Interdisciplinary conservation; meeting the challenge for a better outcome: experiences from sturgeon conservationCarolyn M. Rosten
Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA), Høgskoleringen 9, PO Box 6215, NO-7486 Trondheim, Norway. Email: email@example.com
Marine and Freshwater Research 68(9) 1577-1584 https://doi.org/10.1071/MF16085
Submitted: 19 March 2016 Accepted: 19 November 2016 Published: 1 February 2017
Despite an obvious benefit by involving society in conservation research, interdisciplinary research remains the exception and not the norm. Integration of natural and social science into interdisciplinary conservation research poses several challenges related to (1) different perspectives and theories of knowledge, (2) mismatches in expectations of appropriate data (i.e. quantitative v. qualitative, accuracy), (3) an absence of agreed frameworks and communication issues and (4) different publishing protocols and approaches for reaching conclusions. Hence, when embarking on an interdisciplinary conservation project, there are several stereotypic challenges that may be met along the way. On the basis of experiences with an interdisciplinary sturgeon conservation project, several recommendations are presented for those considering (or considering not!) to establish interdisciplinary conservation research.
Additional keywords: cross-disciplinary collaboration, multidisciplinary, science and politics.
ReferencesAdams, W. M. (2016). Do you speak lion? Science 353, 867–868.
| Do you speak lion?CrossRef | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC28XhsVOjtr%2FJ&md5=f3e679d067be62b1acf1921832dc8665CAS |
Antipa, G. (1912). Die Biologie des Inundationsgebietes des unteren Donaudeltas. Verhandlungen des internationalen Zoologischen Kongresses VIII, 163–208.
Bacalbaşa-Dobrovici, N. (1997). Endangered migratory sturgeons of the lower Danube River and its delta. Environmental Biology of Fishes 48, 201–207.
| Endangered migratory sturgeons of the lower Danube River and its delta.CrossRef |
Barlow, J., Lennox, G. D., Ferreira, J., Berenguer, E., Lees, A. C., Nally, R. M., Thomson, J. R., Ferraz, S. F. B., Louzada, J., Oliveira, V. H. F., Parry, L., Ribeiro de Castro Solar, R., Vieira, I. C. G., Aragão, L. E. O. C., Begotti, R. A., Braga, R. F., Cardoso, T. M., de Oliveira, R. C., Souza, C. M., Moura, N. G., Nunes, S. S., Siqueira, J. V., Pardini, R., Silveira, J. M., Vaz-de-Mello, F. Z., Veiga, R. C., Venturieri, A., and Gardner, T. A. (2016). Anthropogenic disturbance in tropical forests can double biodiversity loss from deforestation. Nature 535, 144–147.
| Anthropogenic disturbance in tropical forests can double biodiversity loss from deforestation.CrossRef | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC28XhtVOns7fN&md5=38e1979bf15843239ef268bfe2eadd45CAS |
Bennet, N. J., and Roth, R. E. (2015). ‘The Conservation Social Sciences: What? How? And Why?’ (Canadian Wildlife Federation and Institute for Resources, Environment and Sustainability, University of British Columbia: Vancouver, BC, Canada.)
Berkes, F., and Folke, C. (1998). ‘Linking Social and Ecological Systems: Management Practices and Social Mechanisms for Building Resilience.’ (Cambridge University Press: New York, NY, USA.)
Bodin, Ö., Crona, B., Thyresson, M., Golz, A.-L., and Tengö, M. (2014). Conservation success as a function of good alignment of social and ecological structures and processes. Conservation Biology 28, 1371–1379.
| Conservation success as a function of good alignment of social and ecological structures and processes.CrossRef |
Boulton, A. J., Panizzon, D., and Prior, J. (2005). Explicit knowledge structures as a tool for overcoming obstacles to interdisciplinary research. Conservation Biology 19, 2026–2029.
| Explicit knowledge structures as a tool for overcoming obstacles to interdisciplinary research.CrossRef |
Bromham, L., Dinnage, R., and Hua, X. (2016). Interdisciplinary research has consistently lower funding success. Nature 534, 684–687.
| Interdisciplinary research has consistently lower funding success.CrossRef | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC28Xht1Gju7nP&md5=9e635c2750749b9868045b6de11a5083CAS |
Brosius, J. P. (2006). Common ground between anthropology and conservation biology. Conservation Biology 20, 683–685.
