Bridging the research-practice gap: Conservation research priorities in a Central and Eastern European country

Barbara Mihók, Eszter Kovács, Bálint Balázs, György Pataki, András Ambrus, Dénes Bartha, Zoltán Czirák, Sándor Csányi, Péter Csépányi, Mónika Csoszi, György Dudás, Csaba Egri, T. Erős, Szilvia Gori, Gergo Halmos, Annamária Kopek, Katalin Margóczi, Gábor Miklay, László Milon, László PodmaniczkyJános Sárvári, András Schmidt, Katalin Sipos, Viktória Siposs, T. Standovár, Csaba Szigetvári, László Szemethy, Balázs Tóth, László Tóth, Péter Tóth, Katalin Török, Péter Török, Csaba Vadász, Ildikó Varga, William J. Sutherland, A. Báldi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Halting biodiversity loss is a critical aim for the forthcoming decades, but is hindered by the gap between research and practice. Bridging this gap is a significant challenge in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, where, compared to Western European countries, biodiversity is higher but the research budget is lower. Approaches to address bridging this gap include participatory research prioritizing exercises. These demand-driven collaborative ranking processes have proven to be a useful tool in providing a research agenda derived from a review of critical challenges based on stakeholder engagement. However, for research agendas to be effectively realized, they are best developed and implemented at the operative level of research financing and implementation. This paper shows the process and the outcome of an exercise conducted in Hungary aiming to compile the most important conservation research questions at the country-level and outlines a set of further measures and tools required for dissemination and advocacy for the research agenda. During the process 792 research questions were collated from conservation practitioners and natural resource managers based on interviews and via an online questionnaire; the final 50 most important questions were identified by practitioners and policy makers during an expert workshop. Questions are embedded in global and EU biodiversity targets and imply a pragmatic approach with the aim of identifying research that supports policy- and decision-making regarding habitat management, land-use and regional development, while also focussing on conflicting issues. The outcome of the process includes the potential for lobbying, therefore post-publication activities and dissemination strategies are outlined as an integrated part of the exercise.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)133-148
Number of pages16
JournalJournal for Nature Conservation
Volume28
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 1 2015

Fingerprint

biodiversity
lobbying
habitat management
advocacy
regional development
policy making
ranking
stakeholder
natural resource
decision making
land use
demand
policy
Eastern Europe
financing
loss
budget

Keywords

  • Conservation management
  • Dissemination strategy
  • Interdisciplinarity
  • Participatory research
  • Research priority

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ecology
  • Nature and Landscape Conservation

Cite this

Bridging the research-practice gap : Conservation research priorities in a Central and Eastern European country. / Mihók, Barbara; Kovács, Eszter; Balázs, Bálint; Pataki, György; Ambrus, András; Bartha, Dénes; Czirák, Zoltán; Csányi, Sándor; Csépányi, Péter; Csoszi, Mónika; Dudás, György; Egri, Csaba; Erős, T.; Gori, Szilvia; Halmos, Gergo; Kopek, Annamária; Margóczi, Katalin; Miklay, Gábor; Milon, László; Podmaniczky, László; Sárvári, János; Schmidt, András; Sipos, Katalin; Siposs, Viktória; Standovár, T.; Szigetvári, Csaba; Szemethy, László; Tóth, Balázs; Tóth, László; Tóth, Péter; Török, Katalin; Török, Péter; Vadász, Csaba; Varga, Ildikó; Sutherland, William J.; Báldi, A.

