Selecting appropriate methods of knowledge synthesis to inform biodiversity policy

Responding to different questions generated by biodiversity and ecosystem services policy or management requires different forms of knowledge (e.g. scientific, experiential) and knowledge synthesis. Additionally, synthesis methods need to be appropriate to policy context (e.g. question types, budget, timeframe, output type, required scientific rigour). In this paper we present a range of different methods that could potentially be used to conduct a knowledge synthesis in response to questions arising from knowledge needs of decision makers on biodiversity and ecosystem services policy and management. Through a series of workshops attended by natural and social scientists and decision makers we compiled a range of question types, different policy contexts and potential methodological approaches to knowledge synthesis. Methods are derived from both natural and social sciences fields and reflect the range of question and study types that may be relevant for syntheses. Knowledge can be available either in qualitative or quantitative form and in some cases also mixed. All methods have their strengths and weaknesses and we discuss a sample of these to illustrate the need for diversity and importance of appropriate selection. To summarize this collection, we present a table that identifies potential methods matched to different combinations of question types and policy contexts, aimed at assisting teams undertaking knowledge syntheses to select appropriate methods

Biodiversity and the forestry sector

This chapter therefore aims to explore competing perspectives on the tradeoffs among forestry- related supporting, regulating, provisioning and cultural services and their governance at multiple scales (local to global), by drawing insights from three developed country case studies. The case study countries selected are Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States, all leading consumers in their respective world regions, with varying forest histories and forest endowments (Table 3.1). Initially, we provide an overview of the economic relevance of the forestry sector, its interplay with biodiversity, and why forestry is a key sector within Green Economy discussions (Section 2). We then discuss key trade- offs and policies within the forestry sectors of Australia, the UK and the US. For each country we provide a brief overview of the status of forests and forest- related biodiversity (Sections 3.1, 4.1, 5.1). We then examine available evidence on non- industrial landowner perspectives as it relates to forest biodiversity (Sections 3.2, 4.2, 5.2), and compare and contrast these perspectives to key trends in national policies for forests and biodiversity (Sections 3.3, 4.3, 5.3). This is then considered in light of each country’s global forest footprint and international policies that attempt to address this footprint (Sections 3.4, 4.4, 5.4). The chapter concludes by considering how a more inclusive perspective on forest governance in the form of ‘productive conservation’ (sensu Perz, 2002) may (or may not) help to improve the coherence of forestry policies across scales and world regions (Section 6)

Biodiversity and the forestry sector

This chapter therefore aims to explore competing perspectives on the tradeoffs among forestry- related supporting, regulating, provisioning and cultural services and their governance at multiple scales (local to global), by drawing insights from three developed country case studies. The case study countries selected are Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States, all leading consumers in their respective world regions, with varying forest histories and forest endowments (Table 3.1). Initially, we provide an overview of the economic relevance of the forestry sector, its interplay with biodiversity, and why forestry is a key sector within Green Economy discussions (Section 2). We then discuss key trade- offs and policies within the forestry sectors of Australia, the UK and the US. For each country we provide a brief overview of the status of forests and forest- related biodiversity (Sections 3.1, 4.1, 5.1). We then examine available evidence on non- industrial landowner perspectives as it relates to forest biodiversity (Sections 3.2, 4.2, 5.2), and compare and contrast these perspectives to key trends in national policies for forests and biodiversity (Sections 3.3, 4.3, 5.3). This is then considered in light of each country’s global forest footprint and international policies that attempt to address this footprint (Sections 3.4, 4.4, 5.4). The chapter concludes by considering how a more inclusive perspective on forest governance in the form of ‘productive conservation’ (sensu Perz, 2002) may (or may not) help to improve the coherence of forestry policies across scales and world regions (Section 6)