IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/envman/v60y2017i6d10.1007_s00267-017-0929-x.html

Exploring Institutional Mechanisms for Scientific Input into the Management Cycle of the National Protected Area Network of Peru: Gaps and Opportunities

Author

Listed:
  • M. D. López-Rodríguez

    (University of Almeria, Department of Biology and Geology, Andalusian Centre for the Assessment and Monitoring of Global Change)

  • H. Castro

    (University of Almeria, Department of Biology and Geology, Andalusian Centre for the Assessment and Monitoring of Global Change)

  • M. Arenas

    (National Service of Natural Protected Areas in Peru)

  • J. M. Requena-Mullor

    (University of Almeria, Department of Biology and Geology, Andalusian Centre for the Assessment and Monitoring of Global Change)

  • A. Cano

    (National University of San Marcos, Natural History Museum)

  • E. Valenzuela

    (National Service of Natural Protected Areas in Peru)

  • J. Cabello

    (University of Almeria, Department of Biology and Geology, Andalusian Centre for the Assessment and Monitoring of Global Change)

Abstract

Understanding how to improve decision makers’ use of scientific information across their different scales of management is a core challenge for narrowing the gap between science and conservation practice. Here, we present a study conducted in collaboration with decision makers that aims to explore the functionality of the mechanisms for scientific input within the institutional setting of the National Protected Area Network of Peru. First, we analyzed institutional mechanisms to assess the scientific information recorded by decision makers. Second, we developed two workshops involving scientists, decision makers and social actors to identify barriers to evidence-based conservation practice. Third, we administered 482 questionnaires to stakeholders to explore social perceptions of the role of science and the willingness to collaborate in the governance of protected areas. The results revealed that (1) the institutional mechanisms did not effectively promote the compilation and application of scientific knowledge for conservation practice; (2) six important barriers hindered scientific input in management decisions; and (3) stakeholders showed positive perceptions about the involvement of scientists in protected areas and expressed their willingness to collaborate in conservation practice. This collaborative research helped to (1) identify gaps and opportunities that should be addressed for increasing the effectiveness of the institutional mechanisms and (2) support institutional changes integrating science-based strategies for strengthening scientific input in decision-making. These insights provide a useful contextual orientation for scholars and decision makers interested in conducting empirical research to connect scientific inputs with operational aspects of the management cycle in other institutional settings around the world.

Suggested Citation

  • M. D. López-Rodríguez & H. Castro & M. Arenas & J. M. Requena-Mullor & A. Cano & E. Valenzuela & J. Cabello, 2017. "Exploring Institutional Mechanisms for Scientific Input into the Management Cycle of the National Protected Area Network of Peru: Gaps and Opportunities," Environmental Management, Springer, vol. 60(6), pages 1022-1041, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:envman:v:60:y:2017:i:6:d:10.1007_s00267-017-0929-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s00267-017-0929-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00267-017-0929-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00267-017-0929-x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:envman:v:60:y:2017:i:6:d:10.1007_s00267-017-0929-x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.