Environmental evidence in action: on the science and practice of evidence synthesis and evidence-based decision-making.

IF 5.2 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Environmental Evidence Pub Date : 2023-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-05-18 DOI:10.1186/s13750-023-00302-5
Steven J Cooke, Carly N Cook, Vivian M Nguyen, Jessica C Walsh, Nathan Young, Christopher Cvitanovic, Matthew J Grainger, Nicola P Randall, Matt Muir, Andrew N Kadykalo, Kathryn A Monk, Andrew S Pullin
{"title":"Environmental evidence in action: on the science and practice of evidence synthesis and evidence-based decision-making.","authors":"Steven J Cooke, Carly N Cook, Vivian M Nguyen, Jessica C Walsh, Nathan Young, Christopher Cvitanovic, Matthew J Grainger, Nicola P Randall, Matt Muir, Andrew N Kadykalo, Kathryn A Monk, Andrew S Pullin","doi":"10.1186/s13750-023-00302-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In civil society we expect that policy and management decisions will be made using the best available evidence. Yet, it is widely known that there are many barriers that limit the extent to which that occurs. One way to overcome these barriers is via robust, comprehensive, transparent and repeatable evidence syntheses (such as systematic reviews) that attempt to minimize various forms of bias to present a summary of existing knowledge for decision-making purposes. Relative to other disciplines (e.g., health care, education), such evidence-based decision-making remains relatively nascent for environment management despite major threats to humanity, such as the climate, pollution and biodiversity crises demonstrating that human well-being is inextricably linked to the biophysical environment. Fortunately, there are a growing number of environmental evidence syntheses being produced that can be used by decision makers. It is therefore an opportune time to reflect on the science and practice of evidence-based decision-making in environment management to understand the extent to which evidence syntheses are embraced and applied in practice. Here we outline a number of key questions related to the use of environmental evidence that need to be explored in an effort to enhance evidence-based decision-making. There is an urgent need for research involving methods from social science, behavioural sciences, and public policy to understand the basis for patterns and trends in environmental evidence use (or misuse or ignorance). There is also a need for those who commission and produce evidence syntheses, as well as the end users of these syntheses to reflect on their experiences and share them with the broader evidence-based practice community to identify needs and opportunities for advancing the entire process of evidence-based practice. It is our hope that the ideas shared here will serve as a roadmap for additional scholarship that will collectively enhance evidence-based decision-making and ultimately benefit the environment and humanity.</p>","PeriodicalId":48621,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Evidence","volume":"12 1","pages":"10"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10191815/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Evidence","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-023-00302-5","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/5/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In civil society we expect that policy and management decisions will be made using the best available evidence. Yet, it is widely known that there are many barriers that limit the extent to which that occurs. One way to overcome these barriers is via robust, comprehensive, transparent and repeatable evidence syntheses (such as systematic reviews) that attempt to minimize various forms of bias to present a summary of existing knowledge for decision-making purposes. Relative to other disciplines (e.g., health care, education), such evidence-based decision-making remains relatively nascent for environment management despite major threats to humanity, such as the climate, pollution and biodiversity crises demonstrating that human well-being is inextricably linked to the biophysical environment. Fortunately, there are a growing number of environmental evidence syntheses being produced that can be used by decision makers. It is therefore an opportune time to reflect on the science and practice of evidence-based decision-making in environment management to understand the extent to which evidence syntheses are embraced and applied in practice. Here we outline a number of key questions related to the use of environmental evidence that need to be explored in an effort to enhance evidence-based decision-making. There is an urgent need for research involving methods from social science, behavioural sciences, and public policy to understand the basis for patterns and trends in environmental evidence use (or misuse or ignorance). There is also a need for those who commission and produce evidence syntheses, as well as the end users of these syntheses to reflect on their experiences and share them with the broader evidence-based practice community to identify needs and opportunities for advancing the entire process of evidence-based practice. It is our hope that the ideas shared here will serve as a roadmap for additional scholarship that will collectively enhance evidence-based decision-making and ultimately benefit the environment and humanity.

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
行动中的环境证据:关于证据综合和循证决策的科学和实践。
在民间社会,我们期望政策和管理决策将使用现有的最佳证据。然而,众所周知,有许多障碍限制了这种情况的发生。克服这些障碍的一种方法是通过稳健、全面、透明和可重复的证据综合(如系统审查),试图最大限度地减少各种形式的偏见,为决策目的提供现有知识的摘要。与其他学科(如卫生保健、教育)相比,尽管气候、污染和生物多样性危机等对人类的重大威胁表明人类福祉与生物物理环境密不可分,但这种循证决策在环境管理方面仍然相对初级。幸运的是,目前正在制作越来越多的环境证据综合,供决策者使用。因此,现在是反思环境管理中循证决策的科学和实践的恰当时机,以了解证据综合在实践中的接受和应用程度。在这里,我们概述了与使用环境证据有关的一些关键问题,这些问题需要探讨,以加强循证决策。迫切需要利用社会科学、行为科学和公共政策的方法进行研究,以了解环境证据使用(或滥用或无知)模式和趋势的基础。委托和制作证据综合的人以及这些综合的最终用户也需要反思自己的经验,并与更广泛的循证实践社区分享,以确定推进整个循证实践过程的需求和机会。我们希望,这里分享的想法将成为额外奖学金的路线图,共同加强循证决策,最终造福环境和人类。
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
Environmental Evidence
Environmental Evidence Environmental Science-Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
18.20%
发文量
36
审稿时长
17 weeks
期刊介绍: Environmental Evidence is the journal of the Collaboration for Environmental Evidence (CEE). The Journal facilitates rapid publication of evidence syntheses, in the form of Systematic Reviews and Maps conducted to CEE Guidelines and Standards. We focus on the effectiveness of environmental management interventions and the impact of human activities on the environment. Our scope covers all forms of environmental management and human impacts and therefore spans the natural and social sciences. Subjects include water security, agriculture, food security, forestry, fisheries, natural resource management, biodiversity conservation, climate change, ecosystem services, pollution, invasive species, environment and human wellbeing, sustainable energy use, soil management, environmental legislation, environmental education.
期刊最新文献
Global evidence for the ecological effects of greening of grey infrastructure: a systematic review protocol. Assessing the effectiveness of ontology-grounded AI term extraction using OntoGPT for environmental evidence synthesis. What research exists on the presence of 6PPD-Q in different environmental media? A systematic map protocol. Correction: What evidence exists on how biodiversity is affected by the adoption of carbon footprint-reducing agricultural practices? A systematic map. What evidence exists on the impacts of human activities on biodiversity and carbon capacity in North-East Atlantic blue carbon ecosystems: a systematic map protocol.
×
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:604180095
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