Adaptive management of natural resources--framework and issues

Adaptive management, an approach for simultaneously managing and learning about natural resources, has been around for several decades. Interest in adaptive decision making has grown steadily over that time, and by now many in natural resources conservation claim that adaptive management is the approach they use in meeting their resource management responsibilities. Yet there remains considerable ambiguity about what adaptive management actually is, and how it is to be implemented by practitioners. The objective of this paper is to present a framework and conditions for adaptive decision making, and discuss some important challenges in its application. Adaptive management is described as a two-phase process of deliberative and iterative phases, which are implemented sequentially over the timeframe of an application. Key elements, processes, and issues in adaptive decision making are highlighted in terms of this framework. Special emphasis is given to the question of geographic scale, the difficulties presented by non-stationarity, and organizational challenges in implementing adaptive management.     

Hydropower,adaptive management,and Biodiversity

Adaptive management is a policy framework within which an iterative process of decision making is followed based on the observed responses to and effectiveness of previous decisions. The use of adaptive management allows science-based research and monitoring of natural resource and ecological community responses, in conjunction with societal values and goals, to guide decisions concerning man's activities. The adaptive management process has been proposed for application to hydropower operations at Glen Canyon Dam on the Colorado River, a situation that requires complex balancing of natural resources requirements and competing human uses. This example is representative of the general increase in public interest in the operation of hydropower facilities and possible effects on downstream natural resources and of the growing conflicts between uses and users of river-based resources. This paper describes the adaptive management process, using the Glen Canyon Dam example, and discusses ways to make the process work effectively in managing downstream natural resources and biodiversity.     

‘Learning by doing’: adaptive planning as a strategy to address uncertainty in planning

Adaptive management, an established method in natural resource and ecosystem management, has not been widely applied to landscape planning due to the lack of an operational method that addresses the role of uncertainty and standardized monitoring protocols and methods. A review of adaptive management literature and practices reveals several key concepts and principles for adaptive planning: (1) management actions are best understood and practiced as experiments; (2) several plans/experiments can be implemented simultaneously; (3) monitoring of management actions are key; and (4) adaptive management can be understood as ‘learning by doing’. The paper identifies various uncertainties in landscape planning as the major obstacles for the adoption of an adaptive approach. To address the uncertainty in landscape planning, an adaptive planning method is proposed where monitoring plays an integral role to reduce uncertainty. The proposed method is then applied to a conceptual test in water resource planning addressing abiotic-biotic-cultural resources. To operationalize adaptive planning, it is argued that professionals, stakeholders and researchers need to function in a genuinely transdisciplinary mode where all contribute to, and benefit from, decision making and the continuous generation of new knowledge.     

Adaptive management in the U.S. National Wildlife Refuge System: science-management partnerships for conservation delivery

Adaptive management is an approach to recurrent decision making in which uncertainty about the decision is reduced over time through comparison of outcomes predicted by competing models against observed values of those outcomes. The National Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS) of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is a large land management program charged with making natural resource management decisions, which often are made under considerable uncertainty, severe operational constraints, and conditions that limit ability to precisely carry out actions as intended. The NWRS presents outstanding opportunities for the application of adaptive management, but also difficult challenges. We describe two cooperative programs between the Fish and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Geological Survey to implement adaptive management at scales ranging from small, single refuge applications to large, multi-refuge, multi-region projects. Our experience to date suggests three important attributes common to successful implementation: a vigorous multi-partner collaboration, practical and informative decision framework components, and a sustained commitment to the process. Administrators in both agencies should consider these attributes when developing programs to promote the use and acceptance of adaptive management in the NWRS.     

Federal Decentralization and Adaptive Management of Water Resources: Reservoir Reallocation by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Reservoir operations must respond to changing conditions, such as climate, water demand, regulations, and sedimentation. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) can reallocate reservoir storage to respond to such changes. We assembled and analyzed a database of reservoir reallocations implemented and proposed by the Corps. While only a small portion of total reservoir storage nationwide has been reallocated, there are substantial differences in reallocation frequency and magnitude across the nation: some Corps Districts and Divisions use reallocation while others do not, relying more on discretion and small‐scale adaptation of operations. This difference illustrates how water resource agencies like the Corps decentralize management decisions to allow responding to disparate conditions. Decentralized decision‐making provides a responsive approach to water management, while centralized and hierarchical decision‐making is a slower, more deliberative approach. Decentralized decision‐making may lead to the accumulation of short‐term, local decisions over time to the point that the system is managed differently than anticipated. Reallocation, which is a form of planned adaptive management, can be accommodating of multiple competing demands and different stakeholders, yet expensive and less temporally responsive. The challenge for any large water resource management agency is to balance between local‐level, responsive discretion vs. centralized, planned decision‐making.     

