S

Gr

JC

a

ARRA

KCGKKRT

I

hmtusoeedsd

dc2StmMkoc

1d

Journal for Nature Conservation 20 (2012) 62– 64

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Journal for Nature Conservation

j our na l ho mepage: www.elsev ier .de / jnc

hort communication

raduate students in conservation biology: Bridging theesearch–implementation gap

ason R. Courter ∗

lemson University, Department of Forestry and Natural Resources, 202 Lehotsky Hall, Clemson, SC 29634-0317, USA

r t i c l e i n f o

rticle history:eceived 7 July 2011eceived in revised form 17 August 2011ccepted 10 October 2011

a b s t r a c t

There is a growing consensus that a gap exists between research conducted at academic institutions andinformation available to practitioners that implement research into conservation policy and practice.Here, I review common recommendations for bridging the Research–Implementation Gap in conservationbiology, highlight the unique abilities of graduate students to contribute solutions to this problem, andpropose ways research institutions and professionals can encourage graduate students to participate in

eywords:onservation educationraduate educationnowing-doing gapnowledge sharingesearch and implementation

this process. While some appropriately point out that the main purpose of graduate school is to focus onresearch, I argue that being exposed early to the broader issues of research and implementation enhancesthe graduate research experience, helps train students to become leaders in conservation science, andcontributes both immediate and long-term solutions to the research–implementation problem.

© 2011 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.

ransdisciplinary conservation research

ntroduction

‘Conservation biology’ is a relatively young discipline thatas grown quickly in popularity since its inception in theid-1980s (Soule 1985). According to the Society for Conserva-

ion Biology (http://www.conbio.org/resources/Programs; websitepdated August 2011), there are currently 521 colleges and univer-ities that offer academic programs in conservation; many of whichffer graduate programs in diverse fields such as environmental sci-nce, ecology, forestry, wildlife, conservation genetics, geography,nvironmental planning, and public policy. In these programs, stu-ents learn basic and applied biology, become familiar with theocio-economic challenges of solving conservation problems, andevelop skills using conservation modeling software.

While quickly growing in popularity, especially among stu-ents, the field of conservation biology has also faced manyhallenges. Recent articles in Conservation Biology (Knight et al.006a, 2008; Manolis et al. 2009) and BioTropica (Born et al. 2009;underland et al. 2009) highlight a Research–Implementation Gaphat exists in conservation biology, whereby conservation assess-

ents are rarely translated into meaningful conservation action.any facets of this problem have been identified, including a lack of

nowledge-sharing between researchers and practitioners, a lackf access by practitioners to information, and a disconnect betweenonservation research and realistic implementation goals, given

∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 616 240 2397; fax: +1 864 656 3304.E-mail address: jcourte@clemson.edu

617-1381/$ – see front matter © 2011 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.oi:10.1016/j.jnc.2011.10.001

real-world management objectives and constraints (Knight et al.2008).

Useful suggestions have been proposed to narrow theResearch–Implementation Gap (Boreux et al. 2009; Sunderlandet al. 2009). Most of these ‘calls for action,’ however, are directedtoward research scientists and large research institutions (Knightet al. 2008). While these groups are certainly appropriate targetaudiences to consider, the role of graduate students in narrowingthis gap has been largely overlooked (Duchelle et al. 2009).

Here, I review four common recommendations for bridging theResearch–Implementation Gap and highlight the unique abilitiesof graduate students to participate in this process. I conclude byproposing three ways research institutions and professionals canencourage graduate students to participate in this endeavour.

Recommendation #1

Facilitate communication between researchers and practition-ers in designing and developing conservation assessments (Bornet al. 2009; Jacobson 2009; Sunderland et al. 2009).

Goals and designs for conservation assessments often differbetween researchers and practitioners. While some internationalconservation organisations (e.g. the Nature Conservancy, the Inter-national Union for Conservation of Nature) have active researchprograms and carry out implementation, the majority of “suc-

cessful” conservation assessments published in highly respectedjournals are not designed or implemented by field practitioners(Knight et al. 2008). The importance of including practitioners inthe developmental phase of a research project has been recognised

ure Co

(p

CpissipAiffMcteebit

dfttfc(mcwcaiadt

R

si

rlpm2ar

ccisaCbt1oat

J.R. Courter / Journal for Nat

Jacobson 2009) and graduate students may be able to contribute byromoting communication between researchers and practitioners.

