In 2010, there was a bold commitment to take action in halting global biodiversity loss by 2020. Now, half way through the Convention on Biological Diversity strategic plan 2011-2020, the success of the mission is under discussion. With the Twelfth Conference of the Parties attesting a lack of action, attention is now focused on the science-policy interface. This article offers a critical examination of the current debate on the science-policy interface and its implications for biodiversity research. The aim is to demonstrate the need for a social-ecological perspective. First, we argue that there is not only a lack of action but also a lack of knowledge. Second, we present socialecological systems as a common framework for biodiversity research. Third, we explain the potential of transdisciplinarity in biodiversity research. We finish by calling for a decisive turning point to consider the hybrid notions of biodiversity in science, politics and conservation activities.
Responding to different questions generated by biodiversity and ecosystem services policy or management requires different forms of knowledge (e.g. scientific, experiential) and knowledge synthesis. Additionally, synthesis methods need to be appropriate to policy context (e.g. question types, budget, timeframe, output type, required scientific rigour). In this paper we present a range of different methods that could potentially be used to conduct a knowledge synthesis in response to questions arising from knowledge needs of decision makers on biodiversity and ecosystem services policy and management. Through a series of workshops attended by natural and social scientists and decision makers we compiled a range of question types, different policy contexts and potential methodological approaches to knowledge synthesis. Methods are derived from both natural and social sciences fields and reflect the range of question and study types that may be relevant for syntheses. Knowledge can be available either in qualitative or quantitative form and in some cases also mixed. All methods have their strengths and weaknesses and we discuss a sample of these to illustrate the need for diversity and importance of appropriate selection. To summarize this collection, we present a table that identifies potential methods matched to different combinations of question types and policy contexts, aimed at assisting teams undertaking knowledge syntheses to select appropriate methods.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.