► Targeting niche modeling studies to management decisions improves utility. ► Niche models using climate change projections overestimate species vulnerabilities. ► Projections of habitat ...unsuitability are inherently weak. ► Management decisions based on projected habitat gains are likely robust. ► Management decisions based on projected habitat loss require field verification.
Conservation science strives to inform management decisions. Applying niche models in concert with future climate projections to project species vulnerability to extinction, range size loss, or distribution shifts has emerged as a potentially useful tool for informing resource management decisions. Making climate change niche modeling useful to conservation decisions requires centering studies on the types of decisions that are made regarding the focal taxa of a niche model study. Recent recommendations for climate adaptation strategies suggest four types of decision makers: policy, habitat protection, habitat management, species management. Targeting research to questions relevant for management decisions will increase utility of a niche model study. Constraints to the accuracy and precision of niche models to project potential future distributions are well-recognized. How to incorporate these uncertainties into management decision-making remains a challenge. Refining estimates and making sound management recommendations is critical because species that are generally modeled to be the most vulnerable to climate change (i.e., narrow endemics), are also the most vulnerable to bad decisions based on uncertain models. I review uncertainties of niche models to assert that there is an inherent bias for models to over-estimate climate-driven vulnerability to extirpation. Explicit recognition of this bias leads to a decision framework that accommodates unbalanced uncertainty. Namely, niche models may be more useful for identifying conservation opportunities identifying newly available habitats under changing climate than they are for asserting where current habitat will no longer exist under future climate states.
Governments pass conservation laws, adopt policies, and make plans yet frequently fail to implement them. Implementation of conservation, however, often requires costly sacrifice: people foregoing ...benefit for the benefit of biodiversity. Decisions involve trade‐offs with outcomes that depend on the values at stake and people's perceptions of those values. Psychology, ethics, and behavioral science have each addressed the challenge of making difficult, often tragic, trade‐off decisions. Based on these literatures, values can be classified as secular or sacred, where sacred values are those for which compensation may be unthinkable (e.g., freedom). Taboo trade‐offs emerge when secular values are pitted against sacred ones. These are difficult to discuss, much less negotiate. Confronting taboo trade‐offs in conservation may require discursive approaches to better understand particular attributes of decisions that place sacred human values at risk. Tragic trade‐offs emerge when sacred values are pitted against one another. The trolley problem—a forced choice between 2 unthinkable outcomes—is a simple heuristic illustrating ethical challenges of tragic trade‐offs. Behavior studies illustrate that people have a strong aversion to losses where an active choice was made, resulting in a bias toward status quo decisions. Faced with tragic, trolley‐problem‐like choices, people tend to avoid taking responsibility for action, defer decisions, evade opinions on painful choices, and regret unfortunate outcomes of actions. To help close the implementation gap, conservation actors may need to directly address the psychological, ethical, and behavioral barriers created by the remorse, regret, and moral residue of implementing conservation choices that have tragic outcomes. Recognition of these predictable features of the human psyche may foster better administrative structures to support action with durable outcomes as well as new research directions.
Lecciones sobre Conservación a Partir de los Tabúes y el Dilema del Tranvía
Resumen
Los gobiernos aprueban leyes, adoptan políticas y elaboran planes para la conservación, pero con frecuencia fallan en implementar todo lo anterior. La implementación de la conservación, sin embargo, requiere con frecuencia un sacrificio muy costoso: que la gente renuncie a un beneficio para beneficiar a la biodiversidad. Las decisiones involucran compensaciones con resultados que dependen de los valores que están en juego y la percepción que tiene la gente de esos valores. La Psicología, la Ética y las Ciencias del Comportamiento han abordado el reto de la toma de decisiones difíciles, con frecuencia trágicas, relacionadas con las compensaciones. Con base en la literatura de estas disciplinas, podemos clasificar los valores como seculares o sagrados, donde los últimos son aquellos para los cuales una compensación puede ser inimaginable (p. ej.: la libertad). Las compensaciones tabúes emergen cuando se confrontan los valores seculares contra los sagrados y es difícil discutirlas y mucho menos negociarlas. La confrontación de las compensaciones tabú dentro del esquema de la conservación puede requerir de estrategias discursivas para entender de mejor manera los atributos particulares de las decisiones que colocan los valores humanos sagrados que están en riesgo. Las compensaciones trágicas surgen cuando se confrontan entre sí los valores sagrados. El dilema del tranvía ‐ una elección forzada entre dos resultados impensables ‐ es un heurístico simple que ilustra los retos éticos que representan las compensaciones trágicas. Los estudios sobre el comportamiento demuestran que las personas tienen una fuerte aversión hacia las pérdidas en las que se realizó una elección activa, lo que resultó en un sesgo hacia las decisiones del orden establecido. Cuando las personas se enfrentan a elecciones trágicas del estilo del dilema del tranvía tienden a evitar responsabilizarse por la acción, aplazar las decisiones, evadir opiniones sobre elecciones dolorosas y arrepentirse por los resultados desafortunados de las acciones. Para ayudar a reducir la brecha de la implementación, los actores de la conservación podrían necesitar abordar directamente las barreras psicológicas, éticas y de comportamiento creadas por el remordimiento, el arrepentimiento y el residuo moral de la implementación de las elecciones de conservación que tienen resultados trágicos. El reconocimiento de estos rasgos predecibles de la psique humana puede promover de mejor manera las estructuras administrativas para respaldar las acciones con resultados duraderos, así como nuevas directrices para la investigación.