Within most graduate departments (e.g., Biological Sciences,onservation Biology, Wildlife) there are students who intend toursue careers in academia and basic research and students who

ntend to pursue careers in applied management. During graduatechool, students who intend to pursue a career in basic researchhould present research at a meeting that focuses on applied issuesn their field (e.g., a meeting of the Wildlife Society, the Euro-ean Conservation Agriculture Federation, or the Association ofpplied Biologists), and students who intend to pursue a career

n applied disciplines should present research at a conference thatocuses on basic science (e.g., a meeting of the American Associationor the Advancement of Science or the Animal Behavior Society).

any organisations (e.g., Society for Conservation Biology, Ecologi-al Society of America) offer student registration rates and generousravel awards for students to attend meetings at reduced costs,specially students from developing countries. Developing patternsarly in a graduate student’s academic career of bridging the gapetween basic and applied science may facilitate knowledge shar-

ng between researchers and practitioners and foster relationshipshat continue throughout a student’s career.

In many graduate programs, graduate committees oversee stu-ent progress. Some universities provide considerable flexibilityor students to select committee members and students shouldhink carefully when making this decision. By including both prac-itioners and academics on graduate committees, students becomeamiliar with broad issues related to their study systems andomfortable discussing their research using different vocabularyJacobson and McDuff 1998). It is also possible that committee

eetings could facilitate positive communication between diverseommittee members (i.e., practitioners and research biologistsithin and between research institutions) that may lead to future

ollaborative efforts. At universities where graduate committeesre non-existent or in cases when it is not possible to formallynclude a field practitioner on a committee (e.g., if a school requiresll committee members to have earned a PhD), graduate stu-ents should consider sending copies of their research proposalso appropriate field practitioners for critique and review.

ecommendation #2

Expand the social dimension of conservation assessments andupport conservation plans with transdisciplinary social learningnstitutions (Knight et al. 2006b, 2008; Sunderland et al. 2009).

Conservation research is unlikely to be implemented if it is notecognised as important by a variety of social institutions. Col-aboration is often necessary among governmental agencies, citylanners, legislators, citizens, and private-interest groups to imple-ent and achieve desired conservation actions (Schindler et al.

011; Shanley and López 2009). It is critical that conservationssessments are designed to encompass social and economic issueselevant to citizens and stakeholders (Kainer et al. 2009).

Graduate students may be well-positioned to assist in this pro-ess. Typical general education requirements of most four-yearolleges and universities include courses in a variety of disciplines,ncluding economics, communication, political science, business,ociology, foreign language, and philosophy. Some undergradu-te programs (e.g., environmental studies) are intentionally broad.oncepts learned from recent interdisciplinary coursework maye useful in communicating with people from a variety of institu-ions regarding the implementation of research findings (Jacobson

990; Jacobson and McDuff 1998). Graduate students may alsoffer different perspectives on how to facilitate communicationmong parties, including the use of social networking tools (e.g.,witter, Facebook). An increasing number of graduate students in

nservation 20 (2012) 62– 64 63

conservation biology are now including a chapter on the socio-economic impacts of their results in their dissertations (Duchelleet al. 2009).

Recommendation #3

Reward academics for societal engagement and implementation(Born et al. 2009; Gallo et al. 2009; Knight et al. 2008).

A third barrier to bridging the Research–Implementation Gap isthat research scientists are given little positive incentive to educatelandowners and management agencies about their findings. Mostuniversity promotion systems are built upon researchers obtaininggrant funds and publishing articles in highly cited research journals,instead of measuring whether research is translated into meaning-ful conservation action (Chapron and Arlettaz 2008). While thissystem may offer an easy way to quantify research production,it largely overlooks and indirectly discourages knowledge sharingwith practitioners as an important responsibility of a researcher(Born et al. 2009). In a recent study measuring conservation andimplementation effectiveness in Greece and Bulgaria, even aca-demic experts that regularly read and publish scientific papersreported rarely learning about conservation and implementationstrategies from published literature, but rather from local manage-ment plans, unpublished reports, and local experts (Schindler et al.2011). Finding time to communicate research results to practition-ers and the general public is often difficult for faculty members,whose responsibilities also include teaching classes, supervisinggraduate students, writing grants, and serving on university com-mittees.

Graduate students should recognise the demanding expecta-tions placed on their advisors and be willing to assist them in theinformation dissemination process. This could mean speaking at alocal Audubon, garden club, or farm meeting, representing a uni-versity at a community event, or helping plan training seminars forfield practitioners (Kainer et al. 2009; Shackleton et al. 2009). Evenhelping with the logistics of a meeting (e.g., reserving a meetingplace or advertising for a seminar) may make it easier for a fac-ulty member to make time for community outreach. As a resultof this process, graduate student research may even benefit fromstakeholder feedback.

