Abstract
Conservation scientists often lack explicit understanding of the knowledge problems faced in practical conservation, which can be resolved through communication between the scientists and the managers. Focusing on cost-effectiveness of such communication, we planned and implemented a rapid research gap prioritization procedure for the main stakeholder groups in conservation management and policy (‘managers’) in Estonia. The procedure required each research gap to be explicitly linked with its expected application and comprised three steps: (i) preparatory work of the managers to list their main knowledge gaps; (ii) a seminar for representatives of all the main manager groups to sort out the potentially most influential research topics at the national scale; (iii) analysis and synopsis writing of the top-voted topics. Researchers provided the methodology, facilitated the procedure, helped to translate practical problems into research topics and checked the topics for existing research. The paper describes the 13 high-priority research topics, which were distinguished among more than 60 topics listed. Land-use planning decisions (notably in forests) were most frequently perceived to lack critical knowledge, while only two priority topics were listed for political decision-making (both in agricultural policy). The priority topics proposed for wetland conservation focused on management techniques to mitigate artificial drainage. Our experience was that, through direct two-way communication between managers and researchers, the perceived knowledge gaps in conservation can be rapidly and transparently formulated as research topics. However, the managers’ views tend to focus on short-term effects of conservation, and a different procedure may be needed for researchers who might vision for longer and less predictable future.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aapala K, Similä M, Penttinen J (2013) Ojitettujen soiden ennallistamisopas. Metsähallituksen luonnonsuojelujulkaisuja B188. Vantaa, Finland
Andersen R, Farrell C, Graf M, Muller F, Calvar E, Frankard P, Caporn S, Anderson P (2017) An overview of the progress and challenges of peatland restoration in Western Europe. Restor Ecol 25:271–282
Andersson J, Westholm E (2019) Closing the future: environmental research and the management of conflicting future value orders. Sci Technol Hum Values 44:237–262
Angelstam P, Khaulyak O, Yamelynets T, Mozgeris G, Naumov V, Chmielewski TJ, Elbakidze M, Manton M, Prots B, Valasiuk S (2017) Green infrastructure development at European Union’s eastern border: effects of road infrastructure and forest habitat loss. J Environ Manage 193:300–311
Araújo MB, Alagador D, Cabeza M, Nogués-Bravo D, Thuiller W (2011) Climate change threatens European conservation areas. Ecol Lett 14:484–492
Bernes C, Jonsson BG, Junninen K, Lõhmus A, MacDonald E, Müller J, Sandström J (2015) What is the impact of active management on biodiversity in boreal and temperate forests set aside for conservation or restoration? A systematic map. Environ Evid 4:25
Bertuol-Garcia D, Morsello C, El‐Hani CN, Pardini R (2018) A conceptual framework for understanding the perspectives on the causes of the science—practice gap in ecology and conservation. Biol Rev 93:1032–1055
Braunisch V, Home R, Pellet J, Arlettaz R (2012) Conservation science relevant to action: a research agenda identified and prioritized by practitioners. Biol Conserv 153:201–210
Cash DW, Clark WC, Alcock F, Dickson NM, Eckley N, Guston DH, Jäger J, Mitchell RB (2003) Knowledge systems for sustainable development. Proc Nat Acad Sci 100:8086–8091
Elts J, Lõhmus A (2012) What do we lack in agri-environment schemes? The case of farmland birds in Estonia. Agric Ecosyst Environ 156:89–93
European Environmental Agency (2017) Environmental indicator report 2017. EEA Report 21. Luxembourg
