0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Knowing but not doing: Quantifying the research-implementation gap in conservation paleobiology

      , , , ,
      Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
      Frontiers Media SA

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Conservation paleobiology aims to provide a longer-term perspective on environmental problems to inform decisions about natural resource conservation. As such, conservation paleobiology research falls short when geohistorical data and insights do not inform conservation practice, contributing to the well-known idea that a “gap” exists between the production and use of science in the environmental realm. Our study quantified the extent of this research-implementation (or knowing-doing) gap through a systematic literature review and survey questionnaire. We determined whether empirical studies in conservation paleobiology with a link to conservation, management, or restoration documented the use of geohistorical data to implement some form of action or if there was a specific mention of how the geohistorical data could be used in theory. Results indicate that “applied” conservation paleobiology has a poor record of translating research into action. Tangible conservation impacts were evident in only 10.8% of studies. Over half of these studies included coauthors affiliated with a conservation organization. Among the studies coded as having a theoretical application, 25.2% specified how the geohistorical data could be implemented to enhance conservation, management, or restoration actions. All studies documenting action used geohistorical data from the geologically recent past where the species and habitats are familiar to those found today. Drawing insights from the bright spots we identified, we offer some practical suggestions to narrow the gap between knowing and doing in conservation paleobiology.

          Related collections

          Most cited references74

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

            The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              What Is Conservation Biology?

              (1985)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
                Front. Ecol. Evol.
                Frontiers Media SA
                2296-701X
                February 9 2023
                February 9 2023
                : 11
                Article
                10.3389/fevo.2023.1058992
                c025d1bb-6466-4a20-a856-5fcfdd2f9211
                © 2023

                Free to read

                https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article