Applied Filters
- Perspective
Journal Title
Topics
- Integrative Sciences56
- Conservation and Sustainability31
- Science and Policy22
- Science and Society19
- Biological and Life Sciences11
- Earth and Environmental Sciences8
- Ecology and Evolution8
- Public Health6
- Science Communication5
- Science Education5
- Ethics4
- Marine and Aquatic Sciences4
- Biomedical and Health Sciences3
- Geosciences3
- Atmospheric and Climate Sciences2
- Data Science2
- Epidemiology2
- Research Data Management2
- Zoology2
- Engineering, Technology, and Mathematics1
- Mental Health1
- Microbiology1
- Plant and Agricultural Sciences1
- Technology1
Publication Date
Author
- Cooke, Steven J10
- Bennett, Joseph R5
- Loring, Philip A3
- Beazley, Karen F2
- Cooke, S J2
- Dufour-Beauséjour, Sophie2
- Ford, Adam T2
- Fortin, Marie-Josée2
- Jacob, Aerin L2
- Lapointe, Nicolas W R2
- Littlechild, Danika Billie2
- Nguyen, Vivian M2
- Pither, Richard2
- Abrams, Alice E I1
- Adamson, S1
- Ahmed, M M M1
- Aiken, Alice1
- Aitken, Sally1
- Akeju, Tolutope1
- Algera, Dirk A1
- Ali, Abdullahi H1
- Alook, Sharlene1
- Amirfazli, Alidad1
- Anastakis, Dimitry1
- Anctil, François1
Access Type
41 - 60of61
Save this search
Please login to be able to save your searches and receive alerts for new content matching your search criteria.
Filters
Search Name | Searched On |
---|---|
Paper Type: Perspective (61) | 4 May 2024 |
You do not have any saved searches
- OPEN ACCESSMore and more research institutions are implementing courses in research integrity (RI). Recent studies indicate that teachers of RI courses are increasingly adopting a “phronetic” approach to their teaching, where the focus is on nurturing values and practical wisdom—what Aristotle called phronesis. When adopting a phronetic approach, it is important to understand what phronesis in relation to RI entails and how and to what extent an RI course can contribute to the development of research phronesis. This paper contains a practice-based discussion of the realistic aims of RI courses and a first step towards a specification of the skill set necessary for developing research phronesis drawing on experiences from the PhD courses on Responsible Conduct of Research at the University of Copenhagen. We discuss the limited extent to which research phronesis can be taught in short courses and examine the broader implications of this for the role of RI courses in the training of good researchers.
- OPEN ACCESSFor cities to grow their urban forest canopy the formula appears rather straightforward: the right trees, plus the right conditions, plus the right care equals success. These simplified “tree chain of custody” steps, however, represent activities within a complex value-chain in Canada. Given that there is heightened demand for urban tree planting as natural climate solutions become the norm, how can we prepare the value-chain to meet these demands? To answer this question, we outline the pathways by which trees presently go from nurseries into urban and peri-urban areas. Delineating the actors, roles, and present barriers to success exposes the complexity of the process and relationships in the value-chain, as there are distinct phases with multiple actor groups involved who influence, and are influenced, by one another. We explore the issues that pose prominent challenges to, as well as opportunities for, the value-chain. Emergent themes include communication, forecasting demand and timing, underpricing and undervaluing tree establishment, lack of awareness on the importance of soils, juvenile tree health, species selection, and gaps in evidence-based decision support tools. The touchstones of science and innovation, collaboration, and knowledge mobilization are pertinent for the value-chain in Canada to draw upon to navigate the future.
