Exploring Institutional Mechanisms for Scientific Input into the Management Cycle of the National Protected Area Network of Peru: Gaps and Opportunities

Abstract

Understanding how to improve decision makers' use of scientific information across their different scales of management is a core challenge for narrowing the gap between science and conservation practice. Here, we present a study conducted in collaboration with decision makers that aims to explore the functionality of the mechanisms for scientific input within the institutional setting of the National Protected Area Network of Peru. First, we analyzed institutional mechanisms to assess the scientific information recorded by decision makers. Second, we developed two workshops involving scientists, decision makers and social actors to identify barriers to evidence-based conservation practice. Third, we administered 482 questionnaires to stakeholders to explore social perceptions of the role of science and the willingness to collaborate in the governance of protected areas. The results revealed that (1) the institutional mechanisms did not effectively promote the compilation and application of scientific knowledge for conservation practice; (2) six important barriers hindered scientific input in management decisions; and (3) stakeholders showed positive perceptions about the involvement of scientists in protected areas and expressed their willingness to collaborate in conservation practice. This collaborative research helped to (1) identify gaps and opportunities that should be addressed for increasing the effectiveness of the institutional mechanisms and (2) support institutional changes integrating science-based strategies for strengthening scientific input in decision-making. These insights provide a useful contextual orientation for scholars and decision makers interested in conducting empirical research to connect scientific inputs with operational aspects of the management cycle in other institutional settings around the world.

An interdisciplinary assessment of private conservation areas in the Western United States

“…Our approach can be used to implement transdisciplinary processes where the scientific, public, and policymaking communities work together with the goal of developing private conservation strategies (López-Rodríguez et al 2017). Although our results refer to a specific case study in the Western U.S., the approach proposed can be easily translated to other areas in the world, because private lands are proliferating both in the developing world and in industrialized countries.…”

Establishing a science-policy-society interface for biodiversity conservation and human well-being in the Amazon: the case of Madre de Dios, Peru

“…Ello se podría posiblemente conseguir mediante algún tipo de institucionalización, pero será importante mantener la flexibilidad y capacidad adaptativa necesaria para poder responder a las necesidades futuras de las diferentes categorías de actores representadas. Además, será importante desarrollar los mecanismos necesarios para facilitar la contribución efectiva del conocimiento científico a la práctica y política de la conservación de la biodiversidad (López-Rodríguez et al 2017). De hecho, de según Cvitanovic y Hobday (2018) sobre la base del análisis de casos de implementación exitosa, los pasos necesarios después de la constitución de una interfaz CGS incluyen la realización de proyectos de investigación participativos, la implementación de un sistema de manejo de conocimientos diseñado a la medida, y el asegurar una colaboración continua que incluya un contacto regular cara a cara y un proceso de reflexión y aprendizaje conjuntos.…”

Social Learning for Facilitating Dialogue and Understanding of the Ecosystem Services Approach: Lessons from a Cross-Border Experience in the Alboran Marine Basin

“…In addition to promoting knowledge transfer amongst the participants, we observed that this shared leadership led to a balanced representation of both countries and strengthened relationships between the participants from the bordering countries. Considering that knowledge-brokering approaches can be adapted based on the context, actors and desired goals (see, e.g., [67,70]), our results suggested that a shared approach between brokers of different countries can be a key factor for facilitating knowledge exchange and building confidence in cross-border contexts. Second, the development of a clearly structured, systematised and timed learning process focused the collective deliberations on specific areas [71].…”