Being relevant: Practical guidance for early career researchers interested in solving conservation problems

Overcoming Common Anxieties in Knowledge Translation: Advice for Scholarly Issue Advocates

Policy Points Faced with urgent threats to human health and well-being such as climate change, calls among the academic community are getting louder to contribute more effectively to the implementation of the evidence generated by our research into public policy. As interest in knowledge translation (KT) surges, so have a number of anxieties about the field's shortcomings. Our paper is motivated by a call in the literature to render useful advice for those beginning in KT on how to advance impact at a policy level. By integrating knowledge from fields such as political science, moral psychology, and marketing, we suggest that thinking and acting like marketers, lobbyists, movements, and political scientists would help us advance on the quest to bridge the chasm between evidence and policy.

Navigating the science policy interface: a co-created mind-map to support early career research contributions to policy-relevant evidence

The interface between science and policy is a complex space, in theory and practice, that sees the interaction of various actors and perspectives coming together to enable policy-relevant evidence to support decision-making. Early Career Researchers (ECRs) are increasingly interested in working at the science-policy interface to support evidence-informed policy, with the number of opportunities to do so increasing at national and international levels. However, there are still many challenges limiting ECRs participation, not least how such a complex space can be accessed and navigated. While recommendations for engaging at the science-policy interface already exist, a practical 'map' of the science-policy interface landscape which would allow for ECR participation in evidence co-production and synthesis in science-policy is missing. With the purpose of facilitating the engagement of ECRs producing biodiversity and ecosystem services policy-relevant evidence at the interface between science and policy, the authors have co-created a 'mind-map'-a tool to review the landscape of and leverage access to the science-policy interface. This tool was developed through reviewing published literature, collating personal experiences of the ECR authors, and validating against wider peer perspectives in an ECR workshop during the 7th Plenary of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). This co-created tool sees ECR engagement in (co-)producing evidence at the science-policy interface as an interaction of three main factors: the environment of the ECR, which mediates their acts of engagement at the science-policy interface leading to outcomes that will ultimately have a reciprocal impact on the ECR's environment.

The who, what, and how of virtual participation in environmental research

As a group of social scientists supporting a large, national, multi-site project dedicated to studying ecosystem services in natural resource production landscapes, we were tasked with co-hosting kick-off workshops at multiple locations. When, due to project design and the Covid-19 pandemic, we were forced to reshape our plans for these workshops and hold them online, we ended up changing our objectives. This redesign resulted in a new focus for our team-on the process of stakeholder and rightsholder engagement in environmental and sustainability research rather than the content of the workshops. Drawing on participant observation, surveys, and our professional experience, this perspective highlights lessons learned about organizing virtual stakeholder workshops to support landscape governance research and practice. We note that procedures followed for initiating stakeholder and rightsholder recruitment and engagement depend on the convenors' goals, although when multiple research teams are involved, the goals need to be negotiated. Further, more important than the robustness of engagement strategies is flexibility, feasibility, managing expectations-and keeping things simple.

Combining Fish Passage and Sediment Bypassing: A Conceptual Solution for Increased Sustainability of Dams and Reservoirs

Sedimentation is one of the main eco-morphological and technological challenges associated with reservoirs. Sedimentation not only reduces the functional capacity of a reservoir by filling it, but also changes downstream sediment dynamics and habitat availability for the aquatic biota. Additionally, dams hinder free bi-directional fish passage, emerging as a major threat to species of migratory fish. In the past decades, mitigation measures aimed at reducing such environmental and technological impacts have been developed. Sediment bypass tunnels (SBTs) have been shown to successfully help prevent reservoir sedimentation, whereas fish passages have been found to be potential solutions to facilitate bi-directional passage of fish. However, the construction of such structures, in particular of SBT, can be extremely costly. The development of design solutions that can function both for downstream sediment transport and up- and downstream fish passage should be considered as they can mitigate ecological deficiencies of reservoir operations while accounting for economic feasibility. Possibilities and challenges of combining SBT and fish passage were explored by bringing together a team of interdisciplinary specialists on hydraulics, sediment transport and continuity, bypassing, hydraulic structures, hydropower engineering, aquatic biology, and fish passage in a two-day workshop. Here, we present potential solutions identified during the workshop for integrating SBT and fish passage.

