Matching a scientific knowledge base with stakeholders' needs. The T10Q project as a case study for forestry.

Forest Policy and Economics

Volumn 37, Issue , 2013, Pages 29-36

  Petrokofsky, Gillian ^a   Brown, Nicholas D ^a   Hemery, Gabriel E ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^b SYLVA FOUNDATION   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Bibliometrics; Evidence based forestry; Research; Research priorities

Indexed keywords

BIBLIOMETRICS; EVIDENCE-BASED; GLOBAL KNOWLEDGE; INVASIVE SPECIES; RESEARCH PRIORITIES; SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE; SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE BASE; SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE;

FORESTRY; INFORMATION SCIENCE; KNOWLEDGE BASED SYSTEMS; TIMBER;

RESEARCH;

FORESTRY; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; RESEARCH;

EID: 84888033920     PISSN: 13899341     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2012.05.005     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Ahsan-ul-Morshed, Sini M. Creating and aligning controlled vocabularies. Advance Technology for Digital Libraries,AT4DL,Trento, Italy, 2009 2009, 50-53. Bozen-Bolzano University Press, Bolzano, Italy, ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/012/ak563e/ak563e00.pdf. downloaded from website 3/12/2010.
2. Bartol T. Scientometric assessment of publishing patterns and performance indicators in agriculture in the JCEA member countries. Journal of Central European Agriculture 2010, 11(1):1-10.
3. Boycoff M.T., Boycoff J. Climate change and journalistic norms: a case-study of US mass-media coverage. Geoforum 2007, 38:1190-1204.
4. Calza L., Garbisa S. Italian professorships. Nature 1995, 374:492.
5. Centre for Evidence Based Conservation (CEBC) Guidelines for Systematic Review in Conservation and Environmental Management (accessed 10/12/2011). http://www.environmentalevidence.org/EBConservation.htm.
6. Centre for Reviews, Diessemination (CRD), University of York Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care (accessed 10/12/2011). http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd.
7. Chalmers I. Trying to do more good than harm in policy and practice: the role of rigorous, transparent, up-to-date evaluations. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 2003, 589:22-40.
8. Clark M.R., Kozar J. Comparing sustainable forest management certifications standards: a meta-analysis. Ecology and Society 2011, 16(1). article 3. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss1/art3/ (accessed 16/6/2012).
9. Cooke S.J., Danylchuk A.J., Kaiser M.J., Rudd M.A. Is there a need for a '100 questions exercise' to enhance fisheries and aquatic conservation, policy, management and research? Lessons from a global 100 questions exercise on conservation of biodiversity. Journal of Fish Biology 2010, 76:2261-2286.
10. Cowling R.M., Egoh B., Knight A.T., et al. An operational model for mainstreaming ecosystem services for implementation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2008, 105:9483-9488.
11. Davies P., Boruch R. The Campbell collaboration. BMJ 2001, 323:294-295.
12. Diedrich A., Upham P., Levidow L., van den Hove S. Framing environmental sustainability challenges for research and innovation in European policy agendas. Environmental Science & Policy 2011, 14(8):935-939.
13. European Academies Science Advisory Council What is EASAC? (downloaded from website on 3/12/2010). http://www.easac.eu/about-easac/what-is-easac.html.
14. European Union Evidence-based policy versus policy-biased evidence: the challenge of feeding scientific advice into policy-making. Conclusions of the High-Level Trans-Atlantic Science for Policy Workshop, 27 October 2009, Ispra, Italy 2010, http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/jrc/downloads/jrc_aaas2010_dialogue_en.pdf. (accessed 16/6/2010).
15. European Union Sharing knowledge: EC-funded projects on scientific information in the digital age. Conclusions of a strategicworkshop, Brussels, 14-15 February 2011 2011, http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/sharing-knowledge-digital-age_en.pdf (accessed 12/12/2011).
16. Forest Europe Warsaw declaration. Fifth Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forest in Europe 5-7 November, 2007, Warsaw, Poland 2007, http://www.coe.int/t/dcr/summit/20050517_decl_varsovie_en.asp downloaded from webstie 3/12/2010.
17. Glover S.W., Bowen S.L. Bibliometric analysis of research published in Tropical Medicine and International Health 1996-2003. Tropical Medicine & International Health 2004, 9(12):1327-1330. (Dec), (PubMed).
18. Goetz S.J., Baccini A., Laporte N., Johns T., Walker W.S., Kellndorfer J.M., Houghton R.A., Sun M. Mapping & monitoring carbon stocks with satellite observations: a comparison of methods. Carbon Balance and Management 2009, (open access online journal). 10.1186/1750-0680-1184-1182.
