Delivered by Ingenta IP : 192.171.192.196 On: Fri, 05 Jul 2019 13:33:10 Copyright The Policy Press networks for evidence-informed European policy Print ISSN1744 2648• Online ISSN1744 2656•https://doi.org/10.1332/174426418X15314036194114 EKLIPSE: engaging knowledgeholders and on biodiversity and ecosystem services Accepted for publication19 June 2018•First published online 25 July 2018 UFZ –Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Germany UFZ –Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Germany without further permissionprovided the original work isattributed. The derivative works Barbara Livoreil, [email protected] permits adaptation,alteration, reproduction and distribution for non-commercial use, NonCommercial 4.0license(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which Evidence &Policy Fondation pour laRecherche surlaBiodiversité, France Royal BelgianInstitute of Natural Sciences, Belgium Royal BelgianInstitute of Natural Sciences, Belgium Royal BelgianInstitute of Natural Sciences, Belgium Royal BelgianInstitute of Natural Sciences, Belgium This article is distributed under thetermsof Creativeis distributed Commonsarticle This Attribution- Estelle Balian, [email protected] Estelle Lise Goudeseune, [email protected] Goudeseune, Pierre Huybrecht, [email protected] Hilde Eggermont, [email protected] Eggermont, Zoi Konstantinou, [email protected] Eszter Kelemen, [email protected] Eeva Furman, [email protected] Eeva do notneed to belicensed on the same terms. Marianne Darbi,[email protected] Finnish Environment Institute,Finland Centre for EcologyandHydrology, UK Centre for EcologyandHydrology, UK George Cojocaru, [email protected] George Cojocaru, Florian Koch, [email protected] Lynn Dicks,[email protected] Gill Ainsworth, [email protected] Gill Ainsworth, University of East Anglia, UK East Anglia, Universityof Allan Watt, [email protected] Allan Watt, practice • vol 15•no2253–264©Policy Press 2019 TIAMASG, Romania CIIMAR, Portugal ESSRG, Hungary 253

Delivered by Ingenta IP : 192.171.192.196 On: Fri, 05 Jul 2019 13:33:10 Copyright The Policy Press • key messages key words adapt to different requirements that arise with the broad range of requests to andactivities of EKLIPSE. networks, ahigh degree of transparency within the processes andahigh flexibility ofstructures to holders. Future success, however, relies on the continued involvement with and engagement of synthesis. We have yet to see,however, significant engagement of formal networks ofknowledge its and requestersand expertsofevidence networks of informal ofevidence, building contributing to those who are building evidence, or both.EKLIPSEhasbeensuccessfulinlinking these peopleandin use evidenceor seek to be theythosethat in evidence, interests similar with among those networks developed has the potentialnot only to build communities of knowledgeholders but to buildinformal and other holders of knowledge on biodiversity and other relevant evidence. The mechanismbeing policy andsociety to jointly identify evidence for decision making;and2) the networking of scientists support mechanismbeing developed by EKLIPSE:1) the engagement of relevant actors from science, related environmental challenges. aspects ofthedecision- paper considers two fundamental This The aim of EKLIPSEis to develop amechanism to inform European-scale policy on biodiversity and challenges. EKLIPSE develops amechanism to inform policy on biodiversity andrelated environmental decision-support mechanism•networksscience-policy-society interface •biodiversity UFZ –Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Germany UFZ –Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Germany UFZ –Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Germany UFZ –Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Germany Carsten Nesshoever,Carsten [email protected] Institute for Social-Ecological Research,forInstitute Social-Ecological Germany Research,forInstitute Social-Ecological Germany Riikka Paloniemi, [email protected] Marie Vandewalle, [email protected] Vandewalle, Heli Saarikoski, [email protected] Saarikoski, Riku Varjopuro,[email protected] Liisa Varumo, [email protected] Varumo, Isabel Sousa Pinto, [email protected] Finnish Environment Institute,Finland Finnish Environment Institute,Finland Finnish Environment Institute,Finland Finnish Environment Institute,Finland Heidi Wittmer, [email protected] Wittmer, Centre for Ecology&Hydrology, UK Marion Mehring, [email protected] Marion Mehring, Karla Locher, [email protected] Juliette Young,[email protected] Alexandra [email protected] Lux, CIIMAR, Portugal Allan Watt et al Allan Wattet 254

