A systematic map of knowledge exchange across the science‐policy interface for forest science: How can we improve consistency and effectiveness?

Abstract

Knowledge produced by scientists is essential to the policy and practice of managing natural resources, including forests. However, there has never been systematic mapping of which techniques in knowledge exchange (KE) have been applied in the forest sciences, by whom, and to what effect. We examined KE techniques documented in the forest sciences globally. We used standardized search strings in English and French across two academic search engines (BASE and Scopus) and a specialist website (ResearchGate) to locate relevant items. We screened items, extracted data, conducted qualitative and quantitative analysis, and built a network visualization diagram to demonstrate knowledge flow. Our final map included 122 items published from 1998 to 2020, with most published after 2010. Items mentioned organizations from 66 countries as knowledge producers or users. The interactive network visualization diagram displays linkages between organizations, sectors and countries. We found that most of the KE activity involved the Global North (89%). Governments were the most common knowledge users, and industry was frequently reported as a user but rarely a producer. Academia was both producer and user. Indigenous, local, traditional or community knowledge was included in 24% of items, but these communities were not associated with any coauthor affiliations. Reported funders were universities, governments, non‐profits or foundations. We found 90 unique terms in the items related to KE with less than 25% of terms used in more than one item. Fifteen per cent of item keywords related to KE. The most commonly identified enabling conditions for KE were trust, funding and established relationships, while major barriers were challenges for translation of science and lack of time. To improve searchability of information related to KE and encourage a culture of considering KE in scientific research and forest management work, we recommend a common lexicon of ‘knowledge exchange’/‘échange de connaisances’. We recommend that more effort be given to forest science‐related KE connections between the Global North and South as well as a deliberate collection of evidence for the effectiveness of KE techniques. Researchers and practitioners can use our KE typology to identify their goals and design appropriate evaluation measures.

The Discursive Boundary Work of Recontextualizing Science for Policy: Opening the Black Box of an Organization’s Genre System and Intermediary Genre Sets

“…In this process, the department seeking a CCA assessment goes through Industry, Social and Economic Development Canada (formerly Industry Canada)-the department that has overseen the CCA's funding agreement since 2005-to pitch a series of policy-oriented questions that they believe would benefit from external consultation. In 2015, the CCA assembled an internal committee consisting of senior CCA research staff and the Scientific Advisory Committee to review Transport Canada's proposal, which initiated a form of solicited knowledge exchange (Westwood et al, 2023).…”

“…More recently, researchers have used this concept to look specifically at science-policy knowledge exchange (Guston, 2001). Boundary work facilitates knowledge exchange between producers and users of knowledge in both the scientific and policy domains (Nguyen et al, 2021; Westwood et al, 2023). Such mediation typically involves the creation of a boundary object (Star & Griesemer, 1989)—any artifact, such as an academic journal article or government report—that sits between two independent domains, such as science and policy, and may be used in either domain (Star, 2010).…”

“…The staff get help from the CCA’s Scientific Advisory Committee, which appoints a member to oversee or “monitor” the peer review of a final expert panel report. The staff recruit members to the peer-review committee to carry out another form of solicited and network knowledge exchange (Westwood et al, 2023).…”

“…Those who received the report or a notification of its release are the secondary audiences. Sharing all these texts in such a manner carried out a type of one-way knowledge exchange (Westwood et al, 2023).…”

“…To bridge this communicative gap, scientists often share scientific knowledge—claims produced through experimental research conducted using the scientific method (Bazerman, 1988)—via “knowledge exchange” techniques. Knowledge exchange involves a multidirectional sharing of information and ideas between knowledge producers and users using one-way, solicited, network, or participatory approaches to persuade policy makers (Kapoor et al, 2023; Nguyen et al, 2021; Westwood et al, 2023). One aspect of policy-oriented knowledge exchange focuses on the role of scientists in providing “science advice” (Gluckman, 2014).…”