{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015399900645802286, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003974167908594138, 'mean_word_length': 6.091549295774648, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Research–Action Interface in Sustainable Land Management in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan: Challenges and Recommendations

International agencies and programmes introduced sustainable land management (SLM) to Central Asia after the former Soviet Republics became independent in 1991. An aim of early SLM initiatives was to address challenges linked to the transformation of the agricultural sector from a centrally planned economy to a decentralized market economy. This article analyses the knowledge–action interface in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan as it relates to SLM. The analysis focuses on the influence of underlying land management concepts by means of a literature review. Contemporary barriers at the research–action interface were identified using participatory appraisal. And a historically contextualized understanding of the effectiveness of interactions between researchers, policy makers and practitioners is based on an analysis of purposefully selected cases. The study concludes that knowledge of different stakeholder groups is often highly disconnected. Interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary studies are rare, and academic research on SLM has subsequently been ineffective at contributing to substantial benefits for society. Further, researchers, policy makers and practitioners in this context must recognize the differences between SLM and what is often referred to as the equivalent Soviet‐era concept—rational use of land resources—and the resulting implications of these differences. The authors recommend the following: creating an enabling environment for SLM research through academic institutional reform removing structural constraints, making research outcomes more effective by applying systems approaches that produce evidence for policy makers on the multiple benefits of SLM, helping land users evaluate SLM strategies and investing in the establishment and maintenance of a multi‐stakeholder SLM platform that allows dynamic exchange. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.