Delivered by Ingenta IP : 192.171.192.196 On: Fri, 05 Jul 2019 13:33:10 Copyright The Policy Press • • around more thanonepolicy area, biodiversity bridge andecosystemservices for Regier, 2000; FairbrassandJordan, 2004; Young etal, 2014). Relevant evidence needs action required toaddress thesustainable useofbiodiversity (forexample, Kay and approach tobiodiversity and ecosystemservices, andalack ofmainstreaming inthe thinking inscience, societyandpolicyoftenresults inadisconnectedandpiecemeal political willandscientific awareness (KNEU Team, 2014; Neßhöver etal, 2016). ‘Silo’ communicationas inappropriate approaches and, in some cases, potentially limited between scientific aims, processes and timing, and societal or policy needs, as well 2007; Vogel etal, 2007; Waylen and Young,Rosenberg, 2007; 2014). andHolmes, Sharman 2010; This islargelyduetomismatches Turnhout etal, 2012; Van denHove,Martens, 2015; Knight et al, 2010; et al, Mehring 2017; McNie, 2007; Owens, 2012; policy development and implementation is still achallenge (Argyris, 1996; Beumer and of biodiversity and ecosystem services, converting this into ‘actionable knowledge’ for a wealth existson thestatusandtrends ofscientific evidence and other information et al, 2014; etal, Saarikoski 2017; Young etal, 2013a; 2013b; Youngsociety withmultiple stakes andoftenconflictingobjectives over etal, biodiversity (Sarkki 2014). While complexity, diverse values andthediversity involved ofactors from science, policyand Commission, 2015a; duetothehighlevels 2015b)anddidsoinpart ofuncertainty, and European scales. etal, (Butchart These targetsclearlyfailed 2010; European ambitious targetstoreduce and even haltthelossofbiodiversity were setatglobal Plan forbiodiversity published in2006(European Commission, 2006). At thattime, biodiversity was explicitlyidentifiedintheEU andecosystemservices first Action creating new knowledge andidentifyingknowledge gaps. fromandanalysethisevidence,holders bothscienceandsocietytointegrate thereby builds onidentifyingrelevant together knowledge existingevidence andbringing on biodiversity by andecosystemservices 2020. mechanism This decision-support European-scale mechanismforcreatingsustainable evidence-informed policy support in 2016.funding stream that started Its chief aim is to establish an innovative, light, self- isaprojectServices) fundedby theEuropean CommissionundertheHorizon2020 EKLIPSE (KnowledgeMechanismonBiodiversity andLearning Ecosystem informed policy on biodiversity and ecosystem services Why there isaneed for a decision-support mechanism for evidence- Vandewalle, M., Varjopuro, R., Varumo, L., Wittmer, H.and Young, J. (2018)EKLIPSE: engaging Livoreil, B.,Locher, K.,Lux, M.,Nesshoever, Mehring, A., C., Paloniemi, R., Saarikoski, H.,Pinto, I.S., Eggermont, H.,Furman,E., Eggermont, Huybrecht,Goudeseune, L., P., Kelemen, E.,Koch, F., Konstantinou, Z., knowledge holders andnetworks for evidence-informed European policy on biodiversity and The need for a decision-support mechanism for evidence-informed policyon mechanismforevidence-informed The needforadecision-support biodiversity and other relevant evidence. biodiversityand other EKLIPSE promotes the networking of scientistsand other holders of knowledge on holders from bothscienceandsociety. EKLIPSE operates ataEuropean scale,bringing together policy-makers andknowledge To cite this article: Watt, A., Ainsworth, G., Balian,E., Cojocaru, G., Darbi,M.,Dicks,L., ecosystem services, DOI: 10.1332/174426418X15314036194114 Evidence &Policy EKLIPSE 255 , vol 15,no2,253–264,

Delivered by Ingenta IP : 192.171.192.196 On: Fri, 05 Jul 2019 13:33:10 Copyright The Policy Press and across policyandpractice(Nilssonetal, onhow allsectors besttoinform 2016). andtrade-offs, ofsynergies example interms andhow from lessonsneedtobelearned (SDGs) demonstratesbothhow linked thepolicychallengesofdifferent are, sectors for 2015; Burch et al, 2014). Indeed, the challenge of the Sustainable Development Goals example healthandbiodiversity, orclimatechangeandbiodiversity (Sandiferetal, reflects critically two mechanism being reflects fundamental aspectsofthedecision-support critically to becomeactively networks. andinformal engaged through bothformal This paper et al, 2014; et al, Carmen 2015). This is achieved all relevant by encouraging actors and outputs, including new concepts, tools andpracticalaction(Cashetal, 2003; Young to increase thelikelihood ofshapingsolution-orientated, policy-relevant knowledge 2015; etal, Carmen 2018). This approach hasbeen putforward ashaving thepotential et al, 2014; Waylen and Young, 2014; producingVan knowledge formutual benefitandtoaddress real Kerkhoff and Lebel,world problems (Fazey 2015; Rosendahl et al, fromholders groups different andbackgrounds to work together withtheaimof is seen as dynamic, process-based and interactional, where we knowledge facilitate relevant toanswering policyandsocietalneedsbut, mostimportantly, knowledge In EKLIPSEprocesses, ofknowledge are alltheseforms if explored and integrated those between organisedknowledge andunorganisedknowledge (Vinketal, 