- OPEN ACCESS
- S.J. Cooke,
- N. Young,
- M.R. Donaldson,
- E.A. Nyboer,
- D.G. Roche,
- C.L. Madliger,
- R.J. Lennox,
- J.M. Chapman,
- Z. Faulkes, and
- J.R. Bennett
For better or for worse, authorship is a currency in scholarly research and advancement. In scholarly writing, authorship is widely acknowledged as a means of conferring credit but is also tied to concepts such as responsibility and accountability. Authorship is one of the most divisive topics both at the level of the research team and more broadly in the academy and beyond. At present, authorship is often the primary way to assert and receive credit in many scholarly pursuits and domains. Debates rage, publicly but mostly privately, regarding authorship. Here we attempt to clarify key concepts related to authorship informed by our collective experiences and anchored in relevant contemporary literature. Rather than dwelling on the problems, we focus on proactive strategies for creating more just, equitable, and transparent avenues for minimizing conflict around authorship and where there is adequate recognition of the entire process of knowledge generation, synthesis, sharing, and application with partners within and beyond the academy. We frame our ideas around 10 strategies that collectively constitute a roadmap for avoiding and overcoming challenges associated with authorship decisions. - OPEN ACCESS
- Jordanna N. Bergman,
- Rachel T. Buxton,
- Hsien-Yung Lin,
- Magdalena Lenda,
- Kayla Attinello,
- Adrianne C. Hajdasz,
- Stephanie A. Rivest,
- Thuong Tran Nguyen,
- Steven J. Cooke, and
- Joseph R. Bennett
Given its extensive volume and reach, social media has the potential to widely spread conservation messaging and be a powerful tool to mobilize social change for conserving biodiversity. We synthesized gray and primary academic literature to investigate the effects of social media on wildlife conservation, revealing several overarching benefits and risks. We found that social media can increase pro-conservation behaviours among the public, increase conservation funding, and incite policy changes. Conversely, social media can contribute to species exploitation and illegal trade, cause unprecedented increases in tourism in protected areas, and perpetuate anti-conservation behaviours via misinformation. In most cases, we found that content sharing on social media did not result in a detectable impact on conservation; in this paper, however, we focus on providing examples where conservation impact was achieved. We relate these positive and negative outcomes of social media to psychological phenomena that may influence conservation efforts and discuss limitations of our findings. We conclude with recommendations of best practices to social media administrators, public social media users, nongovernmental organizations, and governing agencies to minimize conservation risks while maximizing beneficial outcomes. By improving messaging, policing online misconduct, and providing guidance for action, social media can help achieve wildlife conservation goals. - OPEN ACCESS
- Morgan L. Piczak,
- Jill L. Brooks,
- Brittany Bard,
- Christian J. Bihun,
- Andrew Howarth,
- Amanda L. Jeanson,
- Luc LaRochelle,
- Joseph R. Bennett,
- Nicolas W. R. Lapointe,
- Nicholas E. Mandrak, and
- Steven J. Cooke
A seminal report by Peter H. Pearse (1988; Rising to the Challenge: A New Policy for Canada’s Freshwater Fisheries, Canadian Wildlife Federation, Ottawa) outlined 62 policy recommendations focused on the management of Canada’s inland fisheries. Over three decades later, freshwater ecosystems and inland fisheries in Canada are still facing similar challenges with many emerging ones that could not have been foreseen. Here, we reflect on the contemporary relevance of the Pearse Report and propose recommendations that policy makers should consider. Broadly, our recommendations are: (1) manage fishes, fisheries, and habitat using a holistic co-management framework, with clearly defined fishery jurisdictions and partnerships with Indigenous governments; (2) engage in transparent, inclusive, and agile research to support decision-making; (3) facilitate knowledge co-production, involving interdisciplinary projects with diverse groups of actors and sectors including Indigenous Peoples, anglers, policy makers, scientists/researchers, governments, and the public; (4) embrace technological advances to support freshwater fisheries stock assessment and management; and (5) align policy and management activities in Canada with global initiatives related to increasing the sustainability of inland fisheries. We advocate for an updated comprehensive report such as the Pearse Report to ensure that we embrace robust, inclusive, and sustainable management strategies and policies for Canada’s inland fisheries for the next 30 years. It is time to again rise to the challenge. - OPEN ACCESSShortcomings in the rigour and reproducibility of research have become well-known issues and persist despite repeated calls for improvement. A coordinated effort among researchers, institutions, funders, publishers, learned societies, and regulators may be the most effective way of tackling these issues. The UK Reproducibility Network (UKRN) has fostered collaboration across various stakeholders in research and are creating the infrastructure necessary to advance rigorous and reproducible research practices across the United Kingdom. Other Reproducibility Networks, modelled on UKRN, are now emerging in other countries. Canada could benefit from a comparable network to unify the voices around research quality and maximize the value of Canadian research.
