Definitions, dimensions and directions for translational ecology

Background/Question/Methods

Ecology, like all sciences, is challenged to remain relevant to a society that increasingly distrusts all established institutions.  In recognition of this challenge, Schlesinger (2010) called for a “translational ecology” that would “connect end-users of environmental science to the field research carried out by scientists who study the basis of environmental problems.” Such research would entail “continual two-way communication between stakeholders and scientists” throughout all phases, from research design and execution to interpretation and application. A similar concern has arisen in medical science, where what happens in the lab increasingly seems disconnected from what’s needed at the bedside.  But ecology and medicine are very different, and as yet there is no definition of “translational" ecology.  Over the past year we and our students have worked toward developing such a definition, drawing upon ideas from a seemingly disparate set of literatures: translational medicine, resilience theory, science policy, scenario analysis, public understanding of science, participatory action research, and “crowd science” as exemplified by breeding bird surveys and the National Phenology Network. 

Results/Conclusions

In many ways translational ecology resembles what is emerging in Europe under the name “transdisciplinary research” and in Australia as “integration and implementation science” (I2S), but we prefer to interpret it more broadly. It will involve iterative processes, where scientific goals and methods are adapted in response to feedbacks from participants as well as from the phenomenon being studied.  Those participants include a wide range of “users” of scientific information: policy makers, environmental managers, scientists themselves, and the general public.  To do translational ecology well, we will need to learn the languages and scientific understandings of each of those groups.  Study designs will be most effective if they attend to a broad set of dimensions, only some of which are typically considered in ecology.  These include the scale of phenomena being studied and their impacts, intended audiences for knowledge generated, timing of critical processes, modes of communication and consultation, and barriers to translation that may need to be overcome (e.g., institutional cultures, judicial rigidity, lack of resources for implementation of solutions, and competing interpretations of science.  Above all, translational ecology cannot be seen merely as an improved linear transmission of information – making “them” understand why “we” know best – but as mutual learning that results from deliberate communication and consideration.