Masters Dissertation Example

1.2 Introduction to the study 
This research project will examine the actual conservation impact of research published in the 
scientific literature. Conservation science has grown rapidly over recent years, and the volume 
of literature attached to it is constantly increasing (Robinson, 2006). Similarly, there is 
evidence that scientists are becoming more involved in policy forums (Robertson & Hull, 
2001). Although there are many issues surrounding the concept of ‘best available science’ and 
the peer review process (Conroy et al, 2006), it remains that conservation journals, as a 
channel through which assurance of research quality can be obtained through peer review 

---

2 
(Smallwood et al, 2000), are well placed to provide the forum for this science. As such, it is 
important that the rapidly expanding volumes of information contained within these pages be 
put to the best practical use 
There can be no doubt that some key scientific papers have an enormous influence on 
conservation policy and action, obvious examples coming from Myers et al (2000) and the 
introduction of ‘hotspots’ into the policy arena, and Losey et al (1999) on the impact of the Bt 
gene on the Monarch butterfly, subsequently integrated into the Environmental Protection Act 
(Berenbaum, 2001). This highlights some issues with the notion of ‘best available science’, 
particularly in the field of conservation, as the implications are often open to interpretation. 
Indeed, many scientists believed that the impacts on the Monarch butterfly were exaggerated 
and widely misinterpreted by the general public (Berenbaum, 2001). Regardless, it is widely 
accepted that effective conservation decisions rely on practitioners and policy makers having 
all of the available information and knowing the costs and benefits of the different tools at 
their disposal (Salafsky et al, 2002). 
Very few scientific papers, however, make such an obvious impression on the political arena 
(Sutherland et al, 2004), and there are those who believe that conservation journal pages are 
filled with academic research that is never translated into conservation action due to academic 
pressures favouring rapid dissemination of short-term research of little practical use (da 
Fonseca, 2003; Lomas, 1993; Whitten et al, 2001). On a similar note, it has been suggested 
that the peer review tools of judging credibility adopted by scientists are not strong factors for 
conservation managers (Lach et al, 2003). There are also concerns as to the degree to which 
the scientific literature is representative of conservation needs of species in terms of 
taxonomic representation (Levin & Kochin, 2004), type of research carried out (Linklater, 
2003) and the geographical areas represented (Fazey et al, 2005). 
Conservation biology exists as a discipline with the purpose of providing a scientific basis for 
conservation action (Fleishman et al, 1999), but this by its very definition will only occur 
when the design and execution of management plans is actually influenced ‘on the ground’ 
(Robertson & Hull, 2001; Thomas & Salwasser, 1989; Meffe, 1998). As such, given the 
amount of funding that goes into such research (Ferraro & Pattanayak, 2006) along with the 
general consensus that we are lacking in knowledge of biodiversity and species level processes 

---

3 
(Fazey et al, 2004; Olson et al, 2002), it is perhaps surprising that little analysis has been 
undertaken to determine the utility of the relevant literature that is purported to provide the 
source of scientific information on which conservation is based, or to identify factors that 
facilitate the use of research in conservation action.