USGS ScienceSearch

Geology topics

Jose J. Lahoz-Monfort

Publications and source records attributed to Jose J. Lahoz-Monfort.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Adaptive management for improving species conservation across the captive-wild spectrum

Conservation of endangered species increasingly envisages complex strategies that integrate captive and wild management actions. Management decisions in this context must be made in the face of uncertainty, often with limited capacity to collect information. Adaptive management (AM) combines management and monitoring, with the aim of updating knowledge and improving decision-making over time. We provide a guide for managers who may realize the potential of AM, but are unsure where to start. The urgent need for iterative management decisions, the existence of uncertainty, and the opportunity for learning offered by often highly-controlled captive environments create favorable conditions for AM. However, experiments and monitoring may be complicated by small sample sizes, and the ability to control the system, including stochasticity and observability, may be limited toward the wild end of the spectrum. We illustrate the key steps to implementing AM in threatened species management using four case studies, including the management of captive programs for cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus) and whooping cranes (Grus americana), of a translocation protocol for Arizona cliffroses Purshia subintegra and of ongoing supplementary feeding of reintroduced hihi (Notiomystis cincta) populations. For each case study, we explain (1) how to clarify whether the decision can be improved by learning (i.e. it is iterative and complicated by uncertainty) and what the management objectives are; (2) how to articulate uncertainty via alternative, testable hypotheses such as competing models or parameter distributions; (3) how to formally define how additional information can be collected and incorporated in future management decisions.

Biological Conservation

When do we need more data? A primer on calculating the value of information for applied ecologists

Applied ecologists continually advocate further research, under the assumption that obtaining more information will lead to better decisions. Value of information (VoI) analysis can be used to quantify how additional information may improve management outcomes: despite its potential, this method is still underused in environmental decision-making. We provide a primer on how to calculate the VoI and assess whether reducing uncertainty will change a decision. Our aim is to facilitate the application of VoI by managers who are not familiar with decision-analytic principles and notation, by increasing the technical accessibility of the tool. Calculating the VoI requires explicit formulation of management objectives and actions. Uncertainty must be clearly structured and its effects on management outcomes evaluated. We present two measures of the VoI. The expected value of perfect information is a calculation of the expected improvement in management outcomes that would result from access to perfect knowledge. The expected value of sample information calculates the improvement in outcomes expected by collecting a given sample of new data. We guide readers through the calculation of VoI using two case studies: (i) testing for disease when managing a frog species and (ii) learning about demographic rates for the reintroduction of an endangered turtle. We illustrate the use of Bayesian updating to incorporate new information. The VoI depends on our current knowledge, the quality of the information collected and the expected outcomes of the available management actions. Collecting information can require significant investments of resources; VoI analysis assists managers in deciding whether these investments are justified.

Methods in Ecology and Evolution

Minimizing the cost of keeping options open for conservation in a changing climate

Policy documents advocate that managers should keep their options open while planning to protect coastal ecosystems from climate-change impacts. However, the actual costs and benefits of maintaining flexibility remain largely unexplored, and alternative approaches for decision making under uncertainty may lead to better joint outcomes for conservation and other societal goals. For example, keeping options open for coastal ecosystems incurs opportunity costs for developers. We devised a decision framework that integrates these costs and benefits with probabilistic forecasts for the extent of sea-level rise to find a balance between coastal ecosystem protection and moderate coastal development. Here, we suggest that instead of keeping their options open managers should incorporate uncertain sea-level rise predictions into a decision-making framework that evaluates the benefits and costs of conservation and development. In our example, based on plausible scenarios for sea-level rise and assuming a risk-neutral decision maker, we found that substantial development could be accommodated with negligible loss of environmental assets. Characterization of the Pareto efficiency of conservation and development outcomes provides valuable insight into the intensity of trade-offs between development and conservation. However, additional work is required to improve understanding of the consequences of alternative spatial plans and the value judgments and risk preferences of decision makers and stakeholders.

Conservation Biology