PNAS – Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/
(Accessed 6 February 2016)

.

Social Sciences – Sustainability Science – Biological Sciences – Sustainability Science:
Policy impacts of ecosystem services knowledge
Stephen M. Posnera,b,1, Emily McKenziec,d,e, and Taylor H. Rickettsa,b
Author Affiliations
Significance
Our study introduces a conceptual framework and empirical approach to explore how knowledge impacts decision-making. We illustrate this approach with knowledge about ecosystem services (ES), but the approach itself can be applied broadly. Our results indicate that the legitimacy of knowledge (i.e., perceived as unbiased and representative of multiple points of view) is of paramount importance for impact. More surprisingly, we found that credibility of knowledge is not a significant predictor of impact. To enhance legitimacy, ES researchers must engage meaningfully with decision-makers and stakeholders in processes of knowledge coproduction that incorporate diverse perspectives transparently. Our results indicate how research can be designed and carried out to maximize the potential impact on real-world decisions.
Abstract
Research about ecosystem services (ES) often aims to generate knowledge that influences policies and institutions for conservation and human development. However, we have limited understanding of how decision-makers use ES knowledge or what factors facilitate use. Here we address this gap and report on, to our knowledge, the first quantitative analysis of the factors and conditions that explain the policy impact of ES knowledge. We analyze a global sample of cases where similar ES knowledge was generated and applied to decision-making. We first test whether attributes of ES knowledge themselves predict different measures of impact on decisions. We find that legitimacy of knowledge is more often associated with impact than either the credibility or salience of the knowledge. We also examine whether predictor variables related to the science-to-policy process and the contextual conditions of a case are significant in predicting impact. Our findings indicate that, although many factors are important, attributes of the knowledge and aspects of the science-to-policy process that enhance legitimacy best explain the impact of ES science on decision-making. Our results are consistent with both theory and previous qualitative assessments in suggesting that the attributes and perceptions of scientific knowledge and process within which knowledge is coproduced are important determinants of whether that knowledge leads to action.