Core Competencies for Training Conservation Paleobiology Students in a Wicked World

Despite the promise conservation paleobiology holds for using geohistorical data and insights to solve conservation problems, training in the field typically does not equip students to be competent environmental problem solvers. The intention of this perspective piece is to start a conversation about how we might train conservation paleobiology students better, focusing on the competencies needed to promote deep engagement with “wicked” conservation problems that are difficult to solve. Ongoing conversations regarding design of academic programs in sustainability, a field allied with conservation science, can inform our discussion. The sustainability literature has defined an interrelated set of “core competencies” that go beyond general academic competencies to enable real-world sustainability problem solving: systems thinking, temporal thinking, normative thinking, strategic thinking, and interpersonal competence. Conservation paleobiology is usually taught within geology programs, where students are exposed to systems thinking and temporal thinking. However, the remaining competencies typically are absent or insufficiently developed. To infuse these competencies into conservation paleobiology curricula, we recommend: (1) enhancing connections with sustainability programs and encouraging a more cross-disciplinary approach to training; (2) developing a “menu” of concepts and methodologies for each competence from which to choose; and (3) recognizing that different skills are appropriate at different levels of education and experience. The proposed competency-based framework serves as a shared reference that can be used to develop pedagogies to better prepare conservation paleobiology students to navigate the wicked conservation challenges of our time.

Northwest Native Plants: A Digital Space for Paleoethnobotanical Knowledges and Biocultural Heritage

Biocultural heritage preservation relies on ethnobotanical knowledge and the paleoethnobotanical data used in (re)constructing histories of human–biota interactions. Biocultural heritage, defined as the knowledge and practices of Indigenous and local peoples and their biological relatives, is often guarded information, meant for specific audiences and withheld from other social circles. As such, these forms of heritage and knowledge must also be included in the ongoing data sovereignty discussions and movement. In this paper we share the process and design decisions behind creating an online database for ethnobotanical knowledge and associated paleoethnobotanical data, using a content management system designed to foreground Indigenous and local perspectives. Our main purpose is to suggest that the Mukurtu content management system, originally designed for physical items of cultural importance, be considered as a potential tool for digitizing and ethically circulating biocultural heritage, including paleoethnobotanical resources. With this database, we aim to create access to biocultural heritage and paleoethnobotanical considerations for a variety of audiences while also respecting the protected and sensitive natures of Indigenous and local knowledges.

Supporting Actionable Science for Environmental Policy: Advice for Funding Agencies From Decision Makers

Successful incorporation of scientific knowledge into environmental policy and decisions is a significant challenge. Although studies on how to bridge the knowledge-action gap have proliferated over the last decade, few have investigated the roles, responsibilities, and opportunities for funding bodies to meet this challenge. In this study we present a set of criteria gleaned from interviews with experts across Canada that can be used by funding bodies to evaluate the potential for proposed research to produce actionable knowledge for environmental policy and practice. We also provide recommendations for how funding bodies can design funding calls and foster the skills required to bridge the knowledge-action gap. We interviewed 84 individuals with extensive experience as knowledge users at the science-policy interface who work for environmentally-focused federal and provincial/territorial government bodies and non-governmental organizations. Respondents were asked to describe elements of research proposals that indicate that the resulting research is likely to be useful in a policy context, and what advice they would give to funding bodies to increase the potential impact of sponsored research. Twenty-five individuals also completed a closed-ended survey that followed up on these questions. Research proposals that demonstrated (1) a team with diverse expertise and experience in co-production, (2) a flexible research plan that aligns timelines and spatial scale with policy needs, (3) a clear and demonstrable link to a policy issue, and (4) a detailed and diverse knowledge exchange plan for reaching relevant stakeholders were seen as more promising for producing actionable knowledge. Suggested changes to funding models to enhance utility of funded research included (1) using diverse expertise to adjudicate awards, (2) supporting co-production and interdisciplinary research through longer grant durations and integrated reward structures, and (3) following-up on and rewarding knowledge exchange by conducting impact evaluation. The set of recommendations presented here can guide both funding agencies and research teams who wish to change how applied environmental science is conducted and improve its connection to policy and practice.

