Investment and the Policy Process in Conservation Monitoring

作者: JAMES N. SANCHIRICO , MICHAEL R. SPRINGBORN , MARK W. SCHWARTZ , ANGELA N. DOERR

DOI: 10.1111/COBI.12187

关键词:

摘要: Despite decades of discussion and implementation, conservation monitoring remains a challenge. Many current solutions in the literature focus on improving science or making more structured decisions. These insights are important but incomplete accounting for politics economics decisions informed by monitoring. Our novel depiction enterprise unifies from multiple disciplines (conservation, operations research, economics, policy) highlights many underappreciated factors that affect expected benefits For example, there must be strong link between specific needs decision makers information gathering. Furthermore, involvement stakeholders other than scientists research managers means new may not interpreted acted upon as expected. While answering calls sharply delineated objectives will clearly add to efforts, practical reasons, high-level goals purposefully left vague, facilitate necessary steps policy process. We use expanded process highlight problems cooperation conflict. critique invest greater good arguing incentives typically lacking. Although learning accrued within project (e.g., management) provide investing some monitoring, it is unrealistic, general, expect potentially costly measures generate shared benefits. In traditional linear model role decisions, reduces uncertainty rational, unbiased consumers science. However, actions increasingly involve social Drawing political science, we argue high-conflict situations, address conflict prior monitoring. Las Inversiones y el Proceso de Politicas en Monitoreo la Conservacion Sanchirico et al. Resumen A pesar decadas discusion e implementacion, monitoreo conservacion sigue siendo un reto. Muchas soluciones actuales literatura se enfocan mejorar ciencia o hacer decisiones mas estructuradas. Estas ideas son importantes pero incompletas al momento tomar cuenta las politicas economia informadas por monitoreo. Nuestra representacion novedosa empresa unifica multiples disciplinas (conservacion, investigacion operaciones politica) resalta muchos factores no apreciados que pueden afectar los beneficios esperados del Por ejemplo, debe haber fuerte enlace entre necesidades especificas toman recaudacion informacion. Ademas, participacion partes interesadas, ademas cientificos directores investigacion, significa informacion nueva puede ser interpretada respondida como espera. Mientras respuesta llamados objetivos finamente delineados claramente sumara enfoque esfuerzos monitoreo, razones practicas alto nivel dejarse proposito vagos, ejemplo para facilitar otros pasos necesarios proceso politicas. Usamos expandida resaltar problemas cooperacion conflicto. Criticamos invertir bien mayor argumentar incentivos carentes general. Aunque aprendizaje incrementaron dentro proyecto (p. ej.: incrementando manejo) proporcionando algun es realista, esperar administradores anadan medidas potencialmente costosas generar beneficios. En modelo lineal tradicional papel politicas, reduce incertidumbre tomadores consumidores racionales imparciales ciencia. Sin embargo, acciones cada vez involucran conflicto social. Al politica, argumentamos situaciones conflicto, necesario dirigirse antes monitorear.

参考文章(52)
Jill Jäger, Current thinking on using scientific findings in environmental policy making Environmental Modeling & Assessment. ,vol. 3, pp. 143- 153 ,(1998) , 10.1023/A:1019066907165
Hugh Possingham, Ian Ball, Sandy Andelman, Mathematical Methods for Identifying Representative Reserve Networks Springer, New York, NY. pp. 291- 306 ,(2000) , 10.1007/0-387-22648-6_17
Valerie Kapos, Andrew Balmford, Rosalind Aveling, Philip Bubb, Peter Carey, Abigail Entwistle, John Hopkins, Teresa Mulliken, Roger Safford, Alison Stattersfield, Matt Walpole, Andrea Manica, Calibrating conservation: new tools for measuring success Conservation Letters. ,vol. 1, pp. 155- 164 ,(2008) , 10.1111/J.1755-263X.2008.00025.X
Brendan A. Wintle, Michael C. Runge, Sarah A. Bekessy, Allocating monitoring effort in the face of unknown unknowns Ecology Letters. ,vol. 13, pp. 1325- 1337 ,(2010) , 10.1111/J.1461-0248.2010.01514.X
W.Michael Hanemann, Information and the concept of option value Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. ,vol. 16, pp. 23- 37 ,(1989) , 10.1016/0095-0696(89)90042-9
Thomas J. Mills, Roger N. Clark, Roles of research scientists in natural resource decision-making Forest Ecology and Management. ,vol. 153, pp. 189- 198 ,(2001) , 10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00461-3
Robin Gregory, Tim McDaniels, Daryl Fields, Decision Aiding, Not Dispute Resolution: Creating Insights through Structured Environmental Decisions Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. ,vol. 20, pp. 415- 432 ,(2001) , 10.1002/PAM.1001
Colin J. Legg, Laszlo Nagy, Why most conservation monitoring is, but need not be, a waste of time. Journal of Environmental Management. ,vol. 78, pp. 194- 199 ,(2006) , 10.1016/J.JENVMAN.2005.04.016
Michael C. Runge, Sarah J. Converse, James E. Lyons, Which uncertainty? Using expert elicitation and expected value of information to design an adaptive program Biological Conservation. ,vol. 144, pp. 1214- 1223 ,(2011) , 10.1016/J.BIOCON.2010.12.020