Distinguishing between research and monitoring programs in environmental science and management

IF 1.9 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences Pub Date : 2023-09-26 DOI:10.1007/s13412-023-00859-0
T. J. Arciszewski, D. R. Roberts, A. Mahaffey, R. R. O. Hazewinkel
{"title":"Distinguishing between research and monitoring programs in environmental science and management","authors":"T. J. Arciszewski, D. R. Roberts, A. Mahaffey, R. R. O. Hazewinkel","doi":"10.1007/s13412-023-00859-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The terms “research” and “monitoring” are commonly used interchangeably to describe the data-gathering, information-generating, and knowledge-translating activities in environmental science and management. While research and monitoring share many attributes, such as the tools used, they may also differ in important ways, including the audience and their stability. In any environmental program, any potential differences between research and monitoring may be inconsequential, but distinguishing between these two activities, especially when both words are used casually, may be necessary to ensure the alignment between the tools and approaches and the expectations and goals of the program. Additionally, the importance of distinguishing between research and monitoring becomes greater when many participants from varying backgrounds with differing expectations are involved in the design, execution, and governance of the program. In this essay, we highlight differences between environmental research and monitoring, provide potential criteria to define them, and discuss how their activities interact and overlap. In our view, environmental monitoring programs are typically standardized and designed to address stakeholder concerns, to ensure activities comply with regulatory statutes or other known objectives. In contrast, environmental research may be esoteric, driven by a specific line of inquiry, and may lack a defined endpoint. Although potential difficulties with categorizing some programs or portions of combined programs will likely always remain, explicitly identifying the attributes of a program is necessary to achieve its objectives.","PeriodicalId":44550,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-023-00859-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract The terms “research” and “monitoring” are commonly used interchangeably to describe the data-gathering, information-generating, and knowledge-translating activities in environmental science and management. While research and monitoring share many attributes, such as the tools used, they may also differ in important ways, including the audience and their stability. In any environmental program, any potential differences between research and monitoring may be inconsequential, but distinguishing between these two activities, especially when both words are used casually, may be necessary to ensure the alignment between the tools and approaches and the expectations and goals of the program. Additionally, the importance of distinguishing between research and monitoring becomes greater when many participants from varying backgrounds with differing expectations are involved in the design, execution, and governance of the program. In this essay, we highlight differences between environmental research and monitoring, provide potential criteria to define them, and discuss how their activities interact and overlap. In our view, environmental monitoring programs are typically standardized and designed to address stakeholder concerns, to ensure activities comply with regulatory statutes or other known objectives. In contrast, environmental research may be esoteric, driven by a specific line of inquiry, and may lack a defined endpoint. Although potential difficulties with categorizing some programs or portions of combined programs will likely always remain, explicitly identifying the attributes of a program is necessary to achieve its objectives.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
区分环境科学和管理中的研究和监测项目
“研究”和“监测”这两个术语通常交替使用来描述环境科学与管理中的数据收集、信息生成和知识转化活动。虽然研究和监测有许多共同点,如使用的工具,但它们也可能在重要方面有所不同,包括受众和稳定性。在任何环境项目中,研究和监测之间的任何潜在差异可能都是无关紧要的,但区分这两种活动,特别是当这两个词被随意使用时,可能是必要的,以确保工具和方法与项目的期望和目标之间的一致性。此外,当许多来自不同背景、有着不同期望的参与者参与到项目的设计、执行和治理中时,区分研究和监测的重要性就变得更加重要。在本文中,我们强调了环境研究和监测之间的差异,提供了定义它们的潜在标准,并讨论了它们的活动如何相互作用和重叠。在我们看来,环境监测项目通常是标准化的,旨在解决利益相关者的关切,确保活动符合法规或其他已知目标。相比之下,环境研究可能是深奥的,由一个特定的调查线驱动,可能缺乏一个明确的终点。尽管对某些程序或组合程序的部分进行分类的潜在困难可能始终存在,但是明确地识别程序的属性对于实现其目标是必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
9.50%
发文量
75
期刊介绍: The Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences is the official publication for the Association for Environmental?Studies and Sciences?(AESS). Interdisciplinary environmental studies require an integration of many different scientific and professional disciplines. The AESS and the Journal provide fora for the advancement of interdisciplinary approaches to the study of the coupled human-nature systems. A major goal of AESS is to encourage this advancement by promoting related teaching research and service and by facilitating communication across boundaries that may inhibit environmental discourse across traditional academic disciplines—for example between and among the physical biological social sciences the humanities and environmental professions. This commitment also involves supporting the professional development of Association members and advancing the educational status of Environmental Studies and Sciences programs. The Journal provides a peer-reviewed academically rigorous and professionally recognized venue for the publication of explicitly interdisciplinary environmental research policy analysis and advocacy educational discourse and other related matters. Contributions are welcome from any discipline or combination of disciplines any vocation or professional affiliation any national ethnic or cultural background. Articles may relate to any historical and global setting. These contributions should explicitly involve multi-disciplinary or trans-disciplinary aspects of environmental issues; and identify the way(s) in which the work will contribute to environmental research policy making advocacy education or related activities.
期刊最新文献
Perceptions and strategies of adaptation of Moroccan farmers to climate change—case of Khemisset province Understanding pro-environmental behavior: the effects of social influence and environmental awareness in Cambodian context Beyond the classroom: Influence of a sustainability intervention on university students’ environmental knowledge and behaviors Framing uncertainty in water policy discourse: insights from Arizona’s Project ADD Water Impact of climate change awareness on household attitude toward food waste reduction
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1