Improving invasive species management by integrating priorities and contributions of scientists and decision makers

Managing invasive species is a major challenge for society. In the case of newly established invaders, rapid action is key for a successful management. Here, we develop, describe and recommend a three-step transdisciplinary process (the “butterfly model”) to rapidly initiate action for invasion management. In the framing of a case study, we present results from the first of these steps: assessing priorities and contributions of both scientists and decision makers. Both scientists and decision makers prioritise research on prevention. The available scientific knowledge contributions, however, are publications on impacts rather than prevention of the invasive species. The contribution of scientific knowledge does thus not reflect scientists’ perception of what is essentially needed. We argue that a more objective assessment and transparent communication of not only decision makers’ but also scientists’ priorities is an essential basis for a successful cooperation. Our three-step model can help achieve objectivity via transdisciplinary communication.     

Restrictions and options: A heuristic tool to integrate knowledge for strategies towards a sustainable development

SUMMARY

This article presents the heuristic ‘Restrictions and Options’ that was created in an interdisciplinary research team to identify restricting and supporting factors regarding sustainable ways of actions for different institutional and individual actors in the need-field of nutrition. The heuristic format is first presented on a general level. Then it is combined with two different approaches: first, with a systemic constructivist approach to organization theory, and second, with the ipsative theory of action (psychology). Its abilities are illustrated by examples from two research projects.

The heuristic tool was developed to help identify relevant factors that restrict or support sustainable development in two empirical settings and also could be used to compare the findings. Combining the two approaches remains for future research.