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.     

Coping with Change: The Small Experiment as a Strategic Approach to Environmental Sustainability

The patterns of living, planning, and resource utilization as practiced in Western countries for decades are not sustainable; change of some sort is essential. But what changes are appropriate, and, perhaps more important, will people accept them? The small experiment framework provides a strategy for meeting the challenge of change. By encouraging participation, limiting the scale of initial change, and incorporating some aspects of the familiar, many of the difficulties that make change so problematic can be mitigated or even eliminated. An exploration, from a psychological perspective, of the characteristic difficulties surrounding potential change provides the context for a discussion of the components of the small experiment and an analysis of how these elements address these characteristic challenges. A comparison to adaptive management is drawn, and several concrete examples illustrate how the strategy has been used successfully to address a variety of environmental problems.     

Understanding Social Complexity Within the Wildland–Urban Interface: A New Species of Human Habitation?

The lack of knowledge regarding social diversity in the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) or an in-depth understanding of the ways people living there interact to address common problems is concerning, perhaps even dangerous, given that community action is necessary for successful wildland fire preparedness and natural resource management activities. In this article, we lay out the knowledge and preliminary case study evidence needed to begin systematically documenting the differing levels and types of adaptive capacity WUI communities have for addressing collective problems such as wildland fire hazard. In order to achieve this end, we draw from two theoretical perspectives encompassing humans' interactions with their environment, including (1) Kenneth Wilkinson's interactional approach to community, (2) and certain elements of place literature. We also present case study research on wildfire protection planning in two drastically different California communities to illustrate how social diversity influences adaptive capacity to deal with hazards such as wildland fire. These perspectives promote an image of the WUI not as a monolithic entity but a complex mosaic of communities with different needs and existing capacities for wildland fire and natural resource management.     

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.     

Passive and active adaptive management: approaches and an example

Adaptive management is a framework for resource conservation that promotes iterative learning-based decision making. Yet there remains considerable confusion about what adaptive management entails, and how to actually make resource decisions adaptively. A key but somewhat ambiguous distinction in adaptive management is between active and passive forms of adaptive decision making. The objective of this paper is to illustrate some approaches to active and passive adaptive management with a simple example involving the drawdown of water impoundments on a wildlife refuge. The approaches are illustrated for the drawdown example, and contrasted in terms of objectives, costs, and potential learning rates. Some key challenges to the actual practice of AM are discussed, and tradeoffs between implementation costs and long-term benefits are highlighted.     

Adaptive Capacity and Community-Based Natural Resource Management

Why do some community-based natural resource management strategies perform better than others? Commons theorists have approached this question by developing institutional design principles to address collective choice situations, while other analysts have critiqued the underlying assumptions of community-based resource management. However, efforts to enhance community-based natural resource management performance also require an analysis of exogenous and endogenous variables that influence how social actors not only act collectively but do so in ways that respond to changing circumstances, foster learning, and build capacity for management adaptation. Drawing on examples from northern Canada and Southeast Asia, this article examines the relationship among adaptive capacity, community-based resource management performance, and the socio-institutional determinants of collective action, such as technical, financial, and legal constraints, and complex issues of politics, scale, knowledge, community and culture. An emphasis on adaptive capacity responds to a conceptual weakness in community-based natural resource management and highlights an emerging research and policy discourse that builds upon static design principles and the contested concepts in current management practice.     

Co-management of Natural Resources: A Proposed Framework

Co-management acknowledges pragmatic developments and progression of institutional choice theories in natural resource management. This innovative concept embraces a pluralistic management approach based on the principle of subsidiarity and creates opportunities for the reconciliation of competitive property claims. This article reviews definitions of co-management, distinguishes it from other property rights regimes, and develops an organizational structure of the major elements involved. Synthesis of both experiences and literature leads to the development of a conceptual framework. Co-management is structured in terms of context, components, and linking mechanisms. In concert, these elements offer insight into the practice of co-management, address the shortcomings of institutional theories, and respond to critical issues raised in related literature. The framework contributes to natural resource management by acting as a means of identification and evaluation for such arrangements, as well as a systematic guide for future inquiries.     