In addition, graduate student organisations should formallyrecognise outstanding efforts in education and outreach. For exam-ple, awards such as ‘Teacher of the Year Award’ or ‘OutstandingCommunity Achievement Award’ should be given regularly todeserving professors with notification sent to deans and appro-priate university administrators. Graduate students (and graduatestudent organisations) may be in a unique position to encouragecommunity organisations and field practitioners to notify univer-sity officials and local media outlets after receiving exceptionalguidance or service from a university employee. While long-termchanges in faculty incentive structure may occur gradually, draw-ing positive attention to valuable information sharing efforts couldbenefit this effort.

Recommendation #4

Increase the availability of information to practitioners (Bornet al. 2009; Knight et al. 2008).

Information generated by researchers is not always read-ily available to practitioners. Results from conservation researchconducted in developing countries are often published in English-language journals (Duchelle et al. 2009) that are difficult for local

resource managers to access. In addition, high subscription costsmay prohibit many practitioners (in both developing and devel-oped countries) to learn about and implement relevant researchfindings (Sunderland et al. 2009).

6 re Con

m(jsconupijtipt

Sp

bbfh

(

(

(

4 J.R. Courter / Journal for Natu

Graduate students may help increase accessibility to infor-ation by supporting the development of open-access journals

Coloma and Harris 2005; Schindler et al. 2011). Open-accessournals are journals accessible online, worldwide, without a sub-cription fee (for example, see ‘Conservation Evidence’ www.onservationevidence.com or ‘PLoS Biology’ www.plosbiology.rg). Publishing results and citing papers from open-access jour-als or encouraging home institutions to support articles publishedsing the open-access option will help these journals increase inopularity. The demands and expectations of researchers (includ-

ng graduate students) ultimately drive the publication of scientificournals. Expectations from graduate students have the potentialo affect decisions made by publishers. Student opinions regard-ng open-access journals can be appropriately conveyed to journalublishers at ‘meet the editor’ sessions and other student forumshat commonly occur during society meetings.

upport from research institutions and establishedrofessionals

More and more graduate students are entering conservationiology or a related field and are interested in bridging the gapetween research and implementation. Research institutions, pro-essional science organisations, and established professionals canelp facilitate this contribution in at least three ways:

1) Encourage graduate students to communicate research resultswith diverse stakeholders, government agencies, and the gen-eral public. This could involve supporting student travel tocommunity meetings, high schools, or local conservation agen-cies, in addition to providing funding to attend scientificmeetings in multiple subdisciplines. At a larger scale, thismay involve making research fellowships readily available toyoung scientists who effectively integrate research and imple-mentation (e.g., Collaborative Initiative Fund from the SwitzerFoundation, David H. Smith Conservation Research Fellowship,National Science Foundation Integrated Graduate Educationand Research Traineeship program). Learning how to commu-nicate effectively may also require mentoring from a majoradvisor (Kainer et al. 2006).

2) Relax requirements for qualified professionals to serve on grad-uate committees at universities where graduate committeesare utilised. For some professionals acquiring ‘adjunct’ statusor being approved by an entire department may be time con-suming and make serving on a committee undesirable. Makinga provision that at least one committee member outside astudent’s home institution can be added to a committee andquickly approved by the committee itself, would make it eas-ier for graduate students to assemble a diverse committee (i.e.,researchers and practitioners). At schools where graduate com-mittees are not in place, students should be encouraged tosubmit their research proposals to field practitioners for review.

3) Recognise outreach as an important duty of graduate students,along with necessary coursework and research (Noss 1997).Many graduate students currently participate in outreach tocontribute to their communities and gain teaching experi-ences (Andrews et al. 2005), however additional incentivessuch as course credit or increased assistantship funding wouldlikely enhance graduate student participation. In addition, insti-tutional support of courses that emphasise service-learning

(Furco 1996), whereby students provide service to their com-munities while interacting and learning from communitymembers, may provide students with experience communicat-ing effectively with a wide range of audiences.

servation 20 (2012) 62– 64

While some may appropriately point out that the main pur-pose of graduate school is to focus on research and that studentshave the rest of their lives to become involved in implementa-tion, the benefits of graduate student participation in bridging theResearch–Implementation Gap outweigh the costs and graduatestudents are well-suited to contribute to this endeavour. Beingexposed early to the broader issues of research and implementa-tion enhances the graduate research experience and can help trainstudents to become future leaders in conservation science.

