Barriers and incentives to engagement in public policy and discourse

Background/Question/Methods

As ecosystem degradation increases, the gulf between environmental science and its application to policy and resource management has become more apparent. While some environmental managers and scientists increasingly recognize how conservation biology research is relevant to public policy, others contend that engagement in policy erodes scientific credibility, diminishing the objectivity of research. We seek to understand why conservation scientists, graduate students, practitioners and managers choose to engage or withhold from participating in public discourse, informing management practices, and developing environmental policy.

Results/Conclusions

Based on 500 responses from a questionnaire that we distributed at nine scientific conferences, our analysis reveals factors associated with the frequency of engagement, such as tenured status, perception of time restrictions for engagement and perception of adequate communication and policy engagement training. We also demonstrate linkages between infrequent or no engagement in policy with past negative experiences informing public policy, perception of lack of support from peers and mentors and a normative belief that scientists should only report scientific results and leave others to make decisions. Our results provide insights into strategies for overcoming knowledge exchange barriers at the science-policy interface to contribute toward the development of appropriate and effective environmental policy.