2013). between empirical, knowledge theoretical (Nutley andexperimental etal, 2007), and knowledgeecological andscientificknowledge (Berkes etal, 2000), todistinctions intheliterature inmultiple andnotmutuallycategorised exclusive ways, from traditional diverse setofknowledge from holders bothscienceandsociety. Knowledge hasbeen much more holisticapproach, where relevant isidentifiedandusedfroma expertise be addressed by aclosednetwork orinstitutions. ofexperts Rather, they require a 2014; BiodiversityKnowledge White Paper, 2014; Neßhöver etal, 2016). not perceived ascredible, relevant (Sarkkietal, and/orlegitimate 2014; Young etal, highlightedabove,society interface gapspersist, andknowledge generatedisoften and theidentificationacknowledgement ofthechallengesatscience-policy- inEurope,and ecosystemservices seeNeßhöver etal, 2016). Despitetheseefforts, (foracompleteoverviewits holders ofthescience-policylandscapeonbiodiversity policy processes; however, theserarely ofexistingknowledge includethevariety and and processes (forexample, contracts, service houses’)provide‘clearing knowledge for Evidence (PullinandStewart, 2006; Pullinetal, 2009), andanumber of institutions (Sutherland etal, 2014; Dicksetal, 2014)andtheCollaborationforEnvironmental example theCochraneReviews inthepublic healthsector, Conservation Evidence are alsomany approaches tosynthesisescientificknowledge onspecificissues, for BioStrat), developing research needsforbiodiversity andecosystemservices. There has beenactive through oftwo thesupport and EU-fundedprojects (BioPlatform since 1999, forBiodiversity theEuropean Research Platform Strategy(EPBRS) have policy(Neßhöver tosupport beguntostrengthen theirefforts etal, 2013)and, projects have promoted science-policy activities, networks such as ALTER-Net established intheEuropean environmental context. For examplemany EU-funded al, 2016). There are many diverse activities already science-policy-societyinterface consolidated view isstilllacking(Neßhöver thatexplicitlyaddresses uncertainties et Mansfield andHaas, 2006; etal, Primmer 2017). For contestedissuesinparticular, a issues, scalesandvalues thatare relevant fordecisionmaking(Young etal, 2013c; The main underlying principle of EKLIPSE is that these gaps and challenges cannot of EKLIPSE is that these gaps and challenges cannot The main underlying principle Moreover, evidence isoftenframedtoonarrowly, thusnotaddressing the Allan Watt et al Allan Wattet 256 Delivered by Ingenta IP : 192.171.192.196 On: Fri, 05 Jul 2019 13:33:10 Copyright The Policy Press Based onthesetwo fundamentalaspectswe highlightfuture directions forEKLIPSEin ensure robust onbiodiversity science-policy-societyinterfaces andecosystemservices. networking ofknowledgeto strengthen ofscientistsandotherholders thelong-term to jointly develop evidence toaddress specificdecision-making knowledge needs; and2) developed by EKLIPSE: 1)toengagerelevant from actors science, policyandsocietyto has already been done in, forexample, recent reviews of thescientificliterature. in allowing toreframe therequester(s) thequestion inlightofwhat theopportunity which are likely toholdknowledge relevant totherequest, important isparticularly of requests. The open callforknowledge, whichtargetsthosenetworks (seebelow) such as ECDGs or other relevantof additionalactors stakeholders, and the merging to ensure thatitisofEuropean policyandstakeholder relevance, theinvolvement this scopingknowledge discussion, to inform abroadening ofthe focus of the question This stage might include an open call to networks and individuals for topical andtherequesterof EKLIPSEactingasaprocess (Figure 1). andinterface) facilitator Coordinating BodyofEKLIPSE(KCB, thatis, oneofthekey governance structures a difference. Thisisdonethrough ascopingdialogue between theKnowledge what therequester actuallywants toknow, anddiscusshow EKLIPSEcanmake Protection Agency andBuglife, conservation NGO. aBritish inchargeoftheEnvironment,the French Ministry The ScottishEnvironmental For example, EKLIPSEhasreceived requests from theSwedish Board of Agriculture, European relevance, althoughthesemay beinitiallyexpressed inanationalcontext. departments, agenciesandNGOs, however, are alsolikely tosubmitquestionsof have beensubmittedfrom, forexample, and IUCN. ClientEarth Nationalgovernment operating at the European scale are likely to be of European relevance, and questions policy relevance. Similarly, requests from NGOs European NGOsorinternational Environment (ECDGENV). Inbothcases, thequestionsare clearlyofEuropean Subsequent requests have beensubmittedby theEuropean CommissionDG from theEuropean CommissionDGResearch and Innovation (EC DGR&I). on nature-based solutionstopromote climateresilience inurbanareas, was received immediate andpotentialapplicationofresults (policyimpact). relevance ofoutputwithregard toinitialrequest; V. Impact: Assessment ofthe syntheses processes; IV. Quality of results: assessprocesses of quality assuranceand groups, elements; otherparticipatory but alsoconsidering III. Qualityofknowledge develop processable requests; II. Qualityofteam-building process: focusonexpert processes andconsistsoffive dimensions: I. Qualityof request process: offer ways to et al, 2015; LuxandMehring, 2016). The evaluation follows oftherequest thelogic gainedthroughcommunity aprocess andexperience offormative evaluation (Carmen (Cash, 2001; Sarkki et al, 2014; from the feedback of the knowledge 2015) learning this, ofcredibility, basedonprinciples relevance, legitimacy, transparency anditerativity decision making.informed The EKLIPSEproject approach istestingaparticular to tojointlyprovidepolicymakers andothersocietalactors evidence leadingtobetter- A majorobjective ofEKLIPSEistocreate amechanismthatcoordinates scientists, Engagement of science,policyandsociety particular, andSPIsonbiodiversity intheEUmore generally. andecosystemservices The first stepinanswering a The first request istoscopeandframethe request tounderstand The first requestputtoEKLIPSE, ondeveloping animpact evaluation framework EKLIPSE 257

Delivered by Ingenta IP : 192.171.192.196 On: Fri, 05 Jul 2019 13:33:10 Copyright The Policy Press the request isbeingput forward, what the requester wants from the process and the EUpolicyrelevance of 3. Description of Step KCBneed. Workrequestera The todevelopwith the (DoW) thatcaptures works why scoping phase to refine the questionandidentifyhowEKLIPSE couldgive added valuein terms of what they Knowledge Coordination Body(KCB) based on aset of criteria1 the KCB liaises with the requester during a a knowledgeneed. Step 2.Following adviceandselectionby the Strategic Advisory Board (SAB)and Step 1. Open Call for Requests aimedat decision-makers across the EU where they can put forward Figure 1:EKLIPSEprocess of answeringapolicy or societalrequest. should consciously choose the most appropriate synthesismethod(s)(seealso Pullin should consciously choosethemostappropriate that different requests, basedontheir timing, resources and available knowledge, directly inthechoiceofmethods. stemsfromThis specificsupport the recognition and Dicks, 2018), but thework hasbeenretained groups tosupport oftheexpert produce onmethodsforknowledge areport synthesis (Dicksetal, 2017; Haddaway group onmethods,expert established by EKLIPSE. This groupwas setupinitiallyto work indetail, themethods tobe used. particularly byThis stepissupported an Secretariat. workingThe expert itsproposed groupdraftsaprotocol todescribe the taskofanswering oftheKCBandEKLIPSE therequest withthesupport community, working andanexpert group, selectedby theEKLIPSEKCB, takes on then published, againtargetedatnetworks andthebroader scientificandsocietal For knowledge mostoftherequests requiring synthesis, is anopencallforexperts produced from thisdialogue working and which is used to establish an expert group. by on the work an agreement to be done by EKLIPSE, based on a document of work of existing knowledgeto make more the gathering transparent. This step is followed An onlineforum, where theresults of thecallforknowledge are shown, canbeused example different countries and/or different sectors (policy, NGOs/society, research), will be encouraged. knowledge, butbased on the synthesis of existing knowledge,and consortia of requesters, representing for ongoing or future policyprocesses, relevant to biodiversity and ecosystem services.,notrequiring new 1 Note the requester and finally, itis widely disseminatedandmadepublicly available. synthesis to make sure the end product isrobust and credible (3d). Step 4: The end product is then given to knowledge andproduces an end product, (e.g.areport). Then apeer-review is conducted on the knowledge request andgoes through an extended peerreview Next process (3c). theEWG synthesisesall the current The EWG develops aprotocol of methodsandapproach that describes exactly how they will answer the the request (3a). Once the DoWisagreed we put out apublic Call for Experts on the requester’s topic (3b).

Eligibility criteria for requests are that they need to be Relevant to the European scale,relevant to Allan Watt et al Allan Wattet 258