Nipped in the Bud: Why Regional Scale Adaptive Management Is Not Blooming

Adaptive management is an approach to managing natural resources that emphasizes learning from the implementation of policies and strategies. Adaptive management appears to offer a solution to the management gridlock caused by increasing complexity and uncertainty. The concept of adaptive management has been embraced by natural resource managers worldwide, but there are relatively few published examples of adaptive management in use. In this article, we explore two watershed management projects in southeastern Australia to better understand the potential of adaptive management in regional scale programs through qualitative, case study–based investigation. The program logic of one case implies the use of passive adaptive management, whereas the second case claims to be based on active adaptive management. Data were created using participant observation, semistructured interviews with individuals and groups, and document review. Using thematic content and metaphor analysis to explore the case data, we found that each case was successful as an implementation project. However, the use of both passive and active adaptive management was constrained by deeply entrenched social norms and institutional frameworks. We identified seven “imperatives” that guided the behavior of project stakeholders, and that have consequences for the use of adaptive management. Reference to recent evaluations of the Adaptive Management Areas of the Pacific Northwest of the United States suggests that some of these imperatives and their consequences have broad applicability. The implications of our findings are discussed, and suggestions for improving the outcomes of regional scale adaptive management are provided.     

Developing adaptive capacity within groundwater abstraction management systems

Groundwater is a key resource for global agricultural production but is vulnerable to a changing climate. Given significant uncertainty about future impacts, bottom-up approaches for developing adaptive capacity are a more appropriate paradigm than seeking optimal adaptation strategies that assume a high ability to predict future risks or outcomes. This paper analyses the groundwater management practices adopted at multiple scales in East Anglia, UK, to identify wider lessons for developing adaptive capacity within groundwater management. Key elements are (1) horizontal and vertical integration within resource management; (2) making better use of water resources, at all scales, which vary in space and time; (3) embedding adaptation at multiple scales (from farm to national) within an adaptive management framework which allows strategies and management decisions to be updated in the light of changing understanding or conditions; (4) facilitating the ongoing formation through collective action of local Water Abstractor Groups; (5) promoting efficient use of scarce water resources by these groups, so as to increase their power to negotiate over possible short-term license restrictions; (6) controlling abstractions within a sustainable resource management framework, whether at national (regulatory) or at local (Abstractor Group) scales, that takes account of environmental water needs; and (7) reducing non-climate pressures which have the potential to further reduce the availability of usable groundwater.     

Dynamics of local governance in natural resource conservation in the Okavango Delta,Botswana

There has been a shift in natural resource management worldwide. This paper describes how modern institutions and policies influence management and shape access to and utilization of resources by rural communities in the Okavango Delta, Botswana. It is rooted in the framework of adaptive co‐governance within social‐ecological systems, and employs a critical literature review to analyse access to and use of natural resources in rural Botswana. Prior to the establishment of community‐based natural resource management (CBNRM) in Botswana in 1989, resource governance was dominated by strong traditional institutions that were responsible for natural resource management and decision‐making. Contemporary natural resource governance is characterized by a bureaucratic system that invariably undermines the role of traditional institutions in natural resource governance. Findings indicate that policies and regulatory instruments deny rural communities adequate access to and utilization of resources available within their immediate environment. In spite of an orientation towards an anthropocentric approach to natural resource management (as in the case of CBNRM), the current governance system continues to undermine the inclusion of local resource users as legitimate stakeholders in the decision‐making process.     

