Journal article 598 views 80 downloads
Priorities for translating goodwill between movement ecologists and conservation practitioners into effective collaboration
,
Todd E. Katzner ,
Andrew M. Allen,
Allert I. Bijleveld ,
Tjalle Boorsma,
Luca Borger ,
Francesca Cagnacci,
Tom Hart,
Michelle A. Henley ,
Richard M. Herren,
Eva M. A. Kok,
Bronwyn Maree,
Bruno Nebe,
David Shohami ,
Susanne Marieke Vogel,
Paul Walker,
Ignas M. A. Heitkönig,
E. J. Milner‐Gulland
Conservation Science and Practice, Volume: 5, Issue: 1
Swansea University Author:
Luca Borger
-
PDF | Version of Record
© 2022 The Authors. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License
Download (2.25MB)
DOI (Published version): 10.1111/csp2.12870
Abstract
Addressing ongoing biodiversity loss requires collaboration between conservation scientists and practitioners. However, such collaboration has proved challenging. Despite the potential importance of tracking animal movements for conservation, reviews of the tracking literature have identified a gap...
| Published in: | Conservation Science and Practice |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2578-4854 2578-4854 |
| Published: |
Wiley
2023
|
| Online Access: |
Check full text
|
| URI: | https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa62264 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Abstract: |
Addressing ongoing biodiversity loss requires collaboration between conservation scientists and practitioners. However, such collaboration has proved challenging. Despite the potential importance of tracking animal movements for conservation, reviews of the tracking literature have identified a gap between the academic discipline of movement ecology and its application to biodiversity conservation. Through structured conversations with movement ecologists and conservation practitioners, we aimed to understand whether the identified gap is also perceived in practice, and if so, what factors hamper collaboration and how these factors can be remediated. We found that both groups are motivated and willing to collaborate. However, because their motivations differ, there is potential for misunderstandings and miscommunications. In addition, external factors such as funder requirements, academic metrics, and journal scopes may limit the applicability of scientific results in a conservation setting. Potential solutions we identified included improved communication and better presentation of results, acknowledging each other's motivations and desired outputs, and adjustment of funder priorities. Addressing gaps between science and implementation can enhance collaboration and support conservation action to address the global biodiversity crisis more effectively. |
|---|---|
| Keywords: |
biodiversity crisis, biologging, GPS tracking, interdisciplinary collaboration, thematicanalysis, wildlife management |
| College: |
Faculty of Science and Engineering |
| Funders: |
Niels Stensen Fellowship, Grant/AwardNumber: Niels Stensen Fellowship 2021 |
| Issue: |
1 |