Delivered by Ingenta IP : 192.171.192.196 On: Fri, 05 Jul 2019 13:33:10 Copyright The Policy Press for knowledge synthesis, ontherequest todraftareport topic. This draftsynthesis workingThe expert groupthenusestheprotocol, includingtheselectedmethod(s) workingexpert grouprevises theprotocol, by whichisthenagreed therequester. the public, therequester andrelevant knowledge holders. Usingthisfeedback, the et al, 2016). The protocol isthensentoutforopenpeerreview andconsultationwith Economics. Other knowledge includenon-governmental holders organisations, networks insocialsciencesinclude, forexample, theEuropean SocietyofEcological based solutions; and INNGE, anetwork ofnext-generationecologists. Relevant promoting Pan-European research onbiodiversity, andnature- ecosystemservices BiodivERsA Partnership, anetwork fundingorganisations of national andregional for example ALTER-Net, a network of ecosystem research institutions; the scientific knowledge these networks holders includenetworks innaturalsciences, and/or activities have animpact, directly orindirectly, onbiodiversity. Amongst society, scienceandpolicy, attheEuropean particularly level, whoseknowledge networks in andinformal aiming toidentifyandwork closelywiththoseformal therefore follows the ‘network ofknowledge’ concept(Neßhöver etal, 2016), promoting thefullengagementofcommunity ofknowledge holders. EKLIPSE groups/consultantmodelby /closedadvisory alternative tothesingleexpert EKLIPSEbodiesandtasks,and engageinvarious EKLIPSEalsoprovides an transparent selection criteria, provides to all researchers to contribute opportunities Although EKLIPSE, by being inclusive, advertising and using opportunities to decisionmakingby establishing dialogue between science, policyandsociety. The mechanismbeingdeveloped by EKLIPSEseeks toidentifyevidence relevant impact onbiodiversity, andrelated environmental ecosystemservices challenges. of those networks of knowledge whose knowledge holders has a key potential objectiveThe majorsupporting ofEKLIPSEistopromote theengagement Supporting and connecting networks of knowledge use evidence orthosewhoare building evidence, orboth. networks amongthosewithsimilarinterests inevidence, bethey thosewhoseekto only tobuild communities ofknowledge (seebelow) holders but tobuild informal the process of answering it, the mechanism being developed has the potential not knowledge throughout holders theprocess. Bycreating awareness oftherequest and those makingrequests forknowledge, onknowledge experts synthesisandrelevant and effective way. Incontrast, EKLIPSEpromotes anin-depthdialogue between diverse rangeofknowledge mightnotbeinvolved holders inthemostinclusive to besignificantlychangedthrough dialogue withthe requester, andthebroad and bodies.to consultantsoradvisory Inthelatter, ofreference are the terms unlikely from theprocesses typicallyinstigatedby requests from decisionmakers andothers web seminars. The mechanismbeingdeveloped by EKLIPSE istherefore very different approaches (Smith, 2003), orforesight workshops, scanningapproaches and horizon research questions, incritical actors thereby promoting deliberative democracy byfacilitated EKLIPSE, suchassciencecafésandothertoolstogive avoice tosocial requester andismadepublicly available. holders, andundergoesrevision basedontheirfeedback. goestothe The final report of knowledge review goesoutforafurther tothepublic andrelevant knowledge- Depending ontherequests received andaccepted, alternative processes canbe EKLIPSE 259 Delivered by Ingenta IP : 192.171.192.196 On: Fri, 05 Jul 2019 13:33:10 Copyright The Policy Press networks, thenon-scientificones, particularly are interested more intheuseof have inEKLIPSEasknowledge already participated holders, but someofthese Networks ofLocalGovernments forSustainability. ofthesenetworks Members non-governmental Europe, organisationsinCentralandEastern andICLEI, the and civil societyorganisationsandnetworks, forexample, CEEweb, anetwork of have proof ofconceptsandsee the benefitsofsuchprocesses. involvement networks astronger oncethey engagementofformal mightalsotrigger the knowledgeof engaging community. generatedbyThe gravity thisindividual services, itscore iffundingissecured function coordinating tosupport and facilitating ‘community ofpractice’ around knowledge inactiononbiodiversity andecosystem European evidence-informed policy onbiodiversitymechanism tosupport asanew due totheactivities oftheEKLIPSEproject may besufficienttosustainafuture ofexisting networks.not explicitlyasmembers network thatisemerging The informal of knowledge holders. intheEKLIPSE project are Individual engaging but experts its synthesis. We have yet tosee, however, networks significantengagement offormal networksto building ofrequestersevidence, informal ofevidence and andexperts challenges. EKLIPSEhasalsobeensuccessful inlinkingthesepeopleandcontributing biodiversity,and policyneedsconcerning andrelated environmental ecosystemservices groups, reflecting the interest of a broad to become engaged in range of actors evidence knowledge andover 200peoplehave respondedoffour expert tocallsformembers Neßhöver etal, 2016). Inlessthantwo years, EKLIPSEhasreceived 31requests for Tinch etal, 2018), includingthe ‘network ofknowledge’ approach (Livoreil etal, 2016; biodiversity (Young science-policy-societyinterface etal, 2014; etal, Carmen 2015; and previous projects thatsoughttoidentifyandimplementgoodpracticeinthe forbiodiversityscience-policy-society interface inEurope (Neßhöver etal, 