Researcher perspectives on challenges and opportunities in conservation physiology revealed from an online survey

Conservation physiology represents a recently emerging arm of conservation science that applies physiological tools and techniques to understand and solve conservation issues. While a multi-disciplinary toolbox can only help to address the global biodiversity crisis, any field can face challenges while becoming established, particularly highly applied disciplines that require multi-stakeholder involvement. Gaining first-hand knowledge of the challenges that conservation physiologists are facing can help characterize the current state of the field and build a better foundation for determining how it can grow. Through an online survey of 468 scientists working at the intersection of physiology and conservation, we aimed to identify characteristics of those engaging in conservation physiology research (e.g. demographics, primary taxa of study), gauge conservation physiology's role in contributing to on-the-ground conservation action, identify the perceived barriers to achieving success and determine how difficult any identified barriers are to overcome. Despite all participants having experience combining physiology and conservation, only one-third considered themselves to be 'conservation physiologists'. Moreover, there was a general perception that conservation physiology does not yet regularly lead to tangible conservation success. Respondents identified the recent conceptualization of the field and the broader issue of adequately translating science into management action as the primary reasons for these deficits. Other significant barriers that respondents have faced when integrating physiology and conservation science included a lack of funding, logistical constraints (e.g. sample sizes, obtaining permits) and a lack of physiological baseline data (i.e. reference ranges of a physiological metric's 'normal' or pre-environmental change levels). We identified 12 actions based on suggestions of survey participants that we anticipate will help deconstruct the barriers and continue to develop a narrative of physiology that is relevant to conservation science, policy and practice.

Diverse perspectives on interdisciplinarity from Members of the College of the Royal Society of Canada

Various multiple-disciplinary terms and concepts (although most commonly “interdisciplinarity,” which is used herein) are used to frame education, scholarship, research, and interactions within and outside academia. In principle, the premise of interdisciplinarity may appear to have many strengths; yet, the extent to which interdisciplinarity is embraced by the current generation of academics, the benefits and risks for doing so, and the barriers and facilitators to achieving interdisciplinarity, represent inherent challenges. Much has been written on the topic of interdisciplinarity, but to our knowledge there have been few attempts to consider and present diverse perspectives from scholars, artists, and scientists in a cohesive manner. As a team of 57 members from the Canadian College of New Scholars, Artists, and Scientists of the Royal Society of Canada (the College) who self-identify as being engaged or interested in interdisciplinarity, we provide diverse intellectual, cultural, and social perspectives. The goal of this paper is to share our collective wisdom on this topic with the broader community and to stimulate discourse and debate on the merits and challenges associated with interdisciplinarity. Perhaps the clearest message emerging from this exercise is that working across established boundaries of scholarly communities is rewarding, necessary, and is more likely to result in impact. However, there are barriers that limit the ease with which this can occur (e.g., lack of institutional structures and funding to facilitate cross-disciplinary exploration). Occasionally, there can be significant risk associated with doing interdisciplinary work (e.g., lack of adequate measurement or recognition of work by disciplinary peers). Solving many of the world’s complex and pressing problems (e.g., climate change, sustainable agriculture, the burden of chronic disease, and aging populations) demands thinking and working across long-standing, but in some ways restrictive, academic boundaries. Academic institutions and key support structures, especially funding bodies, will play an important role in helping to realize what is readily apparent to all who contributed to this paper—that interdisciplinarity is essential for solving complex problems; it is the new norm. Failure to empower and encourage those doing this research will serve as a great impediment to training, knowledge, and addressing societal issues.

Enhancing fisheries education and research through the Canadian Fisheries Research Network: A student perspective on interdisciplinarity, collaboration and inclusivity

Fisheries involve complex problems not easily addressed by a single discipline, methodology, or set of stakeholders. In 2010, the Canadian Fisheries Research Network (CFRN) was initiated to increase fisheries research capacity in Canada through interdisciplinary and inclusive research collaborations. As post-graduate students in the network, we reflected on the type of training necessary to tackle fisheries problems and reviewed opportunities available at Canadian universities to receive such training. This paper presents an overview of fisheries education currently available in Canada, reflects on our training within the CFRN, and proposes improvements to fisheries education and research. Our review of the subject revealed few dedicated fisheries programs, limited interdisciplinary programs, few specialized fisheries training programs, and a heavy reliance on academic supervisors to secure research opportunities in fisheries. In contrast, the CFRN enhanced our training by deliberately focusing on tools and techniques to address fisheries issues, providing venues to foster interdisciplinary and inclusive research collaborations, and exposing the realities of stakeholder collaborations. We call for post-graduate-level fisheries education and research that is interdisciplinary, collaborative, and inclusive to produce well-rounded scientists and managers, and we suggest ways that universities, researchers, and funding agencies can incorporate these themes into fisheries education and research.

