Systematic reviews of qualitative evidence for environmental policy and management: An overview of different methodological options

This is the final version. Available from BMC via the DOI in this record. Qualitative research related to the human dimensions of conservation and environment is growing in quantity. Rigorous syntheses of such studies can help develop understanding and inform decision-making. They can combine findings from studies in varied or similar contexts to address questions relating to, for example, the lived experience of those affected by environmental phenomena or interventions, or to intervention implementation. Researchers in environmental management have adapted methodology for systematic reviews of quantitative research so as to address questions about the magnitude of intervention effects or the impacts of human activities or exposure. However, guidance for the synthesis of qualitative evidence in this field does not yet exist. The objective of this paper is to present a brief overview of different methods for the synthesis of qualitative research and to explore why and how reviewers might select between these. The paper discusses synthesis methods developed in other fields but applicable to environmental management and policy. These methods include thematic synthesis, framework synthesis, realist synthesis, critical interpretive synthesis and meta-ethnography. We briefly describe each of these approaches, give recommendations for the selection between them, and provide a selection of sources for further reading.European UnionSwedish Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research FORMASSweden’s innovation agency VINNOVAAcademy of FinlandNational Centre for Research and Development in Polan

Literature syntheses to inform marine ecosystem management: lessons learned from stakeholder participation

Systematic literature syntheses are a key element in the scientific realm, considering the steadily growing amount of available knowledge. Involving stakeholders in the research process brings a wide range of advantages, like broadening the perspectives on the problem in question, increasing the relevance of results for policy- and decision-making, the public and other end-users and thus enhancing the impact and acceptance of research. While participatory approaches are on the rise, reflections on stakeholder involvement in systematic syntheses on environmental management are scarce. We reflect on the process of involving stakeholders with expertise also from outside academia during three literature syntheses with different foci of marine and coastal ecosystem services in the Baltic Sea. Our analysis is based on notes, e-mails, minutes and recordings of internal project meetings, interviews and workshops involving both researchers and stakeholders. We discuss the challenges the participatory approach introduced and develop lessons learned to support the planning of stakeholder engagement for future literature syntheses. We conclude that stakeholder identification, communication, collaboration and knowledge translation are highly time- and resource-intensive processes. Furthermore, appropriate training and experience are necessary for the design, execution and evaluation of participatory methods tailored to each project stage. Therefore, we underline the importance of adequate consideration of the required resources during project planning and implementation. To encourage and support valuable stakeholder engagement and knowledge exchange between the research community and actors of policy and practice, more appreciation of such efforts by funding institutions and within the wider scientific community is needed

Data summarizing monitoring and evaluation for three European environmental policies in 9 cases across Europe