Forest Europe (2015) State of Europe’s forests 2015. Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe, Madrid
Fraixedas S, Linden A, Meller K, Lindström Å, Keišs O, Kålås JA, Husby M, Leivits A, Leivits M, Lehikoinen A (2017) Substantial decline of Northern European peatland bird populations: consequences of drainage. Biol Conserv 214:223–232
García-Montero LG, López E, Monzón A, Pastor IO (2010) Environmental screening tools for assessment of infrastructure plans based on biodiversity preservation and global warming (PEIT, Spain). Environ Impact Asses 30:158–168
Gaventa J, Cornwall A (2001) Power and knowledge. In: Reason P, Bradbury H (eds) Handbook of action research: participative inquiry and practice. Sage Publications, London, pp 70–80
Geiger F, Bengtsson J, Berendse F, Weisser WW, Emmerson M, Morales MB, Ceryngier P, Liira J, Tscharntke T, Winqvist C, Eggers S (2010) Persistent negative effects of pesticides on biodiversity and biological control potential on European farmland. Basic Appl Ecol 11:97–105
Habel JC, Gossner MM, Meyer ST, Eggermont H, Lens L, Dengler J, Weisser WW (2013) Mind the gaps when using science to address conservation concerns. Biodivers Conserv 22:2413–2427
Hain H (2005) Social, ecological and economic impacts of forest certification: case study of FSC certified Estonian State Forest Management Center. Master thesis, University of Tartu
Häkkilä M, Le Tortorec E, Brotons L, Rajasärkkä A, Tornberg R, Mönkkönen M (2017) Degradation in landscape matrix has diverse impacts on diversity in protected areas. PLoS ONE 12:e0184792
Helm A, Hanski I, Pärtel M (2006) Slow response of plant species richness to habitat loss and fragmentation. Ecol Lett 9:72–77
Hernández-Morcillo M, Bieling C, Bürgi M, Lieskovský J, Palang H, Printsmann A, Schulp CJ, Verburg PH, Plieninger T (2017) Priority questions for the science, policy and practice of cultural landscapes in Europe. Landsc Ecol 32:2083–2096
Hindrikson M, Remm J, Männil P, Ozolins J, Tammeleht E, Saarma U (2013) Spatial genetic analyses reveal cryptic population structure and migration patterns in a continuously harvested grey wolf (Canis lupus) population in North-Eastern Europe. PLoS ONE 8:e75765
Ilomets M, Truus L, Pajula R, Sepp K (2010) Species composition and structure of vascular plants and bryophytes on the water level gradient within a calcareous fen in North Estonia. Est J Ecol 59:19–38
Jüriado I, Liira J, Csencsics D, Widmer I, Adolf C, Kohv K, Scheidegger C (2011) Dispersal ecology of the endangered woodland lichen Lobaria pulmonaria in managed hemiboreal forest landscape. Biodivers Conserv 20:1803–1819
Jüssi M (2012) Living on an edge: land-locked seals in changing climate. PhD thesis, University of Tartu
Karu V, Valgma I, Kolats M (2013) Mine water as a potential source of energy from underground mined areas in Estonian oil shale deposit. Oil Shale 30:336–362
Kleijn D, Baquero RA, Clough Y, Diaz M, Esteban JD, Fernández F, Gabriel D, Herzog F, Holzschuh A, Jöhl R, Knop E (2006) Mixed biodiversity benefits of agri-environment schemes in five European countries. Ecol Lett 9:243–254
Knight AT, Cowling RM, Rouget M, Balmford A, Lombard AT, Campbell BM (2008) Knowing but not doing: selecting priority conservation areas and the research-implementation gap. Conserv Biol 22:610–617
Kraut A, Liira J, Lõhmus A (2016) Beyond a minimum substrate supply: sustaining saproxylic beetles in semi-natural forest management. For Ecol Manage 360:9–19
Kuuluvainen T (2009) Forest management and biodiversity conservation based on natural ecosystem dynamics in northern Europe: the complexity challenge. Ambio 38:309–315
Kuuluvainen T, Tahvonen O, Aakala T (2012) Even-aged and uneven-aged forest management in boreal Fennoscandia: a review. Ambio 41:720–737
Laarmann D, Korjus H, Sims A, Kangur A, Stanturf JA (2013) Initial effects of restoring natural forest structures in Estonia. For Ecol Manage 304:303–311
