CLOSING THE SCIENCE-SOCIETY GAP BY ENGAGING COMMUNITY PARTNERS IN CONSERVATION PALEOBIOLOGY FIELD STUDIES

The field of conservation paleobiology generates a broad range of data useful in addressing conservation questions and understanding how human activities influence ecosystems. Research has helped to define natural baselines, identify native species, estimate extinction risks and community resilience, determine areas of high impact, identify stressors and drivers of ecosystem change, set conservation goals, and assess the success of restoration efforts. Despite the wealth of data generated by these studies, conclusions and recommendations are difficult to disseminate beyond the pages of academic journals. This “science-society gap” is well-recognized in many other scientific fields of research, but is particularly frustrating when the goal of the research is to have an impact on tangible outcomes (e.g. conservation and restoration of sensitive ecosystems).

The traditional “scientist push” research model is a major contributor to the “science-society gap” because scientists develop scientific research agendas, programs, and priorities without considering the needs or concerns of community stakeholders. By engaging communities throughout the life of a research project, we can work to close this gap and make paleobiology a more open and inclusive discipline. Here, we present case studies from four research projects to illustrate how community-engagement can enrich conservation paleobiology research. Two case studies from the US Midwest (Wisconsin and Ohio) and a case study from the Finger Lakes in western New York illustrate how local community groups engaged in local remediation efforts can help to define and inform research questions, aid field research, and support undergraduate student research. Finally, we discuss an interdisciplinary international research project that engages with farmers in Maharashtra, India to determine their needs and amplify their voices in a climate hotspot. Each of these case studies illustrates that scientific questions are more relevant to local conservation goals and results are more effectively communicated when stakeholders are consulted at every stage in the research process and their knowledge is integrated into a scientific framework. Research truly is enriched when investigators make room for community partners.