Vinculación del Conocimiento y la Acción en Conservación Colaborativa

  Authors have documented a “research‐implementation gap” in conservation. Research intended to inform conservation practice often does not, and practice often is not informed by the best science. We used the literature on policy learning (i.e., literature attributing policy change to learning) to structure a study of how practice is informed by science in collaborative conservation. We studied implementation by U.S. states of state wildlife action plans. On the basis of 60 interviews with government and nongovernmental organization representatives, we identified 144 implementation initiatives for State Wildlife Action Plans that were collaborative. We conducted case studies of 6 of these initiatives, which included interviews of key individuals and analysis of written documents. We coded interview transcripts and written documents to identify factors that influence availability and use of scientific information. We integrated these factors into a model of collaborative conservation. Although tangible factors such as funding and labor directly affected the availability of scientific information, practitioners’ ability and willingness to use the information depended on less tangible factors such as the quality of interpersonal relationships and dialogue. Our work demonstrates empirically that relationships and dialogue led to: (1) the sharing of resources, such as funding and labor, that were needed to carry out research and produce information and (2) agreement among researchers and practitioners on conservation objectives, which was necessary for that new information to inform action. Our findings can be understood in the context of broader concepts articulated in the policy‐learning literature, which establishes that social learning (improving relationships and dialogue) provides the foundation for conceptual learning (setting objectives) and technical learning (determining how to achieve these objectives).