dc.contributor.author
Detoeuf, Diane
dc.contributor.author
De Lange, Emiel
dc.contributor.author
Ibbett, Harriet
dc.contributor.author
Gupta, Trisha
dc.contributor.author
Monterrubio Solís, Constanza
dc.contributor.author
Mavakala, Krossy
dc.contributor.author
Catapani, Mariana Labão
dc.contributor.author
Kretser, Heidi E.
dc.contributor.author
Milner-Gulland, Eleanor J.
dc.contributor.author
Brittain, Stephanie
dc.contributor.author
Newing, Helen
dc.contributor.author
Fariss, Brandie
dc.contributor.author
Spira, Charlotte
dc.contributor.author
Eyster, Harold N.
dc.contributor.author
DeMello, Nicole
dc.contributor.author
Wallen, Kenneth E.
dc.contributor.author
Thornton, Sara A.
dc.contributor.author
Bennett, Nathan J.
dc.contributor.author
Choo, Li Ling
dc.date.accessioned
2025-05-24T15:54:35Z
dc.date.available
2025-05-24T15:54:35Z
dc.date.issued
2025-05-23T08:42:03Z
dc.date.issued
2025-05-23T08:42:03Z
dc.date.issued
2025-05-23T08:42:03Z
dc.identifier
Detoeuf D, De Lange E, Ibbett H, Gupta T, Monterrubio Solís C, Mavakala K, et al. Gap analysis of social science resources for conservation practice. Conserv Biol. 2025 Apr;39(2):e14463. DOI: 10.1111/cobi.14463
dc.identifier
http://hdl.handle.net/10230/70475
dc.identifier
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14463
dc.identifier.uri
https://hdl.handle.net/10230/70475
dc.description.abstract
Conservation is an inherently social process-people collectively endeavor to enact conservation. Yet, in conservation social science, research methodologies, training, and competency are less common than in natural sciences. Globally, formal education and training in the social sciences are often unavailable or inaccessible to conservation practitioners, and nonformal education may help fill this gap. To identify potential opportunities, we implemented a global survey of practitioners to identify their knowledge gaps and social science training needs and conducted a gap analysis of available social science training resources. We compiled 449 resources, including 266 English-language and 183 non-English-languages resources into an open-access online database hosted by the Conservation Social Science Partnership. Resources were categorized as communication, data collection, ethics and human rights, intervention, impact evaluation, or analysis. Most resources were open access (90%) and half were specific to conservation practice. Survey responses (n = 90) revealed demand for help with data analyses, research ethics, and human rights considerations. We found a need for organization leaders to prioritize social sciences in conservation, greater diversity of accessible training resources in alternate mediums and languages, resources tailored to conservation contexts, and additional ethics and human rights and data analysis resources.
dc.format
application/pdf
dc.format
application/pdf
dc.relation
Conservation Biology. 2025 Apr;39(2):e14463
dc.rights
© 2025 The Author(s). Conservation Biology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Conservation Biology. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
dc.rights
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
dc.rights
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subject
Capacity building
dc.subject
Conservation policy
dc.subject
Needs assessment
dc.subject
Qualitative research
dc.subject
Quantitative research
dc.subject
Social science methods
dc.title
Gap analysis of social science resources for conservation practice
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion