Reflexive strategic action to consolidate a research–NGO partnership during science–policy interactions

2017 
Abstract Ecology researchers are increasingly willing to be involved in conservation policy-making processes. However, such processes are driven by complex negotiations between numerous stakeholders. The wish to engage is therefore not enough for ecological scientists to conduct effective science–policy interactions with respect to their conservation goals. The capacity for scientists to influence such negotiations also depends on their understanding of the strategic context, which involves complex cooperation and opposition dynamics among the stakeholders. Reflexive strategic action, an approach derived from the management sciences, can help develop collaborations between social scientists and ecologists that provide both (i) prime field observations on the involvement of scientists in policy-making processes and (ii) a support to scientists in their actions, by increasing their awareness of the strategic context in which they are embedded. In this study, an action research approach was developed within the context of a partnership between an ecology research team and a conservation NGO. The partnership aimed to design a new science–management interface for Mediterranean biodiversity conservation. The action research project was based on reflexive strategic action and focused on how such a partnership could strengthen the capacity of both partners to influence biodiversity conservation policies. While the relationship between the research team and the conservation NGO seemed to be based on a tactical pragmatism, both partners identified the need for a more effective advocacy coalition. Strategic reflexivity brought a number of insights to the partners and helped them collaborate towards their conservation goals. Ultimately, the increase in reflexivity brought by the social sciences is more likely to be useful when all those involved – social scientists, ecology researchers and conservation NGOs – share the same normative perspective on conservation goals.
    • Correction
    • Source
    • Cite
    • Save
    • Machine Reading By IdeaReader
    46
    References
    5
    Citations
    NaN
    KQI
    []