19. Goetz S., et al. Comparison of methods for measuring and assessing carbon stocks and carbon stock changes in terrestrial carbon pools 2010.
20. Higgins J.P.T., Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.1.0 2011, http://www.cochrane-handbook.org/ (accessed 10/12/2011).
21. Hofman K., Ryce A., Prudhomme W., Kotzin S. Reporting of non-communicable disease research in low- and middle-income countries: a pilot bibliometric analysis. Journal of the Medical Library Association 2006, 94(4):415-420. (October).
22. Holmgren P., Marklund L.G. National forest monitoring systems: purposes, options and status 2007, 163-173. CABI, Wallingford, UK. P.H. Freer-Smith, M.S.J. Broadmeadow, J.M. Lynch (Eds.).
23. Lawrence A. Continuous cover forestry: opinion and evidence. Presentation given at the CCFG workshop on 'Silvicultural Systems for Tomorrow!' in Llanidloes, Wales in October 2008 2008, http://www.forestry.gov.uk/fr/INFD-7KEDYE.
24. Li J.F., Wang M.H., Ho Y.S. Trends in research on global climate change: a Science Citation Index Expanded-based analysis. Global and Planetary Change 2011, 77:13-20.
25. May R. The scientific wealth of nations. Science 1997, 275:793-796. (7 February).
26. McDonald P., Lassoie J.P. The Literature of Forestry and Agroforestry 1996, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, London.
27. Meho L.I. The rise and rise of citation analysis. Physics World 2007, 32-36. (January).
28. Morton S.R., Hoegh-Guldberg O., Lindenmayer D.B., et al. The big ecological questions inhibiting effective environmental management in Australia. Austral Ecology 2009, 34:1-9.
29. Mulrow C.D. Systematic reviews: rationale for systematic reviews. BMJ 1994, 309:597-599.
30. Olsen K.H. The clean development mechanism's contribution to sustainable development: a review of the literature. Climatic Change 2007, 84:59-73. 10.1007/s10584-007-9267-y.
31. Pasiecznik N.M., Petrokofsky G. Forestry research in the balance? Trends in the published literature 1939-2005. Presentations from "Forests in the balance: linking tradition and technology". XXII IUFRO World Congress, Brisbane, Australia, 8-13 August 2005 2005, International Union of Forestry Research Organizations.
32. Petrokofsky G., Mills R. The role of librarians and information specialists in evidence-based forestry. Paper presented at the XIII World Forestry Congress, Buenos Aires, 18-23 October, 2009 2009.
33. Petrokofsky G., Brown N.D., Hemery G.E., et al. A participatory process for identifying and prioritizing policy-relevant research questions in natural resource management: a case study from the UK forestry sector. Forestry 2010, 83:357-367.
34. Petticrew M. Systematic reviews from astronomy to zoology: myths and misconceptions. BMJ 2001, 322:98,1.
35. Pouyat R.V., Weathers K.C., Hauber R., Lovett, et al. The role of federal agencies in the application of scientific knowledge. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2010, 8:322-328.
36. Pullin A.S., Knight T.M. Assessing conservation management's evidence base: a survey of management-plan compilers in the United Kingdom and Australia. Conservation Biology 2005, 19:1989-1996.
37. Pullin A.S., Knight T.M. Doing more good than harm-building an evidence-base for conservation and environmental management. Biological Conservation 2009, 142:931-934.
38. Pullin A.S., Knight T.M., Stone D.A., Charman K. Do conservation managers use scientific evidence to support their decision-making?. Biological Conservation 2004, 119:245-252.
39. Ravetz J.R. Usable knowledge, usable ignorance: incomplete science with policy implications. Knowledge 1987, 9:87-116.
40. Saxena S., Maulik P.K., Sharan P., Levav I., Saraceno B. Brief report-mental health research on low- and middle-income countries in indexed journals: a preliminary assessment. The Journal of Mental Health Policy and Economics 2004, 7(3):127-131. (Sep).
41. Stanhill G. The growth of climate change science: a scientometric study. Climatic Change 2001, 48:515-524.
42. Sutherland W.J., Armstrong-Brown S., Armsworth P.R., et al. The identification of 100 ecological questions of high policy relevance in the UK. Journal of Applied Ecology 2006, 43:617-627.
43. Sutherland W.J., Adams W.M., Aronson R.B., et al. One hundred questions of importance to the conservation of global biological diversity. Conservation Biology 2009, 23:557-567.
44. Vieira E.S., Gomes J.A.N.F. A comparison of Scopus and Web of Science for a typical university. Scientometrics 2009, 81(2):587-600. (online.), (PMID:20585380). 10.1007/s11192-009-2178-0.
45. World Health Organization Protecting children's health in a changing environment: report of the Fifth Ministerial Conference on Environment and Health. ISBN 978 92 890 1419 9 (print) 2010, http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/123565/e94331.pdf (accessed 16/06/2012).