Subject area: Environmental policy. More specific subject area: Monitoring; evaluation; European Policy; Water Framework Directive; Natura 2000; Agri-Environment Schemes. Type of data: Tables and text. How data was acquired: Review and analysis of any publicly-available information on monitoring programs. Data format: Summarized, analyzed. Experimental factors: In 2017 the authors searched for publicly available about monitoring programs associated with 3 policy areas: the Water Framework Directive, Natura 2000 and Agri-Environment Schemes under the Common Agricultural Policy. Authors from each organization searched for information about monitoring in the country or region of the organization where they are based: Catalonia (Spain), Estonia, Finland, Flanders (Belgium), Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Scotland (UK), Sweden. Internet searches of grey and academic literature were used: some authors also contacted policy contacts for advice about where this information could be found, but did not use any information that was not already publicly available. Experimental features: Bibliographic information on the information sources was recorded (see reference list below), and each author team searched for and summarized information about monitoring and evaluation according to a standard template (see below). Data source location: Catalonia (Spain), Estonia, Finland, Flanders (Belgium), Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Scotland (UK), Sweden. Data accessibility: All of the data are within this article. Related research article: Companion paper to: Waylen, K.A.; Blackstock, K.L.; van Hulst. F.; Damian, C.; Horváth, F.; Johnson, R.; Kanka, R.; Külvik, M.; Macleod, C.; Meissner, C.; Oprina-Pavelescu, M.; Pino, J.; Primmer, E.; Rîșnoveanu, G.; Šatalová, B.; Silander, J.; Špulerová, J.; Suškevičs, M.; Van Uytvanck, J. 2019. Policy-driven monitoring and evaluation: does it support adaptive management of socio-ecological systems? Science of the Total Environment, 662: 373–384 [2].Value of the data • The data provide the first overview of monitoring and evaluation (M&E) practices carried out by a selection European member states and regions, under 3 European environmental policies (the Water Framework Directive, the Natura 2000 network of protected areas, and Agri-Environment Schemes under the Common Agricultural Policy). • The data permit comparison across cases as well as across policies, and so provide a baseline for comparative studies. • The source of information used to describe monitoring in each case are provided, thus providing a baseline for researchers seeking more in-depth analyses.The data presented in this DiB article provide an overview of Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) carried out for 3 European environmental policies (the Water Framework Directive, the Natura 2000 network of protected areas, and Agri-Environment Schemes implemented under the Common Agricultural Policy), as implemented in 9 cases (Catalonia (Spain), Estonia, Finland, Flanders (Belgium), Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Scotland (UK), Sweden). These data are derived from reports and documents about monitoring programs that were publicly-available online in 2017. The literature on M&E to support adaptive management structured the issues that have been extracted and summarized. The data is related to the research article entitled “Policy-driven monitoring and evaluation: does it support adaptive management of socio-ecological systems?” [Stem et al., 2005]. The information provides a first overview of monitoring and evaluation that has been implemented in response to key European environmental policies. It provides a structured overview that permits a comparison of cases and policies and can assist other scholars and practitioners working on monitoring and evaluation

Policy-driven monitoring and evaluation : Does it support adaptive management of socio-ecological systems?

Inadequate Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) is often thought to hinder adaptive management of socio-ecological systems. A key influence on environmental management practices are environmental policies: however, their consequences for M&E practices have not been well-examined. We examine three policy areas - the Water Framework Directive, the Natura 2000 Directives, and the Agri-Environment Schemes of the Common Agricultural Policy - whose statutory requirements influence how the environment is managed and monitored across Europe. We use a comparative approach to examine what is monitored, how monitoring is carried out, and how results are used to update management, based on publicly available documentation across nine regional and national cases. The requirements and guidelines of these policies have provided significant impetus for monitoring: however, we find this policy-driven M&E usually does not match the ideals of what is needed to inform adaptive management. There is a tendency to focus on understanding state and trends rather than tracking the effect of interventions; a focus on specific biotic and abiotic indicators at the expense of understanding system functions and processes, especially social components; and limited attention to how context affects systems, though this is sometimes considered via secondary data. The resulting data are sometimes publicly-accessible, but it is rarely clear if and how these influence decisions at any level, whether this be in the original policy itself or at the level of measures such as site management plans. Adjustments to policy-driven M&E could better enable learning for adaptive management, by reconsidering what supports a balanced understanding of socio-ecological systems and decision-making. Useful strategies include making more use of secondary data, and more transparency in data-sharing and decision-making. Several countries and policy areas already offer useful examples. Such changes are essential given the influence of policy, and the urgency of enabling adaptive management to safeguard socio-ecological systems. Highlights • Policy strongly influences Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) of socio-ecological systems. • We examine M&E of 3 major European policies in 9 regional and national cases. • Policy-driven M&E is imperfect versus ideals of M&E to support adaptive management. • Attention needed to systems, social issues, sharing data, and sharing intended uses. • Examples from across Europe and different policies offer ideas for improvement

Incorporating Ecosystems in the Water-Energy-Food Nexus: Current Perspective and Future Directions