Using system dynamics to model water-reallocation

Improving the efficiency of water allocation has long been recognised as a key problem for the water resources management decision-makers. However, assessing the efficacy of management decision is difficult due to the complexity and interconnectivity of water resource systems. For this reason, it is vital that robust modelling approaches are employed to deal with the feedback loops inherent in the water resource systems. Whilst many studies have applied modelling to various aspects of water resource management, little attention has been given to innovations in modelling approaches to deal with the modelling challenges associated with improving decision-making. The aim of this study is to apply a System Dynamics modelling approach to improve the efficiency of water allocation incorporating a myriad of irrigation system constraints. The system dynamic approach allows the different system components to be organised as a collection of discrete objects that incorporate data, structure and function to generate complex system behaviour. Through the application of a system dynamic approach, a robust model (named the Economical Reallocating Water Model (ERWM)) was developed which was used to examine the options of re-allocating water resources that minimize the water cost all over an irrigated agricultural area. The EWRM incorporated a wide range of complexities likely to be encountered in water resource management: surface and ground water sources, water trading between sources, system constraint such as maximum ground water pumping, rates, maximum possible trading volumes and differential water resource prices. Two hypothetical systems have been presented here as an example. The results show that the System Dynamics approach has a significant advantages in estimating and assessing the outcomes of alternative water management strategies through time and space.     

Multi‐Criteria Decision Support Systems for Flood Hazard Mitigation and Emergency Response in Urban Watersheds1

Abstract: Flood management problems are inherently complex, time‐bound and multi‐faceted, involving many decision makers (with conflicting priorities and dynamic preferences), high decision stakes, limited technical information (both in terms of quality and quantity), and difficult tradeoffs. Multi‐Criteria Decision Support Systems (MCDSS) can help to manage this complexity and decision load by combining value judgments and technical information in a structured decision framework. A brief overview of MCDSS is presented, an original MCDSS architecture is put forth, and future research directions are discussed, including extensions to Multi‐Criteria Spatial Decision Support Systems and group MCDSS (as flood management involves shared resources and broad constituencies). With application to the September 11‐12, 2000 Tokai floods in Japan, the proposed multi‐criteria decision support instruments enhance communication among stakeholders and improve emergency management resource allocation. In summary, by making the links among flood knowledge, assumptions and choices more explicit, MCDSS increases stakeholder satisfaction, saves lives, and reduces flood management costs, thereby increasing decision‐making effectiveness, efficiency and transparency.     

Creating and sustaining community capacity for ecosystem-based management: Is local government the key?

Recently, collaborative approaches to natural resource management have been widely promoted as ways to broaden participation and community involvement in furthering the goals of ecosystem management. The language of collaboration has even been incorporated into controversial legislation, such as the US Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003. This research examines collaboration and sharing management responsibility for federal public land with local communities through a case study of the Ashland Municipal Watershed in southern Oregon. A policy sciences approach is used to analyze community participation and institutional relationships between the US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, and local city government in the planning processes of five land management actions occurring over a 7-year period. The knowledge gained from examining differing approaches to planning and decision making in the Ashland watershed is used to suggest future planning processes to develop and sustain the community capacity necessary to support implementation of community-based ecosystem management.     

ASSEMBLY OF MAP‐BASED STREAM NARRATIVES TO FACILITATE STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT IN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT1

ABSTRACT: Watershed stewardship activities throughout North America have evolved into a process that requires more involvement in planning and decision making by community stakeholders. Active involvement of all stakeholders in the process of watershed stewardship is dependent on effective exchange of information among participants, and active involvement of a wide range of stakeholders from “communities of place” as well as those from “communities of interest.” We developed a map‐based stream narrative tool as a means to: (a) assemble a wealth of incompletely documented, “traditional” ecological or natural history observations for rivers or streams; and (b) promote a higher level of active involvement by community stakeholders in contributing to information‐based, watershed management. Creation of stream narratives is intended for use as a tool to actively engage local stakeholders in the development of a more comprehensive information system to improve management for multiple stewardship objectives in watersheds. Completion of map‐based stream narrative atlases provides a valuable supplement to other independent efforts to assemble observations and knowledge about land‐based natural resources covering entire watersheds. We are confident that completion of stream narrative projects will make a valuable addition to the information and decision making tools that are currently available to the public and resource agencies interested in advancing the cause of community‐based approaches to watershed and ecosystem management.     

Adaptive Management: From More Talk to Real Action

The challenges currently facing resource managers are large-scale and complex, and demand new approaches to balance development and conservation goals. One approach that shows considerable promise for addressing these challenges is adaptive management, which by now is broadly seen as a natural, intuitive, and potentially effective way to address decision-making in the face of uncertainties. Yet the concept of adaptive management continues to evolve, and its record of success remains limited. In this article, we present an operational framework for adaptive decision-making, and describe the challenges and opportunities in applying it to real-world problems. We discuss the key elements required for adaptive decision-making, and their integration into an iterative process that highlights and distinguishes technical and social learning. We illustrate the elements and processes of the framework with some successful on-the-ground examples of natural resource management. Finally, we address some of the difficulties in applying learning-based management, and finish with a discussion of future directions and strategic challenges.     