Laurance WF, Koster H, Grooten M, Anderson AB, Zuidema PA, Zwick S, Zagt RJ, Lynam AJ, Linkie M, Anten NP (2012) Making conservation research more relevant for conservation practitioners. Biol Conserv 153:164–168
Leito A, Bunce RGH, Külvik M, Ojaste I, Raet J, Villoslada M, Leivits M, Kull A, Kuusemets V, Kull T, Metzger MJ, Sepp K (2015) The potential impacts of changes in ecological networks, land use and climate on the Eurasian crane population in Estonia. Landsc Ecol 30:887–904
Liira J, Issak M, Jõgar Ü, Mändoja M, Zobel M (2009) Restoration management of a floodplain meadow and its cost-effectiveness—the results of a 6-year experiment. Ann Bot Fennici 46:397–408
Lindenmayer DB, Franklin JF, Fischer J (2006) General management principles and a checklist of strategies to guide forest biodiversity conservation. Biol Conserv 131:433–445
Lindenmayer D, Hobbs RJ, Montague-Drake R et al (2008) A checklist for ecological management of landscapes for conservation. Ecol Lett 11:78–91
Lõhmus A (2011a) Aspen-inhabiting Aphyllophoroid fungi in a managed forest landscape in Estonia. Scand J Forest Res 26:212–220
Lõhmus A (2011b) Silviculture as a disturbance regime: the effects of clear-cutting, planting and thinning on polypore communities in mixed forests. J Forest Res 16:194–202
Lõhmus A (2016) Typological analysis of Estonian strictly protected forests. www.envir.ee/sites/default/files/metsade_range_kaitse_2016_alohmus.pdf. Accessed 15 Apr 2018 (in Estonian)
Lõhmus A, Kohv K, Palo A, Viilma K (2004) Loss of old-growth, and the minimum need for strictly protected forests in Estonia. Ecol Bull 51:401–411
Lõhmus A, Remm L, Rannap R (2015) Just a ditch in forest? Reconsidering draining in the context of sustainable forest management. Bioscience 65:1066–1076
Lõhmus A, Nellis R, Pullerits M, Leivits M (2016) The potential for long-term sustainability in seminatural forestry: a broad perspective based on woodpecker populations. Environ Manage 57:558–571
Lõhmus A, Leivits M, Pēterhofs E, Zizas R, Hofmanis H, Ojaste I, Kurlavičius P (2017) The Capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus): an iconic focal species for knowledge-based integrative management and conservation of Baltic forests. Biodivers Conserv 26:1–21
Lõhmus A, Vunk E, Runnel K (2018) Conservation management for forest fungi in Estonia: the case of polypores. Folia Cryptog Estonica 55:79–89
Maes J, Jacobs S (2017) Nature-based solutions for Europe’s sustainable development. Conserv Lett 10:121–124
Marandi A, Veinla H, Karro E (2014) Legal aspects related to the effect of underground mining close to the site entered into the list of potential Natura 2000 network areas. Environ Sci Policy 38:217–224
Marja R, Herzon I, Viik E, Elts J, Mänd M, Tscharntke T, Batáry P (2014) Environmentally friendly management as an intermediate strategy between organic and conventional agriculture to support biodiversity. Biol Conserv 178:146–154
Meier K, Kuusemets V, Luig J, Mander Ü (2005) Riparian buffer zones as elements of ecological networks: case study on Parnassius mnemosyne distribution in Estonia. Ecol Eng 24:531–537
Middleton BA, Holsten B, van Diggelen R (2006) Biodiversity management of fens and fen meadows by grazing, cutting and burning. Appl Veg Sci 9:307–316
Mihók B, Kovács E, Balázs B, Pataki G, Ambrus A, Bartha D, Czirák Z, Csányi S, Csépányi P, Csőszi M, Dudás G, Egri C, Erös T, Göril S, Halmos G, Kopek A, Margóczi K, Miklay G, Milon L, Podmaniczky L, Sárvári J, Schmidt A, Sipos K, Siposs V, Standovár T, Szigetvári C, Szemethy L, Tóth B, Tóth L, Tóth P, Török K, Török P, Vadász C, Varga I, Sutherland WJ, Báldi A (2015) Bridging the research-practice gap: conservation research priorities in a Central and Eastern European country. J Nat Conserv 28:133–148
Ministry of the Environment (2016) Climate change adaption development plan until 2030. Tallinn. http://www.envir.ee/sites/default/files/national_adaptation_strategy.pdf. Accessed 15 Apr 2017