2013) The EKLIPSEproject follows anincreasing awareness oftheneedtoimprove the interfaces science-policy in reflection widerengagement on A critical toitsprocesses.and technicalsupport rather by ownership by thenetworks ofknowledge holders, bothfinancial ensuring mechanism beingbuilt by EKLIPSEwillbesustainednotby project fundingbut from outsidetheconsortium. Inthisway, we are working towards avisionwhere the the project, the coordination of the requests will be made up from selected members the consortium, selected by the EKLIPSE Strategic Board.Advisory Before the end of from composedofmembers outside andpartly oftheEKLIPSEconsortium members the work workinggroups and supports of the expert groups, composed of is partly decisions such as which requests to answer, working of the expert selects the members Furthermore, theKnowledge Coordination BodyofEKLIPSE, whichmakes key tobetheproducerit theopportunity ofthesynthesisedknowledge requested. workingwhilst theexpert groupsare drawn from theknowledge community, giving other relevant from actors theoutset. theanswering ofrequests, EKLIPSEfacilitates To that end, ithasdirectly involved the broad community of knowledge and holders engagementby relevantownership andlong-term policy, scientificandsocietalactors. (see above). evidence andsomehave already becomerequestersofknowledge toEKLIPSE The goal of EKLIPSE is to create a long-term and sustainable mechanism generating The goal ofEKLIPSEis to create along-term Allan Watt et al Allan Wattet 260 Delivered by Ingenta IP : 192.171.192.196 On: Fri, 05 Jul 2019 13:33:10 Copyright The Policy Press rejected), members, group expert were secretariat) interviewed abouttheirexperiences. of the evaluation these EKLIPSEbodies (KCB, SAB, requesters(bothaccepted and networks, and individuals therein, for the different bodies within EKLIPSE. As part the EKLIPSE approach hasbeen effective the relevant atengaging and interested Carmen, E, Watt, A, Carvalho, L, Dick, J, Garcia-Blanco, G, Grizzetti, B, Hauck, J, Carmen, E, Nesshöver, C, Saarikoski, H, Vandewalle, M, Watt, A, Wittmer, H, Young, Butchart, SH, Walpole, M, Collen, B, Van Strien, A, Scharlemann, JP, Almond, RE, Burch, S, Shaw, A, Dale, A, Robinson, J, 2014, Triggering transformative change: a BiodiversityKnowledge, 2014, A recommended designfor ‘BiodiversityKnowledge’, a Beumer, C, Martens, P, 2015, Biodiversity inmy (back)yard: towards aframework for Berkes, F, Colding, J, Folke, C, 2000, Rediscovery knowledge oftraditionalecological Argyris, C, 1996, Actionable knowledge: of consequential design causality in the service References for research andinnovation No690474. agreement undergrant projectand EcosystemServices) fundedby European Union’s 2020Programme Horizon MechanismtoImproveand Learning thePolicy-Science-Society onBiodiversity Interface oftheEKLIPSE(Establishing a European outaspart This work Knowledge was carried Acknowledgements knowledgeneeds andturning intoaction. promoting ofdiverse theintegration knowledge toaddress holders pressing societal will rely of decision makers onthe continued at all scales, support and supporting related toknowledge needsonbiodiversity andecosystemservices. Inaddition, it different withthebroad requirements rangeof thatarise requests toandactivities of transparency withintheprocesses, toadapt andahighflexibilityofstructures involvement withandengagementofnetworks andknowledge holders, ahighdegree ingeneral,both forEKLIPSEandscience-policyinterfaces relies onthecontinued strong commitmentwiththeissuesdealtinEKLIPSE. Future success, however, In general, the feedback has been positive and constructive and demonstrated a The ongoingformative evaluation organisedby theEKLIPSEproject shows that services, 2018, Knowledge needs fortheoperationalisationofconceptecosystem Izakovicova, Z, Kopperoinen, L, Liquete, C, Odee, D, Steingröver, E, Young, JC, network ofknowledge, J, 2015, Creating abiodiversity sciencecommunity: from aEuropean experiences ofrecentindicators declines, Baillie, JE, Bomhard, B, Brown, C, Bruno, J, Carpenter, KE, 2010, Global biodiversity: Policy development pathapproach to climatechangeresponse incommunities, WhitePaper_web.pdf inEurope,services http://www.biodiversityknowledge.eu/images/PDF/ network ofknowledge decisionmakingonbiodiversity tosupport andecosystem gardens, biodiversity inresidential andecosystemservices citizen engagementinexploring as adapative management, theory, 14, 4, 467–487 Applied Behavioral Science Sustainability Science Ecosystem Services Ecosystem Services Environmental Science&Policy Ecological Applications 29, 441–51 10, 1, 87–100 Science 32, 4, 390–406 328, 5982, 1164–8 EKLIPSE 261 10, 1251–62 54, 497–504 Climate Delivered by Ingenta IP : 192.171.192.196 On: Fri, 05 Jul 2019 13:33:10 Copyright The Policy Press Cash, DW, Clark, WC, Alcock, F, Dickson, NM, Eckley, N, Guston, DH, Jäger, J, Cash, DW, 