From parachuting to partnership: Fostering collaborative research in protected areas

I. P. J. Smit,R. J. Fernández,M. F. Menvielle,D. J. Roux,N. Singh,S. Mabuza,B. M. Mthombeni,N. A. Macgregor,H. Fritz,E. Gandiwa,L. C. Foxcroft,C. N. Cook

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.14814

IF: 6.865

2024-11-25

Journal of Applied Ecology

Abstract:Establishing conditions that foster collaboration between national and international researchers, and between PA agency staff and external researchers (regardless of their nationality), would enable parks to better serve as catalysts for research collaboration. This collaborative approach can facilitate access to additional funding, enhance research capacity, increase research productivity and amplify research impact. Research in protected areas (PAs) is often dominated by scientists from outside the conservation agencies managing them. This can potentially lead to misalignment with local needs, insensitivity to the local context and a lack of investment in and use of local expertise. These issues often arise when international researchers work in another country without local engagement (known as 'parachute science'). Despite PAs being key end users of actionable science, there is limited understanding of the prevalence and impact of parachute science in these areas. Here, we investigate parachute versus collaborative research in two national parks in the Global South (Kruger National Park, South Africa; Nahuel Huapi National Park, Argentina) and one park from a developed economy (Kakadu National Park, Australia). To explore the prevalence, risks, benefits and complexities of research practices, we analyse the patterns of authorship, funding and acknowledgement in a random sample of peer‐reviewed papers from research conducted in these parks. Our findings show a higher incidence of potential parachute science in Kruger National Park (18% of papers with only out‐of‐country authors) compared to Nahuel Huapi (4%) and Kakadu (2%) national parks. However, the occurrence of internationally collaborative research (national and international authors) was double in Global South parks (35%–38%) than in the Australian park (18%). The study illustrates the potential benefits of international collaboration for PAs, including increased research productivity, expanded funding sources and possibly higher impact and visibility of published studies. PAs in developed countries may have fewer opportunities to obtain those benefits. Most papers, even those with in‐country authors, lacked authors affiliated with the agency managing the PA and often failed to even acknowledge these agencies. This suggests the potential for a different form of parachute science (which we term 'park parachuting') in which lack of local involvement may hamper integration of research with management. Synthesis and applications: Establishing conditions that foster collaboration between national and international researchers, and between PA agency staff and external researchers (regardless of their nationality), would enable parks to better serve as catalysts for research collaboration. This collaborative approach can facilitate access to additional funding, enhance research capacity, increase research productivity and amplify research impact. De paracaidistas a socios: promoviendo la investigación colaborativa en áreas protegidas La investigación en áreas protegidas (AP) suele estar dominada por científicos externos a las agencias de conservación que las gestionan. Esto puede llevar a una desconexión con las necesidades locales, insensibilidad respecto del contexto, y sub‐aprovechamiento de los conocimientos locales. Estos problemas a menudo surgen cuando los investigadores trabajan en un país que no es el suyo sin participación de investigadores ni gestores locales (conocido como "ciencia paracaídas", o investigación paracaídas). A pesar de que las AP son los supuestos destinatarios finales (y su personal los principales usuarios) de la investigación aplicada, existe un conocimiento limitado sobre la prevalencia y el impacto que en ellas tiene la ciencia paracaídas. Aquí analizamos la investigación paracaídas versus la colaborativa en tres parques nacionales: dos del Sur Global (Parque Nacional Kruger, Sudáfrica; Parque Nacional Nahuel Huapi, Argentina), y uno de una economía desarrollada (Parque Nacional Kakadu, Australia). Sobre una muestra aleatoria de artículos con referato publicados durante 2010–2020 para investigaciones realizadas en estas AP (n = 100 por parque), estudiamos la prevalencia, los riesgos, beneficios y complejidades de las prácticas de investigación. Nuestros resultados muestran una mayor incidencia de posible ciencia paracaídas en el Parque Nacional Kruger (18% de los artículos con sólo autores extranjeros) en comparación con los Parques Nacionales Nahuel Huapi (4%) y Kakadu (2%). Sin embargo, la ocurrencia de investigación colaborativa internacional (autores nacionales y extranjeros) fue el doble en los parques del Sur Global (35–38%) que en el parque australiano (18%). Este trabajo ilustra los posibles beneficios de la colaboración internacional para las AP, incluyendo el aumento del número de publicaciones, la ampliación de las fuentes de financiamiento y, -Abstract Truncated-

biodiversity conservation,ecology