Record Details
Top 40 Priorities for Science to Inform US Conservation and Management Policy
ScholarsArchive at Oregon State University
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Title | Top 40 Priorities for Science to Inform US Conservation and Management Policy |
| Names |
Fleishman, Erica
(creator) Blockstein, David E. (creator) Hall, John A. (creator) Mascia, Michael B. (creator) Rudd, Murray A. (creator) Scott, J. Michael (creator) Sutherland, William J. (creator) Bartuska, Ann M. (creator) Brown, A. Gordon (creator) Christen, Catherine A. (creator) Clement, Joel P. (creator) Dellasala, Dominick (creator) Duke, Clifford S. (creator) Eaton, Marietta (creator) Fiske, Shirley J. (creator) Gosnell, Hannah (creator) Haney, J. Christopher (creator) Hutchins, Michael (creator) Klein, Mary L. (creator) Marqusee, Jeffrey (creator) Noon, Barry R. (creator) Nordgren, John R. (creator) Orbuch, Paul M. (creator) Powell, Jimmie (creator) Quarles, Steven P. (creator) Saterson, Kathryn A. (creator) Savitt, Charles C. (creator) Stein, Bruce A. (creator) Webster, Michael S. (creator) Vedder, Amy (creator) |
| Date Issued | 2011-04 (iso8601) |
| Note | To the best of our knowledge, one or more authors of this paper were federal employees when contributing to this work. This is the publisher’s final pdf. The published article is copyrighted by American Institute of Biological Sciences and can be found at: http://www.aibs.org/bioscience/. |
| Abstract | To maximize the utility of research to decisionmaking, especially given limited financial resources, scientists must set priorities for their efforts. We present a list of the top 40 high-priority, multidisciplinary research questions directed toward informing some of the most important current and future decisions about management of species, communities, and ecological processes in the United States. The questions were generated by an open, inclusive process that included personal interviews with decisionmakers, broad solicitation of research needs from scientists and policymakers, and an intensive workshop that included scientifically oriented individuals responsible for managing and developing policy related to natural resources. The process differed from previous efforts to set priorities for conservation research in its focus on the engagement of decisionmakers in addition to researchers. The research priorities emphasized the importance of addressing societal context and exploration of trade-offs among alternative policies and actions, as well as more traditional questions related to ecological processes and functions. |
| Genre | Article |
| Topic | Conservation |
| Identifier | Fleishman, E., Christen, C. A., Clement, J. P., DellaSala, D., Duke, C. S., Eaton, M., . . . Brown, A. G. (2011). Top 40 priorities for science to inform US conservation and management policy. Bioscience, 61(4), 290-300. doi: 10.1525/bio.2011.61.4.9 |
