Conservation biology in Chile: Are we fulfilling our social contract?

Simonetti, Javier A.

doi:10.4067/s0716-078x2011000200002

Cited by 14 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This suggests that the concerns that publications are targeted at academics rather than managers [9,27] may be universal to managers regardless of whether they are in developed or developing countries. Other studies have reported that managers are concerned about interpreting research for their management context [11], preferring to discuss findings with scientists [10] or colleagues [6].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scientific Evidence and Potential Barriers in the Management of Brazilian Protected Areas

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Protected areas are a crucial tool for halting the loss of biodiversity. Yet, the management of protected areas is under resourced, impacting the ability to achieve effective conservation actions. Effective management depends on the application of the best available knowledge, which can include both scientific evidence and the local knowledge of onsite managers. Despite the clear value of evidence-based conservation, there is still little known about how much scientific evidence is used to guide the management of protected areas. This knowledge gap is especially evident in developing countries, where resource limitations and language barriers may create additional challenges for the use of scientific evidence in management. To assess the extent to which scientific evidence is used to inform management decisions in a developing country, we surveyed Brazilian protected area managers about the information they use to support their management decisions. We targeted on-ground managers who are responsible for management decisions made at the local protected area level. We asked managers about the sources of evidence they use, how frequently they assess the different sources of evidence and the scientific content of the different sources of evidence. We also considered a range of factors that might explain the use of scientific evidence to guide the management of protected areas, such as the language spoken by managers, the accessibility of evidence sources and the characteristics of the managers and the protected areas they manage. The managers who responded to our questionnaire reported that they most frequently made decisions based on their personal experience, with scientific evidence being used relatively infrequently. While managers in our study tended to value scientific evidence less highly than other sources, most managers still considered science important for management decisions. Managers reported that the accessibility of scientific evidence is low relative to other types of evidence, with key barriers being the low levels of open access research and insufficient technical training to enable managers to interpret research findings. Based on our results, we suggest that managers in developing countries face all the same challenges as those in developed countries, along with additional language barriers that can prevent greater use of scientific evidence to support effective management of protected areas in Brazil.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scientific Evidence and Potential Barriers in the Management of Brazilian Protected Areas

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This issue is exacerbated when articles are not readily available to decision-makers through open-access or agency journal subscriptions. Moreover, primary literature is often too technical for environmental managers to interpret and does not clearly articulate how the new results could assist management decisions (Fazey et al 2005;Simonetti, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Utility of primary scientific literature to environmental managers: An international case study on coral-dominated marine protected areas

Cvitanovic

Fulton

Wilson

et al. 2014

Ocean & Coastal Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Please check your proof carefully and mark all corrections at the appropriate place in the proof (e.g., by using on-screen annotation in the PDF file) or compile them in a separate list. Note: if you opt to annotate the file with software other than Adobe Reader then please also highlight the appropriate place in the PDF file. To ensure fast publication of your paper please return your corrections within 48 hours. HighlightsIntegration of science into marine management decisions is a significant challenge. Primary science represents only 14% of information cited in MPA management plans. Inaccessibility of primary scientific literature to MPA manager's a major cause. Serious structural impediments undermine the adaptive governance of MPAs. New improved approaches to knowledge transfer among scientists and managers needed.

show abstract

“…As a minimum, I could have formulated clear and explicit recommendations for practitioners (Memmott et al. ; Simonetti ). So, I have no reason to blame the policy‐makers and practitioners that failed to find my study in the vast ocean of published research.…”

Section: An Example Of the Failure To Communicatementioning

confidence: 99%

“…I should have considered practitioners when publishing, but seem to have forgotten that anyone outside academia might be interested. As a minimum, I could have formulated clear and explicit recommendations for practitioners (Memmott et al 2010;Simonetti 2011). So, I have no reason to blame the policy-makers and practitioners that failed to find my study in the vast ocean of published research.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence‐based vegetation management: prospects and challenges

Milberg

2014

Applied Vegetation Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of applied vegetation science on society has the potential to increase by adopting an evidence-based approach. However, this would require a shift in focus towards effect size and results suitable for meta-analyses, a focus on practitioners as potential readers, more emphasis on practical problems rather than mechanism, and an acceptance of all well-executed experimental studies, even if confirmatory. Thus, the prevailing editorial policies need to be reconsidered, as well as the methods of analysing, reporting and evaluating research, for our research efforts to be of better use within society.

show abstract

Conservation biology in Chile: Are we fulfilling our social contract?

Cited by 14 publications

References 21 publications

Scientific Evidence and Potential Barriers in the Management of Brazilian Protected Areas

Scientific Evidence and Potential Barriers in the Management of Brazilian Protected Areas

Utility of primary scientific literature to environmental managers: An international case study on coral-dominated marine protected areas

Evidence‐based vegetation management: prospects and challenges

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About