Quantifying the value of monitoring species in multi‐species, multi‐threat systems

Abstract

Making effective management decisions is challenging in multi‐species, multi‐threat systems because of uncertainty about the effects of different threats on different species. To inform management decisions, we often monitor species to detect spatial or temporal trends that can help us learn about threatening processes. However, which species to monitor and how to monitor to inform the management of threats can be difficult to determine. Value of information (VOI) analysis is an approach for quantifying the value of monitoring to inform management decisions. We developed a novel method that applies VOI analysis to quantify the benefits of different species monitoring strategies in multi‐threat, multi‐species systems. We applied the approach to compare the effectiveness of surveillance monitoring (monitoring species without experimentation) to targeted monitoring (monitoring species with experimentation to learn about a specific threat), and how prior information drives the benefits of these two different strategies and the species to monitor. We also illustrate the approach by applying it to two contrasting case studies for monitoring and managing declining mammals in Western Australia. Our approach shows that surveillance monitoring generally provides far lower benefits than targeted monitoring for managing threats in multi‐species, multi‐threat systems under economic constraints. Our approach also informs the choice of species to monitor and which threats to manage experimentally to most improve threat management outcomes. We show that the key parameters driving these choices include: the budget available for management, prior understanding of which threats cause declines in which species, the relative cost of managing these threats, and the background probability of decline. Our new VOI approach allows the evaluation of monitoring decisions in multi‐species, multi‐threat systems in the face of uncertainty, while explicitly accounting for the improvement in management outcomes. We recommend that managers need to explicitly consider a range of decision parameters when selecting which species to monitor to inform management. Our framework provides an objective way to do this.

Selecting indicator species for biodiversity management

“…For instance, a value of information analysis (an approach to assess the management gains from obtaining new information) could allow us to quantify the value of reducing uncertainty in management outcomes when monitoring the bilby versus the quoll or field rat (Bal et al . ). In Step 4, the selected threat management actions are implemented and the selected indicator species are monitored.…”

“…; Bal et al . ) also provides a formal way to quantify the management benefits of monitoring alternative indicator species.…”

Unpacking the eagle collision risk model: practical guidance for wind energy

“…Approaches such as Markov decision processes and value of information theory can be used to produce a recommended set of actions that maximize an objective while accounting for costs given different scenarios. Models like these have been used to determine optimal conservation policies balancing tradeoffs between monitoring and management action (Chadès et al 2008;Bennett et al 2018), and in situations with multiple variables and levels of uncertainty (Bal et al 2018). As a prerequisite, these approaches require probabilities and costs associated with transitioning between 'states' of a system.…”

Combining species distribution models and value of information analysis for spatial allocation of conservation resources

“…Applications of VOI to conservation are growing in number (e.g. Bal et al, ; Bennett et al, ; Canessa et al, ; Nicol et al, ), but have been largely restricted to local scale problems where a uniform decision is made for all individuals/species being managed. Yet managers often need to prioritize how resources are allocated across space and actions.…”