**3. Results**

#### *3.1. Background Information of Participants*

A total of 51 participants returned the questionnaires (Table S2a), 67% of them were male. Most respondents were between 25–35 years old (37%), followed by those between 36–45 (29%) and 46–65 years (26%) which corresponded well to the young Malagasy society. Younger than 25 and older than 65 years were, in both age groups, only 4% of all participants. 77% of all participants were of Malagasy origin. The spectrum of positions covered various backgrounds. Most were researchers (25%), followed by students and managers (14% each), technical sta ff and coordinators (8%), lecturers (6% each), and others (<5% each). Accordingly, participants were associated with a range of organizations. Most were from universities (29%), followed by NGOs (26%), research centers (10%), and the UN (6%). All others contributed less than 5% each (e.g., governments, associations, etc.; see Table S2b for details). 82% had more than 10 years of work experience in western Madagascar while no participant had <1-year experience. Over 96% had work experience with locals.

#### *3.2. Top 10 Knowledge Gaps across Categories*

In two cases, knowledge gaps had equal mean scores, so that twelve knowledge gaps made it into the top 10 (Table 1). These consisted of four political, three ecological, three socio–economic and two general knowledge gaps (Table 1, Figure 2). With a mean of 2.68, more knowledge about "Strategies on how to improve justice/fairness/enforcement of laws/rules" was considered most important by a majority of participants. The knowledge gap with the second highest mean (2.67) was "Role of corruption in illegal activities (also beyond logging) and ways to reduce corruption". In the third

position ranked the ecological knowledge gap "Appropriate forest restoration methods in conjunction with biodiversity protection and sustainable use" (mean 2.65). The fourth highest ranking knowledge gap was a socio–economic one: "Economic benefits for local small-holder farmers from biodiversity, e.g., potential of ecotourism, paymen<sup>t</sup> for ecosystem services (PES), and other o ff-set schemes on their well-being" (mean 2.61). The political knowledge gaps "Strategies on how to improve security from violence/theft/corruption" (mean 2.59) and "Strategies to improve long-term funding" (mean 2.50) ranked fifth and sixth. Rank seven was shared by an ecological ("Appropriate livestock managemen<sup>t</sup> practices and fire regimes") and a socio–economic ("E ffectiveness of education and awareness-raising on biodiversity conservation") knowledge gap (mean 2.45). The eight highest ranking knowledge gap was an ecological one: "Ecosystem services (ES) at risk from slash-and-burn as well as associated extractive activities" (mean 2.44). Two knowledge gaps shared rank nine (mean 2.43), a socio–economic ("Traditional knowledge about sustainable natural resource use") and a general one ("Frequent and regular scenario updates based on long-term monitoring"). The lowest ranking knowledge gap of the Top 10 list was a general one: "Interdisciplinary work to generate most comprehensive data sets" (mean 2.41). In Table S3 we provide the ranking of all 71 knowledge gaps.

**Table 1.** Linkages between the top 10 knowledge gaps ordered by mean ranking score and relevant Sustainable Development Goal (SDGs)1, Achi Biodiversity Targets (ABTs)<sup>2</sup> and the 2 ◦C target<sup>3</sup> of the Paris Climate Agreement. Note that due to the same mean values of some knowledge gaps, a rank of the top 10 rankings can harbor more than one knowledge gap.


1 SDG 1: No poverty, SDG 2: Zero hunger, SDG 3 Good health and well-being, SDG 4: Quality education, SDG 5 Gender equality, SDG 6 Clean water and sanitation, SDG 7: Affordable and clean energy, SDG 8: Decent work and economic growth, SDG 9: Industry, innovation and infrastructure, SDG 10: Reduced inequalities, SDG 11: Sustainable cities and communities, SDG 12: Responsible consumption and production, SDG 13: Climate action, SDG 14: Life below water, SDG 15: Life on land, SDG 16: Peace and justice, strong institutions, SDG 17: Partnerships for the goals. 2 ABT 1: Awareness of biodiversity increased, ABT 2: Biodiversity values integrated, ABT 3: Incentives reformed, ABT 4: Sustainable production and consumption, ABT 5: Habitat loss halved or reduced, ABT 6: Sustainable managemen<sup>t</sup> of aquatic living resources, ABT 7: Sustainable agriculture, aquaculture and forestry, ABT 8: Pollution reduced, ABT 9: Invasive alien species prevented and controlled, ABT 10: Ecosystem vulnerable to climate change, ABT 11: Protected Areas, ABT 12: Reducing the risk of extinction, ABT 13: Safeguarding genetic diversity, ABT 14: Ecosystem services, ABT 15: Ecosystem restoration and resilience, ABT 16: Access to and sharing benefits from genetic resources, ABT 17: Biodiversity strategies and action plans, ABT 18: Traditional knowledge, ABT 19: Sharing information and knowledge, ABT 20: Mobilizing resources from all sources. 3 Until 2100 keep warming well below 2 ◦C.

