Suppr超能文献

考虑到科学需要提供可付诸实践的科学。

Considering science needs to deliver actionable science.

机构信息

United States Geological Survey, National Climate Adaptation Science Center, Reston, Virginia, USA.

United States Geological Survey, Southeast Climate Adaptation Science Center, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA.

出版信息

Conserv Biol. 2023 Feb;37(1):e14013. doi: 10.1111/cobi.14013. Epub 2022 Nov 7.

Abstract

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.

摘要

保护实践人员、自然资源管理者和环境管理者通常寻求科学贡献来为决策提供信息。只有当决策者考虑替代行动方案时,这些科学知识才能付诸实践。科学界的许多人将满足利益相关者的科学需求等同于提供可行的科学。然而,并非所有满足科学需求的努力都能提供可行的科学,这表明这两个概念(提供可行的科学和满足科学需求)的同义使用并非微不足道。当这些需求是由那些忽视负责阐明优先管理关注点以及指定预期科学信息将如何帮助决策过程的决策者的人传达时,就会出现这种情况。我们认为,负责阐明这些科学需求的行为者以及用于确定这些需求的过程是提供可行科学的能力的决定性因素,强调了检查科学需求的来源和确定的重要性。为了加强科学家和决策者之间的沟通和跨文化理解,我们根据这一愿望确定了可能不恰当地宣布科学需求的行为者类别(例如,具有和不具有监管隶属关系的应用科学家、外部影响者、不情愿的决策者、决策者的代理人和边界组织代表)。我们还强调了进行需求评估或差距分析作为确定优先科学需求的手段的重要性和一般方法。我们的结论是,使可行科学合法化的基本规定,例如宣布激励科学需求的利益相关决策以及使用稳健的流程来确定优先信息差距,并不总是得到满足,需要验证。为了缓解这些缺点,我们为应用科学家、决策者、研究资助实体和边界组织制定了实用建议供考虑,以帮助创造导致科学产出真正可行的条件。

相似文献

1
Considering science needs to deliver actionable science.
Conserv Biol. 2023 Feb;37(1):e14013. doi: 10.1111/cobi.14013. Epub 2022 Nov 7.
2
Achieving conservation science that bridges the knowledge-action boundary.
Conserv Biol. 2013 Aug;27(4):669-78. doi: 10.1111/cobi.12050. Epub 2013 Apr 10.
3
A conceptual framework for understanding the perspectives on the causes of the science-practice gap in ecology and conservation.
Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2018 May;93(2):1032-1055. doi: 10.1111/brv.12385. Epub 2017 Nov 20.
4
Shared ways of thinking in Brazil about the science-practice interface in ecology and conservation.
Conserv Biol. 2020 Apr;34(2):449-461. doi: 10.1111/cobi.13242. Epub 2018 Nov 20.
5
The decision maker's lament: If I only had some science!
Ambio. 2024 Jun;53(6):898-906. doi: 10.1007/s13280-024-01986-w. Epub 2024 Mar 11.
6
Risk management frameworks for human health and environmental risks.
J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev. 2003 Nov-Dec;6(6):569-720. doi: 10.1080/10937400390208608.
7
Five approaches to producing actionable science in conservation.
Conserv Biol. 2023 Apr;37(2):e14039. doi: 10.1111/cobi.14039. Epub 2022 Dec 13.
8
9
Tackling the Science Usability Gap in a Warming World: Co-Producing Useable Climate Information for Natural Resource Management.
Environ Manage. 2022 Dec;70(6):881-895. doi: 10.1007/s00267-022-01718-4. Epub 2022 Sep 26.
10
From science to action: Principles for undertaking environmental research that enables knowledge exchange and evidence-based decision-making.
J Environ Manage. 2016 Dec 1;183(Pt 3):864-874. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.09.038. Epub 2016 Sep 21.

引用本文的文献

1
Identifying Priority Science Information Needs for Managing Public Lands.
Environ Manage. 2025 Mar;75(3):444-463. doi: 10.1007/s00267-024-02080-3. Epub 2024 Nov 28.
2
The decision maker's lament: If I only had some science!
Ambio. 2024 Jun;53(6):898-906. doi: 10.1007/s13280-024-01986-w. Epub 2024 Mar 11.

本文引用的文献

1
Achieving conservation science that bridges the knowledge-action boundary.
Conserv Biol. 2013 Aug;27(4):669-78. doi: 10.1111/cobi.12050. Epub 2013 Apr 10.
2
Who's in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management.
J Environ Manage. 2009 Apr;90(5):1933-49. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.01.001. Epub 2009 Feb 20.
3
Monitoring for conservation.
Trends Ecol Evol. 2006 Dec;21(12):668-73. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2006.08.007. Epub 2006 Aug 17.
4
The need for evidence-based conservation.
Trends Ecol Evol. 2004 Jun;19(6):305-8. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2004.03.018.
5
Can scientists and policy makers work together?
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2005 Aug;59(8):632-7. doi: 10.1136/jech.2004.031765.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验