The role of scientific evidence and social context in protected area decision making

Evidence-based decision making is increasingly recognized as vital for improving the effectiveness of conservation interventions. However, its practical application in protected area (PA) management remains limited. Drawing on face-to-face interviews with PA managers from 116 PAs across Africa and Europe, we investigated the use of scientific evidence in conservation decisions and the social context under which the decisions are made. Our results revealed that most PA managers believe that there is a favorable social context, highlighting supportive community attitudes and their willingness to participate in conservation. We also found that while only about one-third of PA managers use scientific publications to inform their decisions, an overwhelming majority (85%) of PA managers rely primarily on personal experience. PA managers widely perceive the conservation interventions implemented by their respective PAs as highly effective, regardless of the type of intervention or the degree of scientific support behind it. They also recognize the trust, cooperation, and participation of local communities as crucial for the success of conservation interventions. Our study underlines that the influence of scientific evidence, particularly evidence from systematic research that has been published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, on PA-level decision making remains limited. Although the practical experience of PA managers is undeniably valuable, the underutilization of scientific evidence could undermine the effectiveness of PA managers' decisions and conservation interventions implemented by PAs. Fostering strong partnerships between researchers and PA managers (through co-designed research, mutual learning, and effective communication) can help mainstream evidence-based decision making in protected areas.