The actionability of threat mapping research assessed through stakeholder involvement and intended outcomes of studies

There are often mismatches between the needs of decision makers and the outputs of scientific research, limiting the potential for conservation actions to be evidence-based. Clearly defining the intended pathway from research to action, and engaging stakeholders in the design and delivery of research, have both been suggested as essential to ensuring that research is relevant to decision-makers' needs. However, it is not clear how often such practices are implemented. We developed a novel approach to investigate statements of intended conservation outcome—including recommended actions—and stakeholder involvement reported in scientific articles that geographically map threats to species. We applied this to studies from a published systematic map of the literature. For 68% of studies, general conservation planning processes, tools, and techniques were the primary theme of intended outcomes, rather than specific conservation actions. Reports of stakeholder involvement were uncommon (present in 12.9% of studies) but those retrieved covered the full chronology of a scientific study, from design to planning, delivery, and validation. Our analysis presents an approach and a baseline for monitoring the clear definition of pathways to action and stakeholder involvement in the threat mapping literature, which can highlight ongoing mismatches between scientific output and decision-makers' needs.