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.

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.

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.

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.

Conservation decisions are often made in the face of uncertainty because the urgency to act can preclude delaying management while uncertainty is resolved. In this context, adaptive management is attractive, allowing simultaneous management and learning. An adaptive program design requires the identification of critical uncertainties that impede the choice of management action. Quantitative evaluation of critical uncertainty, using the expected value of information, may require more resources than are available in the early stages of conservation planning. Here, we demonstrate the use of a qualitative index to the value of information (QVoI) to prioritize which sources of uncertainty to reduce regarding the use of prescribed fire to benefit Eastern Black Rails (Laterallus jamaicensis jamaicensis), Yellow Rails (Coterminous noveboracensis), and Mottled Ducks (Anas fulvigula; hereafter, focal species) in high marshes of the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. Prescribed fire has been used as a management tool in Gulf of Mexico high marshes throughout the last 30+ years; however, effects of periodic burning on the focal species and the optimal conditions for burning marshes to improve habitat remain unknown. We followed a structured decision-making framework to develop conceptual models, which we then used to identify sources of uncertainty and articulate alternative hypotheses about prescribed fire in high marshes. We used QVoI to evaluate the sources of uncertainty based on their Magnitude, Relevance for decision-making, and Reducibility. We found that hypotheses related to the optimal fire return interval and season were the highest priorities for study, whereas hypotheses related to predation rates and interactions among management techniques were lowest. These results suggest that learning about the optimal fire frequency and season to benefit the focal species might produce the greatest management benefit. In this case study, we demonstrate that QVoI can help managers decide where to apply limited resources to learn which specific actions will result in a higher likelihood of achieving the desired management objectivesFurther, we summarize the strengths and limitations of QVoI and outline recommendations for its future use for prioritizing research to reduce uncertainty about system dynamics and the effects of management actions.

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.

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.

The approach common to well‐known conservation planning frameworks is rooted in values, like species persistence and quality habitat, and expectations resulting from conservation actions, like restoration and protection. We evaluated value‐focused thinking (VFT) as a framework for setting objectives based on personal or group values. Our approach included five steps: eliciting individual participant values, specifying objectives, organizing objectives, structuring multiple objectives, and a quality check. We implemented these steps with 12 conservation planning teams at a global conservation organization. We performed descriptive analyses based on comparisons between final group objectives and initial individual objectives as well as the quality check. We found that participants could only self‐identify a proportion of the team's objectives, which VFT strengthened. Participants were equally challenged with identifying means and ends objectives, contrasting with general VFT theory. Both experienced and newly formed teams effectively applied VFT. Our study formalizes a common‐sense approach to evaluating the underlying drivers of conservation planning so that its resulting outcomes can be most impactful. This study considered the role of values in conservation planning. We developed a five‐step objective‐setting process based on value‐focused thinking (VFT), a theoretical underpinning of decision analysis and structured decision‐making.