Considerations for effective science communication

It is increasingly common for scientists to engage in sharing science-related knowledge with diverse knowledge users—an activity called science communication. Given that many scientists now seek information on how to communicate effectively, we have generated a list of 16 important considerations for those interested in science communication: (1) Define what science communication means to you and your research; (2) Know—and listen to—your target audience; (3) Consider a diverse but coordinated communication portfolio; (4) Draft skilled players and build a network; (5) Create and seize opportunities; (6) Be creative when you communicate; (7) Focus on the science in science communication; (8) Be an honest broker; (9) Understand the science of science communication; (10) Think like an entrepreneur; (11) Don’t let your colleagues stop you; (12) Integrate science communication into your research program; (13) Recognize how science communication enhances your science; (14) Request science communication funds from grants; (15) Strive for bidirectional communication; and (16) Evaluate, reflect, and be prepared to adapt. It is our ambition that the ideas shared here will encourage readers to engage in science communication and increase the effectiveness of those already active in science communication, stimulating them to share their experiences with others.

Necessary but challenging: Multiple disciplinary approaches to solving conservation problems

Contemporary conservation problems are typically positioned at the interface of complex ecological and human systems. Traditional approaches aiming to compartmentalize a phenomenon within the confines of a single discipline and failing to engage non-science partners are outmoded and cannot identify solutions that have traction in the social, economic, and political arenas in which conservation actions must operate. As a result, conservation science teams must adopt multiple disciplinary approaches that bridge not only academic disciplines but also the political and social realms and engage relevant partners. Five reasons are presented that outline why conservation problems demand multiple disciplinary approaches in order to move forward because: (i) socio-ecological systems are complex, (ii) multiple perspectives are better than one, (iii) the results of research must influence practice, (iv) the heterogeneity of scale necessitates it, and (v) conservation involves compromise. Presenting reasons that support multiple disciplinarity demands a review of the barriers that impede this process, as we are far from attaining a model or framework that is applicable in all contexts. Two challenges that impede multiple disciplinarity are discussed, in addition to pragmatic solutions that conservation scientists and practitioners can adopt in their work. Overall, conservation researchers and practitioners are encouraged to explore the multiple disciplinary dimensions of their respective realms to more effectively solve problems in biodiversity and sustainability.

Conservation physiology and the quest for a 'good' Anthropocene

It has been proposed that we are now living in a new geological epoch known as the Anthropocene, which is specifically defined by the impacts that humans are having on the Earth's biological diversity and geology. Although the proposal of this term was borne out of an acknowledgement of the negative changes we are imparting on the globe (e.g. climate change, pollution, coastal erosion, species extinctions), there has recently been action amongst a variety of disciplines aimed at achieving a 'good Anthropocene' that strives to balance societal needs and the preservation of the natural world. Here, we outline ways that the discipline of conservation physiology can help to delineate a hopeful, progressive and productive path for conservation in the Anthropocene and, specifically, achieve that vision. We focus on four primary ways that conservation physiology can contribute, as follows: (i) building a proactive approach to conservation; (ii) encouraging a pragmatic perspective; (iii) establishing an appreciation for environmental resilience; and (iv) informing and engaging the public and political arenas. As a collection of passionate individuals combining theory, technological advances, public engagement and a dedication to achieving conservation success, conservation physiologists are poised to make meaningful contributions to the productive, motivational and positive way forward that is necessary to curb and reverse negative human impact on the environment.

How do potential knowledge users evaluate new claims about a contested resource? Problems of power and politics in knowledge exchange and mobilization

This article examines how potential users of scientific and local/traditional/experiential knowledge evaluate new claims to knowing, using 67 interviews with government employees and non-governmental stakeholders involved in co-managing salmon fisheries in Canada's Fraser River. Research has consistently shown that there are major obstacles to moving new knowledge into policy, management, and public domains. New concepts such as Knowledge Exchange (KE) and Knowledge Mobilization (KMb) are being used to investigate these obstacles, but the processes by which potential users evaluate (sometimes competing) knowledge claims remain poorly understood. We use concepts from the sociology of science and find that potential users evaluate new knowledge claims based on three broad criteria: (1) the perceived merits of the claim, (2) perceptions of the character and motivation of the claimant, and (3) considerations of the social and political context of the claim. However, government employees and stakeholders have different interpretations of these criteria, leading to different knowledge preferences and normative expectations of scientists and other claimants. We draw both theoretical and practical lessons from these findings. With respect to theory, we argue that the sociology of science provides valuable insights into the political dimensions of knowledge and should be explicitly incorporated into KE/KMb research. With respect to practice, our findings underline the need for scientists and other claimants to make conscious decisions about whose expectations they hope to meet in their communications and engagement activities.