#### *3.3. Links of the Top 10 Knowledge Gaps to the SDGs, ABTs and 2* ◦*C-Target of the Paris Climate Agreement*

While we focused on SDG 2, 10 and 15 when identifying our knowledge gaps at the global scale, we are aware of the interlinkages of these SDGs with other SDGs, various ABTs and the 2 ◦C target [10,12]. Therefore, we linked the knowledge gaps identified for our focus area to other relevant SDGs, ABTs and the 2 ◦C target (Table 1, Figure 2). Ecological knowledge gaps identified within the top 10 knowledge gaps were related SDG 12 (Responsible consumption and production), SDG 13 (Climate change) and to SDG 15 (Life on Land), ABT 7 (Sustainable agriculture, aquaculture and forestry) and the 2 ◦C target (Table 1, Figure 2). Political knowledge gaps were most closely related to SDG 10 (Reduced inequalities), SDG 12 (Responsible consumption and production) and SDG 16 (Peace and justice, strong institutions), as well as ABT 4 (Sustainable production and consumption) and ABT 20 (Mobilizing resources from all sources) (Table 1, Figure 2). Socio–economic knowledge gaps were linked to SDG 4 (Quality education), SDG 8 (Decent work and economic growth), SDG 10 (Reduced inequalities) and SDG 15 (Life on land), as well as to ABT 1 (Awareness of biodiversity increased), ABT 11 (Protected areas), ABT 14 (Ecosystem services), ABT 18 (Traditional knowledge) and ABT 19 (Sharing information and knowledge) (Table 1, Figure 2). General knowledge gaps are linked to SDG 17 (Partnerships for the goals), ABT 7 (Sustainable agriculture, aquaculture and forestry), ABT 19 (Sharing information and knowledge) and ABT 20 (Mobilizing resources from all sources).

**Figure 2.** Overview of the expert-identified top 10 knowledge gaps (wording shortened for display) concerning the slash-and-burn problematic in the dry deciduous forests of Western Madagascar grouped by category (ECOL, POLITICAL, GENERAL, EOCEC) and linked to the SDGs (SDG symbols), Achi Biodiversity Targets (ABTs) (ABT symbols) and 2 ◦C target of the Paris Climate Agreement (COP 11 logo as symbol). ECOL: Ecological; SOCEC: Socio-economic. The full wording of the knowledge gaps can be seen in Table 1. The numbers of the thin tiles represent the ranking position within the top 10.

#### *3.4. E*ff*ects of Gender, Nationality and Age on Ranking Knowledge Gaps*

Most knowledge gaps were ranked similarly by male and female participants (Table S4a). This was true for all socio–economic and ecological, and all but one general ("Better data quality/reliability"), as well as two political knowledge gaps ("Strategies on how accountability of institutions/governments can be strengthened", "E ffects of conservation activities and sustainable use of biodiversity on political

achievements") which were ranked higher by women than men (Table S4a, Figure S1a). However, this affected none of the top 10 knowledge gaps (Table 1).

Rankings of knowledge gaps by Malagasy and other nationalities only di ffered for one general knowledge gap: "Frequent and regular scenario updates based on long-term monitoring") which was ranked higher by participants of Malagasy origin than those of other nationalities (Table S4b). We could not detect any di fferences in the ranking of knowledge gaps for di fferent age groups (Table S4c, Figure S1c).

#### *3.5. Additional Knowledge Gaps Suggested by Participants*

For each knowledge gap category, the participants were given the option to list additional knowledge gaps which they considered of greater importance than those they gave the highest-ranking score. About one third of the participants used this option. Only one entirely new knowledge gap was listed as an ecological as well as a socio–economic knowledge gap by three participants: the impacts of climate change-driven human migration from southwestern to western Madagascar on socio–economic problems and its impacts on natural resources.
