California plant invasions: quantifying the knowing-doing gap

Background/Question/Methods

The "knowing-doing" gap describes a disjunct between scientific research and its application to practical problems of conservation or management. This may result from lack of relevance of scientific research to conservation and management problems; lack of involvement of stakeholders in the formulation of research agendas; lack of access to published research by managers; insufficient expertise on the part of practitioners to apply the results in a management context; or mismatches between the scale of research and the scale of management applications, among other factors. We sought to understand whether a knowing-doing gap exists in invasive species management by surveying California-based managers and practitioners whose jobs involve decision-making about how to control plant invaders. We asked managers where they went for scientific information relevant to management and what research questions they needed answered to be more effective in controlling invaders.

Results/Conclusions

We found that California managers do perceive a knowing-doing gap in invasion biology. Only 23% agreed or strongly agreed with a statement that managers' priorities were well-represented in scientific research agendas. Also, in seeking information useful to controlling invaders, managers rely more heavily on conversations with other managers, or their own field experiences, than on attending scientific meetings or reading the peer-reviewed literature. Managers suggested that in the case of the most troublesome and persistent invasive species, lack of funding, rather than lack of information, was the most important limiting factor in successful control of the invader. However, for lesser-known species, basic research on invader biology and life history is critical to management success. Managers' priorities with regard to research questions centered around understanding relative impacts of invaders to aid in risk assessment; comparing management techniques for effectiveness and cost-efficency; detecting new invaders; understanding seedbank longevity and dispersal mechanisms; predicting impacts of global change on invasive spread; testing alternatives to herbicides; and evaluating the ecological costs and benefits of controlling (or not controlling) invaders.  We found that many of the research needs identified by managers could be fulfilled by researchers investigating within a framework of invasion theory, providing a possible solution to the knowing-doing gap.