Spatial conservation action planning in heterogeneous landscapes

Thomson, J. M.; Regan, Tracey J.; Hollings, Tracey; Amos, Nevil; Geary, William L.; Parkes, David C.; Hauser, Cindy E.; White, Matthew D.

doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108735

Cited by 27 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Standardized methods of comparing between conservation projects are essential tools for government agencies needing to make decisions about the allocation of investment across projects. This approach is now regularly applied by the Victorian State Government to help compare the relative cost‐effectiveness of conservation actions across projects, including the outputs of the spatial conservation action planning tool (Bruce et al, 2020; Thomson et al, 2020). Consistent methods and metrics, such as those used here also have value because they can be easily updated with further expert elicitation as new information and knowledge comes to light.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Specific Needs approach was used to identify management scenarios that would best assist the Orange‐bellied Parrot Recovery Team to meet their objectives (see Section 1). The objectives were considered over a 50‐year time frame into the future, in‐line with the Victorian Government's biodiversity decision‐support framework (Bruce et al, 2020; Thomson et al, 2020).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To meet this need for structured decision support, the Government of Victoria, Australia, has recently implemented a landscape‐scale, spatial conservation action planning tool for assessing the cost‐effectiveness of conservation actions (Thomson et al, 2020). This tool, however, mostly considers landscape‐scale threat management actions, which alone is not sufficient for maximizing the persistence of some species, and this is particularly true for specialized species with very particular management requirements.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Identifying cost‐effective recovery actions for a critically endangered species

Pritchard

Kelly

Biggs³

et al. 2021

Conservat Sci and Prac

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Threatened species managers are often required to make swift decisions in the face of considerable uncertainty. We tested a structured approach for evaluating conservation options for the critically endangered orange‐bellied parrot. The Orange‐bellied Parrot Recovery Team provides advice to government agencies to inform the allocation of a limited number of captive‐bred birds to different release scenarios. Using a structured expert elicitation approach, we determined that scenarios where more fledglings were released were more cost‐effective compared to other options. Following this finding in 2019, the recovery team adjusted plans and allocated additional birds to fledgling release, a response that contributed to an increase in wild birds migrating in 2020 and 2021. The challenges facing orange‐bellied parrot conservation, including limitations in animals, time and resources, and high uncertainty, are common for threatened species recovery programs. Here we show that a structured process can help managers grapple with these complex trade‐offs to make timely decisions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Identifying cost‐effective recovery actions for a critically endangered species

Pritchard

Kelly

Biggs³

et al. 2021

Conservat Sci and Prac

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As anthropogenic impacts on natural systems intensify, there is a growing need for tools that characterize ecological change so that degradation can be recognized, actions can be prioritized, and management can be guided and assessed (Kukkala & Moilanen, 2013; Thomson et al, 2020). Such tools may take many forms, including condition metrics (Booth & Tueller, 2003; Davies et al, 2010; Sinclair et al, 2015; Smith et al, 2011) and ecological risk assessments (Allesina & Bondavalli, 2004; Murray et al, 2018), but they generally require human judgment in one way or another.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stakeholders from diverse backgrounds make similar judgments about ecological condition and collapse in Mongolian rangelands

Batpurev¹,

Sinclair²,

Avirmed³

et al. 2021

Conservat Sci and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Complex socio-ecological problems typically involve a variety of stakeholders, with viewpoints that may range between consensus and deep disagreement over values and judgments. Understanding this distribution of opinion is key to finding conservation solutions. We examine how stakeholders with widely different backgrounds vary in their judgments of rangeland degradation in Mongolia's Gobi Desert, where grazing intensity is a contested issue. We gathered the judgments of 92 stakeholders from a highly diverse group including:(i) nomadic pastoralists (herders), (ii) experts in botany, (iii) experts in wildlife ecology, and (iv) conservation policy practitioners. These stakeholders considered degradation in five ecosystems including Desert shrublands, Steppe, and Siberian Elm riparian woodlands, using written site descriptions in a workshop context. Each stakeholder considered degradation using two conceptual frameworks: the notion of "ecosystem collapse" described by the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems and the concept of ecological condition. We used generalized additive models (GAMs) to examine the relationship between vegetation attributes and stakeholder judgments of condition. Although individual stakeholder varied in their judgments, we found only relatively small systematic variations between different types of stakeholders. Similarly, we found the degree of specialization of experts had little effect on the condition score. We also used GAMs to examine the relationship between vegetation attributes and stakeholder judgments of collapse, finding little variation between groups. We also explored the threshold of overall vegetation cover where stakeholders are likely to shift their judgment from collapsed to not collapsed, and while differences between ecosystems were observed, we found consensus between the different stakeholder groups within each ecosystem. Our results suggest that, at least in the context of the Southern Mongolia, diverse stakeholder groups have convergent views in respect to ecological degradation.

show abstract

“…By translating complex modeling techniques and results into digestible, interactive products or information, SWApps are also commonly used to facilitate decision-making processes in the natural resources management and policy fields. For example, they inform endangered species listing decisions under high uncertainty (e.g., [ 6 ]), facilitate biodiversity land management and planning processes [ 8 ], and are “relied on heavily” for assessing potential impacts of federally proposed or funded projects on critical habitat (personal communication with a user regarding [ 9 ]). As is suggested by the number of publications discussing or mentioning web applications in recent years ( Fig 1 ), SWApps are becoming ubiquitous in scientific communication.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ten simple rules for creating a scientific web application

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of scientific web applications (SWApps) across biological and environmental sciences has grown exponentially over the past decade or so. Although quantitative evidence for such increased use in practice is scant, collectively, we have observed that these tools become more commonplace in teaching, outreach, and in science coproduction (e.g., as decision support tools). Despite the increased popularity of SWApps, researchers often receive little or no training in creating such tools. Although rolling out SWApps can be a relatively simple and quick process using modern, popular platforms like R shiny apps or Tableau dashboards, making them useful, usable, and sustainable is not. These 10 simple rules for creating a SWApp provide a foundation upon which researchers with little to no experience in web application design and development can consider, plan, and carry out SWApp projects.

show abstract

Spatial conservation action planning in heterogeneous landscapes

Cited by 27 publications

References 38 publications

Identifying cost‐effective recovery actions for a critically endangered species

Identifying cost‐effective recovery actions for a critically endangered species

Stakeholders from diverse backgrounds make similar judgments about ecological condition and collapse in Mongolian rangelands

Ten simple rules for creating a scientific web application

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About