Do we need a new science-policy interface for food systems?

Credibility, legitimacy, and diversity of knowledge are critical.

Citizen science networks in natural history and the collective validation of biodiversity data.

Biodiversity data are in increasing demand to inform policy and management. A substantial portion of these data is generated in citizen science networks. To ensure the quality of biodiversity data, standards and criteria for validation have been put in place. We used interviews and document analysis from the United Kingdom and The Netherlands to examine how data validation serves as a point of connection between the diverse people and practices in natural history citizen science networks. We found that rather than a unidirectional imposition of standards, validation was performed collectively. Specifically, it was enacted in ongoing circulations of biodiversity records between recorders and validators as they jointly negotiated the biodiversity that was observed and the validity of the records. These collective validation practices contributed to the citizen science character or natural history networks and tied these networks together. However, when biodiversity records were included in biodiversity-information initiatives on different policy levels and scales, the circulation of records diminished. These initiatives took on a more extractive mode of data use. Validation ceased to be collective with important consequences for the natural history networks involved and citizen science more generally.

Managing climate change in conservation practice: an exploration of the science-management interface in beech forest management.

Scientific studies reveal significant consequences of climate change for nature, from ecosystems to individual species. Such studies are important factors in policy decisions on forest conservation and management in Europe. However, while research has shown that climate change research start to impact on European conservation policies like Natura 2000, climate change information has yet to translate into management practices. This article contributes to the on-going debates about science-society relations and knowledge utilization by exploring and analysing the interface between scientific knowledge and forest management practice. We focus specifically on climate change debates in conservation policy and on how managers of forest areas in Europe perceive and use climate change ecology. Our findings show that forest managers do not necessarily deny the potential importance of climate change for their management practices, at least in the future, but have reservations about the current usefulness of available knowledge for their own areas and circumstances. This suggests that the science-management interface is not as politicized as current policy debates about climate change and that the use of climate change ecology is situated in practice. We conclude the article by discussing what forms of knowledge may enable responsible and future oriented management in practice focusing specifically on the role of reflexive experimentation and monitoring.