- OPEN ACCESS
- Christopher J. Lemieux,
- Karen F. Beazley,
- David MacKinnon,
- Pamela Wright,
- Daniel Kraus,
- Richard Pither,
- Lindsay Crawford,
- Aerin L. Jacob, and
- Jodi Hilty
The first draft of the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) includes an unprecedented call for states that have ratified the treaty (Parties) to implement measures to maintain and enhance ecological connectivity as urgent actions to abate further biodiversity loss and ecosystem decline. Considering the challenges that lie ahead for Parties to the CBD, we highlight the ways in which effective and equitable connectivity conservation can be achieved through four transformative changes, including: (1) mainstreaming connectivity retention and restoration within biodiversity conservation sector and influencing sectors (e.g., transportation, energy, agriculture, forestry); (2) mainstreaming financial resources and incentives to support effective implementation; (3) fostering collaboration with a focus on cross-sector collective action; and (4) investing in diverse forms of knowledge (co-)production and management in support of adaptive governance. We detail 15 key actions that can be used to support the implementation of these transformative changes. While ambitious, the transformative changes and associated key actions recommended in this perspective will need to be put in place with unprecedented urgency, coherency, and coordination if Parties to the CBD truly aspire to achieve the goals and targets of the forthcoming Post-2020 GBF in this new decade of biodiversity. - OPEN ACCESSMismatches between institutions and social–ecological systems (SESs) are one of the foremost challenges in natural resource management. However, while mismatches are often cited in the literature as a major challenge, empirical evidence of mismatches and their consequences is limited. This is particularly true for complex SESs, such as on the Pacific Coast of North America, where salmon drive interactions across multiple environments, jurisdictions, and scales. Here, I use the theoretical concept of fit to examine institutional alignment in a large-scale Pacific salmon SES, the Skeena River watershed in British Columbia, Canada. Utilizing Canadian federal environmental assessments as a proxy for colonial environmental governance institutions, I describe the common causes and consequences of mismatches between institutions and salmon SESs. This case study suggests that mismatches are threatening salmon sustainability and negatively affecting Indigenous People’s rights, livelihoods, and approaches to resource management and stewardship. I argue that improving social–ecological fit in salmon SESs will require new or revitalized forms of environmental governance that consciously fit the underlying social–ecological dynamics. While these findings are based on the Skeena River watershed, they may be generalizable to other salmon SESs in which mismatches between social and ecological processes and institutions exist.
- OPEN ACCESSSince the initial outbreak in December 2019, the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in more than four million deaths worldwide. Ecuador initially experienced one of the worst coronavirus outbreaks in the world. The pandemic quickly overwhelmed health care systems resulting in excess deaths of 37 000 from March to October, 2020. The public health measures taken to stop the spread of the virus had a devastating impact on the economy. There was a sharp contraction (7.8%) in Ecuador’s GDP in 2020. Furthermore, income poverty and inequality increased dramatically. The lasting effects of the pandemic will be harder to overcome. This article recounts and analyzes the COVID-19 pandemic in Ecuador, to draw lessons from this complex experience, and from the benefit of limited but important successes. We also aim to provide suggestions for best practices moving forward.
- OPEN ACCESSThis perspective essay examines the role of conservation law in contributing to biodiversity decline by exploring how current conservation laws exacerbate the challenges Canada faces. We contend that there are three intertwined foundation-setting functions of conservation law: they codify priorities and values, define and influence acceptable conservation behaviour, and drive the establishment of the institutions, programs, and governance arrangements of today’s conservation regime. We describe these functions and then assess whether conservation laws in Canada are adequately fulfilling the functions. We find that the federal conservation law regime is sub-optimal and likely incapable of halting and reversing the negative biodiversity trends. Based on this, we suggest a set of conservation legislative principles capable of catalyzing change and supporting the transition to a more sustainable conservation future.
