Require Timely topic or peer-reviewed and research(recent research paper 2018-2021),  Conservation relevance,  Visual Appeal, and formatting, Clear jargon free writing, numbers and facts, Title and byline, section and heading, pictures, problem, so what(Why matter), solution, benefit, box, and citation.

MUST full fill all required section

Writing an Effective Policy Brief

Why write a policy brief?

Many of us decided to pursue conservation science to have an impact— to create actionable knowledge that can inform decisions. Yet, for those of you who go on to pursue careers in conservation science, you will quickly realize that you are often incentivized to communicate with other scientists but not with the people that are actually in charge of making decisions! As you have probably noticed, scientific articles are dense and riddled with difficult to understand jargon. Worse, they are often hidden behind paid subscription services that make them inaccessible to policy-makers. In summary, policy makers rarely have the time— or inclination— to access the wealth of conservation relevant knowledge that is constantly being published. Thus, to translate science into practice, we often need to reach out to policy makers directly!

A policy brief is a concise, attractive, synthesis of a scientific study or topic that discusses the relevance and importance of the study or topic to policy-makers. It is often used as a leave-behind. What is a leave-behind? Many scientists will arrange meetings with their representatives (or more likely the staffers of their representatives) and, after giving them a quick elevator pitch about an important issue, will “leave behind” a 1 page policy brief summarizing the issue. Staffers can revisit the policy brief at a later time or when their boss (your representative) needs more information before a crucial vote.

What’s required

Choosing an article or topic— Each student is required to choose
either
a recent journal article (from 2019, 2020, or 2021)
or
a timely conservation topic as the subject of their policy brief. Policy briefs are intended to inform policy-makers about a key bit of science they should know to effectively do their jobs. If you choose a scientific article as your subject, it must be:

· Peer reviewed and published in an academic journal such as Conservation Biology, Conservation Letters, Ecological Applications, Journal of Applied Ecology, Global Change Biology or others.

· Relevant to conservation, with clear management implications.

· Recent— published in 2019, 2020, or 2021. Earlier dates are not permitted.

If you choose a timely conservation topic, the topic must:

· Have appeared in a major news outlet in the last 6 months OR be the subject of an upcoming (or recent) vote in either our state or federal legislature.

· Be relevant to conservation

· Be supported by scientific literature. You must cite 1 (or more) studies to back up your policy recommendations.

Assigned course readings cannot be used. The paper you used for the blog cannot be used. Feel free to email the TAs if you have any questions about your article or topic and its appropriateness for the assignment.

Writing the policy brief— The policy brief will be attractively formatted onto
1 page
and will be targeted to policy-makers. For the purposes of this assignment, we will use the message box to structure how your policy brief is formatted. An example of how a policy brief could look is available in the files section of canvas. This example, however, was not written with all the guidelines and requirements in mind. It should thus be viewed as an example of how policy briefs should generally look and read, not an example of what is expected for this assignment.

Here is a list of what each policy brief must contain:

· A clear, concise title. The title must reflect the broad topic that you intend to discuss. In message box jargon, the title is your issue or the center of the box.

· Your byline. Include your name, contact information (email/phone number), and affiliation below the title.

· Section headings. The core text of the policy brief will be made up of four sections, corresponding to the four main sections of the message box: (1) the problem, (2) so what?, (3) solutions, and (4) benefits. Do not use the message box titles as section headings! Instead write headings that pertain to your topic.

· The problem. Lead off your policy brief with a succinct description of the problem that you seek to address. State why the problem is important and why it is relevant now.

· So what? Why should your policy-maker care about this issue? Who is affected by this problem? What are the broader implications? Make sure you remember your audience!

· The solution. Clearly articulate a solution to the problem that has emerged from the research you are focusing on. For our purposes, funding more research is not an acceptable solution. I want to see an actionable path forward to address the problem. Also, be sure to explain how the solution differs from current practices or policies.

· Benefits. What would the broad benefits be of adopting this solution?

· A picture or figure. Include at least 1 picture or figure (with a caption) to make your policy brief more attractive. Be sure to cite the source of your picture/figure.
Be sure to choose pictures/figures that are NOT copyrighted. See below for choosing appropriate images.

· A box with key points. Also include a box with several (3-5) bullet points detailing the core things that a policy-maker should take away from this document. The policy-maker should be able to read your key points box and broadly understand your policy brief without having to read anything else.

In addition to the components listed above, we will also grade policy briefs based on:

· Visual appeal. Policy briefs should be visually appealing. Make sure to format your brief so that the picture(s), box, title, and text form an attractive document. Feel free to use one or multiple columns of text (like a newspaper).

· Numbers and facts. Back up your statements with numbers and facts, but do not go overboard with statistics. Also, try to translate numbers into a more digestible form. For example, write “excluding birds doubled pest infestations” instead of “excluding birds increased pest infestations by 96%.”

· Clear, jargon-free, professional writing. Remember, you are writing for a policy-maker so keep the technical terms to a minimum unless they are absolutely necessary. Also, unlike the blog, the policy brief is written in a formal tone: puns and wordplay are to be avoided. As always, copy-edit your policy brief to ensure it appears professional.