Socially cooperative choices: An approach to achieving resource sustainability in the coastal zone

Achieving resource sustainability, particularly in the coastal zone, is complicated by a variety of interdependencies and trade-offs between economic, social, and ecological variables. Although trade-offs between each of these variables are important, this paper emphasizes the social components of resource management. In this regard a distinction is made between individual and cooperative choices. Individual choices frequently are made from a shortterm, self-interested perspective, whereas cooperative choices are made from a long-term, community and resource-sustainability perspective. Typically, when presented with a spectrum of resource management decisions, individuals have a tendency to act in a self-interested manner. Thus, cooperative benefits, such as reduced conflict and improved resource certainty, are not realized. An overview of selected aspects of social dilemma theory suggests that socially cooperative choice outcomes are attainable in coastal zone management by integrating structural and behavioral solutions in resource use decision making. Three barriers to successful integration of structural and behavioral solutions are identified as self-interest, mistrust, and variable perceptions of resource amenities. Examples from coastal zone management indicate that these barriers may be overcome using approaches such as scopereduction, co-management, community education, and local participation. The paper also provides comment on the potential benefits of integrating structural and behavioral solutions in international coastal zone management efforts.     

Pathology and failure in the design and implementation of adaptive management

The conceptual underpinnings for adaptive management are simple; there will always be inherent uncertainty and unpredictability in the dynamics and behavior of complex ecological systems as a result non-linear interactions among components and emergence, yet management decisions must still be made. The strength of adaptive management is in the recognition and confrontation of such uncertainty. Rather than ignore uncertainty, or use it to preclude management actions, adaptive management can foster resilience and flexibility to cope with an uncertain future, and develop safe to fail management approaches that acknowledge inevitable changes and surprises. Since its initial introduction, adaptive management has been hailed as a solution to endless trial and error approaches to complex natural resource management challenges. However, its implementation has failed more often than not. It does not produce easy answers, and it is appropriate in only a subset of natural resource management problems. Clearly adaptive management has great potential when applied appropriately. Just as clearly adaptive management has seemingly failed to live up to its high expectations. Why? We outline nine pathologies and challenges that can lead to failure in adaptive management programs. We focus on general sources of failures in adaptive management, so that others can avoid these pitfalls in the future. Adaptive management can be a powerful and beneficial tool when applied correctly to appropriate management problems; the challenge is to keep the concept of adaptive management from being hijacked for inappropriate use.     

Threshold-Based Resource Management: A Framework for Comprehensive Ecosystem Management

The problems posed by adaptive management for improved ecosystem health are reviewed. Other kinds of science-informed ecosystem management are needed for those regions of conflict between rapid human population growth, increased resource extraction, and the rising demand for better environmental amenities, where large-scale experiments are not feasible. One new framework is threshold-based resource management. Threshold-based resource management guides management choices among four major science and engineering approaches to achieve healthier ecosystems: self-sustaining ecosystem management, adaptive management, case-by-case resource management, and high-reliability management. As resource conflicts increase over a landscape (i.e., as the ecosystems in the landscape move through different thresholds), management options change for the environmental decision-maker in terms of what can and cannot be attained by way of ecosystem health. The major policy and management implication of the framework is that the exclusive use or recommendation of any one management regime, be it self-sustaining, adaptive, case-by-case, or high-reliability management, across all categories of ecosystems within a heterogeneous landscape that is variably populated and extractively used is not only inappropriate, it is fatal to the goals of improved ecosystem health. The article concludes with detailed proposals for environmental decision-makers to undertake “bandwidth management” in ways that blend the best of adaptive management and high-reliability management for improved ecosystem health while at the same time maintaining highly reliable flows of ecosystem services, such as water.     