| Common ground between anthropology and conservation biology.CrossRef |
Brown, R. R., Deletic, A., and Wong, T. H. F. (2015). Interdisciplinarity: how to catalyse collaboration. Nature 525, 315–317.
| Interdisciplinarity: how to catalyse collaboration.CrossRef | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC2MXhsFeisbvI&md5=2e7f6ea44e1941a6cd48a76e2fa89ce7CAS |
Campbell, L. M. (2005). Overcoming obstacles to interdisciplinary research. Conservation Biology 19, 574–577.
| Overcoming obstacles to interdisciplinary research.CrossRef |
Claus, C. A., Chan, K. M. A., and Satterfield, T. (2010). The roles of people in conservation. In ‘Conservation Biology for All’. (Eds N. S. Sodhi and P. R. Ehrlich.) pp. 262–281. (Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK.)
de Snoo, G. R., Herzon, I., and Staats, H. Burton, R. J. F., Schindler, S., van Dijk, J., Lokhorst, A. M. Bullock, J. M., Lobley, M., Wrbka, T., Schwarz, G. and Musters, C. J. M. (2013). Toward effective nature conservation on farmland: making farmers matter. Conservation Letters 6, 66–72.
Endter-Wada, J., Blahna, D., Krannich, R., and Brunson, M. (1998). A framework for understanding social science contributions to ecosystem management. Ecological Applications 8, 891–904.
| A framework for understanding social science contributions to ecosystem management.CrossRef |
Fischer, A. R. H., Tobi, H., and Ronteltap, A. (2011). When natural met social: a review of collaboration between the natural and social sciences. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 36, 341–358.
| When natural met social: a review of collaboration between the natural and social sciences.CrossRef |
Heck, N., Stedman, R. C., and Gaden, M. (2015). The integration of social science information into Great Lakes fishery management: opportunities and challenges. Fisheries Research 167, 30–37.
| The integration of social science information into Great Lakes fishery management: opportunities and challenges.CrossRef |
Hensel, K., and Holcik, J. (1997). Past and current status of sturgeons in the upper and middle Danube River. Environmental Biology of Fishes 48, 184–200.
| Past and current status of sturgeons in the upper and middle Danube River.CrossRef |
Jarić, I., Lenhardt, M., Cvijanovic, G., and Ebenhard, T. (2009). Acipenser sturio and Acipenser nudiventris in the Danube: extant or extinct? Journal of Applied Ichthyology 25, 137–141.
| Acipenser sturio and Acipenser nudiventris in the Danube: extant or extinct?CrossRef |
Jarić, I., Gessner, J., and Solow, A. R. (2016). Inferring functional extinction based on sighting records Biological Conservation 199, 84–87.
| Inferring functional extinction based on sighting recordsCrossRef |
Kareiva, P., and Marvier, M. (2012). What is conservation science? Bioscience 62, 962–969.
| What is conservation science?CrossRef |
Kinzig, A. (2001). Bridging disciplinary divides to address environmental and intellectual challenges. Ecosystems 4, 709–715.
| Bridging disciplinary divides to address environmental and intellectual challenges.CrossRef |
Knight, R. L., and Riedel, S. (Eds) (2002). ‘Aldo Leopold and the Ecological Conscience.’ (Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA.)
Kynard, B., Suciu, R., and Horgan, M. (2002). Migration and habitats of diadromous Danube River sturgeons in Romania 1998–2000. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 18, 529–535.
| Migration and habitats of diadromous Danube River sturgeons in Romania 1998–2000.CrossRef |
Lande, R. (1998). Anthropogenic, ecological and genetic factors in extinction and conservation. Researches on Population Ecology 40, 259–269.
| Anthropogenic, ecological and genetic factors in extinction and conservation.CrossRef |
Ledford, H. (2015). Team science. Nature 525, 308–311.
| Team science.CrossRef | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC2MXhsFeisbrE&md5=195b7ca87180b1efc74f8fd1f8a0ad8dCAS |
Leenhardt, P., Teneva, L., Kininmonth, S., Darling, E., Cooley, S., and Claudet, J. (2015). Challenges, insights and perspectives associated with using social-ecological science for marine conservation. Ocean and Coastal Management 115, 49–60.
| Challenges, insights and perspectives associated with using social-ecological science for marine conservation.CrossRef |
Lewin, K. (1952). Frontiers in group dynamics. In ‘Field Theory in Social Science’. (Ed. D. Cartwright.) pp. 188–237. (Social Science Paperbacks: London, UK.) [Reprinted from Human Relations (1947), vol. 1, pp. 2–38].
