Strategic Adaptive Management in freshwater protected areas and their rivers

Kingsford, Richard T.; Biggs, Harry; Pollard, Sharon

doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2010.09.022

Cited by 115 publications

(111 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

110

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Natural resource management professionals involved in adaptive management learned mostly through assessment, i.e., direct evaluation (e.g., Biggs et al 2011, Kingsford et al 2011, Martin and Pope 2011, Bonanno 2013, Giebels et al 2013, as well as through experimentation and reflection (e.g., Briceño-Linares et al , Bunnefeld et al 2011, Johnson 2011, Smith 2011, Van Wilgen et al 2011, Marcot et al 2012, and to a lesser extent through dialogue (e.g., Foxcroft and McGeoch 2011, Moore et al 2011, Kelly et al 2012, Varady et al 2013). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the papers we analyzed, the emphasis on assessment is paralleled by the dominance of single-loop learning (e.g., Briceño-Linares et al 2011, Holness and Biggs 2011, Kingsford et al 2011, Martin and Pope 2011, Bonanno 2013, with only a small number of papers (e.g., , Varady et al 2013) exclusively adopting double-loop learning. However, a significant number of papers showed evidence of the parallel and blended use of single-and doubleloop learning (e.g., Bunnefeld et al 2011, Johnson 2011, McLoughlin et al 2011, Moore et al 2011, Rumpff et al 2011, Scheepers et al 2011, Smith 2011, Marcot et al 2012) by implementing and modifying field experiments or developing, testing, and refining models, consistent with the approach advocated by Walters (1986) and Holling (1978).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Learning in Adaptive Management: Insights from Published Practice

Fabricius¹,

Cundill²

2014

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Adaptive management is often advocated as a solution to understanding and managing complexity in social-ecological systems. Given the centrality of learning in adaptive management, it remains unclear how learning in adaptive management is understood to occur, who learns, what they learn about, and how they learn. We conducted a systematic review using the Thomson Reuters Web of Science, and searched specifically for examples of the practical implementation of adaptive management between 2011 and 2013, i.e., excluding articles that suggested frameworks, models, or recommendations for future action. This provided a subset of 22 papers that were analyzed using five elements: the aims of adaptive management as stated in each paper; the reported achievements of adaptive management; what was learned; who learned; and how they learned. Our results indicate that, although most published adaptive management initiatives aimed at improvements in biological conservation or ecosystem management, scholars of adaptive management tend to report on learning more about governance and about learning, than about ecosystems or biological conservation. Whereas almost all the papers (91%) listed improvements in biological conservation and ecosystem management as aims, 59% reported these as achievements. Whereas only 27% listed improved governance as an aim, 73% mentioned this as an achievement. Conservation scientists and academics reporting on adaptive management tend to learn among themselves, and very seldom (18%) with external stakeholders. Adaptive ecosystem management is dominated by direct assessment and single-loop learning aimed at improving existing practices (86%), with about 50% engaged in double-loop learning and a similar number in deutero-learning (learning about learning). Some adaptive managers (36%) combined double-and single-loop learning and the majority of these (6/8) reported on conservation achievements. A possible explanation for these findings is that adaptive management is an evolutionary process and in most instances is still in an early pioneering stage, possibly held back by participants' capacity for learning. The constraint of learning capacity may also explain why so few adaptive management initiatives reported on learning with societal stakeholders.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning in Adaptive Management: Insights from Published Practice

Fabricius¹,

Cundill²

2014

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We would argue that an overlap between social preferences and what is biophysically desirable and sustainable is integral to the adaptive management of a wetland that is dependent for its health upon releases of environmental water from a regulated river system. Not only does this approach reflect the interconnectedness of social and biophysical factors in such a system but it also provides a holistic, inclusive and flexible framework for community engagement and empowerment of water managers (Kingsford et al 2011).…”

Section: Identification Of Relevant Datasetsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Rates of movement towards or away from thresholds give an indication of how the ecosystem is tracking in relation to its resilience characteristics and undesirable change. The TPC has become a unifying concept in the adaptive management of Kruger National Park, set in the context of a hierarchy of objectives relating clearly to goals set for its management (Biggs and Rogers 2003;K. H. Rogers and Biggs 1999;Kingsford et al 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of thresholds of potential concern and limits of acceptable change in the condition assessment of a significant wetland

Rogers

Saintilan²,

Colloff

et al. 2013

Environ Monit Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We propose a framework in which thresholds of potential concern (TPCs) and limits of acceptable change (LACs) are used in concert in the assessment of wetland condition and vulnerability and apply the framework in a case study. The lower Murrumbidgee River floodplain (the 'Lowbidgee') is one of the most ecologically important wetlands in Australia and the focus of intense management intervention by State and Federal government agencies. We used a targeted management stakeholder workshop to identify key values that contribute to the ecological significance of the Lowbidgee floodplain, and identified LACs that, if crossed, would signify the loss of significance. We then used conceptual models linking the condition of these values (wetland vegetation communities, waterbirds, fish species and the endangered southern bell frog) to measurable threat indicators, for which we defined a management goal and a TPC. We applied this framework to data collected across 70 wetland storages', or eco-hydrological units, at the peak of a prolonged drought (2008) and following extensive re-flooding (2010). At the suggestion of water and wetland mangers, we neither aggregated nor integrated indices but reported separately in a series of chloropleth maps. The resulting assessment clearly identified the effect of rewetting in restoring indicators within TPC in most cases, for most storages. The scale of assessment was useful in informing the targeted and timely management intervention and provided a context for retaining and utilising monitoring information in an adaptive management context. wetland "storages", or eco-hydrological units, at the peak of a prolonged drought

show abstract

“…Although there is a prevalent view that the probable impacts of climate change on wetlands may be relatively minor in comparison with other anthropogenic stressors (e.g. river regulation), the interaction of climate change with existing threats is of widespread concern, particularly given the uncertainties involved (Finlayson et al 2006;Kingsford et al 2011).…”

Section: Wetland Vulnerability To Climate Changementioning

confidence: 99%

Policy considerations for managing wetlands under a changing climate

Finlayson

Capon

Rissik

et al. 2017

Mar. Freshwater Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Drawing on the experience and lessons of wetland researchers and managers in Australia and New Zealand, we examined the implications of climate change for wetland policy and management, and identified potential adaptation responses and the information needed to support these. First, we considered wetland vulnerability to climate change, focusing on wetland exposure and sensitivity. We then outlined the existing policy context for dealing with climate change, with an emphasis on the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands. We then considered how the objectives and targets for wetland management can be set in the face of climate change, how management can be adapted to climate change given the uncertainties involved, and how we can monitor and evaluate wetland condition in the face of climate change. We concluded with a set of principles to guide adaptation of wetland conservation and management policy to climate change.

show abstract

Strategic Adaptive Management in freshwater protected areas and their rivers

Cited by 115 publications

References 31 publications

Learning in Adaptive Management: Insights from Published Practice

Learning in Adaptive Management: Insights from Published Practice

Application of thresholds of potential concern and limits of acceptable change in the condition assessment of a significant wetland

Policy considerations for managing wetlands under a changing climate

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About