This week I had the honor of delivering a keynote speech at the NØF 2019 conference "Towards Policy-Relevant Ecology" in Tromsø, Norway. During this presentation I shared my career journey, starting off as a marine ecologist and moving much more towards the applied side of science, to give my research the best chance at generating real world impact. I have done this by working with partners in government agencies, NGOs and the private sector on projects that range from ocean management through to corporate biodiversity accountability over the last 15 years. In my keynote I reflect on my experience of working across the science-policy-practice interface, and share what I believe are five critical factors for achieving research impact. I have shared my experience, particularly to help early career researchers wanting to enter into this emerging field of applied research across the science-policy-practice interface. I'd like to thank the wonderful NØF 2019 organising committee for inviting me as a keynote speaker. I really enjoyed listening to many inspiring talks about ecological research that is spanning the science-policy interface in Norway!

1. Keynote presentation: Dr Prue Addison, University of Oxford

2. @prueaddison
Dr Prue Addison
Knowledge Exchange & Research
Fellow
Applying the output from
ecological science into
decision-making

3. 3

6. 6

7. 7
The decision context for the Victorian coastline
Considered but not adequately
consulted about our research

8. 8
“Despite the aligned aspirations of many applied
scientists and policy-makers that science should
contribute directly to policy decisions, there are
significant gaps between what scientists provide
and what policymakers can use.”
Burgman. 2015. Asia & the Pacific
Policy Studies. 2. 441-451

9. 9
Evidence used in Protected Area management

10. 10
Cook, et al. 2010. Front Ecol Environ 8: 181-186
Evidence used in Protected Area management

11. 11
Cook, et al. 2010. Front Ecol Environ 8: 181-186
Evidence used in Protected Area management

12. Rethinking the ‘evidence-based’ mindset
12
1. Reject ‘evidence-based’ mindset 2. Think ‘evidence-informed’
Rose, 2014. Nature Climate Change 4: 522.

13. 13
Knowledge Exchange: an emerging discipline

14. 14Source: https://www.mpls.ox.ac.uk/public-engagement/what-is-public-engagement
Achieving
research impact:
Informing
>
Consulting
>
Collaborating
>
Co-production

15. 15
About me…
… after my time as
a marine ecologist

16. 16
Science Practice
• Developing decision support
tools for MPA managers
• Developing decision support tools
for catchment policy-makers and
managers
• Developing guidance and
decision support for businesses
wanting to integrate biodiversity
into management & reporting

17. 17
5 critical factors for achieving
research impact

18. 1: Build & maintain networks
18

19. 2: Develop collaborative partnerships
19
Research Practice

20. 20
Cvitanovic et al. 2015.
Ocean & Coastal
Management 112: 25-35.
2: Develop collaborative partnerships

21. 21
Research Councils UK, Pathways to Impact
• Passion
• Communication
• Trust
• Power
3: Master social dynamics

22. 22
4: Seek institutional support
Cvitanovic et al. 2019.
Environmental Science &
Policy. 94: 20-31

23. 23
Creating a New Kind of Science in Academia
Produce not only professors but also future environmental leaders
Keeler et al, 2017.
BioScience, 67: 591-592
4: Seek institutional support

24. 5: Evaluate & learn
24
Knight et al (in prep)
Knowledge exchange
process
Changes to
understanding
Policy or
practice
change
Impacts of
policy or
practice
change
Extent of control over that being evaluated
Extent of real world impact

25. 25
5 critical factors for achieving research impact
1: Build & maintain networks
2: Develop collaborative partnerships
3: Master social dynamics
4: Seek institutional support
5: Evaluate and learn

26. 26
A process to integrate science
into decision-making

27. 27Source: https://www.mpls.ox.ac.uk/public-engagement/what-is-public-engagement
A method to
support
co-production:

28. Structured decision-making
— Framework, concept, & community of
practice
— Based on decision theory and risk
assessment
— Collaboration of natural resource
scientists and managers
— Creates good decision-making
processes rather than good outcomes
28
Addison et al. 2013. Diversity and
Distributions. 19: 490–502

29. Structured decision-making helps when
29
Navigating complex environmental
decisions:
— Multiple competing objectives
— Multiple stakeholders with different
perspectives (values)
— Uncertainty & risk
= Difficult to work out what the best
(optimal) solution

30. Promotes the incorporation of scientific facts and values into decisions,
acknowledging that decision-making is not a value free process
30
Incorporates scientific facts and human
values
Economic
Social
Environmental
Facts Values
© AIMS

31. 31

32. 32
A participatory modelling approach
to set management thresholds
Mean%cover
Current population
Management threshold
Addison et al. 2015. Conservation
Biology. 29, 1411–1422

33. Thank you!
prue.addison@zoo.ox.ac.uk
@prueaddison