Moilanen A, Kotiaho JS (2018) Fifteen operationally important decisions in the planning of biodiversity offsets. Biol Conserv 227:112–120
Morton SR, Hoegh-Guldberg O, Lindenmayer DB, Harriss Olson M, Hughes L, McCulloch MT, McIntyre S, Nix HA, Prober SM, Saunders DA, Andersen AN, Burgman MA, Lefroy EC, Lonsdale WM, Lowe I, McMichael AJ, Parslow JS, Steffen W, Williams JE, Woinarski JCZ (2009) The big ecological questions inhibiting effective environmental management in Australia. Austral Ecol 34:1–9
Nolet P, Béland M (2017) Long-term susceptibility of even-and uneven-aged northern hardwood stands to partial windthrow. Forests 8:128
Nolet P, Kneeshaw D, Messier C, Béland M (2018) Comparing the effects of even-and uneven-aged silviculture on ecological diversity and processes: a review. Ecol Evol 8:1217–1226
Ockendon N, Thomas DH, Cortina J, Adams WM, Aykroyd T, Barov B, Boitani L, Bonn A, Branquinho C, Brombacher M, Burrell C (2018) One hundred priority questions for landscape restoration in Europe. Biol Conserv 221:198–208
Opdam P, Luque S, Nassauer J, Verburg PH, Wu J (2018) How can landscape ecology contribute to sustainability science? Landsc Ecol 33:1–7
Paal J, Jürjendal I, Suija A, Kull A (2016) Impact of drainage on vegetation of transitional mires in Estonia. Mires Peat 18:02
Paal T, Kütt L, Lõhmus K, Liira J (2017) Both spatiotemporal connectivity and habitat quality limit the immigration of forest plants into wooded corridors. Plant Ecol 218:417–431
Peura M, Burgas D, Eyvindson K, Repo A, Mönkkönen M (2018) Continuous cover forestry is a cost-efficient tool to increase multifunctionality of boreal production forests in Fennoscandia. Biol Conserv 217:104–112
Plumer L, Keis M, Remm J, Hindrikson M, Jõgisalu I, Männil P, Kübarsepp M, Saarma U (2016) Wolves recolonizing islands: genetic consequences and implications for conservation and management. PLoS ONE 11:e0158911
Pukkala T, Lähde E, Laiho O (2011) Variable-density thinning in uneven-aged forest management—a case for Norway spruce in Finland. Forestry 84:557–565
Rannap R, Lõhmus A, Briggs L (2009) Restoring ponds for amphibians: a success story. Hydrobiologia 634:87–95
Rannap R, Kaart T, Pehlak H, Kana S, Soomets E, Lanno K (2017) Coastal meadow management for threatened waders has a strong supporting impact on meadow plants and amphibians. J Nat Conserv 35:77–91
Raudsaar M, Siimon KL, Valgepea M (2018) Yearbook forest 2017. Estonian Environmental Agency, Tallinn
Reed MS, Stringer LC, Fazey I, Evely AC, Kruijsen JH (2014) Five principles for the practice of knowledge exchange in environmental management. J Environ Manage 146:337–345
Remm L, Lõhmus P, Leis M, Lõhmus A (2013) Long-term impacts of forest ditching on non-aquatic biodiversity: conservation perspectives for a novel ecosystem. PLoS ONE 8:e63086
Remm L, Vaikre M, Rannap R, Kohv M (2018) Amphibians in drained forest landscapes: conservation opportunities for commercial forests and protected sites. For Ecol Manage 428:87–92
Rosenvald R, Lõhmus A (2003) Nesting of the black stork (Ciconia nigra) and white-tailed eagle (Haliaeetus albicilla) in relation to forest management. For Ecol Manage 185:217–223
Rosenvald R, Tullus H, Lõhmus A (2018) Is shelterwood harvesting preferable over clear-cutting for sustaining dead-wood pools? The case of Estonian conifer forests. For Ecol Manage 429:375–383
Rowe G, Frewer LJ (2000) Public participation methods: a framework for evaluation. Sci Technol Hum Values 25:3–29
Rudd MA (2011) How research-prioritization exercises affect conservation policy. Conserv Biol 25:860–866
Runnel K, Lõhmus A (2017) Deadwood-rich managed forests provide insights into the old-forest association of wood-inhabiting fungi. Fungal Ecol 27:155–167
Sammul M, Kattai K, Lanno K, Meltsov V, Otsus M, Nõukas L, Kukk D, Mesipuu M, Kana S, Kukk T (2008) Wooded meadows of Estonia: conservation efforts for a traditional habitat. Agric Food Sci 17:413–429
