Cargando…

Closing the knowledge‐action gap in conservation with open science

The knowledge‐action gap in conservation science and practice occurs when research outputs do not result in actions to protect or restore biodiversity. Among the diverse and complex reasons for this gap, three barriers are fundamental: knowledge is often unavailable to practitioners and challenging...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Roche, Dominique G., O'Dea, Rose E., Kerr, Kecia A., Rytwinski, Trina, Schuster, Richard, Nguyen, Vivian M., Young, Nathan, Bennett, Joseph R., Cooke, Steven J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9300006/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34476839
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13835
_version_ 1784751108904714240
author Roche, Dominique G.
O'Dea, Rose E.
Kerr, Kecia A.
Rytwinski, Trina
Schuster, Richard
Nguyen, Vivian M.
Young, Nathan
Bennett, Joseph R.
Cooke, Steven J.
author_facet Roche, Dominique G.
O'Dea, Rose E.
Kerr, Kecia A.
Rytwinski, Trina
Schuster, Richard
Nguyen, Vivian M.
Young, Nathan
Bennett, Joseph R.
Cooke, Steven J.
author_sort Roche, Dominique G.
collection PubMed
description The knowledge‐action gap in conservation science and practice occurs when research outputs do not result in actions to protect or restore biodiversity. Among the diverse and complex reasons for this gap, three barriers are fundamental: knowledge is often unavailable to practitioners and challenging to interpret or difficult to use or both. Problems of availability, interpretability, and useability are solvable with open science practices. We considered the benefits and challenges of three open science practices for use by conservation scientists and practitioners. First, open access publishing makes the scientific literature available to all. Second, open materials (detailed methods, data, code, and software) increase the transparency and use of research findings. Third, open education resources allow conservation scientists and practitioners to acquire the skills needed to use research outputs. The long‐term adoption of open science practices would help researchers and practitioners achieve conservation goals more quickly and efficiently and reduce inequities in information sharing. However, short‐term costs for individual researchers (insufficient institutional incentives to engage in open science and knowledge mobilization) remain a challenge. We caution against a passive approach to sharing that simply involves making information available. We advocate a proactive stance toward transparency, communication, collaboration, and capacity building that involves seeking out and engaging with potential users to maximize the environmental and societal impact of conservation science.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9300006
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93000062022-07-21 Closing the knowledge‐action gap in conservation with open science Roche, Dominique G. O'Dea, Rose E. Kerr, Kecia A. Rytwinski, Trina Schuster, Richard Nguyen, Vivian M. Young, Nathan Bennett, Joseph R. Cooke, Steven J. Conserv Biol Essays The knowledge‐action gap in conservation science and practice occurs when research outputs do not result in actions to protect or restore biodiversity. Among the diverse and complex reasons for this gap, three barriers are fundamental: knowledge is often unavailable to practitioners and challenging to interpret or difficult to use or both. Problems of availability, interpretability, and useability are solvable with open science practices. We considered the benefits and challenges of three open science practices for use by conservation scientists and practitioners. First, open access publishing makes the scientific literature available to all. Second, open materials (detailed methods, data, code, and software) increase the transparency and use of research findings. Third, open education resources allow conservation scientists and practitioners to acquire the skills needed to use research outputs. The long‐term adoption of open science practices would help researchers and practitioners achieve conservation goals more quickly and efficiently and reduce inequities in information sharing. However, short‐term costs for individual researchers (insufficient institutional incentives to engage in open science and knowledge mobilization) remain a challenge. We caution against a passive approach to sharing that simply involves making information available. We advocate a proactive stance toward transparency, communication, collaboration, and capacity building that involves seeking out and engaging with potential users to maximize the environmental and societal impact of conservation science. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-11-29 2022-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9300006/ /pubmed/34476839 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13835 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Conservation Biology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Conservation Biology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Essays
Roche, Dominique G.
O'Dea, Rose E.
Kerr, Kecia A.
Rytwinski, Trina
Schuster, Richard
Nguyen, Vivian M.
Young, Nathan
Bennett, Joseph R.
Cooke, Steven J.
Closing the knowledge‐action gap in conservation with open science
title Closing the knowledge‐action gap in conservation with open science
title_full Closing the knowledge‐action gap in conservation with open science
title_fullStr Closing the knowledge‐action gap in conservation with open science
title_full_unstemmed Closing the knowledge‐action gap in conservation with open science
title_short Closing the knowledge‐action gap in conservation with open science
title_sort closing the knowledge‐action gap in conservation with open science
topic Essays
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9300006/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34476839
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13835
work_keys_str_mv AT rochedominiqueg closingtheknowledgeactiongapinconservationwithopenscience
AT odearosee closingtheknowledgeactiongapinconservationwithopenscience
AT kerrkeciaa closingtheknowledgeactiongapinconservationwithopenscience
AT rytwinskitrina closingtheknowledgeactiongapinconservationwithopenscience
AT schusterrichard closingtheknowledgeactiongapinconservationwithopenscience
AT nguyenvivianm closingtheknowledgeactiongapinconservationwithopenscience
AT youngnathan closingtheknowledgeactiongapinconservationwithopenscience
AT bennettjosephr closingtheknowledgeactiongapinconservationwithopenscience
AT cookestevenj closingtheknowledgeactiongapinconservationwithopenscience