Explore the vast range of titles available.

1. Applied ecologists often face uncertainty that hinders effective decision-making. 2. Common traps that may catch the unwary are: ignoring uncertainty, acknowledging uncertainty but ploughing on, focussing on trivial uncertainties, believing your models, and unclear objectives. 3. We integrate research insights and examples from a wide range of applied ecological fields to illustrate advances that are generally underused, but could facilitate ecologists' ability to plan and execute research to support management. 4. Recommended approaches to avoid uncertainty traps are: embracing models, using decision theory, using models more effectively, thinking experimentally, and being realistic about uncertainty. 5. Synthesis and applications. Applied ecologists can become more effective at informing management by using approaches that explicitly take account of uncertainty.

Threats to biodiversity and the integrity of ecological systems are escalating globally, both within and outside of protected areas. Decision makers have inadequate resources to manage all threats and typically lack information on the likely outcomes and cost‐effectiveness of possible management strategies. Priority Threat Management (PTM) is an emerging approach designed to address this challenge, by defining and appraising cost‐effective strategies for mitigating threats to biodiversity across regions. The scientific and practical impacts of PTM are increasing, with a growing number of case study applications across the globe. Here, we provide guidance and resource material for conducting the PTM process based on our experience delivering six large‐scale projects across Australia and Canada. Our handbook describes the four stages of PTM: scoping and planning; defining and collecting key elements; analysing the cost‐effectiveness of strategies; and communicating and integrating recommendations. We summarise critical tips, strengths, and limitations and scope for possible enhancements of the approach. Priority Threat Management harnesses scientific and expert‐derived information to prioritise management strategies based on their benefit to biodiversity, management costs and feasibility. The approach involves collaboration with key experts and stakeholders in a region to improve knowledge sharing and conservation support. The PTM approach identifies sets of regional level strategies that together provide the greatest benefits for multiple species under a limited budget, which can be used to inform existing processes for decision‐making. The PTM approach applies some generalisations in management strategies and resolution, in order to address complex challenges. Further developments of the approach include testing in a greater range of socioecological systems with adaptations that cater for multiobjective decisions. Synthesis and applications. Priority Threat Management is a decision science approach that brings people together to define and prioritise strategies for managing threats to biodiversity across broad regions. It delivers a prospectus for investment in the biodiversity of a region that is transparent, repeatable, participatory, and based on the best available information. Our handbook provides the necessary guidance and resources for expanding the Priority Threat Management approach to new locations, contexts, and challenges. Priority Threat Management is a decision science approach that brings people together to define and prioritise strategies for managing threats to biodiversity across broad regions. It delivers a prospectus for investment in the biodiversity of a region that is transparent, repeatable, participatory, and based on the best available information. Our handbook provides the necessary guidance and resources for expanding the Priority Threat Management approach to new locations, contexts, and challenges.

Aim: Decision-making for conservation management often involves evaluating risks in the face of environmental uncertainty. Models support decision-making by (1) synthesizing available knowledge in a systematic, rational and transparent way and (2) providing a platform for exploring and resolving uncertainty about the consequences of management decisions. Despite their benefits, models are still not used in many conservation decision-making contexts. In this article, we provide evidence of common objections to the use of models in environmental decision-making. In response, we present a series of practical solutions for modellers to help improve the effectiveness and relevance of their work in conservation decision-making. Location: Global review. Methods: We reviewed scientific and grey literature for evidence of common objections to the use of models in conservation decision-making. We present a set of practical solutions based on theory, empirical evidence and best-practice examples to help modellers substantively address these objections. Results: We recommend using a structured decision-making framework to guide good modelling practice in decision-making and highlight a variety of modelling techniques that can be used to support the process. We emphasize the importance of participatory decision-making to improve the knowledge-base and social acceptance of decisions and to facilitate better conservation outcomes. Improving communication and building trust are key to successfully engaging participants, and we suggest some practical solutions to help modellers develop these skills. Main conclusions: If implemented, we believe these practical solutions could help broaden the use of models, forging deeper and more appropriate linkages between science and management for the improvement of conservation decision-making.