- OPEN ACCESS
- Nicolas Mansuy,
- Diana Staley,
- Sharlene Alook,
- Brenda Parlee,
- Alexandra Thomson,
- Danika Billie Littlechild,
- Matthew Munson, and
- Fred Didzena
Wilderness and national parks play a fundamental role in defining Canadian identity, yet Indigenous Peoples have historically been excluded from conservation decisions, resulting in systematic dispossession and oppression. In this article, we collaborate with Dene Tha'First Nation to discuss the recent paradigm shift towards Indigenous-led conservation and propose guiding principles to advance and assert the critical role of Indigenous Peoples in conservation. We begin with a brief history of Indigenous Peoples in conservation, followed by the concept of Indigenous protected and conserved areas (IPCAs). Our analyses show that IPCAs have gained momentum recently, driven by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and Canada's commitment to global conservation goals. With one of the largest landmasses and Indigenous populations in the world, IPCAs in Canada have the potential to make immense contributions to environmental and cultural conservation rooted in an intrinsic relationship to the land. Despite this biocultural diversity, as of 2022, less than 1% of Canada's landmass is declared as Indigenous-led protected areas. However, more than 50 Indigenous communities across the country have currently received funding to establish IPCAs or to undertake early planning and engagement that could position Canada as a global leader in Indigenous-led conservation. As the Government of Canada aims to designate 25% of the territory as protected space by 2025 and 30% by 2030, embedding Indigenous rights, knowledge, and values in the national conservation strategy will be essential to simultaneously honoring the commitments to reconciliation and meeting the ambitious targets stipulated in the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. - OPEN ACCESSDinerstein et al. present a spatially explicit global framework for protected areas needed to reverse catastrophic biodiversity losses and stabilize climate. The Province of Ontario (Canada) stands out in this “Global Safety Net (GSN)” as a critical jurisdiction for meeting those goals, because of both the large extent of roadless lands and high carbon storage in terrestrial ecosystems. Simultaneously, pressure is increasing to develop unmanaged lands in Ontario, particularly in the Far North, for resource extraction. Here, we extract data from the GSN to identify and calculate the areal extent of target regions present in Ontario and critically review the results in terms of accuracy and implications for conservation. We show that when region-specific data are incorporated, Ontario is even more significant than what is shown in the GSN, especially in terms of carbon stocks in forested and open peatlands. Additionally, the biodiversity metrics used in the GSN only partially capture opportunities for conservation in Ontario, and the officially recognized extent of Indigenous lands vastly underestimates the role of First Nations in conservation. Despite these limitations, our analyses indicate that Ontario plays an outsized role in terms of its potential to impact the trajectories both of biodiversity and climate globally.
- OPEN ACCESSThere is a global focus by governments on retrofitting buildings, as well as incorporating energy efficiency into new construction, as a means to address climate change. Initiatives to reduce energy use, source renewable electricity, and use low-carbon materials are aimed at leading by example, where governments attempt to showcase innovation through green building strategies. Greening government initiatives are promoted to reduce operating costs, improve energy system resilience, grow the “green” economy, support clean energy development, and encourage sustainable building practices. Here, we outline the benefits of greening government initiatives by examining Canada's Greening Government Strategy as a case study approach for transitioning to a low-carbon building portfolio. We focus our review on initiatives that outline how public institutions can transition buildings to reduce their carbon footprint by (1) pairing greening government mandates with adequate support structures for public agencies, (2) using an integrated energy management process for the planning and development of carbon-neutral portfolios, and (3) overcoming barriers to low-carbon project implementation with procurement standards, financial instruments, and staff training. These approaches are defined to offer leadership in the green building industry, strategically identify carbon reduction projects, and reduce barriers to a low-carbon building portfolio.
