Cooke Steven J, Cook Carly N, Nguyen Vivian M, Walsh Jessica C, Young Nathan, Cvitanovic Christopher, Grainger Matthew J, Randall Nicola P, Muir Matt, Kadykalo Andrew N, Monk Kathryn A, Pullin Andrew S
Canadian Centre for Evidence-Based Conservation, Department of Biology and Institute of Environmental and Interdisciplinary Science, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Dr., Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6 Canada.
School of Biological Sciences, Monash University, 25 Rainforest Walk, Clayton, VIC 3800 Australia.
Environ Evid. 2023;12(1):10. doi: 10.1186/s13750-023-00302-5. Epub 2023 May 18.
In civil society we expect that policy and management decisions will be made using the best available evidence. Yet, it is widely known that there are many barriers that limit the extent to which that occurs. One way to overcome these barriers is via robust, comprehensive, transparent and repeatable evidence syntheses (such as systematic reviews) that attempt to minimize various forms of bias to present a summary of existing knowledge for decision-making purposes. Relative to other disciplines (e.g., health care, education), such evidence-based decision-making remains relatively nascent for environment management despite major threats to humanity, such as the climate, pollution and biodiversity crises demonstrating that human well-being is inextricably linked to the biophysical environment. Fortunately, there are a growing number of environmental evidence syntheses being produced that can be used by decision makers. It is therefore an opportune time to reflect on the science and practice of evidence-based decision-making in environment management to understand the extent to which evidence syntheses are embraced and applied in practice. Here we outline a number of key questions related to the use of environmental evidence that need to be explored in an effort to enhance evidence-based decision-making. There is an urgent need for research involving methods from social science, behavioural sciences, and public policy to understand the basis for patterns and trends in environmental evidence use (or misuse or ignorance). There is also a need for those who commission and produce evidence syntheses, as well as the end users of these syntheses to reflect on their experiences and share them with the broader evidence-based practice community to identify needs and opportunities for advancing the entire process of evidence-based practice. It is our hope that the ideas shared here will serve as a roadmap for additional scholarship that will collectively enhance evidence-based decision-making and ultimately benefit the environment and humanity.
在公民社会中,我们期望政策和管理决策能基于现有最佳证据做出。然而,众所周知,存在许多障碍限制了这一目标的实现程度。克服这些障碍的一种方法是通过强有力、全面、透明且可重复的证据综合(如系统评价),尽量减少各种形式的偏差,以便为决策提供现有知识的总结。相对于其他学科(如医疗保健、教育),尽管存在诸如气候、污染和生物多样性危机等对人类的重大威胁,表明人类福祉与生物物理环境紧密相连,但基于证据的决策在环境管理中仍相对处于起步阶段。幸运的是,现在有越来越多的环境证据综合成果可供决策者使用。因此,当下正是反思环境管理中基于证据决策的科学与实践的时机,以了解证据综合在实践中被接受和应用的程度。在此,我们概述了一些与环境证据使用相关的关键问题,这些问题有待探索,以努力加强基于证据的决策。迫切需要开展涉及社会科学、行为科学和公共政策方法的研究,以了解环境证据使用(或误用或忽视)模式和趋势的基础。还需要那些委托和制作证据综合成果的人员以及这些成果的最终使用者反思他们的经验,并与更广泛的循证实践社区分享,以确定推进循证实践整个过程的需求和机遇。我们希望这里分享的想法将成为更多学术研究的路线图,共同加强基于证据的决策,最终造福环境和人类。