Selecting appropriate methods of knowledge synthesis to inform biodiversity policy

Responding to different questions generated by biodiversity and ecosystem services policy or management requires different forms of knowledge (e.g. scientific, experiential) and knowledge synthesis. Additionally, synthesis methods need to be appropriate to policy context (e.g. question types, budget, timeframe, output type, required scientific rigour). In this paper we present a range of different methods that could potentially be used to conduct a knowledge synthesis in response to questions arising from knowledge needs of decision makers on biodiversity and ecosystem services policy and management. Through a series of workshops attended by natural and social scientists and decision makers we compiled a range of question types, different policy contexts and potential methodological approaches to knowledge synthesis. Methods are derived from both natural and social sciences fields and reflect the range of question and study types that may be relevant for syntheses. Knowledge can be available either in qualitative or quantitative form and in some cases also mixed. All methods have their strengths and weaknesses and we discuss a sample of these to illustrate the need for diversity and importance of appropriate selection. To summarize this collection, we present a table that identifies potential methods matched to different combinations of question types and policy contexts, aimed at assisting teams undertaking knowledge syntheses to select appropriate methods.

[1]  J. Peek,et al.  COMPASS AND GYROSCOPE : INTEGRATING SCIENCE AND POLITICS , 1995 .

[2]  Robin Gregory,et al.  Valuing Environmental Policy Options: A Case Study Comparison of Multiattribute and Contingent Valuation Survey Methods , 2000 .

[3]  Esther Carmen,et al.  The Network of Knowledge approach: improving the science and society dialogue on biodiversity and ecosystem services in Europe , 2016, Biodiversity and Conservation.

[4]  Andrew Jordan,et al.  Embedding the Concept of Ecosystem Services? The Utilisation of Ecological Knowledge in Different Policy Venues , 2014 .

[5]  Judith E. Innes,et al.  San Francisco Estuary Project , 1999 .

[6]  Carsten Nesshöver,et al.  Biodiversity knowledge synthesis at the European scale: actors and steps , 2016, Biodiversity and Conservation.

[7]  M. Foucault.  Orders of discourse , 1971 .

[8]  Susan Owens,et al.  Making a difference? Some perspectives on environmental research and policy , 2005 .

[9]  Claudia Pahl-Wostl,et al.  Transitions towards adaptive management of water facing climate and global change , 2006 .

[10]  N. Isendahl,et al.  Facilitating Transitional Processes in Rigid Institutional Regimes for Water Management and Wetland Conservation: Experience from the Guadalquivir Estuary , 2012 .

[11]  Matthias Bergmann,et al.  Methods for Transdisciplinary Research: A Primer for Practice , 2013 .

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

[13]  W. Sutherland,et al.  Policy advice: Use experts wisely , 2015, Nature.

[14]  Richard Margoluis,et al.  Adaptive management: A tool for conservation practitioners , 2001 .

[15]  Theodor J. Stewart,et al.  Multiple criteria decision analysis - an integrated approach , 2001 .

[16]  Amelia Sharman,et al.  Evidence-based policy or policy-based evidence gathering? Biofuels, the EU and the 10% target† , 2010 .

[17]  Norman Fenton,et al.  Risk Assessment and Decision Analysis with Bayesian Networks , 2012 .

[18]  John R. Ehrmann,et al.  Joint Fact-Finding and the Use of Technical Experts , 1999 .

[19]  R. Ottow.  Ein Modell Politischer Diskursanalyse , 2002, European Journal of Sociology.

[20]  A. Pullin,et al.  Guidelines for Systematic Review in Conservation and Environmental Management , 2006, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[21]  Laura Uusitalo,et al.  Advantages and challenges of Bayesian networks in environmental modelling , 2007 .

[22]  Juliette Young,et al.  Creating a biodiversity science community: Experiences from a European Network of Knowledge , 2015 .

[23]  J. Breckon,et al.  Using evidence: what works? , 2016 .

[24]  Thomas Dietz,et al.  Policy Forum Science, values, and biodiversity , 1998 .

[25]  Murray Turoff,et al.  The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications , 1976 .

[26]  S. Hove,et al.  Balancing credibility, relevance and legitimacy: A critical assessment of trade-offs in science-policy interfaces , 2014 .

[27]  David W. Macdonald,et al.  The identification of 100 ecological questions of high policy relevance in the UK , 2006 .

[28]  D. Gough,et al.  An Introduction to Systematic Reviews , 2017 .

[29]  L. Gunderson,et al.  Adaptive management and adaptive governance in the everglades ecosystem , 2007 .

[30]  Theodor J. Stewart,et al.  Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis , 2001 .

[31]  L. Susskind,et al.  The consensus building handbook : a comprehensive guide to reaching agreement , 1999 .

[32]  David W. Cash,et al.  Knowledge systems for sustainable development , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[33]  William J. Sutherland,et al.  The Delphi technique in ecology and biological conservation: applications and guidelines , 2015 .

[34]  Arne Orvik,et al.  Situational Factors in Focus Group Studies: A Systematic Review , 2013 .

[35]  Michele-Lee Moore,et al.  From coastal timber supply area to Great Bear Rainforest: exploring power in a social–ecological governance innovation. , 2012 .

[36]  H. Saarikoski.  Naturalized Epistemology and Dilemmas of Planning Practice , 2002 .

[37]  Andrew S. Pullin,et al.  The network BiodiversityKnowledge in practice: insights from three trial assessments , 2016, Biodiversity and Conservation.

[38]  Heli Saarikoski,et al.  Objectivity and the environment – epistemic value of biases , 2007 .

[39]  R. K. Neumann,et al.  Conceptualizing credibility, relevance and legitimacy for evaluating the effectiveness of science–policy interfaces: Challenges and opportunities , 2015 .

[40]  G. Bateson,et al.  Mind and Nature: A Necessary Unity , 1979 .

[41]  Carl J. Walters,et al.  ECOLOGICAL OPTIMIZATION *.:4 1 39 AND ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT , 1978 .

[42]  Guillermo A. Mendoza,et al.  Multi-criteria decision analysis in natural resource management: A critical review of methods and new modelling paradigms , 2006 .