Conservation conflict is widespread, damaging, and has proved difficult to manage using conventional conservation approaches. Conflicts are often “wicked problems,” lacking clear solutions due to divergent values of stakeholders, and being embedded within wickedly complex environments. Drawing on the concept of wicked environmental problems could lead to management strategies better suited to tackling conflict. However, it is unclear whether managers are embracing ideas from the wicked problems concept. There is currently a lack of guidance for applying strategies to tackle particular wicked problems, such as conservation conflict. We explored the suitability of wicked problems‐inspired management, using eight contemporary conflict case studies. Conservation conflict was managed predominantly using conventional approaches suited to tackling single objectives in simple environments, rather than balancing competing objectives in complex environments. To deal with different characteristics of wickedness, we recommend that managers develop strategies combining distributed decision‐making, diverse opinions, pattern‐based predictions, trade‐off‐based objectives, and reporting of failures. Recent advances in conservation conflict research have focused on improving interactions among stakeholders. We believe that such stakeholder‐focused approaches would dovetail with the whole‐system focus of a wicked problems framework, allowing conservationists to move toward a holistic strategy for managing conservation conflict.

Although most wildlife professionals agree that science should inform wildlife management decisions, disconnect still exists between researchers and managers. If researchers are not striving to incorporate their findings into management decisions, support for research programs by managers can wane. If managers are not using research findings to inform management decisions, those decisions may be less effective or more vulnerable to legal challenges. Both of these situations can have negative consequences for wildlife conservation. We outline a collaborative research-management approach to bridging the gap between wildlife managers and researchers. We describe differences in perspectives, perceptions, and priorities between managers and researchers; outline how and why the divide between researchers and managers has likely occurred and continues to grow; and present specific strategies and recommendations to foster stronger collaborations between managers and researchers. We advocate increased synergy between managers and researchers based on a shared vision of conservation and a collaborative structure that rewards researchers and managers. Most importantly, we suggest that relationships and communication between managers and researchers must be established early in research development and decision-making processes, fostering the trust needed for collaboration. Institutions and agencies can facilitate these relationships by creating opportunities and incentives for integrating collaborative research into management decisions. We suggest this approach will strengthen ties between researchers and managers, increase relevance of research to management decisions, promote effectiveness of management decisions, reduce legal challenges, and ultimately produce positive, tangible, and lasting effects on wildlife conservation.

Climate change will have profound and unexpected impacts on biodiversity in the future. These impacts could potentially be mitigated through adaptive and responsive conservation planning, but it remains unclear how adaptation opportunities can be harnessed through careful planning of present‐day activities. Here, we show that the use of flexible conservation strategies that exploit opportunities for climate adaptation can mitigate climate risks without increasing total conservation costs. We estimate the value of allowing flexible delays of conservation investments for protecting habitats of the iconic and threatened koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) in eastern Australia. Conservation strategies that have no option to strategically delay investments face significant trade‐offs between minimizing conservation costs and reducing risks in conservation outcomes. These trade‐offs are substantially mitigated by flexible strategies that strategically delay investments into the future when the effects of climate change are likely to be better understood. Strategic delays are shown to mitigate climate risks in inflexible conservation strategies without even increasing conservation costs. These results show that conservation planning that strategically allocates present‐day conservation resources while also allowing the flexibility to shift these resources in the future is much more likely to achieve cost‐effective conservation outcomes in the face of uncertain climate change impacts.

Climate change and its associated uncertainties are of concern to natural resource managers. Although aspects of climate change may be novel (e.g., system change and nonstationarity), natural resource managers have long dealt with uncertainties and have developed corresponding approaches to decision-making. Adaptive resource management is an application of structured decision-making for recurrent decision problems with uncertainty, focusing on management objectives, and the reduction of uncertainty over time. We identified 4 types of uncertainty that characterize problems in natural resource management. We examined ways in which climate change is expected to exacerbate these uncertainties, as well as potential approaches to dealing with them. As a case study, we examined North American waterfowl harvest management and considered problems anticipated to result from climate change and potential solutions. Despite challenges expected to accompany the use of adaptive resource management to address problems associated with climate change, we conclude that adaptive resource management approaches will be the methods of choice for managers trying to deal with the uncertainties of climate change.

