ArticleConservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology2022
Closing the knowledge-action gap in conservation with open science.
Article in Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Challenging 10 misconceptions in conservation physiology.Conservation physiology · 2026Article
- Impacts of Fire-fighting Chemicals on Native Fauna and Ecosystems in Australia: Identification of Key Knowledge Gaps and Research Priorities.Environmental management · 2025Article
- How will we prepare for an uncertain future? The value of open data and code for unborn generations facing climate change.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Protective multi-stressor interactions in the Anthropocene: Key considerations for investigating cross-tolerance in a conservation context.Conservation physiology · 2025Article
- Advances and challenges in ecological connectivity science.Ecology and evolution · 2024Review
- TrackdAT, an acoustic telemetry metadata dataset to support aquatic animal tracking research.Scientific data · 2024Article
- Make global biodiversity information useful to national decision-makers.Nature ecology & evolution · 2023Article
- Incentivising open ecological data using blockchain technology.Scientific data · 2023Article
- Closing the knowledge-action gap in conservation with open science.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2022Article
- Slow improvement to the archiving quality of open datasets shared by researchers in ecology and evolution.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The knowledge-action gap in conservation science and practice occurs when research outputs do not result in actions to protect or restore biodiversity. Among the diverse and complex reasons for this gap, three barriers are fundamental: knowledge is often unavailable to practitioners and challenging to interpret or difficult to use or both. Problems of availability, interpretability, and useability are solvable with open science practices. We considered the benefits and challenges of three open science practices for use by conservation scientists and practitioners. First, open access publishing makes the scientific literature available to all. Second, open materials (detailed methods, data, code, and software) increase the transparency and use of research findings. Third, open education resources allow conservation scientists and practitioners to acquire the skills needed to use research outputs. The long-term adoption of open science practices would help researchers and practitioners achieve conservation goals more quickly and efficiently and reduce inequities in information sharing. However, short-term costs for individual researchers (insufficient institutional incentives to engage in open science and knowledge mobilization) remain a challenge. We caution against a passive approach to sharing that simply involves making information available. We advocate a proactive stance toward transparency, communication, collaboration, and capacity building that involves seeking out and engaging with potential users to maximize the environmental and societal impact of conservation science.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.