Scientific assessments: Matching the process to the problem
Bothalia - African Biodiversity & Conservation
| Field | Value | |
| Title | Scientific assessments: Matching the process to the problem | |
| Creator | Scholes, Robert J. Schreiner, Gregory O. Snyman-Van der Walt, Luanita | |
| Description | Background: The science–policy interface process – known as a ‘scientific assessment’ – has risen to prominence in the past few decades. Complex assessments are appropriate for issues which are both technically complicated, multifaceted and of high societal interest. There is increasing interest from the research community that studies biological invasions to undertake such an assessment. Objectives: Providing the relevant background and context, the article describes key principles and steps for designing, planning, resourcing and executing such a process, as well as providing evidence of high-impact assessments enhancing scientific careers. Method: Experience from international and national assessments, most recently the South African scientific assessment for the Shale Gas Development in the Central Karoo, was used to develop this guiding generic template for practitioners. Analyses of researcher publication performances were undertaken to determine the benefit of being involved in assessments. Results: The key success factors for assessments mostly relate to adherence to ‘process’ and ‘governance’ aspects, for which scientists are sometimes ill-equipped. As regards publication outputs, authors involved in assessment processes demonstrated higher H-indices than their environmental scientist peers. We have suggested causal explanations for this. Conclusion: Effectively designed and managed assessments provide the platform for the ‘co-production of knowledge’ – an iterative and collaborative process involving scientists, stakeholders and policymakers. This increases scientific impact in the society–policy domain. While scientists seem concerned that effort directed towards assessments comes at the detriment of scientific credibility and productivity, we have presented data that suggest the opposite. | |
| Publisher | AOSIS | |
| Date | 2017-03-31 | |
| Identifier | 10.4102/abc.v47i2.2144 | |
| Source | Bothalia; Vol 47, No 2 (2017); 9 pages 2311-9284 0006-8241 | |
| Language | eng | |
| Relation |
The following web links (URLs) may trigger a file download or direct you to an alternative webpage to gain access to a publication file format of the published article:
https://journals.abcjournal.aosis.co.za/index.php/abc/article/view/2144/2161
https://journals.abcjournal.aosis.co.za/index.php/abc/article/view/2144/2160
https://journals.abcjournal.aosis.co.za/index.php/abc/article/view/2144/2162
https://journals.abcjournal.aosis.co.za/index.php/abc/article/view/2144/2135
|
|
ADVERTISEMENT