Wire cages (exclosures) that exclude nest predators are regularly used for management of federally threatened and endangered populations of piping plovers (Charadrius melodus) and similar species. However, recent evidence that apparent nest abandonment related to exclosure use is indicative of adult mortality has led to concern about the technique. We developed a decision support tool named PiperEx that uses site-specific nest-fate data to inform a stochastic population projection model to predict population growth rate at the site level with and without exclosure use. Underlying PiperEx is a Bayesian logistic-exposure multinomial nest fate model, with informative priors based on analysis of 1,312 piping plover nests monitored throughout the U.S. Atlantic Coast in 2015 and 2016. We used simulated nest fate data sets and real nest data from 3 management areas from 2013 to 2018 to test tool performance. Based on simulations, the probability of making the correct decision increased with sample size, exceeding 80% with 20 nests. Decisions recommended by the tool were robust to variation in demographic parameters. Using real data, the decision for a given year only matched the decision for the immediately previous year 16% to 67% of the time, whereas data pooled across years predicted the best decision for a particular year up to 100% of the time for a given area. We used a case study of Edwin B. Forsythe National Wildlife Refuge to demonstrate that the optimal decision is sensitive to how a site was defined. We recommend that data for PiperEx be collected on an annual basis, and data for the previous 5 or 6 years be pooled for making a decision at the start of the season. Further development of the tool should focus on its use to make regional recommendations, and use of multiple years of data to improve the capability of the tool to make robust site-specific recommendations.

To reduce detrimental impacts of anthropogenic change, natural resource managers often look for place‐based solutions to minimize biodiversity loss. Climate‐change refugia, areas buffered from contemporary climate change, can enable the persistence of valued natural resources and prolong the benefits of conservation action. Here we combine climate‐change refugia modeling with structured decision‐making to inform conservation decisions for the endangered foothill yellow‐legged frog (Rana boylii) in the Sierra Nevada region of California, USA. We used an ensemble of species distribution models to identify areas projected to remain suitable into the 2040s and the 2080s under an RCP 8.5 emissions scenario, as well as areas projected to transition to suitable habitat during this time. We integrated these projections with a structured decision‐making process to align management strategies with refugia model outcomes for R. boylii in a subset of the study area. Habitat suitability for R. boylii is projected to decline in the study area by over 90% by the 2040s and by a subsequent 15% by the 2080s. Climate‐change refugia are projected to occupy ~7% of present‐day suitable habitat, with high agreement between GCMs and model timesteps. Areas projected to transition to suitable habitat within the existing R. boylii clade boundaries are negligible. Collectively, climate‐change refugia modeling and structured decision‐making provide opportunities to improve resource allocation and empower conservation practitioners in climate change adaptation for at‐risk species.

1. Active engagement with practitioners is a crucial component of model-based decisionmaking in conservation management; it can assist with data acquisition, improve models and help narrow the 'knowing-doing' gap. 2. We worked with practitioners of one of the worst invasive species in Australia, the cane toad Rhinella marina, to revise a model that estimates the effectiveness of landscape barriers to contain spread. The original model predicted that the invasion could be contained by managing artificial watering points on pastoral properties, but was initially met with scepticism by practitioners, in part due to a lack of engagement during model development. 3. We held a workshop with practitioners and experts in cane toad biology. Using structured decision-making, we elicited concerns about the original model, revised its structure, updated relevant input data, added an economic component and found the most cost-effective location for a barrier across a range of fixed budgets and management scenarios. We then conducted scenario analyses to test the sensitivity of management decisions to model revisions. 4. We found that toad spread could be contained for all of the scenarios tested. Our modelling suggests a barrier could cost $4·5 M (2015 AUD) over 50 years for the most likely landscape scenario. The incorporation of practitioner knowledge into the model was crucial. As well as improving engagement, when we incorporated practitioner concerns (particularly regarding the effects of irrigation and dwellings on toad spread), we found a different location for the optimal barrier compared to a previously published study (Tingley et al. 2013). 5. Synthesis and applications. Through engagement with practitioners, we turned an academic modelling exercise into a decision-support tool that integrated local information, and considered more realistic scenarios and constraints. Active engagement with practitioners led to productive revisions of a model that estimates the effectiveness of a landscape barrier to contain spread of the invasive cane toad R. marina. Benefits also include greater confidence in model predictions, improving our assessment of the cost and feasibility of containing the spread of toads.