WHAT IS THE IMPORTANCE OF YOUR RESEARCH? A FRAMEWORK FOR CLEAR ECOLOGICAL RELEVANCE

Yuri Costa; José A.C.C. Nunes; Charbel Niño El-Hani; Francisco Barros

doi:10.32435/envsmoke.2022537-12

Authors

Yuri Costa UFBA - Federal University of Bahia, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2647-6931
José A.C.C. Nunes UFBA - Federal University of Bahia, IBIO - Institute of Biology, Laboratory of Benthic Ecology, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2743-797X
Charbel Niño El-Hani UFBA - Federal University of Bahia, INCT IN‑TREE - National Institute of Science and Technology in Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary Studies in Ecology and Evolution, Salvador, Brazil https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2308-3983
Francisco Barros UFBA - Federal University of Bahia, CIEnAm - Interdisciplinary Centre for Energy and Environment, INCT IN-TREE - Institute of Biology and Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary Studies in Ecology and Evolution, Salvador, Brazil https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3037-1991

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32435/envsmoke.2022537-12

Keywords:

Research Relevance, Ecology, Theory, Methodology, Applicability

Abstract

How to clarify the relevance of research is a challenge for ecologists since this is not a trivial question for any scientist but may be especially difficult for early-career researchers, who often find more difficulty in providing answers that are synthetic, logical, and cogent. However, a clear answer to this question is critical for obtaining funding and is increasingly required by journal editors in order to send papers to review, let alone to attract readers to the published paper. Here, we argue that relevance should in fact appear in all steps of ecological research, including project preparation (e.g., for funding requests), manuscript submissions, oral communications, and also in media releases. Herein we discuss a framework for ecological relevance based on five key elements: clear connections with theory, knowledge gap, novelty, methodological innovation, and applicability. There are different ways of combining these elements, but in order to make the relevance of a study clear, ecologists should make explicit how these elements are connected with their main research question. Journal editors and grant agencies or donors decide on the relevance of the submitted works or proposals. We argue that categorically deciding whether or not an article is relevant is a delicate issue, particularly if one considers how scientific works can range from a gradient of no relevance to extreme relevance. We hope that with this simple “must-have argument list”, ecologists, especially in early careers, can enhance and show the relevance of their work in improving the field of ecology and, ultimately, human society.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Yuri Costa, UFBA - Federal University of Bahia, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil

UFBA - Federal University of Bahia, IBIO - Institute of Biology / INCT IN-TREE - National Institute of Science and Technology in Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary Studies in Ecology and Evolution, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil

José A.C.C. Nunes, UFBA - Federal University of Bahia, IBIO - Institute of Biology, Laboratory of Benthic Ecology, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil

UFBA - Federal University of Bahia, IBIO - Institute of Biology, Post-Graduate Programme in Ecology and Biomonitoring, Laboratory of Benthic Ecology / INCT IN-TREE - National Institute of Science and Technology in Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary Studies in Ecology and Evolution, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil

Charbel Niño El-Hani, UFBA - Federal University of Bahia, INCT IN‑TREE - National Institute of Science and Technology in Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary Studies in Ecology and Evolution, Salvador, Brazil

Federal University of Bahia (UFBA), National Institute of Science and Technology in Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary Studies in Ecology and Evolution (INCT IN-TREE), Salvador, Bahia, Brazil

Francisco Barros, UFBA - Federal University of Bahia, CIEnAm - Interdisciplinary Centre for Energy and Environment, INCT IN-TREE - Institute of Biology and Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary Studies in Ecology and Evolution, Salvador, Brazil

Federal University of Bahia (UFBA), Benthic Ecology Laboratory, Interdisciplinary Centre for Energy and Environment (CIEnAm), Institute of Biology and Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary Studies in Ecology and Evolution (INCT IN-TREE), Salvador, Bahia, Brazil

References

BLAND, L.; BIELBY, J.; KEARNEY, S.; ORME, C.D.L.; WATSON, J.E.M.; COLLEN, B. Toward reassessing data-deficient species. Conservation Biology, Washington, v. 31, n. 3, p. 531–539, 2017. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12850. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12850

CARTON, G.; MOURICOU, P. Is management research relevant? A systematic analysis of the rigor-relevance debate in top-tier journals (1994–2013). M@n@gement, Sceaux, v. 20, n. 2, p. 166, 2017. Available from: https://management-aims.com/index.php/mgmt/article/view/3869. Accessed on: 5 dec. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3917/mana.202.0166

COREN, S. Is relevance relevant in research? American Psychologist, Washington, v. 25, n. 7, p. 649–650, 1970. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0037873. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0037873

DA SILVA, J.A.T.; TSIGARIS, P. The relevance of James Lovelock’s research and philosophy to environmental science and academia. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, Beijing, v. 17, n. 3, art. 39, 2023. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-023-1639-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-023-1639-7

DALOSTO, M.M.; PALAORO, A.V.; SANTOS, S.; COSTA, J.R. Aggressiveness and life underground: The case of burrowing crayfish. Behaviour, Leiden, v. 150, n. 1, p. 3–22, 2013. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1163/1568539x-00003034. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/1568539X-00003034