Article impact statement: Implementation may be improved by understanding psychological barriers in making tragic choices between biodiversity and human well‐being.
We synthesize insights from current understanding of drought impacts at stand‐to‐biogeographic scales, including management options, and we identify challenges to be addressed with new research. ...Large stand‐level shifts underway in western forests already are showing the importance of interactions involving drought, insects, and fire. Diebacks, changes in composition and structure, and shifting range limits are widely observed. In the eastern US, the effects of increasing drought are becoming better understood at the level of individual trees, but this knowledge cannot yet be confidently translated to predictions of changing structure and diversity of forest stands. While eastern forests have not experienced the types of changes seen in western forests in recent decades, they too are vulnerable to drought and could experience significant changes with increased severity, frequency, or duration in drought. Throughout the continental United States, the combination of projected large climate‐induced shifts in suitable habitat from modeling studies and limited potential for the rapid migration of tree populations suggests that changing tree and forest biogeography could substantially lag habitat shifts already underway. Forest management practices can partially ameliorate drought impacts through reductions in stand density, selection of drought‐tolerant species and genotypes, artificial regeneration, and the development of multistructured stands. However, silvicultural treatments also could exacerbate drought impacts unless implemented with careful attention to site and stand characteristics. Gaps in our understanding should motivate new research on the effects of interactions involving climate and other species at the stand scale and how interactions and multiple responses are represented in models. This assessment indicates that, without a stronger empirical basis for drought impacts at the stand scale, more complex models may provide limited guidance.
Foundations of translational ecology Enquist, Carolyn AF; Jackson, Stephen T; Garfin, Gregg M ...
Frontiers in ecology and the environment,
12/2017, Volume:
15, Issue:
10
Journal Article
Peer reviewed
Open access
Ecologists who specialize in translational ecology (TE) seek to link ecological knowledge to decision making by integrating ecological science with the full complement of social dimensions that ...underlie today's complex environmental issues. TE is motivated by a search for outcomes that directly serve the needs of natural resource managers and decision makers. This objective distinguishes it from both basic and applied ecological research and, as a practice, it deliberately extends research beyond theory or opportunistic applications. TE is uniquely positioned to address complex issues through interdisciplinary team approaches and integrated scientist-practitioner partnerships. The creativity and context-specific knowledge of resource managers, practitioners, and decision makers inform and enrich the scientific process and help shape use-driven, actionable science. Moreover, addressing research questions that arise from on-the-ground management issues - as opposed to the top-down or expert-oriented perspectives of traditional science - can foster the high levels of trust and commitment that are critical for long-term, sustained engagement between partners.
The practice of conservation occurs within complex socioecological systems fraught with challenges that require transparent, defensible, and often socially engaged project planning and management. ...Planning and decision support frameworks are designed to help conservation practitioners increase planning rigor, project accountability, stakeholder participation, transparency in decisions, and learning. We describe and contrast five common frameworks within the context of six fundamental questions (why, who, what, where, when, how) at each of three planning stages of adaptive management (project scoping, operational planning, learning). We demonstrate that decision support frameworks provide varied and extensive tools for conservation planning and management. However, using any framework in isolation risks diminishing potential benefits since no one framework covers the full spectrum of potential conservation planning and decision challenges. We describe two case studies that have effectively deployed tools from across conservation frameworks to improve conservation actions and outcomes. Attention to the critical questions for conservation project planning should allow practitioners to operate within any framework and adapt tools to suit their specific management context. We call on conservation researchers and practitioners to regularly use decision support tools as standard practice for framing both practice and research.
