Broader impacts in conservation research

Abstract

This article explores the “broader impacts” of research related to biodiversity conservation. We analyze a sample of abstracts of proposals funded by the United States National Science Foundation's (NSF) Biology (BIO) and Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences (SBE) directorates. The analysis, based on the NSF conceptualization of broader impacts, identified 21 important types of broader impacts mentioned in the abstracts. Our results show that the vast majority of NSF grant recipients propose a small range of broader impacts, and that predictable differences exist in the types of broader impacts that are more and less common for conservation‐related work in the biological and social sciences. BIO abstracts contained proportionally fewer mentions of equity, case studies, international links, and workshops for conservation practitioners. SBE abstracts contained proportionally fewer mentions of dissemination to local communities, data sharing, websites, and curriculum. We discuss multiple forms of broader impact (e.g., process‐based impacts vs. sharing of results), and then, like the abstracts we analyzed, focus on communication and engagement mechanisms. In order to aid future efforts, we provide examples of unusual and particularly creative approaches that conservation scientists can use to enhance the broader impacts of their work.

Improving scientific impact: How to practice science that influences environmental policy and management

“…Communications plans are ideally developed with both communications experts and members of the target audience and updated as research is completed. They may include nontraditional formats like art, guided walks, or classes (Gould et al, 2019). Communication products should be shared repeatedly over time to increase the likelihood of them being received by the intended audience (Fisher et al, 2018).…”

Leveraging a University to Create Local Equity-Oriented K–12 Learning Opportunities: A Conversation Starter

“…Our process started with reflecting on “broader impact.” As BI options, NSF often encourages academics to leverage their research projects to support K–12 students and/or teachers and to prioritize underresourced communities of all ages for greater societal benefits (MacFadden, 2019). Many observers have urged stretching beyond small/short-term efforts and largely academic audiences (Gould et al, 2019; Lima, 2017) toward deeper engagement in underrepresented communities, including K–12 (Nadkarni & Stasch, 2013a, 2013b). Like others, we have found the BI push creates a stream of faculty seeking potentially equity-oriented K–12 applications for their work—requiring supports for effective design (ARIS, 2020; Roberts, 2009).…”

Pursuing Diverse Forms of Impact in Scientific Research

“…While robust advice exists regarding science communication, outreach, and exposure (e.g. Skrip 2015), guidance for other forms of impact is less developed, resulting in a narrow set of objectives and strategies to expand the benefits of research activities (Nadkarni and Stasch 2013, Gould et al 2019, Woodson and Boutilier 2023. Simply put, the desire for a variety of research impacts has not yet been matched by actionable guidance, training, and other support necessary to achieve it.…”