Do conservation managers use scientific evidence to support their decision-making?

Do conservation managers use scientific evidence to support their decision-making? Conservation involves making decisions on appropriate action from a wide range of options. For conservation to be effective, decision-makers need to know what actions do and do not work. Ideally, decisions should be based on effectiveness as demonstrated by scientific experiment or systematic review of evidence. Can decision-makers get this kind of information? We undertook a formal assessment of the extent to which scientific evidence is being used in conservation practice by conducting a survey of management plans and their compilers from major conservation organizations within the UK. Data collected suggest that the majority of conservation actions remain experience-based and rely heavily on traditional land management practices because, many management interventions remain unevaluated and, although some evidence exists, much is not readily accessible in a suitable form. We argue that nature conservation along with other fields of applied ecology, should exploit the concept of evidence-based practice developed and used in medicine and public health that aims to provide the best available evidence to the decision-maker(s) on the likely outcomes of alternative actions. Through critical evaluation, we present the challenges and benefits of adopting evidence based practice from the decision-makers point of view and identify the process to be followed to make it work. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Biological Conservation Elsevier

Do conservation managers use scientific evidence to support their decision-making?

Loading next page...
 
/lp/elsevier/do-conservation-managers-use-scientific-evidence-to-support-their-uK10acnXkg
Publisher
Elsevier
Copyright
Copyright © 2003 Elsevier Ltd
ISSN
0006-3207
D.O.I.
10.1016/j.biocon.2003.11.007
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Conservation involves making decisions on appropriate action from a wide range of options. For conservation to be effective, decision-makers need to know what actions do and do not work. Ideally, decisions should be based on effectiveness as demonstrated by scientific experiment or systematic review of evidence. Can decision-makers get this kind of information? We undertook a formal assessment of the extent to which scientific evidence is being used in conservation practice by conducting a survey of management plans and their compilers from major conservation organizations within the UK. Data collected suggest that the majority of conservation actions remain experience-based and rely heavily on traditional land management practices because, many management interventions remain unevaluated and, although some evidence exists, much is not readily accessible in a suitable form. We argue that nature conservation along with other fields of applied ecology, should exploit the concept of evidence-based practice developed and used in medicine and public health that aims to provide the best available evidence to the decision-maker(s) on the likely outcomes of alternative actions. Through critical evaluation, we present the challenges and benefits of adopting evidence based practice from the decision-makers point of view and identify the process to be followed to make it work.

Journal

Biological ConservationElsevier

Published: Sep 1, 2004

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off