Realizing an effectiveness revolution in environmental management

Keene, Matt; Pullin, Andrew S.

doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.03.035

Cited by 72 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 40 publications

(41 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is especially so when problems are complex, conflict among decision makers produces gridlock, or processes become stranded because of lack of appropriate follow through. If nothing else, the application of decision science to resource conservation is an effective mechanism for providing the transparency and accountability that is increasingly demanded by stakeholders and the courts [4,15,16], even though we acknowledge that transparency and accountability are not always regarded as desirable by decision makers.…”

Section: Decision Making In Conservationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Biological conservation is often disparaged for its preoccupation with planning at the expense of implementation [1,2], for failing to evaluate the effectiveness of on-the-ground actions [3,4], and for engaging in reactive, "alternative-focused" thinking rather than proactive "values-focused" decision making [5,6]. Consequently, there are an increasing number of pleas to treat conservation more as a business, in which there is a mandate for efficiency and accountability [7,8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Training Conservation Practitioners to be Better Decision Makers

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Traditional conservation curricula and training typically emphasizes only one part of systematic decision making (i.e., the science), at the expense of preparing conservation practitioners with critical skills in values-setting, working with decision makers and stakeholders, and effective problem framing. In this article we describe how the application of decision science is relevant to conservation problems and suggest how current and future conservation practitioners can be trained to be better decision makers. Though decision-analytic approaches vary considerably, they all involve: (1) properly formulating the decision problem; (2) specifying feasible alternative actions; and (3) selecting criteria for evaluating potential outcomes. Two approaches are available for providing training in decision science, with each serving different needs. Formal education is useful for providing simple, well-defined problems that allow demonstrations of the structure, axioms and general characteristics of a decision-analytic approach. In contrast, practical training can offer complex, realistic decision problems requiring more careful structuring and analysis than those used for formal training purposes. Ultimately, the kinds and degree of training necessary depend on the role conservation practitioners play in a decision-making process. Those attempting to facilitate decision-making processes will need advanced training in both technical aspects of decision science and in facilitation techniques, as well as opportunities to apprentice under decision analysts/consultants. Our primary goal should be an attempt to ingrain a discipline for applying clarity of thought to all decisions. OPEN ACCESSSustainability 2015, 7 8355

show abstract

Section: Decision Making In Conservationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Training Conservation Practitioners to be Better Decision Makers

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In order to utilise the concept, a standard protocol for the assessment of ecosystem services have been called for (Anton et al, 2010;Keene, Pullin, 2011). Generic lists of ecosystem services have been published (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecosytem Services: A Rapid Assessment Method Tested at 35 Sites of the LTER-Europe Network

Dick¹,

Al-Assaf²,

Andrews³

et al. 2014

Ekologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vihervaara P.: Ecosystem services: a rapid assessment method tested at 35 sites of the LTER-Europe network. Ekológia (Bratislava), Vol. 33, No. 3, p. 217-231, 2014.The identification of parameters to monitor the ecosystem services delivered at a site is fundamental to the concept's adoption as a useful policy instrument at local, national and international scales. In this paper we (i) describe the process of developing a rapid comprehensive ecosystem service assessment methodology and (ii) test the applicability of the protocol at 35 long-term research (LTER) sites across 14 countries in the LTER-Europe network (www.lter-europe.net) including marine, urban, agricultural, forest, desert and conservation sites. An assessment of probability of occurrence with estimated confidence score using 83 ecosystem service parameters was tested. The parameters were either specific services like food production or proxies such as human activities which were considered surrogates for cultural diversity and economic activity. This initial test of the ecosystem service parameter list revealed that the parameters tested were relatively easy to score by site managers with a high level of certainty (92% scored as either occurring or not occu-

show abstract

“…Conservationists are under increasing pressure to demonstrate that their activities are cost effective and achieving intended ecological and social benefits (Possingham 2001, Keene andPullin 2011). Demonstrating this effectiveness is proving to be quite challenging, however.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resilience Thinking and a Decision-Analytic Approach to Conservation: Strange Bedfellows or Essential Partners?

Johnson¹,

Williams²,

Nichols³

2013

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. There has been some tendency to view decision science and resilience theory as opposing approaches, or at least as contending perspectives, for natural resource management. Resilience proponents have been especially critical of optimization in decision science, at least for those cases where it is focused on the aggressive pursuit of efficiency. In general, optimization of resource systems is held to reduce spatial, temporal, or organizational heterogeneity that would otherwise limit efficiency, leading to homogenization of a system and making it less able to cope with unexpected changes or disturbances. For their part, decision analysts have been critical of resilience proponents for not providing much practical advice to decision makers. We believe a key source of tension between resilience thinking and application of decision science is the pursuit of efficiency in the latter (i.e., choosing the "best" management action or strategy option to maximize productivity of one or few resource components), vs. a desire in the former to keep options open (i.e., maintaining and enhancing diversity). It seems obvious, however, that with managed natural systems, there must be a principle by which to guide decision making, which at a minimum allows for a comparison of projected outcomes associated with decision alternatives. This is true even if the primary concern of decision making is the preservation of system resilience. We describe how a careful framing of conservation problems, especially in terms of management objectives and predictive models, can help reduce the purported tension between resilience thinking and decision analysis. In particular, objective setting in conservation problems needs to be more attuned to the dynamics of ecological systems and to the possibility of deep uncertainties that underlie the risk of unintended, if not irreversible, outcomes.Resilience thinking also leads to the suggestion that model development should focus more on process rather than pattern, on multiple scales of influence, and on phenomena that can create alternative stability regimes. Although we acknowledge the inherent difficulties in modeling ecological processes, we stress that formulation of useful models need not depend on a thorough mechanistic understanding or precise parameterization, assuming that uncertainty is acknowledged and treated in a systematic manner.

show abstract

Realizing an effectiveness revolution in environmental management

Cited by 72 publications

References 40 publications

Training Conservation Practitioners to be Better Decision Makers

Training Conservation Practitioners to be Better Decision Makers

Ecosytem Services: A Rapid Assessment Method Tested at 35 Sites of the LTER-Europe Network

Resilience Thinking and a Decision-Analytic Approach to Conservation: Strange Bedfellows or Essential Partners?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About