The role of scientific evidence and social context in protected area decision making
Abstract Evidence‐based decision making is increasingly recognized as vital for improving the effectiveness of conservation interventions. However, its practical application in protected area (PA) management remains limited. Drawing on face‐to‐face interviews with PA managers from 116 PAs across Africa and Europe, we investigated the use of scientific evidence in conservation decisions and the social context under which the decisions are made. Our results revealed that most PA managers believe that there is a favorable social context, highlighting supportive community attitudes and their willingness to participate in conservation. We also found that while only about one‐third of PA managers use scientific publications to inform their decisions, an overwhelming majority (85%) of PA managers rely primarily on personal experience. PA managers widely perceive the conservation interventions implemented by their respective PAs as highly effective, regardless of the type of intervention or the degree of scientific support behind it. They also recognize the trust, cooperation, and participation of local communities as crucial for the success of conservation interventions. Our study underlines that the influence of scientific evidence, particularly evidence from systematic research that has been published in peer‐reviewed scientific journals, on PA‐level decision making remains limited. Although the practical experience of PA managers is undeniably valuable, the underutilization of scientific evidence could undermine the effectiveness of PA managers' decisions and conservation interventions implemented by PAs. Fostering strong partnerships between researchers and PA managers (through co‐designed research, mutual learning, and effective communication) can help mainstream evidence‐based decision making in protected areas.
Authors
- Aletta Bonn (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8345-4600)
- Marco Heurich (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0051-2930)
- Tsegaye T. Gatiso (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0333-225X)
- Tenekwetche Sop (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3758-5981)
- Mona Bachmann (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0533-4304)
- Hjalmar S. Kühl (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4440-9161)
- Karsten Wesche (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0088-6492)
- Isabel Ordaz‐Németh (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6171-7422)
- Lars Kulik (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3357-736X)
- Andreas Freytag
- Lukas Bösch
Institutions
- University of Copenhagen (DK)
- Ifo Institute for Economic Research (DE)
- Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (DE)
- University of Freiburg (DE)
- Copenhagen Business School (DK)
- Stellenbosch University (ZA)
- Bavarian Forest National Park (DE)
- German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (DE)
- Frederiksberg Hospital (DK)
- Dansk Sprognævn (DK)
- Wild Chimpanzee Foundation (DE)
- University of Inland Norway (NO)
- Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology (DE)
- Senckenberg Museum für Naturkunde Görlitz (DE)
- International University Institute (IHI) Zittau (DE)
- Friedrich Schiller University Jena (DE)
- Technische Universität Dresden (DE)
- Manaaki Whenua – Landcare Research (NZ)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Conservation Science and Practice
- Published
- 2025-11-14
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.70182
- Primary Topic
- Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00
Funders
- Robert Bosch Stiftung
- Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
- Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology
- Deutsches Zentrum für integrative Biodiversitätsforschung Halle-Jena-Leipzig