Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38011081›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Taming a 'fuzzy beast'? Stakeholder perspectives on Antarctic science-policy knowledge exchange practices in New Zealand.

Natasha Blaize Gardiner, Neil Gilbert, Daniela Liggett

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Measuring the performance of Antarctic Treaty decision-making.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025
    Article
  3. Leading with courage and integrity in the National Science Challenges.Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Natasha Blaize GardinerGateway Antarctica, Centre for Antarctic Studies and Research, School of Earth & Environment, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0002-2743-3039
Neil GilbertGateway Antarctica, Centre for Antarctic Studies and Research, School of Earth & Environment, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.
Daniela LiggettGateway Antarctica, Centre for Antarctic Studies and Research, School of Earth & Environment, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0003-4184-5205

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antarctic environmental change is accelerating with significant regional and global consequences making it critically important for Antarctic research knowledge to inform relevant policymaking forums. A key challenge is maximising the utility of evidence in decision-making, to which scholars have responded by shifting away from linear science-policy arrangements towards co-production alternatives. As an Antarctic Treaty Consultative Party (ATCP), New Zealand (NZ) is responsible for facilitating knowledge exchange (KE) among Antarctic science and policy actors at national and international levels. However, at present, we have few metrics for assessing the success of science-policy dialogues. Furthermore, studies on the Antarctic science-policy interface have so far primarily focused on the international perspective. This paper is the first to examine domestic stakeholder perspectives regarding Antarctic KE using NZ as a case study. We report on the findings of two workshops involving over 60 NZ Antarctic stakeholders in 2021 that aimed to explore the various elements of NZ's Antarctic science-policy interface and identify barriers or drivers for success, including future opportunities. Our results indicate that there is a desire to shift away from the current linear approach towards a more collaborative model. To achieve this, stakeholders share an understanding that KE practices need to become more equitable, inclusive and diverse, and that the policy community needs to play a more proactive and leading role. Described as a 'fuzzy beast', the NZ Antarctic science-policy interface is complex. This study contributes to our understanding of Antarctic KE practices by offering new guidance on several key elements that should be considered in any attempts to understand or improve future KE practices in NZ or within the domestic settings of other ATCPs interested in fostering science-policy success.

Indexed as

International CooperationPolicy MakingAntarctic RegionsNew ZealandPolicy

Identifiers

PMID38011081
PMCPMC10681205

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.