Knowledge exchange (KE) is usually undertaken in environmental management to inform policymakers and invoke social learning, knowledge co-production, and co-management among stakeholders [1–6]. Such KE, i.e., the “processes that generate, share and/or use knowledge through various methods appropriate to the context, purpose, and participants involved” [1], is increasingly recognised as key to facilitating social, environmental, and economic impacts of research, policy and practice. To improve KE between scientists and policymakers, research has to be explicitly and demonstrably policy relevant so that it can provide pathway(s) for policy impact. Enabling factors, such as identifying policymakers and their information and knowledge needs, are helpful for making scientific research available, visible, accessible, and compatible with these needs [7]. To encourage the use of research, scientists are advised to incorporate potential users’ needs into project plans and ensure their engagement in research activities [7–9]. Effects of different strategies in participatory management have been explored and elucidated [10–16]. While research has rigorously examined the processes for increasing the use of knowledge, the outcomes of knowledge use has been given less attention [17]. From useful knowledge that scientists believe to usable knowledge that users really use, there are many factors and needs interactions at varying levels [18, 19]. Dilling and Lemos suggest (2011) that usability of science is determined by its production process as well as context of its potential use, and successful use of knowledge involves iteration between knowledge producers and users [20]. It is also difficult to ascertain the usability of the knowledge due to the complexities and emergencies arising from the intersections of knowledge production and its use [21].

Current research puts considerable emphasis on scientists as producers of usable knowledge, alongside policy makers and practitioners as the main users, while acknowledging that present environmental challenges pose threats to both social and ecological systems, with actions needed from everyone. Rist et al. (2016) have pointed out that the needs of local communities, such as smallholder farmers and herders, have not been adequately attended to in KE [3]. The needs of street-level bureaucrats, i.e., as Sevä & Jagers put, “the practicing and, typically, anonymous civil servants at the very end of the environmental policy chain” in the top-down system, are also rarely considered in policy arenas [22]. However, these groups work for and are often directly affected by both the policies and the environmental issues that the policies aim to address. Their actions and behaviours determine the effectiveness of policies and therefore they are important but often neglected stakeholders within KE processes.