165
however, these participatory structures need to be based on incentive schemes that
are able to support the required long-term interactive dialogue to secure continuous,
trusted, and adaptable SPI processes. Finally, participatory approaches also constitute possible solutions to challenges faced in the production of SPI outputs, by
ensuring continuous interaction between scientists, policymakers, and other possible stakeholders to overcome silos and creating participatory assessment frameworks as a possible solution to existing knowledge gaps.
Trust building and capacity building are also important, closely related, possible
solutions to existing SPI challenges. Trust building facilitates the engagement of
different stakeholders in participatory processes by enhancing the mutual understanding and interaction of scientists and policymakers throughout the stages of
setting SPI goals, developing their structures and producing relevant outputs.
Flexibility to change and continuity were also identified as relevant sub-features of
SPI processes. In this regard, it is vital to ensure more dynamic, iterative, and collaborative interactions between scientists, practitioners, knowledge holders, and
policymakers to identify research gaps, consolidate interdisciplinary scientific
views, build capacity and long-term trust of organizations, and ultimately develop
effective interdisciplinary SPIs that provide timely and relevant outputs to policymakers. Effective instruments for SPIs to deliver credible, relevant, and legitimate
outcomes include ensuring a well-defined quality assessment process possibly
through extended peer-reviews and the production of a knowledge synthesis that is
relevant and handy for knowledge users.
It is important to note that our findings draw on a limited number of studies of a
limited number of SPIs. These studies are, furthermore, skewed towards SPIs at
global level and/or in Europe and North America. Further studies that empirically
assess the features of SPIs and their contributions to outcomes are needed, particularly at underrepresented scales and in underrepresented regions. Further research
into how SPI goals and outputs can provide solutions to challenges and lead to positive outcomes is also needed, to develop a more comprehensive choice of approaches
that can generate positive outcomes at the science–policy interface.
Acknowledgments This research was supported by the Environment Research and Technology
Development Fund (S-15-1(4) Science-Policy interface on Natural Capital and Ecosystem Services
in International, Asian and Japanese Contexts; Predicting and Assessing Natural Capital and
Ecosystem Services (PANCES)) of the Ministry of the Environment, Japan.
References
Andaloro F, Castriota L, Falautano M et al (2016) Public feedback on early warning initiatives
undertaken for hazardous non-indigenous species: the case of Lagocephalus sceleratus from
Italian and Maltese waters. Manag Biol Invasions 7(4):313–319. https://doi.org/10.3391/
mbi.2016.7.4.01
8 Mapping the Current Understanding of Biodiversity Science–Policy Interfaces
however, these participatory structures need to be based on incentive schemes that
are able to support the required long-term interactive dialogue to secure continuous,
trusted, and adaptable SPI processes. Finally, participatory approaches also constitute possible solutions to challenges faced in the production of SPI outputs, by
ensuring continuous interaction between scientists, policymakers, and other possible stakeholders to overcome silos and creating participatory assessment frameworks as a possible solution to existing knowledge gaps.
Trust building and capacity building are also important, closely related, possible
solutions to existing SPI challenges. Trust building facilitates the engagement of
different stakeholders in participatory processes by enhancing the mutual understanding and interaction of scientists and policymakers throughout the stages of
setting SPI goals, developing their structures and producing relevant outputs.
Flexibility to change and continuity were also identified as relevant sub-features of
SPI processes. In this regard, it is vital to ensure more dynamic, iterative, and collaborative interactions between scientists, practitioners, knowledge holders, and
policymakers to identify research gaps, consolidate interdisciplinary scientific
views, build capacity and long-term trust of organizations, and ultimately develop
effective interdisciplinary SPIs that provide timely and relevant outputs to policymakers. Effective instruments for SPIs to deliver credible, relevant, and legitimate
outcomes include ensuring a well-defined quality assessment process possibly
through extended peer-reviews and the production of a knowledge synthesis that is
relevant and handy for knowledge users.
It is important to note that our findings draw on a limited number of studies of a
limited number of SPIs. These studies are, furthermore, skewed towards SPIs at
global level and/or in Europe and North America. Further studies that empirically
assess the features of SPIs and their contributions to outcomes are needed, particularly at underrepresented scales and in underrepresented regions. Further research
into how SPI goals and outputs can provide solutions to challenges and lead to positive outcomes is also needed, to develop a more comprehensive choice of approaches
that can generate positive outcomes at the science–policy interface.
Acknowledgments This research was supported by the Environment Research and Technology
Development Fund (S-15-1(4) Science-Policy interface on Natural Capital and Ecosystem Services
in International, Asian and Japanese Contexts; Predicting and Assessing Natural Capital and
Ecosystem Services (PANCES)) of the Ministry of the Environment, Japan.
References
Andaloro F, Castriota L, Falautano M et al (2016) Public feedback on early warning initiatives
undertaken for hazardous non-indigenous species: the case of Lagocephalus sceleratus from
Italian and Maltese waters. Manag Biol Invasions 7(4):313–319. https://doi.org/10.3391/
mbi.2016.7.4.01
8 Mapping the Current Understanding of Biodiversity Science–Policy Interfaces