The severity of wildfire burns in interior lands of western US ecosystems has been increasing. However, less is known about its coastal mountain ecosystems, especially under extreme weather ...conditions, raising concerns about the vulnerability of these populated areas to catastrophic fires. Here we examine the fine-scale association between burn severity and a suite of environmental drivers including explicit fuel information, weather, climate, and topography, for diverse ecosystems in California's northern coastal mountains. Burn severity was quantified using Relative difference Normalized Burn Ratio from Landsat multispectral imagery during 1984-2017. We found a significant increasing trend in burned areas and severity. During low-precipitation years, areas that burned had much lower fuel moisture and higher climatic water deficit than in wetter years, and the percentage of high-severity areas doubled, especially during the most recent 2012-2016 drought. The random forest (RF) machine learning model achieved overall accuracy of 79% in classifying categories of burn severity. Aspect, slope, fuel type and availability, and temperature were the most important drivers, based on both classification and regression RF models. We further examined the importance of drivers under four climatic conditions: dry vs. wet years, and during two extended drought periods (the 2012-2016 warmer drought vs. the 1987-1992 drought). During warm and dry years, the spatial variability of burn severity was a mixed effect of slope, long-term minimum temperature, fuel amount, and fuel moisture. In contrast, climatic water deficit and short-term weather became dominant factors for fires during wetter years. These results suggest that relative importance of drivers for burn severity in the broader domain of California's northern coastal mountains varied with weather scenarios, especially when exacerbated by warm and extended drought. Our findings highlight the importance of targeting areas with high burn severity risk for fire adaptation and mitigation strategies in a changing climate and intensifying extremes.
Arguably the most notable success of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) is that listed species improve in status through time. More species are downlisted than the converse; more species transition ...from stable to improving status than the converse. Although some listed species have gone extinct, this number is smaller than expected. Given modest recovery funding, the fraction of listed species responding positively is remarkable. Several factors have been linked to improving species status including recovery expenditures, critical habitat listing, and time spent under protection. The inability of government to fully empower the agencies to implement the law has been the most notable failure of the ESA. Listing of species has not matched need, recovery expenditures do not match need or agency-set priorities, and critical habitat determinations have lagged. Alternative protection strategies to listing may be having a positive effect, but are difficult to assess because of sparse data.
There are many barriers to using science to inform conservation policy and practice. Conservation scientists wishing to produce management-relevant science must balance this goal with the imperative ...of demonstrating novelty and rigor in their science. Decision makers seeking to make evidence-based decisions must balance a desire for knowledge with the need to act despite uncertainty. Generating science that will effectively inform management decisions requires that the production of information (the components of knowledge) be salient (relevant and timely), credible (authoritative, believable, and trusted), and legitimate (developed via a process that considers the values and perspectives of all relevant actors) in the eyes of both researchers and decision makers. We perceive 3 key challenges for those hoping to generate conservation science that achieves all 3 of these information characteristics. First, scientific and management audiences can have contrasting perceptions about the salience of research. Second, the pursuit of scientific credibility can come at the cost of salience and legitimacy in the eyes of decision makers, and, third, different actors can have conflicting views about what constitutes legitimate information. We highlight 4 institutional frameworks that can facilitate science that will inform management: boundary organizations (environmental organizations that span the boundary between science and management), research scientists embedded in resource management agencies, formal links between decision makers and scientists at research-focused institutions, and training programs for conservation professionals. Although these are not the only approaches to generating boundary-spanning science, nor are they mutually exclusive, they provide mechanisms for promoting communication, translation, and mediation across the knowledge-action boundary. We believe that despite the challenges, conservation science should strive to be a boundary science, which both advances scientific understanding and contributes to decision making. Hay muchas barreras para utilizar ciencia para informar a la política y práctica de la conservación. Los científicos de la conservación que desean producir ciencia relevante para el manejo deben equilibrar esta meta con el imperativo de demostrar novedad y rigor en su ciencia. Los tomadores de decisiones que buscan que sus decisiones se basen en evidencias deben equilibrar el deseo de conocimientos con la necesidad de actuar a pesar de la incertidumbre. La generación de ciencia que informe efectivamente a las decisiones de manejo requiere que la producción de información (los componentes del conocimiento) sea sobresaliente (relevante y oportuna), creíble (autoritativa, verosímil y confiable) y legítima (desarrollada mediante un proceso que considera los valores y perspectivas de todos los actores relevantes) a la vista tanto de investigadores como de tomadores de decisiones. Percibimos tres retos clave para quienes desean generar ciencia de la conservación que logre estas tres características de la información. Primero, las audiencias científicas y de manejo pueden tener percepciones contrastantes sobre la relevancia de la investigación. Segundo, la credibilidad se puede lograr a costa de la relevancia y legitimidad a la vista de los tomadores de decisiones y tercero, los diferentes actores pueden tener percepciones conflictivas sobre los que constituye información legítima. Resaltamos cuatro marcos institucionales que pueden facilitar que la ciencia informe al manejo: organizaciones de frontera (organizaciones ambientales que trasponen la frontera entre la ciencia y el manejo), investigadores científicos insertados en agencias de manejo de recursos, vínculos formales entre tomadores de decisiones y científicos en instituciones enfocadas a la investigación, y programas de capacitación para profesionales de la conservación. Aunque estos no son los únicos métodos para generar ciencia que traspone fronteras, ni son mutuamente excluyentes, proporcionan mecanismos que promueven la comunicación, traslación y mediación para trasponer la frontera conocimiento-acción. Consideramos que no obstante los retos, la ciencia de la conservación debería pugnar por ser una ciencia de frontera, que incrementa el entendimiento científico y contribuye a la toma de decisiones.
PDF