In: Journal for Nature Conservation, Vol. 28, 01.11.2015, p. 133-148.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Mihók, B, Kovács, E, Balázs, B, Pataki, G, Ambrus, A, Bartha, D, Czirák, Z, Csányi, S, Csépányi, P, Csoszi, M, Dudás, G, Egri, C, Erős, T, Gori, S, Halmos, G, Kopek, A, Margóczi, K, Miklay, G, Milon, L, Podmaniczky, L, Sárvári, J, Schmidt, A, Sipos, K, Siposs, V, Standovár, T, Szigetvári, C, Szemethy, L, Tóth, B, Tóth, L, Tóth, P, Török, K, Török, P, Vadász, C, Varga, I, Sutherland, WJ & Báldi, A 2015, 'Bridging the research-practice gap: Conservation research priorities in a Central and Eastern European country', Journal for Nature Conservation, vol. 28, pp. 133-148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2015.09.010
Mihók, Barbara ; Kovács, Eszter ; Balázs, Bálint ; Pataki, György ; Ambrus, András ; Bartha, Dénes ; Czirák, Zoltán ; Csányi, Sándor ; Csépányi, Péter ; Csoszi, Mónika ; Dudás, György ; Egri, Csaba ; Erős, T. ; Gori, Szilvia ; Halmos, Gergo ; Kopek, Annamária ; Margóczi, Katalin ; Miklay, Gábor ; Milon, László ; Podmaniczky, László ; Sárvári, János ; Schmidt, András ; Sipos, Katalin ; Siposs, Viktória ; Standovár, T. ; Szigetvári, Csaba ; Szemethy, László ; Tóth, Balázs ; Tóth, László ; Tóth, Péter ; Török, Katalin ; Török, Péter ; Vadász, Csaba ; Varga, Ildikó ; Sutherland, William J. ; Báldi, A. / Bridging the research-practice gap : Conservation research priorities in a Central and Eastern European country. In: Journal for Nature Conservation. 2015 ; Vol. 28. pp. 133-148.
@article{f538a06577af4105b0361e7043bda2e7,
title = "Bridging the research-practice gap: Conservation research priorities in a Central and Eastern European country",
abstract = "Halting biodiversity loss is a critical aim for the forthcoming decades, but is hindered by the gap between research and practice. Bridging this gap is a significant challenge in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, where, compared to Western European countries, biodiversity is higher but the research budget is lower. Approaches to address bridging this gap include participatory research prioritizing exercises. These demand-driven collaborative ranking processes have proven to be a useful tool in providing a research agenda derived from a review of critical challenges based on stakeholder engagement. However, for research agendas to be effectively realized, they are best developed and implemented at the operative level of research financing and implementation. This paper shows the process and the outcome of an exercise conducted in Hungary aiming to compile the most important conservation research questions at the country-level and outlines a set of further measures and tools required for dissemination and advocacy for the research agenda. During the process 792 research questions were collated from conservation practitioners and natural resource managers based on interviews and via an online questionnaire; the final 50 most important questions were identified by practitioners and policy makers during an expert workshop. Questions are embedded in global and EU biodiversity targets and imply a pragmatic approach with the aim of identifying research that supports policy- and decision-making regarding habitat management, land-use and regional development, while also focussing on conflicting issues. The outcome of the process includes the potential for lobbying, therefore post-publication activities and dissemination strategies are outlined as an integrated part of the exercise.",
keywords = "Conservation management, Dissemination strategy, Interdisciplinarity, Participatory research, Research priority",
author = "Barbara Mih{\'o}k and Eszter Kov{\'a}cs and B{\'a}lint Bal{\'a}zs and Gy{\"o}rgy Pataki and Andr{\'a}s Ambrus and D{\'e}nes Bartha and Zolt{\'a}n Czir{\'a}k and S{\'a}ndor Cs{\'a}nyi and P{\'e}ter Cs{\'e}p{\'a}nyi and M{\'o}nika Csoszi and Gy{\"o}rgy Dud{\'a}s and Csaba Egri and T. Erős and Szilvia Gori and Gergo Halmos and Annam{\'a}ria Kopek and Katalin Marg{\'o}czi and G{\'a}bor Miklay and L{\'a}szl{\'o} Milon and L{\'a}szl{\'o} Podmaniczky and J{\'a}nos S{\'a}rv{\'a}ri and Andr{\'a}s Schmidt and Katalin Sipos and Vikt{\'o}ria Siposs and T. Standov{\'a}r and Csaba Szigetv{\'a}ri and L{\'a}szl{\'o} Szemethy and Bal{\'a}zs T{\'o}th and L{\'a}szl{\'o} T{\'o}th and P{\'e}ter T{\'o}th and Katalin T{\"o}r{\"o}k and P{\'e}ter T{\"o}r{\"o}k and Csaba Vad{\'a}sz and Ildik{\'o} Varga and Sutherland, {William J.} and A. B{\'a}ldi",
year = "2015",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jnc.2015.09.010",
language = "English",
volume = "28",
pages = "133--148",
journal = "Journal for Nature Conservation",
issn = "1617-1381",
publisher = "Urban und Fischer Verlag GmbH und Co. KG",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Bridging the research-practice gap

T2 - Conservation research priorities in a Central and Eastern European country

AU - Mihók, Barbara

AU - Kovács, Eszter

AU - Balázs, Bálint

AU - Pataki, György

AU - Ambrus, András

AU - Bartha, Dénes

AU - Czirák, Zoltán

AU - Csányi, Sándor

AU - Csépányi, Péter

AU - Csoszi, Mónika

AU - Dudás, György

AU - Egri, Csaba

AU - Erős, T.

