A standardized definition of Rapid Evidence Assessment for environmental applications

• DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/u7z2g
• Publication Date: 2024-07-09T18:06:19Z
• Authors: Kate A. Schofield; Carly Cook; Jonathan Robert B...; James Angus Webb; Samantha H Cheng; Alec Philip Christie; Steven J Cooke; Natalie Dubois; Geoff Frampton; Biljana Macura; Susan J Nichols; Rob Richards; Rebecca Aicher; Sara Mason; Erik Anderson; Erin Betley; Mark Borsuk; Jonah Busch; Sara Carlson; Jean-Jacques Dubois; Jacqualyn Eales; Edward Game; Robyn Irvine; Matt Muir; Lydia Olander; Amina Pollard; Ana Porzecanski; Elizabeth Radke-F...; Nicola Randall; Trevor Riley; Stephanie Mary Ri...; Nick Salafsky; Amanda Sigouin; Kara Stevens; Caroline Ridley
• Keywords: Natural Resources and Conservation; Physical Sciences and Mathematics; Life Sciences; Environmental Sciences

Evidence assessment—identifying, evaluating, and synthesizing data and findings from previous studies—is important to inform environmental decision-making but can be slow and resource intensive. Users seeking more efficient approaches have developed a wide range of definitions and methods for Rapid Evidence Assessment (REA), raising concerns about consistency and rigor. To improve consistency and confidence in REA, we convened an international group of evidence users and researchers to define REA for environmental applications. Our iteratively developed consensus definition of REA highlights it as an efficient, structured process that is suitable for decisions with moderate to high risk profiles; transparent regarding the trade-offs required and potential bias; able to integrate multiple types of evidence; and reflective of the decision-making context. Having a standardized definition of REA, which improves transparency and facilitates decisions about the appropriate levels of required rigor, will be helpful to those who commission, carry out, and use REAs.