- OPEN ACCESSHabitat sensitivity is a consideration for decision-making under environmental laws in many jurisdictions. However, habitat sensitivity has been variously defined and there is no consistent approach to its quantification, which limits our understanding of how habitat sensitivity varies among systems and in response to different pressures. We review various definitions offered in the scientific literature and policy documents before suggesting a universal framework for habitat sensitivity as (i) a habitat trait that defines the ecological impacts from a given pressure, (ii) which is composed of three components (habitat resistance, resilience, and recoverability), and (iii) which is quantified by measuring the change and recovery in the state of key habitat attributes in response to pressures. In addition, we provide guidance toward a consistent approach to assessing habitat sensitivity, which includes the use of pressure benchmarks and standardized metrics of change in key habitat attributes to create a common scale for comparison among habitat attributes and pressures. Our framework and recommendations should help to standardize the way in which habitat sensitivity is defined and assessed, and could be integrated into decision-making processes to improve ecosystem management in different jurisdictions.
- OPEN ACCESSThe creation and deployment of plastic structures made out of pipes and panels in freshwater ecosystems to enhance fish habitat or restore freshwater systems have become popularized in some regions. Here, we outline concerns with these activities, examine the associated evidence base for using plastic materials for restoration, and provide some suggestions for a path forward. The evidence base supporting the use of plastic structures in freshwater systems is limited in terms of ecological benefit and assurances that the use of plastics does not contribute to pollution via plastic degradation or leaching. Rarely was a cradle-to-grave approach (i.e. the full life cycle of restoration as well as the full suite of environmental consequences arising from plastic creation to disposal) considered nor were decommissioning plans required for deployment of plastic habitats. We suggest that there is a need to embrace natural materials when engaging in habitat restoration and provide more opportunities for relevant actors to have a voice regarding the types of materials used. It is clear that restoration of freshwater ecosystems is critically important, but those efforts need to be guided by science and not result in potential long-term harm. We conclude that based on the current evidence base, the use of plastic for habitat enhancement or restoration in freshwater systems is nothing short of littering.
- OPEN ACCESS
- P.J. Duke,
- B. Richaud,
- R. Arruda,
- J. Länger,
- K. Schuler,
- P. Gooya,
- M.M.M. Ahmed,
- M.R. Miller,
- C.A. Braybrook,
- K. Kam,
- R. Piunno,
- Y. Sezginer,
- G. Nickoloff, and
- A.C. Franco
Improving our understanding of how the ocean absorbs carbon dioxide is critical to climate change mitigation efforts. We, a group of early career ocean professionals working in Canada, summarize current research and identify steps forward to improve our understanding of the marine carbon sink in Canadian national and offshore waters. We have compiled an extensive collection of reported surface ocean air–sea carbon dioxide exchange values within each of Canada's three adjacent ocean basins. We review the current understanding of air–sea carbon fluxes and identify major challenges limiting our understanding in the Pacific, the Arctic, and the Atlantic Ocean. We focus on ways of reducing uncertainty to inform Canada's carbon stocktake, establish baselines for marine carbon dioxide removal projects, and support efforts to mitigate and adapt to ocean acidification. Future directions recommended by this group include investing in maturing and building capacity in the use of marine carbon sensors, improving ocean biogeochemical models fit-for-purpose in regional and ocean carbon dioxide removal applications, creating transparent and robust monitoring, verification, and reporting protocols for marine carbon dioxide removal, tailoring community-specific approaches to co-generate knowledge with First Nations, and advancing training opportunities for early career ocean professionals in marine carbon science and technology. - OPEN ACCESSDespite some progress, successful co-management in Canada has remained the exception rather than the rule, and especially so in jurisdictions not covered by a comprehensive land claims agreement. As such, our aim in this perspective is to identify and describe some of the primary factors that may impede more rapid progress toward successful co-management and to explore why they persist, with particular attention to fisheries and marine contexts. Specifically, we outline several institutional conditions that are likely to impede broader adoption of co-management approaches in Canada, including (1) antiquated and incomplete legislative arrangements; (2) a co-management policy vacuum that has not grappled with emerging expectations for co-governance; (3) relative absence of the knowledge co-production systems needed to create the precursors for successful co-management initiatives; and (4) financial and human resource capacity limitations. Such conditions must also be situated in a dynamic context that includes the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, ongoing reconciliation processes, and shifts in the ownership and use of fisheries and other marine resources. We offer, finally, some suggestions to augment co-management efforts and ultimately achieve its promise.
