Fisheries knowledge exchange and mobilization through a network of policy and practice actors

Highlights: • Case study of rainbow trout management in British Columbia, Canada is used to assess processes of knowledge mediation. • The study builds on a knowledge-action framework and makes use of the concept of knowledge mediation spaces. • This study reaffirms the importance of political, economic, and social influences on adoption and use of scientific research. • Rainbow trout research would benefit from stronger relationships between researchers and actors who draw on their science. Conservation researchers have been shown to be motivated by the application of their work to address real world problems. However, a significant number of recent studies in the sociology of science and related fields such as knowledge exchange and knowledge mobilization have shown that direct influence of conservation science on policy and practice is rare. To improve conservation science uptake, we need a better understanding of how knowledge mediation and interpretation by potential knowledge users actually happens. This article examines qualitative data from a set of 65 interviews with government staff and other stakeholders and rights holders involved with rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) management in British Columbia, Canada. The focus of the investigation is on the ways that scientific knowledge moves through this network of actors. We approach knowledge exchange and mobilization as a social and political process. Our analysis makes use of the concept of knowledge mediation spaces as the specific settings in which actors deliberate and make sense of multiple forms of knowledge and competing social interests. Four knowledge mediation spaces were identified in the case study: sharing expertise and best practices, consultation on policy direction, program delivery, and research partnerships. Sharing of knowledge among actors in this network was found to be influenced by the movement of individuals from one organization to another throughout their careers. We also found that there is frequent interaction among actors for problem solving and seeking expert advice and that scientific methods strongly inform the actions of fisheries actors; yet science does not always play a role in policy formation. We recommend researchers place more emphasis on engaging stakeholders and Indigenous rights holders more directly in order to inform their research agendas and to facilitate more direct pathways for knowledge exchange, and by extension impacts on management and conservation.