Prioritizing Research Gaps for National Conservation Management and Policy: The Managers' Perspective in Estonia

Lõhmus et al. (2019) full text summary PDF

For which topic were research priorities identified?

national conservation management and policy

In which location was the research priority setting conducted?

Europe - Estonia

Why was it conducted at all?

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.

What was the objective?

to identify those research topics that, if resolved within the next 10 years, would make the greatest positive impact on the effectiveness of Estonian nature conservation

What was the outcome?

a list of 13 research topics

How long did the research prioritization take?

No information provided.

Which methods were used to identify research priorities?


How were the priorities for research identified exactly?

Step 1: workshop: group discussions for preliminary distinguishing of commonly agreed knowledge gaps followed by open brainstorming of additional topics, appraisal of 66 topics, individual voting for priority topics: participants secretly voted for top-25% and top-10% topics based on what they perceived to have the largest positive influence on national nature conservation, then voting results presented and discussed, list of ranked topics was sent to all participants for feedback and comments after workshop

Which stakeholders took part?

Ministry of the Environment, the Ministry of Rural Affairs, the Environmental Board, the Estonian Environment Agency and the State Forest Management Centre. 39 participants.

How were stakeholders recruited?

Institutions were asked to appoint their employees, who thereafter were personally invited to a joint seminar and to perform the preparatory work beforehand.

Were stakeholders actively involved or did they just participate?

Stakeholders were mere participants of the research prioritization process; they were not actively involved in the process.