2001, Inorder toaidindiffusingusefulandpracticalinformation: McNie, EC, 2007, with user demands: Reconciling the supply of scientific information Mansfield, B, Haas, J, 2006, incontroversy Scaleframingofscientificuncertainty over Lux, A, Mehring, M, 2016, Formative evaluation strategyandframework, areport Livoreil, B, Geijzendorffer, I, Pullin, AS, Schindler, S, Vandewalle, M, Nesshöver, 2016, Knight, AT, Bode, M, Fuller, RA, Grantham, HS, Possingham, HP, Watson, JEM, KNEU Team, 2014, A recommended design for ‘BiodiversityKnowledge’, anetwork Kay, JJ, Regier, HA, 2000, Uncertainty, complexity, integrity: andecological insights Haddaway, N, Dicks, LV, 2018, Over-simplifying evidence synthesis? A response to Fazey, I, Bunse, L, Msika, J, Pinke, M, Preedy, K, Evely, AC, Lambert, E, Hastings, E, Fairbrass, J, Jordan, A, 2004, Multi-level governance andenvironmental policy, in European Commission, 2015b, The stateofnature intheEuropean Union, European Commission, 2015a, review themid-term oftheEUbiodiversity strategy European Commission, 2006, Communication from theCommission: haltingtheloss Dicks, LV, Haddaway, N, Hernández-Morcillo, M, Mattsson, B, Randall, N, Failler, P, Dicks, LV, Hodge, I, Randall, NP, Scharlemann, JPW, Siriwardena, GM, Smith, HG, Mitchell, RB, 2003, Knowledge systemsforsustainable development, Values organizations, extension and boundary agricultural Policy an analysisoftheproblem andreview oftheliterature, the endangered Stellersealion, of theEKLIPSEProject and Conservation Biodiversity knowledge synthesisattheEuropean scale: andsteps, actors Wilson, KA, 2010, Barometer oflife: more action, notmore data, in Europe of knowledge decisionmakingonbiodiversity tosupport andecosystemservices (eds) from anecosystemapproach, inCrabbé, P, Holland, A, Ryszkowski, L, Westra, L Cook etal, 2017, and multi-stakeholder research, Morris, S, Reed, MS, 2014, Evaluating knowledge exchangeininterdisciplinary 147–64 Bache, I, Flinders, MV(eds), COM(2015) 219final to 2020, COM2015)478final well-being, COM/2006/0216final of biodiversity by 2010 – and beyond for human – sustaining ecosystem services EKLIPSE project methods, andguidancefortheirselection, useanddevelopment, from areport the H, 2017, Knowledge synthesisforenvironmental decisions: anevaluation ofexisting Ferretti, J, Livoreil, B, Saarikoski, H, Santamaria, L, Rodela, R, Velizarova, E, Wittmer, policy making, Smith, RK, Sutherland, WJ, 2014, A transparent process for ‘evidence-informed’ of theNational Academy ofSciences Implementing ecologicalintegrity , 10, 17-38 26, 4, 431–53 Conservation Letters , 25, 1269 Biological Conservation Multi-level governance Environmental Politics Global EnvironmentalChange , 100, 8086–91 Allan Watt et al Allan Wattet , Dordrecht: Springer, 121–56 7, 119–25 262 218, 289–90 . Oxford: Oxford University Press, 15, 1, 78–94 Science, Technology & Human Environmental Science& 25, 204–20 Science Biodiversity Proceedings 329, 141

Delivered by Ingenta IP : 192.171.192.196 On: Fri, 05 Jul 2019 13:33:10 Copyright The Policy Press Neßhöver, C, Timaeus, J, Wittmer, H, Krieg, A, Geamana, N, van denHove, S, Young, Mehring, M, Bernard, B, Hummel, D, Liehr, S, Lux, A, 2017, Haltingbiodiversity loss: Sarkki, S, Niemelä, J, Tinch, R, van denHove, S, Watt, AD, Young, JC, 2014, Balancing Sandifer, PA, Sutton-Grier, AE, Ward, BP, 2015, connections among nature, Exploring Saarikoski, H, Primmer, E, Saarela, S-R, Antunes, P, Aszalós, R, Baró, F, Berry, P, Blanko, Rosendahl, J, Zanella, MA, Rist, S, Weigelt, J, 2015,Rosenberg, Scientists’ situatedknowledge:AA, 2007, Fishingforcertainty, Pullin, A, Frampton, G, Jongman, R, Kohl, C, Livoreil, B, Lux, A, Pataki, G, Petrokofsky, Pullin, AS, Knight, TM, Watkinson, AR, 2009, Linkingreductionist scienceandholistic Pullin, AS, Stewart, GB, 2006, Guidelines forsystematicreview in conservation and Primmer, E, Termansen, M, Bredin, YK, Blicharska, M, Garcia-Llorente, M, Berry, P, Owens, S, 2012, andtheenvironment: Experts The UKRoyal Commissionon Nutley, SM, Walter, I, Davies, HTO, 2007, Nilsson, M, Griggs, D, Visbeck, M, 2016, Maptheinteractionsbetween sustainable Neßhöver, C, Vandewalle, M, Wittmer, H, Balian, EV, Carmen, E, Geijzendorffer, IR, J, Watt, A, 2013, Improving ofbiodiversity thescience-policyinterface research of Biodiversity Science, &Management EcosystemServices how biodiversity social-ecological research makes adifference, policy interfaces, credibility, relevance andlegitimacy: assessmentoftrade-offsinscience– acritical to enhancehealthandbiodiversity conservation, biodiversity, ecosystemservices, andhumanhealthwell-being: opportunities knowledge inpractice, W, Vikström, S, Young, J,Preda, 2017, E, Institutionalchallengesinputtingecosystemservice