver, Carsten; Vandewalle, Marie; Wittmer, Heidi; Balian, Estelle; Carmen, Esther; Geijzendorffer, Ilse R.; Görg, Christoph; Jongman, R.H.G.; Livoreil, Barbara; Santamarı́a, Luis; Schindler, Stefan; Settele, Josef; Sousa-Pinto, Isabel; Török, Katalin; Dijk, J. van; Watt, Allan D.; Young, Juliette; Zulka, Klaus Peter

doi:10.1007/s10531-016-1127-5

Cited by 49 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…1). Nesshöver et al (2016) Fig. 1 Dimensions of a Network of Knowledge (NoK) approach required to become a successful sciencepolicy-society interface.…”

Section: Challenges and Solutions For Networking Knowledgementioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges and solutions for networking knowledge holders and better informing decision-making on biodiversity and ecosystem services

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How to effectively inform decision-making on biodiversity and ecosystem services has been under continuous debate in Europe and globally since the Convention on Biological Diversity was adopted in 1992. On the global level the Intergovernmental science-policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services was installed in 2012 to address this need. Yet, biodiversity and ecosystem services management have to be addressed on multiple levels, across biophysical as well as administrative scales. Also, the knowledge needed to address them has to be brought together from science, management practices and other knowledge domains to become relevant and it must be delivered in ways relevant for policies beyond the environmental sector. This Special Issue brings together papers that analyse the challenges arising from this context. Most of them are based on the EU-funded project KNEU that aimed at developing a new, integrative approach to activate knowledge holders and bring them together for targeted knowledge synthesis activities. The papers address the potential functions, structures and processes of such activities in a joint framework, the Network of Knowledge. Practical aspects are addressed via a number of trial assessments carried out in the project. All in all, they 123Biodivers Conserv (2016) 25:1207-1214 DOI 10.1007/s10531-016-1124 showcase new ways of knowledge synthesis that have the potential to complement and strengthen existing ones across scales and sectors, thus supporting an improved management of biodiversity and ecosystem services.

show abstract

“…1). Nesshöver et al (2016) Fig. 1 Dimensions of a Network of Knowledge (NoK) approach required to become a successful sciencepolicy-society interface.…”

Section: Challenges and Solutions For Networking Knowledgementioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges and solutions for networking knowledge holders and better informing decision-making on biodiversity and ecosystem services

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While identifying the right stakeholders is usually successful, several projects find involving enough stakeholders (e.g., several farmers of one village) a challenge. In addition, the translation of regional needs and interests into research questions that may be addressed in projects has been less productive in the past and remains to be developed further, making use of recent research on improving dialogue between researchers and decision-makers (e.g., [53]). …”

Section: Availability Of and Access To Data And Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-Term Socio-Ecological Research in Practice: Lessons from Inter- and Transdisciplinary Research in the Austrian Eisenwurzen

Gingrich¹,

Schmid²,

Dirnböck

et al. 2016

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Long-Term Socio-Ecological Research (LTSER) is an inter-and transdisciplinary research field addressing socio-ecological change over time at various spatial and temporal scales. In the Austrian Eisenwurzen region, an LTSER platform was founded in 2004. It has fostered and documented research projects aiming at advancing LTSER scientifically and at providing regional stakeholders with relevant information for sustainable regional development. Since its establishment, a broad range of research activities has been pursued in the region, integrating information from long-term ecological monitoring sites with approaches from social sciences and the humanities, and in cooperation with regional stakeholders. Based on the experiences gained in the Eisenwurzen LTSER platform, this article presents current activities in the heterogeneous field of LTSER, identifying specific (inter-)disciplinary contributions of three research strands of LTSER: long-term ecological research, socio-ecological basic research, and transdisciplinary research. Given the broad array of diverse contributions to LTSER, we argue that the platform has become a relevant "boundary organization," linking research to its regional non-academic context, and ensuring interdisciplinary exchange among the variety of disciplines. We consider the diversity of LTSER approaches an important resource for future research. Major success criteria of LTSER face specific challenges: (1) existing loose, yet stable networks need to be maintained and extended; (2) continuous generation of and access to relevant data needs to be secured and more data need to be included; and

