A Best Practices Case Study for Scientific Collaboration between Researchers and Managers

Effective engagement among scientists, government agency staff, and policymakers is necessary for solving fisheries challenges, but remains challenging for a variety of reasons. We present seven practices learned from a collaborative project focused on invasive species in the Great Lakes region (USA‐CAN). These practices were based on a researcher–manager model composed of a research team, a management advisory board, and a bridging organization. We suggest this type of system functions well when (1) the management advisory board is provided compelling rationale for engagement; (2) the process uses key individuals as communicators; (3) the research team thoughtfully selects organizations and individuals involved; (4) the funding entity provides logistical support and allows for (5) a flexible structure that prioritizes management needs; (6) a bridging organization sustains communication between in‐person meetings; and (7) the project team determines and enacts a project endpoint. We predict these approaches apply equally effectively to other challenges at the research–management–policy interface, including reductions of water pollution, transitions to renewable energy, increasing food security, and addressing climate change.

[1]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  Do altmetrics point to the broader impact of research? An overview of benefits and disadvantages of altmetrics , 2014, J. Informetrics.

[2]  Carl J. Walters,et al.  Adaptive Management of Renewable Resources , 1986 .

[3]  C. Jerde,et al.  The use of environmental DNA in invasive species surveillance of the Great Lakes commercial bait trade , 2015, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[4]  Robin Gregory,et al.  Structured Decision Making: A Practical Guide to Environmental Management Choices , 2012 .

[5]  W. L. Chadderton,et al.  Suitability of Laurentian Great Lakes for invasive species based on global species distribution models and local habitat , 2017 .

[6]  Christina M. Romagosa,et al.  Predicting invasiveness of species in trade: climate match, trophic guild and fecundity influence establishment and impact of non‐native freshwater fishes , 2016 .

[7]  Dawn M. Lawson,et al.  Foundations of translational ecology , 2017 .

[8]  W. L. Chadderton,et al.  Predicting spread of aquatic invasive species by lake currents , 2017 .

[9]  Daniel M. Kammen,et al.  Stakeholders in climate science: Beyond lip service? , 2015, Science.

[10]  W. L. Chadderton,et al.  “Sight‐unseen” detection of rare aquatic species using environmental DNA , 2011 .

[11]  Carel Dieperink,et al.  Conceptualising joint knowledge production in regional climate change adaptation projects: success conditions and levers for action , 2012 .

[12]  Tamara U. Wall,et al.  Use‐inspired science: making science usable by and useful to decision makers , 2017 .

[13]  Kristy Deiner,et al.  Environmental DNA metabarcoding: Transforming how we survey animal and plant communities , 2017, Molecular ecology.

[14]  J. Kevin Hiers,et al.  Linking knowledge to action: the role of boundary spanners in translating ecology , 2017 .

[15]  Ockie J. H. Bosch,et al.  Integrating science and management through collaborative learning and better information management , 2003 .

[16]  S. Shackley,et al.  Representing Uncertainty in Global Climate Change Science and Policy: Boundary-Ordering Devices and Authority , 1996 .

[17]  M. Wittmann,et al.  Implementing invasive species control: a case study of multi-jurisdictional coordination at Lake Tahoe, USA , 2015 .

[18]  W. L. Chadderton,et al.  A Spatial Modeling Approach to Predicting the Secondary Spread of Invasive Species Due to Ballast Water Discharge , 2014, PloS one.

[19]  W. L. Chadderton,et al.  Detection of Asian carp DNA as part of a Great Lakes basin-wide surveillance program , 2013 .

[20]  M. Mac,et al.  Stakeholder Involvement in Natural Resource Decisions: The Missouri River , 2020 .

[21]  W. Sheate,et al.  Knowledge exchange: a review and research agenda for environmental management , 2012, Environmental Conservation.

[22]  Yuqiong Liu,et al.  Linking science with environmental decision making: Experiences from an integrated modeling approach to supporting sustainable water resources management , 2008, Environ. Model. Softw..

[23]  J. Drake.  Range bagging: a new method for ecological niche modelling from presence-only data , 2015, Journal of The Royal Society Interface.

[24]  Matthew A. Williamson,et al.  Developing a translational ecology workforce , 2017 .

[25]  Roger M. Cooke,et al.  Forecasting the Impacts of Silver and Bighead Carp on the Lake Erie Food Web , 2016 .

[26]  C. Walters.  Is Adaptive Management Helping to Solve Fisheries Problems? , 2007, Ambio.

[27]  V. Nguyen,et al.  A roadmap for knowledge exchange and mobilization research in conservation and natural resource management , 2017, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[28]  David F. Channell.  Pasteur's Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation , 1999 .

[29]  Reuben P. Keller,et al.  Risk Analysis and Bioeconomics of Invasive Species to Inform Policy and Management , 2016 .

[30]  W. L. Chadderton,et al.  A sensitive environmental DNA (eDNA) assay leads to new insights on Ruffe (Gymnocephalus cernua) spread in North America , 2016, Biological Invasions.

[31]  W. L. Chadderton,et al.  Managing the introduction and spread of non-native aquatic plants in the Laurentian Great Lakes: a regional risk assessment approach , 2015 .

[32]  Applying the collective impact approach to address non-native species: a case study of the Great Lakes Phragmites Collaborative , 2016, Biological Invasions.

[33]  Matthew A. Williamson,et al.  Navigating translational ecology: Creating opportunities for scientist participation , 2017 .

[34]  W. L. Chadderton,et al.  Refining species distribution model outputs using landscape-scale habitat data: Forecasting grass carp and Hydrilla establishment in the Great Lakes region , 2017 .