Machlis, G. E. (1992). The contribution of sociology to biodiversity research and management. Biological Conservation 62, 161–170.
| The contribution of sociology to biodiversity research and management.CrossRef |
Mascia, M. B., Brosius, J. P., Dobson, T. A., Forbes, B. C., Horowitz, L., McKean, M. A., and Turner, N. J. (2003). Conservation and the social sciences. Conservation Biology 17, 649–650.
| Conservation and the social sciences.CrossRef |
Meffe, G. K., and Carroll, C. R. (1997). ‘Principles of Conservation Biology’, 2nd edn. (Sinauer Associates: Sunderland, MA, USA.)
Moon, K., and Blackman, D. (2014). A guide to understanding social science research for natural scientists. Conservation Biology 28, 1167–1177.
| A guide to understanding social science research for natural scientists.CrossRef |
Olsson, P., Folke, C., and Hahn, T. (2004). Social-ecological transformation for ecosystem management: the development of adaptive co-management of a wetland landscape in southern Sweden. Ecology and Society 9, art2.
| Social-ecological transformation for ecosystem management: the development of adaptive co-management of a wetland landscape in southern Sweden.CrossRef |
Otel, V. (2007). ‘The Atlas of the Fish Species of the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve.’ (Centrul de Informare Tehnologica Delta Dunarii: Tulcea, Romania.) [In Romanian].
Otterstad, O., Capota, P. A., and Simion, A. (2011). Beluga sturgeon community based tourism (Best Combat). Journal of Coastal Research 61, 183–193.
| Beluga sturgeon community based tourism (Best Combat).CrossRef |
Peterson, R. B., Russell, D., West, P., and Brosius, J. P. (2010). Seeing (and doing) conservation through cultural lenses. Environmental Management 45, 5–18.
| Seeing (and doing) conservation through cultural lenses.CrossRef |
Pikitch, E. K., Doukakis, P., Lauck, L., Chakrabarty, P., and Erickson, D. L. (2005). Status, trends and management of sturgeon and paddlefish fisheries. Fish and Fisheries 6, 233–265.
| Status, trends and management of sturgeon and paddlefish fisheries.CrossRef |
Pimm, S. L. (1998). Extinction. In ‘Conservation Science and Action’. (Ed. W. J. Sutherland.) pp. 20–38. (Blackwell Science: Oxford, UK.) https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444313499.CH2
Pooley, S. P., Mendelsohn, J. A., and Milner-Gulland, E. J. (2014). Hunting down the chimera of multiple disciplinarity in conservation science. Conservation Biology 28, 22–32.
| Hunting down the chimera of multiple disciplinarity in conservation science.CrossRef |
Rosten, C. M., Onara, D., Hawley, K. L., and Suciu, R. (2012). The status of Danube beluga sturgeon (Huso huso): past, present and future. Vann 47, 523–534.
Sievanen, L., Campbell, L. M., and Leslie, H. M. (2012). Challenges to interdisciplinary research in ecosystem-based management. Conservation Biology 26, 315–323.
| Challenges to interdisciplinary research in ecosystem-based management.CrossRef |
Stokols, D., Misra, S., Moser, R. P., Hall, K. L., and Taylor, B. K. (2008). The ecology of team science. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 35, S96–S115.
| The ecology of team science.CrossRef |
United Nations (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. (United Nations.) Available at https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld [Verified 20 January 2017].
Urquhart, J., Acott, T., Reed, M., and Courtney, P. (2011). Setting an agenda for social science research in fisheries policy in northern Europe. Fisheries Research 108, 240–247.
| Setting an agenda for social science research in fisheries policy in northern Europe.CrossRef |
Van Noorden, R. (2015). Interdisciplinary research by the numbers. Nature 525, 306–307.
| Interdisciplinary research by the numbers.CrossRef | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC2MXhsFeisbrL&md5=a46051e7e622b73f16f87430a0bf28d8CAS |
Viseu, A. (2015). Integration of social science into research is crucial. Nature 525, 291.
| Integration of social science into research is crucial.CrossRef | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC2MXhsFeisb3I&md5=20b6803076dfcec4003e12ba8c68a81cCAS |