Masters Dissertation Example

2.1.3 Utility of research 
There is as yet little empirical evidence that the quality of natural resource management 
decisions is improved by the use of scientific information (Lach et al, 2003). It is also worth 
noting that peer-review does not completely guarantee research quality, as was found for the 
Florida panther, where it is believed that unreliable conclusions undermined conservation 
efforts (Conroy et al, 2006; Beier et al, 2003). Indeed, there are some who urge caution in the 
use of science as a basis for action, because it can be interpreted in different ways (Sarawitz, 
2004)
. 
Conservation success in itself is difficult to quantify, and the parameters vary from project to 
project, depending on the context of the situation and how success was initially defined 
(Brooks et al, 2006). However, Boersma et al (2001) attempted to determine whether the 
presence of solid science was correlated with indicators of species recovery plan effectiveness 
and found that, in general, the more effective plans had clear links to species biology and 
recovery goals, and were practical but biologically valid. Similarly, an analysis of tiger 
conservation projects (Gratwicke et al, 2007) showed that strong scientific information was 
one of the factors associated with project success.
There are some fundamental questions, such as the viability of a population that can only be 
established through research (Pullin et al, 2004), especially as many underlying processes are 
not intuitive or obvious (Sutherland et al, 2004). To take such an example from China, 
research on a pheasant species showed that lack of breeding success was due to disturbance by 
mushroom pickers, allowing the correct action to be put in place, re-establishing a healthy 
breeding population (Fuller et al, 2003). Re-establishment of magpie robin populations, along 

---

8 
with those of the black robin and pink pigeon are also prime examples, as mis-diagnosis of the 
reasons for their decline due to intuition and coincidence had hampered recovery before 
thorough ecological monitoring and fieldwork identified the true limiting factors to enable 
appropriate recovery management (Caughley & Gunn, 1996). Likewise, appropriate 
conservation measures were only taken for the prairie chicken, Key Largo wood rat, and white 
tailed deer after a comprehensive analysis of the scientific literature on the species and habitat 
over a period of time (McCleery et al, in press). It has been suggested that the stakes are too 
high in endangered species conservation to take actions without the best scientific information 
(Smallwood et al, 2000). 
It is clear that the chances of success of any conservation action will be increased when it is 
based upon solid evidence. It is widely believed that the ‘evidence based’ (Sutherland et al, 
2004) conservation model should be taken a step further to incorporate ‘adaptive 
management’, a concept whereby research and action are combined, mixing evidence with 
experience, with the results of monitoring identifying the focus for further research or action 
and reporting failures for future improvement (Salafsky et al, 2002; Kleiman et al, 2000; 
Fazey et al, 2004; Huetmann, 2005), of which peer review is an essential component (Karanth 
et al, 2003).