Beyond Academia: A case for reviews of gray literature for science-policy processes and applied research

Gray literature is increasingly considered to complement evidence and knowledge from peer-reviewed literature for science-policy processes and applied research. On the one hand, science-policy assessments need to consider a diversity of worldviews, knowledge types and values from a variety of sectors and actor groups, and synthesize policy-relevant findings that are salient, legitimate and credible. On the other hand, practitioners and scholars conducting applied research are affected by the time lag and biases of academic publication processes. Gray literature holds diverse perspectives informative for science-policy processes as well as practical evidence unfiltered by commercial publication processes. However, its heterogeneity has made it challenging to access through conventional means for a literature review. This paper details one endeavor within the Values Assessment of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) to review gray literature using Google’s Programmable Search Engine. In the absence of a standardized approach, we build on the limited experiential knowledge base for reviewing gray literature and report on the potential applicability of our strategy for future reviews. Gray literature review results contrast findings of our parallel review of academic literature, underlining the importance of mobilizing different knowledge bases in science-policy assessments, evidence-based practices, and applied research. • We examine the integration of gray literature in the IPBES Values Assessment. • Open-access, customizable search engines enable targeted, systematic reviews of gray literature. • Gray literature differed from peer-reviewed literature in every aspect assessed. • Gray literature more often contained future visions with transformative potential. • Findings support uptake of gray literature in science-policy assessments and practice.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Environmental Science & Policy
Published
2024-09-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103882
Citations
20
Primary Topic
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
9.23

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Beyond Academia: A case for reviews of gray literature for science-policy processes and applied research

Marta Berbés‐Blázquez, Gabriela Arroyo-Robles, Patrick O’Farrell, Zuzana V. Harmáčková et al.
20 citations
Environmental Science & Policy
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
9.23
article

Beyond Academia: A case for reviews of gray literature for science-policy processes and applied research

Marta Berbés‐Blázquez, Gabriela Arroyo-Robles, Patrick O’Farrell, Zuzana V. Harmáčková, Aidin Niamir, Nadia Sitas, Lelani Mannetti, Yuki Yoshida, David González-Jiménez, Valerie Nelson
article en
20 citations

Abstract

Gray literature is increasingly considered to complement evidence and knowledge from peer-reviewed literature for science-policy processes and applied research. On the one hand, science-policy assessments need to consider a diversity of worldviews, knowledge types and values from a variety of sectors and actor groups, and synthesize policy-relevant findings that are salient, legitimate and credible. On the other hand, practitioners and scholars conducting applied research are affected by the time lag and biases of academic publication processes. Gray literature holds diverse perspectives informative for science-policy processes as well as practical evidence unfiltered by commercial publication processes. However, its heterogeneity has made it challenging to access through conventional means for a literature review. This paper details one endeavor within the Values Assessment of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) to review gray literature using Google’s Programmable Search Engine. In the absence of a standardized approach, we build on the limited experiential knowledge base for reviewing gray literature and report on the potential applicability of our strategy for future reviews. Gray literature review results contrast findings of our parallel review of academic literature, underlining the importance of mobilizing different knowledge bases in science-policy assessments, evidence-based practices, and applied research. • We examine the integration of gray literature in the IPBES Values Assessment. • Open-access, customizable search engines enable targeted, systematic reviews of gray literature. • Gray literature differed from peer-reviewed literature in every aspect assessed. • Gray literature more often contained future visions with transformative potential. • Findings support uptake of gray literature in science-policy assessments and practice.

Environmental Science & PolicyVol. 162
Stockholm Resilience Centre (SE), University of Waterloo (CA), Stockholm University (SE), Georgia State University (US), National Institute for Environmental Studies (JP), Stellenbosch University (ZA), Czech Academy of Sciences, Global Change Research Institute (CZ), Senckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre (DE), SouthSouthNorth (ZA), Natural Resources Institute (GB), University of Greenwich (GB), University of the Western Cape (ZA), Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (MX)
National Science Foundation, Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
9.23
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.