AU - Gori, Szilvia

AU - Halmos, Gergo

AU - Kopek, Annamária

AU - Margóczi, Katalin

AU - Miklay, Gábor

AU - Milon, László

AU - Podmaniczky, László

AU - Sárvári, János

AU - Schmidt, András

AU - Sipos, Katalin

AU - Siposs, Viktória

AU - Standovár, T.

AU - Szigetvári, Csaba

AU - Szemethy, László

AU - Tóth, Balázs

AU - Tóth, László

AU - Tóth, Péter

AU - Török, Katalin

AU - Török, Péter

AU - Vadász, Csaba

AU - Varga, Ildikó

AU - Sutherland, William J.

AU - Báldi, A.

PY - 2015/11/1

Y1 - 2015/11/1

N2 - Halting biodiversity loss is a critical aim for the forthcoming decades, but is hindered by the gap between research and practice. Bridging this gap is a significant challenge in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, where, compared to Western European countries, biodiversity is higher but the research budget is lower. Approaches to address bridging this gap include participatory research prioritizing exercises. These demand-driven collaborative ranking processes have proven to be a useful tool in providing a research agenda derived from a review of critical challenges based on stakeholder engagement. However, for research agendas to be effectively realized, they are best developed and implemented at the operative level of research financing and implementation. This paper shows the process and the outcome of an exercise conducted in Hungary aiming to compile the most important conservation research questions at the country-level and outlines a set of further measures and tools required for dissemination and advocacy for the research agenda. During the process 792 research questions were collated from conservation practitioners and natural resource managers based on interviews and via an online questionnaire; the final 50 most important questions were identified by practitioners and policy makers during an expert workshop. Questions are embedded in global and EU biodiversity targets and imply a pragmatic approach with the aim of identifying research that supports policy- and decision-making regarding habitat management, land-use and regional development, while also focussing on conflicting issues. The outcome of the process includes the potential for lobbying, therefore post-publication activities and dissemination strategies are outlined as an integrated part of the exercise.

AB - Halting biodiversity loss is a critical aim for the forthcoming decades, but is hindered by the gap between research and practice. Bridging this gap is a significant challenge in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, where, compared to Western European countries, biodiversity is higher but the research budget is lower. Approaches to address bridging this gap include participatory research prioritizing exercises. These demand-driven collaborative ranking processes have proven to be a useful tool in providing a research agenda derived from a review of critical challenges based on stakeholder engagement. However, for research agendas to be effectively realized, they are best developed and implemented at the operative level of research financing and implementation. This paper shows the process and the outcome of an exercise conducted in Hungary aiming to compile the most important conservation research questions at the country-level and outlines a set of further measures and tools required for dissemination and advocacy for the research agenda. During the process 792 research questions were collated from conservation practitioners and natural resource managers based on interviews and via an online questionnaire; the final 50 most important questions were identified by practitioners and policy makers during an expert workshop. Questions are embedded in global and EU biodiversity targets and imply a pragmatic approach with the aim of identifying research that supports policy- and decision-making regarding habitat management, land-use and regional development, while also focussing on conflicting issues. The outcome of the process includes the potential for lobbying, therefore post-publication activities and dissemination strategies are outlined as an integrated part of the exercise.

KW - Conservation management

KW - Dissemination strategy

KW - Interdisciplinarity

KW - Participatory research

KW - Research priority

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84946411468&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84946411468&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jnc.2015.09.010

DO - 10.1016/j.jnc.2015.09.010

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84946411468

VL - 28

SP - 133

EP - 148

JO - Journal for Nature Conservation

JF - Journal for Nature Conservation

SN - 1617-1381

ER -