{"title":"Expert engagement in setting a climate adaptation research agenda","authors":"Sarah Skikne, Jessica Hellmann","doi":"10.1111/csp2.13227","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In order to initiate the actionable science needed to support effective conservation under climate change, we engaged researchers and other experts in refining and prioritizing a climate adaptation research agenda that was originally developed via dialogue with natural resource managers. Experts identified topics that were missing or underrepresented in an initial practitioner-defined list of science topics, and then scored topics according to the state of knowledge, the feasibility of research, and the potential that research might change management. Our process capitalizes on the complementarity between the expertise of practitioners and the expertise of researchers and other non-practitioners, improves the transparency and legitimacy of the agenda-setting process, and reveals the challenges public agencies have in focusing on some research topics.</p>","PeriodicalId":51337,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Science and Practice","volume":"6 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/csp2.13227","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conservation Science and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/csp2.13227","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In order to initiate the actionable science needed to support effective conservation under climate change, we engaged researchers and other experts in refining and prioritizing a climate adaptation research agenda that was originally developed via dialogue with natural resource managers. Experts identified topics that were missing or underrepresented in an initial practitioner-defined list of science topics, and then scored topics according to the state of knowledge, the feasibility of research, and the potential that research might change management. Our process capitalizes on the complementarity between the expertise of practitioners and the expertise of researchers and other non-practitioners, improves the transparency and legitimacy of the agenda-setting process, and reveals the challenges public agencies have in focusing on some research topics.