TY - JOUR
T1 - Principles for the production of evidence-based guidance for conservation actions
AU - Downey, Harriet
AU - Bretagnolle, Vincent
AU - Brick, Cameron
AU - Bulman, Caroline R.
AU - Cooke, Steven J.
AU - Dean, Mike
AU - Edmonds, Bob
AU - Frick, Winifred F.
AU - Friedman, Kim
AU - McNicol, Catherine
AU - Nichols, Christopher
AU - Herbert, Saul
AU - O’Brien, David
AU - Ockendon, Nancy
AU - Petrovan, Silviu
AU - Stroud, David
AU - White, Thomas B.
AU - Worthington, Thomas A.
AU - Sutherland, William J.
PY - 2022/5
Y1 - 2022/5
N2 - Many types of guidance documents inform conservation by providing practical recommendations for the management of species and habitats. To ensure effective decisions are made, such guidance should be based upon relevant and up-to-date evidence. We reviewed conservation guidance for mitigation and management of species and habitats in the United Kingdom and Ireland, identifying 301 examples produced by over 50 organizations. Of these, only 29% provided a reference list, of which only 32% provided reference(s) relevant to justify the recommended actions (9% of the total). Furthermore, even this guidance was often outdated, lacked a methodology for production, or did not highlight uncertainty in the key evidence that supported the recommendations. These deficiencies can lead to misguided and ineffective conservation practices, policies, and decisions, and a waste of resources. Based on this review and co-design by experts from 14 organizations, we present a set of principles for ensuring sufficient and relevant evidence is transparently incorporated into future conservation guidance. Producing evidence-based guidance in line with these principles would enable more effective conservation outcomes.
AB - Many types of guidance documents inform conservation by providing practical recommendations for the management of species and habitats. To ensure effective decisions are made, such guidance should be based upon relevant and up-to-date evidence. We reviewed conservation guidance for mitigation and management of species and habitats in the United Kingdom and Ireland, identifying 301 examples produced by over 50 organizations. Of these, only 29% provided a reference list, of which only 32% provided reference(s) relevant to justify the recommended actions (9% of the total). Furthermore, even this guidance was often outdated, lacked a methodology for production, or did not highlight uncertainty in the key evidence that supported the recommendations. These deficiencies can lead to misguided and ineffective conservation practices, policies, and decisions, and a waste of resources. Based on this review and co-design by experts from 14 organizations, we present a set of principles for ensuring sufficient and relevant evidence is transparently incorporated into future conservation guidance. Producing evidence-based guidance in line with these principles would enable more effective conservation outcomes.
KW - evidence-based conservation
KW - knowledge
KW - policy
KW - practice
KW - recommendations
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85128912667&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/csp2.12663
DO - 10.1111/csp2.12663
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85128912667
SN - 2578-4854
VL - 4
JO - Conservation Science and Practice
JF - Conservation Science and Practice
IS - 5
M1 - e12663
ER -