Sustainable Water Resources Management in a Conflict Resolution Framework1

Abstract: A decision support system for sustainable water resources management in a water conflict resolution framework is developed to identify and evaluate a range of acceptable alternatives for the Geum River Basin in Korea and to facilitate strategies that will result in sustainable water resource management. Working with stakeholders in a “shared vision modeling” framework, sustainable management strategies are created to illustrate system tradeoffs as well as long‐term system planning. A multi‐criterion decision‐making (MCDM) approach using subjective scales is utilized to evaluate the complex water resource allocation and management tradeoffs between stakeholders and system objectives. The procedures used in this study include the development of a “shared vision model,” a simulated decision‐making support system (as a tool for sustainable water management strategies associated with water conflicts, management options, and planning criteria), and the application of MCDM techniques for evaluating alternatives provided by the model. The research results demonstrate the utility of the sustainable water resource management model in aid of MCDM techniques in facilitating flexibility during initial stages of alternative identification and evaluation in a basin suffering from severe water conflicts.     

Adaptive management for a turbulent future

The challenges that face humanity today differ from the past because as the scale of human influence has increased, our biggest challenges have become global in nature, and formerly local problems that could be addressed by shifting populations or switching resources, now aggregate (i.e., "scale up") limiting potential management options. Adaptive management is an approach to natural resource management that emphasizes learning through management based on the philosophy that knowledge is incomplete and much of what we think we know is actually wrong. Adaptive management has explicit structure, including careful elucidation of goals, identification of alternative management objectives and hypotheses of causation, and procedures for the collection of data followed by evaluation and reiteration. It is evident that adaptive management has matured, but it has also reached a crossroads. Practitioners and scientists have developed adaptive management and structured decision making techniques, and mathematicians have developed methods to reduce the uncertainties encountered in resource management, yet there continues to be misapplication of the method and misunderstanding of its purpose. Ironically, the confusion over the term "adaptive management" may stem from the flexibility inherent in the approach, which has resulted in multiple interpretations of "adaptive management" that fall along a continuum of complexity and a priori design. Adaptive management is not a panacea for the navigation of 'wicked problems' as it does not produce easy answers, and is only appropriate in a subset of natural resource management problems where both uncertainty and controllability are high. Nonetheless, the conceptual underpinnings of adaptive management are simple; there will always be inherent uncertainty and unpredictability in the dynamics and behavior of complex social-ecological systems, but management decisions must still be made, and whenever possible, we should incorporate learning into management.     

Monitoring in adaptive co-management: Toward a learning based approach

The recognition of complexity and uncertainty in natural resource management has lead to the development of a wealth of conceptual frameworks aimed at integrated assessment and complex systems monitoring. Relatively less attention has however been given to methodological approaches that might facilitate learning as part of the monitoring process. This paper reviews the monitoring literature relevant to adaptive co-management, with a focus on the synergies between existing monitoring frameworks, collaborative monitoring approaches and social learning. The paper discusses the role of monitoring in environmental management in general, and the challenges posed by scale and complexity when monitoring in adaptive co-management. Existing conceptual frameworks for monitoring relevant to adaptive co-management are reviewed, as are lessons from experiences with collaborative monitoring. The paper concludes by offering a methodological approach to monitoring that actively seeks to engender reflexive learning as a means to deal with uncertainty in natural resource management.     

Improving our legacy: incorporation of adaptive management into state wildlife action plans

The loss of biodiversity is a mounting concern, but despite numerous attempts there are few large scale conservation efforts that have proven successful in reversing current declines. Given the challenge of biodiversity conservation, there is a need to develop strategic conservation plans that address species declines even with the inherent uncertainty in managing multiple species in complex environments. In 2002, the State Wildlife Grant program was initiated to fulfill this need, and while not explicitly outlined by Congress follows the fundamental premise of adaptive management, 'Learning by doing'. When action is necessary, but basic biological information and an understanding of appropriate management strategies are lacking, adaptive management enables managers to be proactive in spite of uncertainty. However, regardless of the strengths of adaptive management, the development of an effective adaptive management framework is challenging. In a review of 53 State Wildlife Action Plans, I found a keen awareness by planners that adaptive management was an effective method for addressing biodiversity conservation, but the development and incorporation of explicit adaptive management approaches within each plan remained elusive. Only ~25% of the plans included a framework for how adaptive management would be implemented at the project level within their state. There was, however, considerable support across plans for further development and implementation of adaptive management. By furthering the incorporation of adaptive management principles in conservation plans and explicitly outlining the decision making process, states will be poised to meet the pending challenges to biodiversity conservation.