A productive role for science in assisted colonization policy

Abstract

Assisted colonization—the intentional movement of species as a climate adaptation strategy—has emerged as a divisive controversy in the conservation biology literature. We review selected scientific literature to understand the nature of the controversy, alongside relevant scholarship on the science‐policy interface to highlight ways in which scientists and their work might most effectively and appropriately inform decisions on this management strategy. The scientific literature thus far is problematic in two ways that threaten to undermine the utility of science to actual decision‐making processes: As a collection, it contains abundant and seemingly incommensurable insights about assisted colonization. This is at least in part a product of nature, which is sufficiently diverse to provide examples and case studies that appear to justify any number of policy preferences regarding ecosystem management. This first shortcoming exacerbates the second: Scientific authors thus far have not adequately addressed the value‐based considerations implicit in their own work, nor acknowledged public's legitimate standing in these inherently value‐based decisions. In combination, these attributes of the literature ensure that additional knowledge on assisted colonization will exacerbate public controversy—rather than dispel it—when public attention increases. We propose that if scientists appropriately disentangle value considerations from technical ones, invite public debates over values, and treat proposals individually rather than debating the approach writ‐large, they stand to have the greatest influence over technical aspects of decision processes. Scientists would serve themselves well to acknowledge the limits of science and embrace public dialogue about specific management proposals. WIREs Clim Change 2016, 7:852–868. doi: 10.1002/wcc.420 This article is categorized under: Climate, Ecology, and Conservation > Extinction Risk Social Status of Climate Change Knowledge > Climate Science and Decision Making

Climate readiness of recovery plans for threatened Australian species

“…The idea that translocation beyond a species’ historical range may be necessary to prevent climate‐change‐related extinction is, however, not new, it has been actively canvassed in the scientific literature for over 30 years (Peters & Darling ). Arguments for and against such interventions continue to rage (reviewed by Neff & Carroll ). We contend that the risk of accelerating species extinction justifies a case‐by‐case consideration of this strategy, with appropriate risk analysis, for the threatened species itself and for other species with which it may interact, at least for the most imperiled species (Seddon et al.…”

Perceived Barriers to the Use of Assisted Colonization for Climate Sensitive Species in the Hawaiian Islands

“…Despite successes, and the numerous threats to species around the world, assisted colonization is rarely considered during conservation planning processes (Fazey and Fischer 2009 ; Ricciardi and Simberloff 2009 ; Neff and Carroll 2016 ). Much of the apprehension surrounding the use of assisted colonization, and translocations in general, may be alleviated by experienced leaders who are proficient in translocation procedures including permitting, habitat preparation, husbandry, and cultural knowledge.…”

Perceptions of conservation introduction to inform decision support among U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service employees

“…In particular, no one can be certain about the ecological risks posed by CI (Albrecht and others, 2013;Schwartz and others, 2012;Ahteensuu and Lehvävirta, 2014). As such, CI decision making is a matter of perspective and values (Neff and Carroll, 2016). Beyond this central issue, Albrecht and others (2013) highlight many other ethical considerations, such as those related to interspecies competition and ecosystem resilience, which may also be taken under consideration.…”