Selecting appropriate methods of knowledge synthesis to inform biodiversity policy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Electronic versions

Documents

DOI

  • Andrew Pullin
  • Geoff Frampton
    University of Southampton
  • Rob Jongman
  • Christian Kohl
    Julius Kühn-Institut
  • Barbara Livoreil
    The Foundation for Research on Biodiversity
  • Alexandra Lux
    Institute for Social-Ecological Research
  • György Pataki
    Corvinus University of Budapest
  • Gillian Petrokofsky
    University of Oxford
  • Aranka Podhora
    Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research
  • Heli Saarikoski
    Finnish Environment Institute
  • Luis Santamaria
    Doñana Biological Station
  • Stefan Schindler
    University of Vienna
  • Isabel Sousa-Pinto
    University of Porto
  • Marie Vandewalle
    Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ, Leipzig
  • Heidi Wittmer
    Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ, Leipzig
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.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1285-1300
JournalBiodiversity and Conservation
Volume25
Issue number7
Early online date24 May 2016
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jun 2016

Total downloads

No data available
View graph of relations