- OPEN ACCESS
- Linda Rabeneck,
- Chris McCabe,
- Mark Dobrow,
- Arlinda Ruco,
- Melissa Andrew,
- Sabrina Wong,
- Sharon Straus,
- Lawrence Paszat,
- Lisa Richardson,
- Chris Simpson, and
- Andrew Boozary
The purpose of this policy briefing is to examine our health care systems through the lens of the COVID-19 pandemic and identify how we can strengthen health care in Canada post-pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic has provided compelling evidence that substantive changes to our health care systems are needed. Specifically, the pandemic has emphasized structural inequities on a broad scale within Canadian society. These include systemic racial and socioeconomic inequities that must be addressed broadly, including in the delivery of health care. We make recommendations about what we can do to emerge stronger from the pandemic. While these recommendations are not novel, how they are framed and contextualized differs because of the problems in our health care system that have been highlighted and exacerbated by the pandemic.The evidence is clear that socioeconomic circumstances, intergenerational trauma, adverse early life experiences, and educational opportunities are critical factors when it comes to health over the life course. Given the problems in the delivery of health care that the pandemic has revealed, we need a different approach. How health care was organized prior to the COVID-19 pandemic did not produce what people wanted and needed in terms of health care and outcomes. How do we emerge from COVID-19 with an effective, equitable, and resilient health care system for all Canadians?To address health inequities and emerge from the pandemic with strengthened health care in Canada, we must consider how Amartya Sen's capabilities framework on social well-being can be operationalized to achieve better health care and health outcomes. Specifically, we address the need to: strengthen primary care and improve access to primary care;utilize a community-embedded approach to care; andimplement better integration across the care continuum, including integration between primary care and public health.Coherent governance and leadership that are charged with realizing benefits through collaboration will maximize outcomes and promote sustainability. Only when we provide access to high-quality culturally competent care that is centered around the individual and their needs will we be able to make true headway in addressing these long-standing health inequities. - OPEN ACCESSWith growing attention to the ethical and equity implications of Western-based approaches to research, the urgency of decolonizing research has emerged as a critical topic across academic disciplines, including the field of sustainability. The complexity and messiness of this endeavour, however, may translate into uncertainty among researchers about how and where to start. This is partly due to a lack of guidance, training, and accountability mechanisms through Western academic institutions. In this paper, we advance a three-step process that systematically guides critical reflection toward respectful engagement of local and Indigenous communities, as well as other marginalized groups, by drawing on the literature and on learnings from a recent graduate student-led initiative. The process we develop aims to provide a pragmatic starting point for decolonizing research and a counterpoint to conventional modes of research. Such a process will not only foster accountability, respect, and reciprocity but also movement toward locally relevant, context-appropriate, and action-oriented research outcomes. Our three-step process also challenges Western-based and extractive research practices and seeks to facilitate a shift in mindset about the purpose of research and how to approach it.
- OPEN ACCESS
Can fisheries be “regenerative”? Adapting agroecological concepts for fisheries and the blue economy
Regenerative design, in which agricultural practices are organized to work with nutrient cycles and successional processes, is increasingly being explored in food systems research and practice. In this commentary, I explore whether regenerative design concepts can be adapted to marine contexts, given increased global interest in the potential of marine ecosystems to support sustainable development, i.e., the blue economy. There are numerous fundamental ecological differences between terrestrial and marine ecologies that make it difficult to directly translate regenerative farming's focus on managing the nutrient cycle. However, building on a framework for regenerative food systems that focuses on how production activities are organized rather than the specific practices and technologies in use, I find multiple useful parallels to familiar patterns in the fisheries literature, specifically, fishing down the food web, poverty traps, and portfolio-based fishing. I conclude with a discussion of directions for research on regenerative fisheries and concerns regarding the potential for greenwashing under the banner of a regenerative blue economy.