· Citations. Cite any scientific articles you reference in the text by using a numbering system. For example, “Birds have been shown to eat pests in Costa Rica (1,2). They also are important for ecotourism (3).” Then, on a separate second page, include the bibliography of all cited papers. Use the following format:

· Karp, D.S., Mendenhall, C.D., Sandi, R.F., Chaumont, N., Ehrlich, P.R. & Daily, G.C. (2013). Forest bolsters bird abundance, pest control, and coffee yield. Ecology Letters, 16, 1339–1347

Choosing images— An important part of writing an effective blog is the addition compelling, attractive figures that accent your writing. Such images abound on the internet, but photos and figures represent people’s personal property- even when they are posted on the internet. As such, it is important to carefully abide by copyright laws when choosing photos to post alongside your blog. Even when photos are labeled for reuse (meaning the owner allows them to published on the websites of other people), there may be further restrictions regarding attribution. The procedure below is a surefire way to make sure you are abiding by copyright law and that you are protecting yourself and your institution.

Google image search:

1. Visit images.google.com and type in your search phrase (e.g., Peregrine Falcon)

2. Click on tools.

3. Click on usage rights.

4. Click on labeled for reuse.

5. Click on the photo you would like to use and then visit the website from which it was taken.

6. On that website, there should be a section on attribution. Read how the author would like to be attributed. If it does not say, then, as a rule, cite the author’s name and a link to the website where you got the image.

If you cannot find a suitable image in google image search, try visiting any of the following websites:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/

https://www.pexels.com/

https://freephotos.cc/

https://unsplash.com/

Turning it in— Save your policy brief as a Microsoft word document, and turn it in electronically using the assignments tab in Canvas. The policy brief is due by March 3 at midnight.

In2006, a high profile outbreak of toxic E. coli in bagged spinach was traced to

California’s Central Coast, where >70% of the United States’ salad greens and

vegetables are produced. Though no definitive cause for the outbreak could be

determined, wildlife was implicated because some animals can harbor

pathogens. Growers were subsequently pressured, primarily through their

buyers and sometimes through regulatory mechanisms, to reduce perceived

risk by adopting practices to minimize potential wildlife intrusion onto their farm

fields. Specifically, growers were asked to remove surrounding non-crop

(natural) vegetation presumed to harbor wildlife. This practice is expensive for

growers to implement and has led to a significant loss of important natural

habitat in the region.

The authors of a study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of

Sciences assessed whether the presence of non-crop vegetation is associated

with foodborne pathogen prevalence on farms. They used a detailed

vegetation map and examined ~250,000 pathogen samples including

enterohemorrhagic E. coli (EHEC), generic E. coli, and Salmonella bacteria.

Although EHEC prevalence in produce was higher on farms near areas

suitable for livestock grazing, there was no evidence that EHEC, generic E.

coli, or Salmonella increased near non-grazed, semi-natural areas. Rather,

pathogen prevalence increased most on farms where non-crop vegetation was

removed.

The authors recommend that buyers, auditors, and regulators encourage

science-based approaches to co-manage for environmental quality and food

safety. The findings of this study suggest that the requirement for farmers to

clear non-crop vegetation is unnecessary, at best, and is damaging to the

natural environment. Government agencies and buyers can instead promote

both food safety and ecosystem benefits by funding and encouraging practices

such as vegetated buffers and wildlife-friendly fencing of riparian areas.

Practices to conserve vegetation and wildlife habitat will help sustain

agricultural productivity by providing natural benefits such as pest control,

water quality, groundwater recharge, and pollination services. These benefits

are urgently needed for agriculture, and will be increasingly valuable over time.

A diverse farming landscape, including non-crop vegetation on and near farms,

promotes these benefits.

California has long been a global leader in agriculture. By addressing the

serious issues of food safety and ecosystem benefits together, California has

the opportunity to demonstrate a path toward harmonizing environmental

quality, agricultural productivity and human

health.

Healthy farms and nature are not at odds: Reducing environmental

impacts of food safety practices
Karp DS, Gennet S, Kilonzo C, Partyka M, Chaumont N, Atwill ER, Kremen C. (2015) Co-managing fresh produce for nature

conservation and food safety. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. August 10, 2015

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2015/08/05/1508435112.abstract

Contacts: sgennet@tnc.org, danielsolkarp@gmail.com, or ckremen@berkeley.edu

S
C

IE
N

C
E

f
o
r

C
O

N
S

E
R

V
A

T
IO

N

p
u

b
li

ca
ti

o
n

b
ri

e
f

Schematic of farm environment

using co-management approach

for food safety and environment

KEY POINTS

Produce growers in California

have been pressured to remove

non-crop vegetation and wildlife

habitat on farms for food safety

A new study shows this practice

of habitat removal around farms is

costly, damaging to the

environment, and is not effective

in reducing pathogens. In fact,

it may result in higher

prevalence of some pathogens.

Habitat removal should no longer

be encouraged. Buyers and

regulators should instead support

farming practices that enhance

nature for its beneficial functions.

Proximity of grazeable lands near

farm fields is correlated with

pathogens. However, practices

such as vegetated water quality

buffers and riparian fencing can

help mitigate associated risk.

California can be a global leader

in demonstrating sustainable

agriculture by solving this key

challenge to nature and human

health.

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2015/08/05/1508435112.abstract