show abstract

“…Such dialogue must encompass the complete cycle of knowledge generation through scientific research, policy design and its implementation (which, in turn, involves the generation of practical knowledge and know-how by decision-makers and practitioners). Also, a better framing is needed at the sciencepolicy interfaces (SPIs) to increase transparency, address potential limitations and biases in procedures, and evaluate the progress made in such collaborative undertakings (Hulme et al 2011;Nesshöver et al 2013Nesshöver et al , 2016Carmen et al 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, scientific evidence is reported in a rapidly growing number of publications that are increasingly difficult to survey and read thoroughly. On the other hand, policy-makers and other stakeholders have to take decisions on a short timescale, and they often base their decision on personal knowledge, professional experience or the opinion of a single expert (Sutherland and Burgman 2015;Nesshöver et al 2016). Knowledge requirements of policy-makers and stakeholders are often task-oriented, practical, and related to a current problem requiring urgent action.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At the European scale, a recent effort to foster knowledge synthesis was undertaken by the European Network of Knowledge for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (NoK, hereafter also named BiodiversityKnowledge) that developed a knowledge synthesis process of a European SPI for Biodiversity issues aimed at providing a transparent structure to receive and answer requests from policy-makers and stakeholders (KNEU Team 2014;Livoreil et al 2016;Nesshöver et al 2016). The knowledge synthesis process explains the roles of the several actors involved and the various steps to be implemented, and it was initially developed around three methodological frameworks: expert consultation, evidence-based approaches, and collaborative adaptive management .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The network BiodiversityKnowledge in practice: insights from three trial assessments

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to develop BiodiversityKnowledge, a Network of Knowledge working at the European science-policy interface for biodiversity and ecosystem services, we conducted three trial assessments. Their purpose was to test structure and processes of the knowledge synthesis function and to produce knowledge syntheses. The trial assessments covered conservation and management of kelp ecosystems, biological control of agricultural pests, and conservation and multifunctional management of floodplains. Following the BiodiversityKnowledge processes, we set up expert consultations, systematic reviews, and collaborative adaptive management procedures in collaboration with requesters, policy and decision-makers, stakeholders, and knowledge holders. Outputs included expert consultations, systematic review protocols, a group model and a policy brief. Important lessons learned were firstly that the scoping process, in which requesters and experts iteratively -016-1128-4 negotiate the scope, scale and synthesis methodology, is of paramount importance to maximize the scientific credibility and policy relevance of the output. Secondly, selection of a broad array of experts with diverse and complementary skills (including multidisciplinary background and a broad geographical coverage) and participation of all relevant stakeholders is crucial to ensure an adequate breath of expertise, better methodological choices, and maximal uptake of outcomes: Thirdly, as the most important challenge was expert and stakeholder engagement, a high visibility and reputation of BiodiversityKnowledge, supported by an incentive system for participation, will be crucial to ensure such engagement. We conclude that BiodiversityKnowledge has potential for a good performance in delivering assessments, but it requires adequate funding, trust-building among knowledge holders and stakeholders, and a proactive and robust interface with the policy and decision making community.

show abstract

The Network of Knowledge approach: improving the science and society dialogue on biodiversity and ecosystem services in Europe

Cited by 49 publications

References 56 publications

Challenges and solutions for networking knowledge holders and better informing decision-making on biodiversity and ecosystem services

Challenges and solutions for networking knowledge holders and better informing decision-making on biodiversity and ecosystem services

Long-Term Socio-Ecological Research in Practice: Lessons from Inter- and Transdisciplinary Research in the Austrian Eisenwurzen

The network BiodiversityKnowledge in practice: insights from three trial assessments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About