Abstract Despite the expressed desire for ‘evidence based policy’, especially in the environmental field, many policies seem to ignore available knowledge and to put aside scientific evidence. The science–policy interface, therefore, has abundant examples showing that knowledge production and decision-making processes should be analysed together. In this regard, we address the question of how biodiversity scientists could participate in social and political negotiation so that scientific biodiversity knowledge becomes evidence. We use the use of Bti for mosquito control in the Camargue, South of France, as an empirical case study to examine the place of biodiversity in the decision-making process and the role of scientists supporting biodiversity conservation. We demonstrate that to become evidence, scientific knowledge has to be widely adopted by stakeholders. In that context, biodiversity scientists have to keep demonstrating impacts on biodiversity to maintain the controversy opened. They also have to propose and eventually test alternative solutions. Combining actor-network theory and strategic analysis, our approach encourages social scientists to adopt case-based long-term field studies to contribute to reflections by biodiversity scientists as they struggle to make their work impact biodiversity policy.

中文翻译：

---

如何使生物多样性知识引人注目？卡马格（法国）蚊虫控制实施案例

摘要 尽管表达了对“基于证据的政策”的渴望，尤其是在环境领域，但许多政策似乎忽略了现有知识并将科学证据放在一边。因此，科学政策界面有大量的例子表明知识生产和决策过程应该一起分析。在这方面，我们解决了生物多样性科学家如何参与社会和政治谈判的问题，以便科学的生物多样性知识成为证据。我们在法国南部卡马格使用 Bti 控制蚊子作为实证案例研究，以检查生物多样性在决策过程中的地位以及科学家在支持生物多样性保护方面的作用。我们证明要成为证据，利益攸关方必须广泛采用科学知识。在这种情况下，生物多样性科学家必须不断证明对生物多样性的影响，以维持争议的展开。他们还必须提出并最终测试替代解决方案。结合行动者网络理论和战略分析，我们的方法鼓励社会科学家采用基于案例的长期实地研究，以促进生物多样性科学家在努力使他们的工作影响生物多样性政策时的反思。