Geology Reports⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · 70255072

An introduction to decision science for conservation

Victoria Hemming·Abbey E. Camaclang·Megan Adams·Mark Burgman·Katherine Carbeck·Josie Carwardine·Iadine Chades·Lia Chalifour·Sarah J. Converse·Lindsay Davidson·Georgia E. Garrard·Riley Finn·Jesse R. Fleri·Jacqueline Huard·Helen Mayfield·Eve McDonald Madden·Ilona Naujokaitis-Lewis·Hugh P. Possingham·Libby Rumpff·Michael C. Runge·Daniel Stewart·Vivitskaia J. D. Tulloch·Terry Walshe·Tara G. Martin
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Biodiversity conservation decisions are difficult, especially when they involve differing values, complex multidimensional objectives, scarce resources, urgency, and considerable uncertainty. Decision science embodies a theory about how to make difficult decisions and an extensive array of frameworks and tools that make that theory practical. We sought to improve conceptual clarity and practical application of decision science to help decision makers apply decision science to conservation problems. We addressed barriers to the uptake of decision science, including a lack of training and awareness of decision science; confusion over common terminology and which tools and frameworks to apply; and the mistaken impression that applying decision science must be time consuming, expensive, and complex. To aid in navigating the extensive and disparate decision science literature, we clarify meaning of common terms: decision science , decision theory , decision analysis , structured decision-making , and decision-support tools . Applying decision science does not have to be complex or time consuming; rather, it begins with knowing how to think through the components of a decision utilizing decision analysis (i.e., define the problem, elicit objectives, develop alternatives, estimate consequences, and perform trade-offs). This is best achieved by applying a rapid-prototyping approach. At each step, decision-support tools can provide additional insight and clarity, whereas decision-support frameworks (e.g., priority threat management and systematic conservation planning) can aid navigation of multiple steps of a decision analysis for particular contexts. We summarize key decision-support frameworks and tools and describe to which step of a decision analysis, and to which contexts, each is most useful to apply. Our introduction to decision science will aid in contextualizing current approaches and new developments, and help decision makers begin to apply decision science to conservation problems.

Explore related subjects

Conservation BiologyArticle

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Victoria Hemming, Abbey E. Camaclang, Megan Adams, Mark Burgman, Katherine Carbeck, Josie Carwardine, Iadine Chades, Lia Chalifour, Sarah J. Converse, Lindsay Davidson, Georgia E. Garrard, Riley Finn, Jesse R. Fleri, Jacqueline Huard, Helen Mayfield, Eve McDonald Madden, Ilona Naujokaitis-Lewis, Hugh P. Possingham, Libby Rumpff, Michael C. Runge, Daniel Stewart, Vivitskaia J. D. Tulloch, Terry Walshe, Tara G. Martin. 2022-01-28. An introduction to decision science for conservation. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13868

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

The collective application of shorebird tracking data to conservation

Addressing urgent conservation issues, such as the drastic declines of North American migratory birds, requires creative, evidence-based, efficient, and collaborative approaches. The abundance of over 50% of monitored North American shorebird populations has declined by over 50% since 1980. To address these declines, we developed a partnership of scientists and practitioners called the Shorebird Science and Conservation Collective (hereafter the collective ). The collective was founded to translate the combined findings of shorebird tracking data into on-the-ground conservation action. With advice from an advisory group, the collective acts as an intermediary whereby dedicated staff collate and analyze data contributions from scientists to support knowledge requests from conservation practitioners. In its first three years, data contributions from 75 organizations include over 7.1 million shorebird observations forming movement paths of 3420 individuals representing 36 species tracked across the Americas and have informed 18 conservation projects spanning education, land and species management, land conservation, and policy requests. Others engaged in translational science from big data could consider similar knowledge-sharing models that prioritize usable data products, foster collaborative engagement between science experts and practitioners, build focused communities around topics or taxonomic groups, and employ a proof-of-concept phase to develop scalable solutions while making progress toward long-term funding to sustain impact. As the volume of scientific data continues to grow, intermediaries, such as the collective, can be vital liaisons to rapidly integrate and interpret research to support conservation action. Dedicated to the memory of Shiloh Schulte and his conservation achievements for shorebirds.

Conservation Biology↗
USGS2026

Scenarios and strategies for future-proofing ecosystem management under climatic novelty

Climate change is driving unprecedented declines in dominant, habitat-forming foundation species across marine and terrestrial ecosystems globally. As climatic novelty becomes the norm, ecosystem reassembly will become increasingly common. Predicting and understanding these transitions, and their implications for future ecosystem functioning, is essential for designing effective forward-looking management strategies. We explored 3 scenarios that describe a range of ecosystem reassembly trajectories following declines in previously dominant habitat-forming taxa: compensation, in which functionally similar subdominant or immigrating taxa maintain ecosystem structure and function; decline, in which no compensation occurs leading to loss of ecosystem structure and function; and transformation, in which the ecosystem present historically can no longer persist and shifts into a fundamentally different ecosystem type with distinct structure and function. This range of potential outcomes highlights the urgent need to assess the ecological feasibility and functional implications of potential management actions. Scientists and managers can work together to quantify local-scale climatic novelty and ecosystem resilience to better predict the most likely reassembly trajectories and identify management interventions that will optimize ecosystem function. This approach would allow for more proactive planning to support persistence of ecosystem structure and function, helping to future-proof ecosystem management in a rapidly changing world.

Conservation Biology↗
USGS2026

Constructed value of information with iterative scoring and parametric uncertainty to identify management-relevant research priorities for a declining raptor species

Constructed value of information (CVoI) is an expert elicitation decision-analytic tool used to prioritize sources of uncertainty based on their potential to improve decision outcomes if resolved. Despite increased application of CVoI, the robustness of CVoI prioritization of sources of uncertainty relative to differences in expert elicitation and scoring methods has not been evaluated. We engaged a group of species experts in a decision-analytic process to elicit uncertainties, framed as alternative hypotheses, about current population declines of the American kestrel ( Falco sparverius ) in the United States. Participants scored 13 hypotheses across 3 CVoI criteria, which are defined as constructed scales. Rather than experts selecting a single score per criterion, we used a likelihood point method to incorporate parametric uncertainty in the scoring process, in which experts were given 100 points to distribute across possible score categories within the criterion-specific constructed scale. Experts provided scores over 2 scoring rounds, with an opportunity to review and discuss initial scores between rounds. We used a Shannon entropy calculation to quantify how evenly participants allotted their points. We used simulation to evaluate the robustness of our prioritization results relative to a scoring method in which participants selected a single score category for each criterion. Participants often spread their points across 2 adjacent scores, reflecting parametric uncertainty. For one third of the hypothesis-scoring round combinations, the prioritization results differed in approximately 50% of simulations. The highest scoring hypotheses related to how the use of artificial versus natural nest cavities affects fecundity or survival, whether winter roosting sites are a limiting factor for population growth, and whether gamebird habitat management may benefit kestrel populations. Our CVoI prioritization framework can be used to develop collaborative research that is directly relevant to a management decision and is an advance in eliciting more representative expert beliefs.

Conservation Biology↗