Sklenicka P, Kottová B, Šálek M (2017) Success in preserving historic rural landscapes under various policy measures: incentives, restrictions or planning? Environ Sci Policy 75:1–9
Suislepp K, Rannap R, Lõhmus A (2011) Impacts of artificial drainage on amphibian breeding sites in hemiboreal forests. For Ecol Manage 262:1078–1083
Sutherland WJ, Woodroof HJ (2009) The need for environmental horizon scanning. Trends Ecol Evol 24:523–527
Sutherland WJ, Armstrong-Brown S, Armsworth PR, Brereton T, Brickland J, Campbell CD, Chamberlain DE, Cooke AI, Dulvy NK, Dusic NR, Fitton M, Freckleton RP, Godfray HCJ, Grout N, Harvey HJ, Hedley C, Hopkins JJ, Kift NB, Kirby J, Kunin WE, Macdonald DW, Marker B, Naura M, Neale AR, Oliver T, Osborn D, Pullin AS, Shardlow MEA, Showler DA, Smith PL, Smithers RJ, Solandt JL, Spencer J, Spray CJ, Thomas CD, Thompson J, Webb SE, Yalden DW, Watkinson AR (2006) The identification of 100 ecological questions of high policy relevance in the UK. J Appl Ecol 43:617–627
Sutherland WJ, Fleishman E, Mascia MB, Pretty J, Rudd MA (2011) Methods for collaboratively identifying research priorities and emerging issues in science and policy. Methods Ecol Evol 2:238–247
Taylor NG, Grillas P, Sutherland WJ (2018) Peatland conservation: Global evidence for the effects of interventions to conserve peatland vegetation. Synopses of conservation evidence series. University of Cambridge, Cambridge
Tollington S, Turbe A, Rabitsch W, Groombridge JJ, Scalera R, Essl F, Shwartz A (2017) Making the EU legislation on invasive species a conservation success. Conserv Lett 10:112–120
Tscharntke T, Klein AM, Kruess A, Steffan-Dewenter I, Thies C (2005) Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity–ecosystem service management. Ecol Lett 8:857–874
Tullus H (2014) Turberaiete ökoloogilis-majanduslik analüüs ja näidiskatsealade võrgustiku rajamine [Ecological-economic analysis of shelterwood harvests and development of experimental site network]. Estonian University of Life Sciences. http://www.rmk.ee/files/Rakendusuuringu_lopparuanne_turberaie.pdf. Accessed 13 Oct 2018 (in Estonian)
Tuvi EL, Vellak A, Reier Ü, Szava-Kovats R, Pärtel M (2011) Establishment of protected areas in different ecoregions, ecosystems, and diversity hotspots under successive political systems. Biol Conserv 144:1726–1732
Väizene V, Valgma I, Karu V, Orru M (2016) Environmental impact of oil shale mining. Environ Earth Sci 75:1201
van der Heijden HA (2010) Ecological modernization and the Trans-European transport network. Social movements, public spheres and the European politics of the environment. Palgrave Macmillan, London, pp 145–166
Zedler JB (2000) Progress in wetland restoration ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 15:402–407
Acknowledgements
We thank Tsipe Aavik, Aveliina Helm, Piret Lõhmus, Liina Remm, Kadri Runnel, Elin Soomets and Kai Vellak for helping to facilitate the stakeholder seminar. Helpful comments on the manuscript were provided by Kaidi Jakobson from the Ministry of Rural Affairs, by Katrin Kaldma, Leelo Kukk, Taavi Tattar and Murel Truu from the Environmental Board, and by two anonymous reviewers. Authors A.L. and R.R. were supported by the Estonian Research Council grant IUT 34-7.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by Grzegorz Mikusinski.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This article belongs to the Topical Collection: Biodiversity protection and reserves.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lõhmus, A., Fridolin, H., Leivits, A. et al. Prioritizing research gaps for national conservation management and policy: the managers’ perspective in Estonia. Biodivers Conserv 28, 2565–2579 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-019-01779-8
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-019-01779-8