A typology of barriers and enablers of scientific evidence use in conservation practice

被引:84
|
作者
Walsh, Jessica C. [1 ,6 ,7 ]
Dicks, Lynn V. [1 ,2 ]
Raymond, Christopher M. [3 ,4 ,5 ]
Sutherland, William J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Cambridge, Dept Zool, David Attenborough Bldg, Cambridge CB2 3QZ, England
[2] Univ East Anglia, Sch Biol Sci, Norwich NR4 7TJ, Norfolk, England
[3] Univ Helsinki, Fac Biol & Environm Sci, Ecosyst & Environm Res Program, POB 65, FIN-00014 Helsinki, Finland
[4] Univ Helsinki, Helsinki Inst Sustainabil Sci HELSUS, Yliopistonkatu 3, FIN-00014 Helsinki, Finland
[5] Univ Helsinki, Fac Agr & Forestry Sci, Dept Econ & Management, Latokartanonkaari 7, FIN-00014 Helsinki, Finland
[6] Monash Univ, Sch Biol Sci, Clayton, Vic 3800, Australia
[7] Univ Queensland, Sch Earth & Environm Sci, St Lucia, Qld 4072, Australia
基金
英国自然环境研究理事会;
关键词
Environmental decision making; Evidence-based conservation; Knowledge-action; Knowledge exchange; Research implementation; Science-practice; KNOWING-DOING GAP; KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE; DECISION-MAKERS; MANAGEMENT; INFORMATION; SCIENCE; IMPLEMENTATION; PRACTITIONERS; PUBLICATIONS; BIOLOGISTS;
D O I
10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109481
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Over the last decade, there has been an increased focus (and pressure) in conservation practice globally towards evidence-based or evidence-informed decision making. Despite calls for increased use of scientific evidence, it often remains aspirational for many conservation organizations. Contributing to this is the lack of guidance on how to identify and classify the array of complex reasons limiting research use. In this study, we collated a comprehensive inventory of 230 factors that facilitate or limit the use of scientific evidence in conservation management decisions, through interviews with conservation practitioners in South Africa and UK and a review of the healthcare literature. We used the inventory, combined with concepts from knowledge exchange and research use theories, to construct a taxonomy that categorizes the barriers and enablers. We compared the similarities and differences between the taxonomies from the conservation and the healthcare fields, and highlighted the common barriers and enablers found within conservation organizations in the United Kingdom and South Africa. The most commonly mentioned barriers limiting the use of scientific evidence in our case studies were associated with the day-to-day decision-making processes of practitioners, and the organizational structures, management processes and resource constraints of conservation organizations. The key characteristics that facilitated the use of science in conservation decisions were associated with an organization's structure, decision-making processes and culture, along with practitioners' attitudes and the relationships between scientists and practitioners. This taxonomy and inventory of barriers and enablers can help researchers, practitioners and other conservation actors to identify aspects within their organizations and cross-institutional networks that limit research use - acting as a guide on how to strengthen the science-practice interface.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Evidence-Based Practice in physiotherapy: a systematic review of barriers, enablers and interventions
    Scurlock-Evans, Laura
    Upton, Penney
    Upton, Dominic
    PHYSIOTHERAPY, 2014, 100 (03) : 208 - 219
  • [2] The effect of scientific evidence on conservation practitioners' management decisions
    Walsh, Jessica C.
    Dicks, Lynn V.
    Sutherland, William J.
    CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, 2015, 29 (01) : 88 - 98
  • [3] The major barriers to evidence-informed conservation policy and possible solutions
    Rose, David C.
    Sutherland, William J.
    Amano, Tatsuya
    Gonzalez-Varo, Juan P.
    Robertson, Rebecca J.
    Simmons, Benno I.
    Wauchope, Hannah S.
    Kovacs, Eszter
    Duran, America Paz
    Vadrot, Alice B. M.
    Wu, Weiling
    Dias, Maria P.
    Di Fonzo, Martina M. I.
    Ivory, Sarah
    Norris, Lucia
    Nunes, Matheus Henrique
    Nyumba, Tobias Ochieng
    Steiner, Noa
    Vickery, Juliet
    Mukherjee, Nibedita
    CONSERVATION LETTERS, 2018, 11 (05):
  • [4] How expert insight into alpine peatland conservation complements global scientific evidence
    Rowland, Jessica A.
    Moore, Joslin L.
    Walsh, Jessica C.
    CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, 2023, 37 (03)
  • [5] Opportunities, Enablers, and Barriers to the Use of Recorded Recovery Narratives in Clinical Settings
    Roe, James
    Brown, Susan
    Yeo, Caroline
    Rennick-Egglestone, Stefan
    Repper, Julie
    Ng, Fiona
    Llewelyn-Beardsley, Joy
    Hui, Ada
    Cuijpers, Pim
    Thornicroft, Graham
    Manley, David
    Pollock, Kristian
    Slade, Mike
    FRONTIERS IN PSYCHIATRY, 2020, 11
  • [6] A systematic review of barriers to and facilitators of the use of evidence by policymakers
    Oliver, Kathryn
    Innvar, Simon
    Lorenc, Theo
    Woodman, Jenny
    Thomas, James
    BMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2014, 14
  • [7] A mixed methodology for evaluating use of evidence in conservation planning
    Stevens, Madison
    Norris, D. Ryan
    CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, 2022, 36 (04)
  • [8] Health professionals' views on the barriers and enablers to evidence-based practice for acute stroke care: a systematic review
    Baatiema, Leonard
    Otim, Michael E.
    Mnatzaganian, George
    Aikins, Ama de-Graft
    Coombes, Judith
    Somerset, Shawn
    IMPLEMENTATION SCIENCE, 2017, 12
  • [9] Barriers and opportunities to incorporate scientific evidence into air quality management in Mexico: A stakeholders' perspective
    Munoz-Pizza, Dalia M.
    Villada-Canela, Mariana
    Rivera-Castaneda, Patricia
    Osornio-Vargas, Alvaro
    Martinez-Cruz, Adan L.
    Luis Texcalac-Sangrador, Jose
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & POLICY, 2022, 129 : 87 - 95
  • [10] Conservation Science Policies Versus Scientific Practice: Evidence from a Mexican Biosphere Reserve
    Alonso-Yanez, Gabriela
    Davidsen, Conny
    HUMAN ECOLOGY REVIEW, 2014, 20 (02) : 3 - 29