When peer-reviewed publications are not enough! Delivering science for natural resource management

McKinley, Duncan C.; Briggs, Russell D.; Bartuska, Ann M.

doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2012.03.007

Cited by 44 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 99 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this new mode of knowledge production, society speaks back to science, affecting the "scientific activities both in its forms of organization, division of labour and day-to-day practices, and deep down in its epistemological core" (33, page 161). Different forms of participatory science production include boundary organizations and science shops, participatory technology assessment, citizen science, knowledge networks, integrated assessments, public ecology and sciencepolicy dialogues (25,26,(39)(40)(41)(42)(43)(44)(45)(46)(47)(48)(49).…”

Section: Insert Figure 1 About Herementioning

confidence: 99%

Actionable Knowledge for Environmental Decision Making: Broadening the Usability of Climate Science

Kirchhoff

Lemos

Dessai

2013

Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour.

408

271

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

KeywordsScience-policy model; producer-user interaction; user typology; information usability; climate information use AbstractConsistently scholars have sought to characterize society's relationship to science, especially to understand how it shapes the way science is produced and used in decision making. These efforts spurred a rapid evolution in models of science-society interaction with growing levels of complexity both in terms of interdisciplinarity and involvement of stakeholders. Despite these efforts, the rate of use of science in decision-making remains below expectations. This suggests a persistent gap between production and use which, to date, efforts to re-think and restructure science production have not been able to surmount. We review the different models of science-society interaction and the emergence of new approaches to knowledge creation to understand how they have influenced the organization of knowledge production and application. We then examine

show abstract

Section: Insert Figure 1 About Herementioning

confidence: 99%

Actionable Knowledge for Environmental Decision Making: Broadening the Usability of Climate Science

Kirchhoff

Lemos

Dessai

2013

Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour.

408

271

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A weakness of the existing collection of articles is that most focus on only assessing content knowledge. For agencies such as the U.S. Forest Service, which seeks to boost effectiveness in obtaining user feedback to identify problems by incorporating participatory monitoring into its research efforts (McKinley et al 2012), understanding gains in content knowledge of participants is insufficient. For such agencies, understanding whether volunteer monitoring participants improve knowledge and skills related to diplomacy, public speaking, data synthesis, effective networking, or communications might provide greater insight into the value of volunteer environmental monitoring as a public participation tool.…”

Section: Exploring Findings and Identifying Knowledge Gapsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Individual- and community-level impacts of volunteer environmental monitoring: a synthesis of peer-reviewed literature

Stepenuck¹,

Green²

2015

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Citizens have long contributed to scientific research about the environment through volunteer environmental monitoring programs. Their participation has also resulted in outcomes for themselves, their communities, and the environment. This research synthesizes 35 peer-reviewed journal articles that reported such outcomes through 2012. This collection of articles was derived from a pool of 436 peer-reviewed journal articles about participatory environmental monitoring. Reported outcomes for participants and communities ranged from increasing personal knowledge and community awareness to changing attitudes and behaviors, building social capital, and ultimately, influencing change in natural resource management and policies. Mixed results were reported in regard to citizen participation in natural resource decision-making processes and in terms of participant knowledge gain. Future research recommendations that address identified knowledge gaps include the following: (1) assessing knowledge beyond the basic content of the subject of monitoring to better address the value of volunteer environmental monitoring as a public participation tool; (2) conducting independent research across programs to enable null or negative outcome reporting, understand commonalities of outcomes across programs, and make linkages between outcomes and program characteristics; (3) carrying out rigorous research that includes data collection and statistical analysis focused on the effectiveness of citizen participation in decision making; (4) assessing the time component of outcome achievement to inform the volunteer monitoring community; and (5) conducting additional research to identify changes in attitudes and behaviors, particularly geared toward minimizing losses in biodiversity and impacts of climate change.

show abstract

“…For better or worse, peer-reviewed journals are the primary means by which conservation scientists disseminate their work (Arlettaz et al 2010, McKinley et al 2012, Cook et al 2013, Habel et al 2013, Hulme 2014. Science clearly has a critical role in conservation (Tracy & Brussard 1996, Gibbons et al 2011, Habel et al 2013, and peer-reviewed literature is an important but flawed tool for closing the knowledge−action gap (Knight et al 2008, Hulme 2014.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The need for speed in a crisis discipline: perspectives on peer-review duration and implications for conservation science

Cooke

Nguyen

Wilson

et al. 2016

Endang. Species. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scholarly peer review relies on rigorous yet fair assessments of articles by qualified referees in a timely manner. We considered the extent to which a prolonged peer-review process can delay the dissemination of results in a conservation context by combining insight from a survey with our own perspectives. A survey of authors who published peer-reviewed articles in biodiversity and conservation in 2012 and 2013 yielded 461 responses from participants in 119 countries. Approximately 44% of respondents thought that slow review times might hamper conservation, while only ~5% provided specific examples of how slow reviews had actually impeded conservation actions or policy formation. When queried about the value of expediting the review process for studies of high policy or conservation relevance, ca. 1/3 of respondents thought it was a worthwhile idea in principle, though mechanics of implementing such practices are unclear. Author self-identification of potentially important papers could lead to requesting a rapid review provided that a paper meets certain criteria -an approach already used by some generalist journals. Given the urgency of many conservation-oriented initiatives, we encourage the entire editorial team (staff, editors, referees, authors) to make a concerted effort towards improving the speed of the peer-review process while maintaining quality. Such efforts would reflect the notion that timeliness is a key component of scientific relevance to practitioners and policy makers in a crisis discipline. We conclude that there is a 'need for speed' and advocate that rapid, rigorous and thorough peer review can be accomplished and can provide collective benefits to the scientific community and global biodiversity.

show abstract

When peer-reviewed publications are not enough! Delivering science for natural resource management

Cited by 44 publications

References 99 publications

Actionable Knowledge for Environmental Decision Making: Broadening the Usability of Climate Science

Actionable Knowledge for Environmental Decision Making: Broadening the Usability of Climate Science

Individual- and community-level impacts of volunteer environmental monitoring: a synthesis of peer-reviewed literature

The need for speed in a crisis discipline: perspectives on peer-review duration and implications for conservation science

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About