Evaluation of US state pollinator plans using 3 evidence-based policymaking frameworks

After the US federal government created a national pollinator protection plan in 2015, many states followed with their own. Since their goal is to promote pollinating insect conservation, we wanted to know whether the state plans are using best practices for evidence-based science policy. In early 2019 we found and downloaded every existing, publicly available US state pollinator protection plan. We then used content analysis to assess the goals, scope, and implementation of state-level pollinator protection plans across the US. This analysis was conducted using three distinct frameworks for evidence-based policymaking: US Department of Interior Adaptive Resources Management (ARM), US Environmental Protection Agency management pollinator protection plan (MP3) guidance, and Pew Trusts Pew-MacAthur Results First Project elements of evidence-based state policymaking (PEW) framework. Then we scored them using the framework criteria, to assess whether the plans were using known best practices for evidence based policymaking. Of the 31 states with a state pollinator plan, Connecticut was the state with the lowest total score across the three evaluation frameworks. The state with the highest overall scores, across the three frameworks, was Missouri. Most states did not score highly on the majority of the frameworks. Overall, many state plans were lacking policy elements that address monitoring, evaluation, and adjustment. These missing elements impact states ability to achieve their conservation goals. Our results indicate that states can improve their pollinator conservation policies to better match evidence-based science policy guidance, regardless of which framework is used.