Westwood, Alana
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://hdl.handle.net/10222/84370
Browse
Recent Submissions
Item Open Access A systematic mapping protocol for understanding knowledge exchange in forest science(Wiley & Sons, 5/8/2021) Westwood, Alana Rachel; Hutchen, Jenna; Kapoor, Tyreen; Klenk, Kimberly; Saturno, Jacquelyn; Wang, Jonathan; Falconer, Matthew; Nguyen, Vivian1. When making decisions about forest and environmental management, managers and policymakers often rely upon scientific knowledge. There is awell-documented ‘knowledge–integration gap’ where often the production of knowledge and its use are not aligned. Though there are several theoretical frameworks that conceptualize how knowledge is exchanged between producers of scientific knowledge and users of that information, there has been little attention to documenting knowledge exchange practices and their effectiveness, especially about forests. 2. In the systematic map, we will examine the peer-reviewed academic and grey literature to document and classify the knowledge exchange techniques suggested and adopted by knowledge producers and users in the forest sciences globally. Characterizing this knowledge exchange landscape will provide new information about which techniques are used and their frequency, if there is evidence of effectiveness for particular techniques, and recommendations for best practices. This map will also show whether approaches to knowledge exchange differ between sectors (e.g. academia, government). 3. We will create a systematic literature map as defined by the Collaboration for Environmental Evidence to capture case studies of, or theories about, knowledge exchange related to forest science. The search of peer-reviewed academic and grey literaturewill be conducted in English and French in two academic databases (BASE and Scopus) and one specialist database (ResearchGate). Candidate search strings will be evaluated against a test list of documents to determine strings with maximum sensitivity and specificity. Eligibility criteria will be applied to items at two screening stages: (1) title and abstract and (2) full-text. All screening decisions will be recorded in a databasewith 15% of full-text screening decisions validated. Items retained for inclusion will have data extracted according to a standardized strategy. Each reviewer conducting data extraction will have at least three of their extractions validated. 4. The systematic map will employ a narrative synthesis approach that includes descriptive statistics, tables, and figures which describe the types and frequency of knowledge exchange techniques theorized or described, a network map displaying the institutions within and between which knowledge exchange occurs, as well as summarizing any available evidence of effectiveness for particular knowledge exchange techniques.Item Open Access A systematic map of knowledge exchange across the science-policy interface for forest science: How can we improve consistency and effectiveness?(Wiley & Sons, 2023) Westwood, Alana; Hutchen, Jenna; Kapoor, Tyreen; Klenk, Kimberly; Saturno, Jacquelyn; Antwi, Effah; Egunyu, Felicitas; Cortini, Francesco; Robertson, Manjulika; Le Noble, Sophie; Wang, Jonathan; Falconer, Matthew; Nguyen, VivianKnowledge produced by scientists is essential to the policy and practice of managing natural resources, including forests. However, there has never been systematic mapping of which techniques in knowledge exchange (KE) have been applied in the forest sciences, by whom, and to what effect. We examined KE techniques documented in the forest sciences globally. 2. We used standardized search strings in English and French across two academic search engines (BASE and Scopus) and a specialist website (ResearchGate) to locate relevant items. We screened items, extracted data, conducted qualitative and quantitative analysis, and built a network visualization diagram to demonstrate knowledge flow. 3. Our final map included 122 items published from 1998-2020, with most published after 2010. Items mentioned organizations from 66 countries as knowledge producers or users. The interactive network visualization diagram displays linkages between organizations, sectors, and countries. We found that most of the KE activity involved the Global North (89%). Governments were the most common knowledge users, and industry was frequently reported as a user but rarely a producer. Academia was both producer and user. Indigenous, local, traditional or community knowledge was included in 24% of items, but these communities were not associated with any coauthor affiliations. Reported funders were universities, governments, non-profits, or foundations. We found 90 unique terms in the items related to KE with less than 25% of terms used in more than one item. 15% of item keywords related to KE. The most commonly identified enabling conditions for KE were trust, funding, and established relationships, while major barriers were challenges for translation of science and lack of time. 4. To improve searchability of information related to KE and encourage a culture of considering KE in scientific research and forest management work, we recommend a common lexicon of ‘knowledge exchange’/‘échange de connaisances’. We recommend that more effort be given to forest science-related KE connections between the Global North and South as well as a deliberate collection of evidence for the effectiveness of KE techniques. Researchers and practitioners can use our KE typology to identify their goals and design appropriate evaluation measures.