Conservation practitioners, natural resource managers, and environmental stewards often seek out scientific contributions to inform decision-making. This body of science only becomes actionable when motivated by decision makers considering alternative courses of action. Many in the science community equate addressing stakeholder science needs with delivering actionable science. However, not all efforts to address science needs deliver actionable science, suggesting that the synonymous use of these two constructs (delivering actionable science and addressing science needs) is not trivial. This can be the case when such needs are conveyed by people who neglect decision makers responsible for articulating a priority management concern and for specifying how the anticipated scientific information will aid the decision-making process. We argue that the actors responsible for articulating these science needs and the process used to identify them are decisive factors in the ability to deliver actionable science, stressing the importance of examining the provenance and the determination of science needs. Guided by a desire to enhance communication and cross-literacy between scientists and decision makers, we identified categories of actors who may inappropriately declare science needs (e.g., applied scientists with and without regulatory affiliation, external influencers, reluctant decision makers, agents in place of decision makers, and boundary organization representatives). We also emphasize the importance of, and general approach to, undertaking needs assessments or gap analyses as a means to identify priority science needs. We conclude that basic stipulations to legitimize actionable science, such as the declaration of decisions of interest that motivate science needs and using a robust process to identify priority information gaps, are not always satisfied and require verification. To alleviate these shortcomings, we formulated practical suggestions for consideration by applied scientists, decision makers, research funding entities, and boundary organizations to help foster conditions that lead to science output being truly actionable.
KEYWORDS decision analysis, decision maker, gap analysis, needs assessment, problem framing
ResumenLos administradores ambientales y de los recursos y los practicantes de la conservación buscan frecuentemente contribuciones científicas para informar sus decisiones. Este sector de la ciencia sólo se vuelve práctico cuando lo incentivan los órganos decisorios que consideran vías alternas de acción. Muchos dentro de la comunidad científica equiparan abordar las necesidades científicas de los actores con la ciencia práctica como resultado. Sin embargo, no son todos los esfuerzos por abordar las necesidades científicas los que resultan en ciencia práctica, lo que sugiere que el uso sinónimo de estos dos constructos (ciencia