Priess, JA, Santos, R, Schleyer, C, Turkelboom,D, F, Liquete, C, Luque,Vadineanu, S, Mederly, A, P, Verheyden,PA, Niemelä, J, Izakovicova, Palomo, Z, I, Kertész, Pastur, M, Kopperoinen, GM, Peri, L, P,L, Köhler, B,GG, Langemeyer, Goméz-Baggethun, E, J, Carvalho, Lapola, L, Dick, J, Dunford, R, Hanzu, M, Harrison, strong objectivity intransdisciplinarity, 25, 7, 1285–1300 biodiversityof knowledge policy, synthesistoinform G, Podhora, A, Saarikoski, H, Santamaria, L, 2016, methods Selectingappropriate anevidence-based framework,construct policy usingsystematicreviews: unpackingenvironmental policyquestions to environmental management, 27, 6, 588–604 conservation inEuropean decisionmaking, Holst Andersen, A, 2017, Caughtbetween andcollective personal values: biodiversity Jääskeläinen, T, Bela, G, Fabók, V, Geamana, N, Harrison, PA, Haslett, J, Cosor, G, environmental pollution1970–2011, services development goals, inEurope,and ecosystemservices of knowledge approach: improving thescienceandsocietydialogue onbiodiversity K, van Dijk, J, Watt, A, Young,C, Jongman, J, R, Zulka, Livoreil, KP, B, KNEU Project Santamaria, L,Team, Schindler, S, 2016, Settele, J,The network Sousa Pinto, I, Török, projects, , Bristol: Policy Press Gaia-Ecological Perspectives forScienceandSociety Science &Public Policy Nature Ecosystem Services 534, 7607, 320–23 Conservation Biology Biodiversity andConservation EKLIPSE Environmental Law 263 41, 2, 194–206 Futures Using evidence: public caninform how research 29, 579–98 Applied Ecology Nature Environmental PolicyandGovernance 65, 17–27 449, 7165, 989 20, 1647–56 Ecosystem Services 13, 1, 172–80 Biodiversity andConservation 22, 99–103 46, 970–75 24, 1, 1–22 25, 7, 1215–34 International Journal Journal International 12, 1–15

Görg,

Delivered by Ingenta IP : 192.171.192.196 On: Fri, 05 Jul 2019 13:33:10 Copyright The Policy Press Sharman, A, Holmes, J, 2010, Evidence-basedpolicyorpolicy-basedevidence Sarkki, S, Tinch, R, Niemelä, J, Heink, U, Waylen, K, Timaeus, J, Young, J, Watt, A, Young, JC, Waylen, K, Sarkki, S, Albon, S, Bainbridge, I, Balian, E, Edwards, D, Davidson, Young, JC, Jordan, A, Searle, KR, Butler, A, Simmons, P, Watt, AD, 2013c, Framing Young, JC, Watt, AD, van den Hove, S, the SPIRAL project team, 2013b, A resource Young, JC, Watt, AD, van denHove, S, theSPIRAL project team, 2013a, Effective Waylen, KA, Young, J, 2014, of diverse of Expectations and experiences forms Vogel, C, Moser, SC, Kasperson, RE, Dabelko, GD, 2007, Linkingvulnerability, Vink, MJ, Dewulf, A, Termeer, C, 2013, The role ofknowledge andpower in climate Van Kerkhoff, LE, Lebel, L, 2015, Coproduction capacities: rethinking science Van denHove, S, 2007, A rationaleforscience-policyinterfaces, Turnhout, E, Bloomfield, B, Hulme, M, Vogel, J, Wynne, B, 2012, Listentothe voices Tinch, R, Balian, E, Carss, D, EzzineDeBlas, D, Geamana, NA, Keune, H, Nesshöver, Sutherland, WJ, Gardner, T, Bogich, TL,Smith, Bradbury, G, RB, 2003, Clothier, B, Jonsson, M, Environmental Science&Policy legitimacy: anovel schemetohighlightdynamicaspectsofscience–policyinterfaces, Neßhöver, C, van denHove, S, 2015, Adding ‘iterativity’ tothecredibility, relevance, rather thantalkingatoneanother, dialogue tomeetthechallengesofbiodiversity conservation: having conversations Thompson, D, Tinch, R, van den Hove, S, Watt,J, Fairley, A, 2014, R, Improving Margerison, science-policy C, McCracken, D, Owen, R, Quine, C, Stewart-Roper, C, solutions, biodiversity tomore managementmayscale inparticipatory sustainable contribute spiral-project.eu/sites/default/files/Synthesis-Report_web.pdf book onscience-policyinterfaces: The SPIRALsynthesisreport, http://www. http://www.spiral-project.eu/content/documents betweeninterfaces science, policyandsociety: theSPIRALproject handbook, Planning C: andPolicy Government knowledge use: thecaseofUKnationalecosystemassessment, Global EnvironmentalChange adaptation, andresilience sciencetopractice: pathways, players, andpartnerships, 18, 4, 46 change adaptationgovernance: asystematicliterature review, governance relations inadiverse world, of experience, and Conservation for biodiversity: environments Dynamiclearning forsuccessfulimpact, Watt, AD, Waylen, KA, Wittmer,C, H and Niemelä, J,Young, Sarkki, S, JC, 2018, Thibon, Science-policy interfaces M, Timaeus, J, Vadineanu, A, Van DenHove,and Society S, interventions tohelpmaintainandenhanceregulating ecosystemservices, Dicks, LV, 2014, Solutionscanningasakey policytool: identifyingmanagement Kapos, V, Lane, SN, Möller, I, Schroeder, MSpalding, M, Spencer, T, White, PCL, 20, 309–21 Biofuels,gathering? theEUand10%target, Conservation Letters 19, 2, 3 Deliberative democracy andtheenvironment Nature , 27, 1679–702 488, 23, 454–5 17, 349–64 6, 333–40 54, 505–12 Allan Watt et al Allan Wattet 32, 2, 229–46 Biodiversity andConservation 264 Ecology andSociety Environmental PolicyandGovernance , London: Routledge 20, 1, 14 Futures 23, 2, 387–404 Ecology andSociety Environment and 39, 7, 807–26 Biodiversity Ecology