1. Gavin Stewart Centre for Evidence-Based Conservation University of Birmingham, UK The Key Players in Evidence-Based Practice

2. Talk overview Three phases to the review process Planning the review Conducting the review Disseminating the review

3. Planning the review Policy input Science input Stakeholder input Review team role

4. Policy input Why do we need to know about this? Review focus e.g. geographical scope Unpacking elements e.g. access

5. Science input Provides the raw material of an evidence base Helps define elements e.g. blanket bog, wet-heath, dry heath Reasons for heterogeneity e.g. timing of grazing

6. Stakeholder input Conflict resolution

7. Review Team role Facilitate question formulation Interact with policy formers and scientists to generate question (protocol proforma) Circulate question to stakeholders to identify potential for conflict

8. Conducting the review CEBC Review team External lead reviewer Subject expert Review guidance Access to data

9. Review team Either undertake the review, or:

10. Lead reviewer Facilitate role of lead reviewer Funding body assist in identifying independent lead reviewer? Subject expert is necessary in absence of lead reviewer (for independence if nothing else)

11. Review guidance Who from What for

12. Who from Lead reviewer or Subject expert Wider scientific community Review commissioners

13. What for What kind of guidance do we need?

14. Access to data

15. Dissemination Dissemination roles under development Mechanisms: reviews available on open access website, peer reviewed manuscripts, policy briefs, practitioner information notes, workshops. Different information is required by different target audiences

16. summary collaborative CEBC External review team Scientific communityPolicy community Active practitioners Funding bodies, Research councils