GU, Y.; HU, L.; ZHANG, H.; HOU, C. Innovation ecosystem research: Emerging trends and future research. Sustainability, Basel, v. 13, n. 20, art. 11458, p. 1-21, 2021. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3390/su132011458. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su132011458

KELLY, C.D. Rate and success of study replication in ecology and evolution. PeerJ, San Diego and London, v. 2019, n. 9, 2019. Available from: https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.7654. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.7654

KHAN, K.S.; KUNZ, R.; KLEIJNEN, J.; ANTES, G. Five steps to conducting a systematic review. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, London, v. 96, p. 118-121, 2003. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/014107680309600304. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/014107680309600304

MARQUET, P.A.; ALLEN, A.P.; BROWN, J.H.; DUNNE, J.A.; ENQUIST, B.J.; GILLOOLY, J.F.; GOWATY, P.A.; GREEN, J.L.; HARTE, J.; HUBBELL, S.P.; O’DWYER, J.; OKIE, J.G.; OSTLING, A.; RITCHIE, M., STORCH, D.; WEST, G.B. On theory in ecology. BioScience, Herndon, v. 64, n. 8, p. 701–710, 2014. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biu098. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biu098

PICKETT, S.T.A.; KOLASA, J.; JONES, C.G. Ecological understanding: The nature of theory and the theory of nature. 2. ed. Burlington: Academic Press, 2007. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-554522-8.X5001-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-554522-8.X5001-8

PICZAK, M.L.; ANDERTON, R.; CARTWRIGHT, L.A.; LITTLE, D.; MacPHERSON, G.; MATOS, L.; McDONALD, K.; PORTISS, R.; RIEHL, M.; SCISCIONE, T.; VALERE, B.; WALLACE, A.M.; YOUNG, N.; DOKA, S.E.; MIDWOOD, J.D.; COOKE, S.J. Towards effective ecological restoration: Investigating knowledge co-production on fish–habitat relationships with Aquatic Habitat Toronto. Ecological Solutions and Evidence, London, v. 3, n. 4, art. e12187, p. 1-10, 2022. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/2688-8319.12187. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/2688-8319.12187

SERROUYA, R.; SEIP, D.R.; HERVIEUX, D.; McLELLAN, B.N.; McNAY, R.S.; STEENWEG, R.; HEARD, D.C.; HEBBLEWHITE, M.; GILLINGHAM, M.; BOUTIN, S. Saving endangered species using adaptive management. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, Washington, v. 116, n. 13, p. 6181–6186, 2019. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1816923116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1816923116

SHAW, D.M.; ELGER, B.S. The relevance of relevance in research. Swiss Medical Weekly, Basel, v. 143, n. 1920, p. w13792 (1-4), 2013. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4414/smw.2013.13792. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4414/smw.2013.13792

SUTHERLAND, W.J.; FRECKLETON, R.P.; GODFRAY, H.C.J.; BEISSINGER, S.R.; BENTON, T.; CAMERON, D.D.; CARMEL, Y.; COOMES, D.A.; COULSON, T.; EMMERSON, M.C.; HAILS, R.S.; HAYS, G.C.; HODGSON, D.J.; HUTCHINGS, M.J.; JOHNSON, D.; JONES, J.P.G.; KEELING, M.J.; KOKKO, H.; KUNIN, W.E.; LAMBIN, X.; LEWIS, O.T.; MALHI, Y.; MIESZKOWSKA, N.; MILNER-GULLAND, E.J.; NORRIS, K.; PHILLIMORE, A.B.; PURVES, D.W.; REID, J.M.; REUMAN, D.C.; THOMPSON, K.; TRAVIS, J.M.J.; TURNBULL, L.A., WARDLE, D.A.; WIEGAND, T. Identification of 100 fundamental ecological questions. Journal of Ecology, London, v. 101, n. 1, p. 58–67, 2013. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.12025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.12025

SWISS FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. Loi fédérale relative à la recherche sur l’être humain, LRH [Federal Act

on Research involving Human Beings]. Available from: https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/cc/2013/617/fr. Accessed on: 8 dec. 2022.

TERWILLIGER, R.F. To what relevance is research relevant? American Psychologist, Washington, v. 25, n. 12, p. 1174–1175, 1970. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0037907. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0037907

Van GRUNSVEN, R.H.A.; LIEFTING, M. How to maintain ecological relevance in ecology. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, London, v. 30, n. 10, p. 563–564, out. 2015. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2015.07.010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2015.07.010

WADGYMAR, S.M.; LOWRY, D.B.; GOULD, B.A.; BYRON, C.N.; MACTAVISH, R.M.; ANDERSON, J.T. Identifying targets and agents of selection: innovative methods to evaluate the processes that contribute to local adaptation. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, London, v. 8, n. 6, p. 738–749, 2017. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12777. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12777

WYCKHUYS, K.A.G.; LU, Y.; ZHOU, W.; COCK, M.J.W.; NARANJO, S.E.; FERETI, A.; WILLIAMS, F.E.; FURLONG, M.J. Ecological pest control fortifies agricultural growth in Asia–Pacific economies. Nature Ecology & Evolution, London, v. 4, n. 11, p. 1522–1530, 2020. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-01294-y. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-01294-y