Who knows best? Understanding the use of research-based knowledge in conservation conflicts

Isla D. Hodgson* (Corresponding Author), Steve M. Redpath, Anke Fischer, Juliette Young

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The way in which research-based knowledge is used, interpreted and communicated by different actors can influence the dynamics of conservation conflicts. The conflict that occurs between grouse shooting interests and the conservation of birds of prey in Scotland is notoriously complex, involving multiple actors at multiple levels, and shaped by the values and world views of these actors. This paper explores how research-based knowledge is used in the debate by six key organisations, and looks to understand the drivers that may influence knowledge use and interpretation in this, and other, cases of conservation conflict. Research was used to both legitimise and reinforce certain world views, and to support associated political actions that would cause these to become reality. Actors offered divergent interpretations of the same piece of research, emphasising different findings and outcomes. Research-based knowledge was thus employed by actors to support or counter the 'status quo’, and challenge other claims that clashed with their own values. Although the intention of such knowledge use is unclear, the selective reconstruction of research by actors could stem from, and reiterate, divergent value systems. This may pose significant challenges to conflict mitigation efforts; whilst some may look to research-based knowledge as the bringer of truth, its interpretation by different actors may exacerbate existing rifts between stakeholders; promoting polarisation of views. Mitigation strategies should be sensitive to this, and aim to improve the inclusiveness and transparency of the knowledge transfer process.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1065-1075
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of Environmental Management
Volume231
Early online date13 Nov 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Feb 2019

Fingerprint

Conservation
mitigation
Birds
conflict
transparency
Transparency
stakeholder
polarization
Polarization

Keywords

  • Conflict mitigation
  • Conservation conflicts
  • Environmental management
  • Knowledge use
  • Land use

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Environmental Engineering
  • Waste Management and Disposal
  • Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

Cite this

Who knows best? Understanding the use of research-based knowledge in conservation conflicts. / Hodgson, Isla D. (Corresponding Author); Redpath, Steve M.; Fischer, Anke; Young, Juliette.

In: Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 231, 01.02.2019, p. 1065-1075.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{9fe9723d50534f939751f1eda9935aab,
title = "Who knows best? Understanding the use of research-based knowledge in conservation conflicts",
abstract = "The way in which research-based knowledge is used, interpreted and communicated by different actors can influence the dynamics of conservation conflicts. The conflict that occurs between grouse shooting interests and the conservation of birds of prey in Scotland is notoriously complex, involving multiple actors at multiple levels, and shaped by the values and world views of these actors. This paper explores how research-based knowledge is used in the debate by six key organisations, and looks to understand the drivers that may influence knowledge use and interpretation in this, and other, cases of conservation conflict. Research was used to both legitimise and reinforce certain world views, and to support associated political actions that would cause these to become reality. Actors offered divergent interpretations of the same piece of research, emphasising different findings and outcomes. Research-based knowledge was thus employed by actors to support or counter the 'status quo’, and challenge other claims that clashed with their own values. Although the intention of such knowledge use is unclear, the selective reconstruction of research by actors could stem from, and reiterate, divergent value systems. This may pose significant challenges to conflict mitigation efforts; whilst some may look to research-based knowledge as the bringer of truth, its interpretation by different actors may exacerbate existing rifts between stakeholders; promoting polarisation of views. Mitigation strategies should be sensitive to this, and aim to improve the inclusiveness and transparency of the knowledge transfer process.",
keywords = "Conflict mitigation, Conservation conflicts, Environmental management, Knowledge use, Land use",
author = "Hodgson, {Isla D.} and Redpath, {Steve M.} and Anke Fischer and Juliette Young",
note = "The authors are grateful to the Macaulay Development Trust (RG12845-10) and the University of Aberdeen (CF10166-93), for funding this research. We would also like to thank Rene van der Waal and three anonymous referees for their constructive comments on the earlier versions of this manuscript.",
year = "2019",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.09.023",
language = "English",
volume = "231",
pages = "1065--1075",
journal = "Journal of Environmental Management",
issn = "0301-4797",
publisher = "ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Who knows best? Understanding the use of research-based knowledge in conservation conflicts

AU - Hodgson, Isla D.

AU - Redpath, Steve M.

AU - Fischer, Anke

AU - Young, Juliette

N1 - The authors are grateful to the Macaulay Development Trust (RG12845-10) and the University of Aberdeen (CF10166-93), for funding this research. We would also like to thank Rene van der Waal and three anonymous referees for their constructive comments on the earlier versions of this manuscript.

PY - 2019/2/1

Y1 - 2019/2/1

N2 - The way in which research-based knowledge is used, interpreted and communicated by different actors can influence the dynamics of conservation conflicts. The conflict that occurs between grouse shooting interests and the conservation of birds of prey in Scotland is notoriously complex, involving multiple actors at multiple levels, and shaped by the values and world views of these actors. This paper explores how research-based knowledge is used in the debate by six key organisations, and looks to understand the drivers that may influence knowledge use and interpretation in this, and other, cases of conservation conflict. Research was used to both legitimise and reinforce certain world views, and to support associated political actions that would cause these to become reality. Actors offered divergent interpretations of the same piece of research, emphasising different findings and outcomes. Research-based knowledge was thus employed by actors to support or counter the 'status quo’, and challenge other claims that clashed with their own values. Although the intention of such knowledge use is unclear, the selective reconstruction of research by actors could stem from, and reiterate, divergent value systems. This may pose significant challenges to conflict mitigation efforts; whilst some may look to research-based knowledge as the bringer of truth, its interpretation by different actors may exacerbate existing rifts between stakeholders; promoting polarisation of views. Mitigation strategies should be sensitive to this, and aim to improve the inclusiveness and transparency of the knowledge transfer process.

AB - The way in which research-based knowledge is used, interpreted and communicated by different actors can influence the dynamics of conservation conflicts. The conflict that occurs between grouse shooting interests and the conservation of birds of prey in Scotland is notoriously complex, involving multiple actors at multiple levels, and shaped by the values and world views of these actors. This paper explores how research-based knowledge is used in the debate by six key organisations, and looks to understand the drivers that may influence knowledge use and interpretation in this, and other, cases of conservation conflict. Research was used to both legitimise and reinforce certain world views, and to support associated political actions that would cause these to become reality. Actors offered divergent interpretations of the same piece of research, emphasising different findings and outcomes. Research-based knowledge was thus employed by actors to support or counter the 'status quo’, and challenge other claims that clashed with their own values. Although the intention of such knowledge use is unclear, the selective reconstruction of research by actors could stem from, and reiterate, divergent value systems. This may pose significant challenges to conflict mitigation efforts; whilst some may look to research-based knowledge as the bringer of truth, its interpretation by different actors may exacerbate existing rifts between stakeholders; promoting polarisation of views. Mitigation strategies should be sensitive to this, and aim to improve the inclusiveness and transparency of the knowledge transfer process.

KW - Conflict mitigation

KW - Conservation conflicts

KW - Environmental management

KW - Knowledge use

KW - Land use

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85057196217&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.09.023

DO - 10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.09.023

M3 - Article

VL - 231

SP - 1065

EP - 1075

JO - Journal of Environmental Management

JF - Journal of Environmental Management

SN - 0301-4797

ER -