Integrated approaches for managing natural resources are needed to meet the increasing demand for freshwater, energy and food, while, in parallel, mitigating and adapting to climate change, maintaining the integrity of ecosystems, and ensuring equitable access to resources. The Water-Energy-Food (WEF) Nexus has been proposed as a cross-sectoral approach to understand, analyse, and manage the complex trade-offs and exploit synergies that arise among these resource sectors. Although not initially included as a component of the Nexus, the importance of ecosystems in supporting water, energy and food security is increasingly recognised by the Nexus community of researchers and practitioners. However, attempts to conceptually integrate Ecosystems into the Nexus have yet to converge into a common framework. A group of natural resources management researchers, system thinkers and ecosystem services experts from the European network COST Action CA20138 NEXUSNET have compiled and investigated the various approaches for integrating ecosystems in the WEF Nexus. By combining literature analysis with interdisciplinary workshops – one of which was held in a hybrid format (in person and online) at the University of Oulu, Finland, in September 2022 – we reveal a multiplicity of concepts utilised to represent, partially or fully, ecosystems in the Nexus, namely “natural environment”, “ecosystem services” and “biodiversity”. Disparity was also found in the role attributed to ecosystems in the Nexus framework, being it an underlying layer from which resources for Nexus sectors are extracted or the pillar of an expanded Nexus system – i.e., the WEF-Ecosystems Nexus. Through this collaborative effort, we present possible advantages and disadvantages of adopting differential WEF-Ecosystems Nexus approaches, highlighting their potential complementarity and integration to support future advancement of Nexus research. In the oral presentation, we will show our preliminary findings and encourage the exchange of ideas and feedback from the different scientific disciplines present at the CEMEPE Conference.Tenth International Conference on Environmental Management, Engineering, Planning and Economics (CEMEPE) & SECOTOX Conference organized by: Division of Hydraulics and Environmental Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki and Society of Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety (SECOTOX), Skiathos island, Greece, 2023

Citizen science in the social sciences and humanities: the power of interdisciplinarity

Citizen science evolved through multiple disciplinary manifestations into a new field of study and a participatory method of enquiry. While most citizen science projects take place within problem-focused natural sciences, social sciences and humanities help understanding the human dimension and open a broad methodological spectrum for enriching scientific research with new approaches and for boosting public participation. In this paper, we use a meta-synthesis approach to explore how citizen science is practised in the so far less addressed social sciences and humanities by focusing on the role of the citizens, the goals and approaches of the projects, the tasks in which citizens are engaged and their gains across projects of diverse disciplinary background. Our findings indicate that social sciences are gaining more acknowledgment within interdisciplinary citizen science projects by addressing ‘wicked’ problems of human behaviour and agency, while humanities are in quest of a better-defined locus in citizen science. We conclude that social sciences and humanities still face considerable barriers to infiltrate citizen science; the payoffs are substantial and already rewarding for several subfields in social sciences and humanities. © 2020, The Author(s)

Policy-driven monitoring and evaluation : Does it support adaptive management of socio-ecological systems?

Inadequate Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) is often thought to hinder adaptive management of socio-ecological systems. A key influence on environmental management practices are environmental policies: however, their consequences for M&E practices have not been well-examined. We examine three policy areas - the Water Framework Directive, the Natura 2000 Directives, and the Agri-Environment Schemes of the Common Agricultural Policy - whose statutory requirements influence how the environment is managed and monitored across Europe. We use a comparative approach to examine what is monitored, how monitoring is carried out, and how results are used to update management, based on publicly available documentation across nine regional and national cases. The requirements and guidelines of these policies have provided significant impetus for monitoring: however, we find this policy-driven M&E usually does not match the ideals of what is needed to inform adaptive management. There is a tendency to focus on understanding state and trends rather than tracking the effect of interventions; a focus on specific biotic and abiotic indicators at the expense of understanding system functions and processes, especially social components; and limited attention to how context affects systems, though this is sometimes considered via secondary data. The resulting data are sometimes publicly-accessible, but it is rarely clear if and how these influence decisions at any level, whether this be in the original policy itself or at the level of measures such as site management plans. Adjustments to policy-driven M&E could better enable learning for adaptive management, by reconsidering what supports a balanced understanding of socio-ecological systems and decision-making. Useful strategies include making more use of secondary data, and more transparency in data-sharing and decision-making. Several countries and policy areas already offer useful examples. Such changes are essential given the influence of policy, and the urgency of enabling adaptive management to safeguard socio-ecological systems