Geology topics

Megan A. Moore

Publications and source records attributed to Megan A. Moore.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2026

Debunking the myth of the quintessential resource manager: Precision in actionable science

“Actionable science” is a widely held standard for identifying the merits of natural resources research. Yet, science is often framed as actionable to a vaguely identified quintessential “manager” without defining either the intended manager or use. Generic descriptions lack precision for identifying end users or their needs, limiting methodological rigor in research design and leading to contextual misalignments of outputs with the need they intended to serve. Further, imprecise terminology limits the ability to evaluate impact, replicate efforts, or foster adoption and implementation of findings. This perspective article presents the heuristic of “who, what, when, where, why, how” to help researchers be more precise when describing their actionable science. Through intentional reflection, researchers can move beyond generic framings of “managers” representing monolithic organizations. “Managers” become individuals, with unique responsibilities, functions, worldviews, and levels of authority, all influencing their use of and need for scientific information and data.

Conservation Science and Practice↗

USGS2026

Practical guidance for engaging end-users and experts in developing scientific tools

This report provides actionable guidance for scientists developing scientific tools that inform on-the-ground decision making. Scientific tools, in the context of this report, are technology or protocols that help practitioners collect and analyze their own data, and information products and web tools that practitioners could use to inform decisions. Engaging end-users and fellow experts is fundamental to the creation of useful scientific tools. Scientists can use clear and specific direction on action steps and activities to effectively engage with end-users and fellow experts during development. Our study explores lessons learned from six U.S. Geological Survey projects that designed and implemented engagement activities with end-users and experts to coproduce scientific tools for natural resource managers. U.S. Geological Survey teams engaged end-users and experts across the United States from Federal, State, and local governments; universities; Tribes; territories; and nongovernmental organizations in designing and developing scientific tools intended to support end-users in their work. An online survey with 98 participants measured satisfaction across several indicators of successful engagement, including engagement activity frequency, sufficient opportunities to provide feedback, feedback implementation, inclusion of necessary perspectives, and functionality of the tool for end-users. Semistructured interviews were held with project leads, during which the project leads reviewed a summary of the survey results. The project leads reflected on the engagement efforts used in their project, then described lessons learned from the engagement experience and participant feedback. Common themes for ensuring effective engagement identified through thematic analysis included engaging end-users during product conceptualization; establishing clear roles and expectations; considering who end-users are and how end-users may use the tool; recruiting participants through your network, boundary spanners, and leadership; understanding individual use cases; communicating how feedback was integrated into the product; and strategically using virtual meeting tools. This guide shares practical steps and exercises for planning and facilitating effective engagement based on lessons learned from project leads and case study summaries of each project.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS2022

Murky waters: Divergent ways scientists, practitioners, and landowners evaluate beaver mimicry

Beaver mimicry is a fast-growing conservation technique to restore streams and manage water that is gaining popularity within the natural resource management community because of a wide variety of claimed socio-environmental benefits. Despite a growing number of projects, many questions and concerns about beaver mimicry remain. This study draws on qualitative data from 49 interviews with scientists, practitioners, and landowners, to explore the question of how beaver mimicry projects continue to be promoted and implemented, despite the lack of comprehensive scientific studies and unclear regulatory requirements. Specifically, we investigate how these three groups differentially assess the salience, credibility, and legitimacy of evidence for beaver mimicry and analyze how those assessments affect each group’s conclusions about the feasibility, desirability, and scalability of beaver mimicry. By highlighting the interaction between how someone assesses evidence and how they draw conclusions about an emerging natural resource management approach, we draw attention to the roles of experiential evidence and scientific data in debates over beaver mimicry. Our research emphasizes that understanding how different groups perceive salience, credibility, and legitimacy of scientific information is necessary for understanding how they make assessments about conservation and natural resource management strategies.

Ecology and Society↗