Acknowledgements

The author thanks Ron Johnson, Rob Baldwin, and members ofthe Clemson University Natural Resources Graduate Student Asso-ciation for helpful comments to improve this manuscript.

References

Andrews, E., Weaver, A., Hanley, D., Shamatha, J., & Melton, G. (2005). Scientistsand public outreach: Participation, motivations, and impediments. Journal ofGeoscience Education, 53, 281–293.

Boreux, V., Born, J., & Lawes, M. J. (2009). Sharing ecological knowledge: Opportuni-ties and barriers to uptake. Biotropica, 41, 532–534.

Born, J., Boreux, V., & Lawes, M. J. (2009). Synthesis: Sharing ecological knowledge:The way forward. Biotropica, 41, 586–588.

Chapron, G., & Arlettaz, R. (2008). Conservation: Academics should ‘conserve orperish’. Nature, 451, 127.

Coloma, J., & Harris, E. (2005). Open-access science: A necessity for global publichealth. PLoS Pathogens, 1, e21.

Duchelle, A. E., Biedenweg, K., Lucas, C., Virapongse, A., Radachowsky, J., Wojcik, D.J., et al. (2009). Graduate students and knowledge exchange with local stake-holders: Possibilities and preparation. Biotropica, 5, 578–585.

Furco, A. (1996). Service-learning: A balanced approach to experiential education. InB. Taylor (Ed.), Expanding boundaries: Serving and learning (pp. 2–6). Corporationfor National Service: Washington, DC.

Gallo, L. A., Marchelli, P., Chauchard, L., & Penalba, M. G. (2009). Knowing and doing:Research leading to action in the conservation of forest genetic diversity ofPatagonian temperate forests. Conservation Biology, 23, 895–898.

Jacobson, S. K. (1990). Graduate education in conservation biology. ConservationBiology, 4, 431–440.

Jacobson, S. K. (2009). Communication skills for conservation professionals. Washing-ton, DC: Island Press.

Jacobson, S. K., & McDuff, M. D. (1998). Training idiot savants: The lack of humandimensions in conservation biology. Conservation Biology, 12, 263–267.

Kainer, K. A., DiGiano, M. L., Duchelle, A. E., Wadt, L. H. O., Bruna, E., & Dain, J.L. (2009). Partnering for greater success: Local stakeholders and research intropical biology and conservation. Biotropica, 41, 555–562.

Kainer, K. A., Schmink, M., Covert, H., Stepp, J. R., Bruna, E. M., Dain, J. L., et al. (2006).A graduate education framework for tropical conservation and development.Conservation Biology, 20, 3–13.

Knight, A. T., Cowling, R. M., & Campbell, B. M. (2006). An operational model forimplementing conservation action. Conservation Biology, 20, 408–419.

Knight, A. T., Cowling, R. M., Rouget, M., Balmford, A., Lombard, A. T., & Campbell,B. M. (2008). Knowing but not doing: Selecting priority conservation areas andthe research–implementation gap. Conservation Biology, 22, 610–617.

Knight, A. T., Driver, A., Cowling, R. M., Maze, K., Desmet, P. G., Lombard, A. T., et al.(2006). Designing systematic conservation assessments that promote effec-tive implementation: Best practice from South Africa. Conservation Biology, 20,739–750.

Manolis, J. C., Chan, K. M., Finkelstein, M. E., Stephens, S., Nelson, C. R., Grant, J. B.,et al. (2009). Leadership: A new frontier in conservation science. ConservationBiology, 23, 879–886.

Noss, R. F. (1997). The failure of universities to produce conservation biologists.Conservation Biology, 11, 1267–1269.

Schindler, S., Curado, N., Nikolov, S. C., Kret, E., Carcamo, B., Catsadorakis, G., et al.(2011). From research to implementation: Nature conservation in the EasternRhodopes mountains (Greece and Bulgaria), European Green Belt. Journal forNature Conservation, 19, 193–201.

Shackleton, C. M., Cundill, G., & Knight, A. T. (2009). Beyond just research: Expe-riences from southern Africa in developing social learning partnerships forresource conservation initiatives. Biotropica, 41, 563–570.

Shanley, P., & López, C. (2009). Out of the loop: Why research rarely reaches policymakers and the public and what can be done. Biotropica, 41, 535–544.

Soule, M. E. (1985). What is conservation biology? Bioscience, 35, 727–734.Sunderland, T., Sunderland-Groves, J., Shanley, P., & Campbell, B. (2009). Bridging the

gap: How can information access and exchange between conservation biologistsand field practitioners be improved for better conservation outcomes. Biotropica,41, 549–554.