A Framework to Evaluate Ecological and Social Outcomes of Collaborative Management: Lessons from Implementation with a Northern Arizona Collaborative Group

As collaborative groups gain popularity as an alternative means for addressing conflict over management of public lands, the need for methods to evaluate their effectiveness in achieving ecological and social goals increases. However, frameworks that examine both effectiveness of the collaborative process and its outcomes are poorly developed or altogether lacking. This paper presents and evaluates the utility of the holistic ecosystem health indicator (HEHI), a framework that integrates multiple ecological and socioeconomic criteria to evaluate management effectiveness of collaborative processes. Through the development and application of the HEHI to a collaborative in northern Arizona, the Diablo Trust, we present the opportunities and challenges in using this framework to evaluate the ecological and social outcomes of collaborative adaptive management. Baseline results from the first application of the HEHI are presented as an illustration of its potential as a co-adaptive management tool. We discuss lessons learned from the process of selecting indicators and potential issues to their long-term implementation. Finally, we provide recommendations for applying this framework to monitoring and adaptive management in the context of collaborative management.     

Integrated Resource Management: Moving from Rhetoric to Practice in Australian Agriculture

/ Implementing the concept of sustainability through integrated approaches to natural resource management poses enormous challenges for both the rural communities and government agencies concerned. This paper reviews the underlying rhetoric of sustainable agricultural systems and the integrated resource management paradigm and identifies some of the challenges being experienced in translating this rhetoric into practice. A relatively recently implemented community-based integrated catchment management (ICM) process in a rural community in northeast Australia is examined in terms of some of the lessons learned that may be relevant to other similar integrated resource management (IRM) processes. It reveals a pragmatic, opportunistic, and evolving implementation process based on adaptive learning rather than a more traditional "rational" planning approach. Some essential characteristics of a community-based IRM process are identified, including fostering communication; providing a structure that fosters cooperation and facilities coordination among community, industry, and government agencies; the integration of IRM principles into local government planning schemes; and an emergent strategic approach to IRM program implementation. We conclude by identifying some essential characteristics of an IRM process that can assist a community to adapt to, and manage change for, sustainable resource use.     

Integrating Science into Management of Ecosystems in the Greater Blue Mountains

Effective management of large protected conservation areas is challenged by political, institutional and environmental complexity and inconsistency. Knowledge generation and its uptake into management are crucial to address these challenges. We reflect on practice at the interface between science and management of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area (GBMWHA), which covers approximately 1 million hectares west of Sydney, Australia. Multiple government agencies and other stakeholders are involved in its management, and decision-making is confounded by numerous plans of management and competing values and goals, reflecting the different objectives and responsibilities of stakeholders. To highlight the complexities of the decision-making process for this large area, we draw on the outcomes of a recent collaborative research project and focus on fire regimes and wild-dog control as examples of how existing knowledge is integrated into management. The collaborative research project achieved the objectives of collating and synthesizing biological data for the region; however, transfer of the project’s outcomes to management has proved problematic. Reasons attributed to this include lack of clearly defined management objectives to guide research directions and uptake, and scientific information not being made more understandable and accessible. A key role of a local bridging organisation (e.g., the Blue Mountains World Heritage Institute) in linking science and management is ensuring that research results with management significance can be effectively transmitted to agencies and that outcomes are explained for nonspecialists as well as more widely distributed. We conclude that improved links between science, policy, and management within an adaptive learning-by-doing framework for the GBMWHA would assist the usefulness and uptake of future research.     

The Adaptation for Conservation Targets (ACT) Framework: A Tool for Incorporating Climate Change into Natural Resource Management

As natural resource management agencies and conservation organizations seek guidance on responding to climate change, myriad potential actions and strategies have been proposed for increasing the long-term viability of some attributes of natural systems. Managers need practical tools for selecting among these actions and strategies to develop a tailored management approach for specific targets at a given location. We developed and present one such tool, the participatory Adaptation for Conservation Targets (ACT) framework, which considers the effects of climate change in the development of management actions for particular species, ecosystems and ecological functions. Our framework is based on the premise that effective adaptation of management to climate change can rely on local knowledge of an ecosystem and does not necessarily require detailed projections of climate change or its effects. We illustrate the ACT framework by applying it to an ecological function in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho, USA)-water flows in the upper Yellowstone River. We suggest that the ACT framework is a practical tool for initiating adaptation planning, and for generating and communicating specific management interventions given an increasingly altered, yet uncertain, climate.     

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.     

Barriers and Opportunities for Integrating Social Science into Natural Resource Management: Lessons from National Estuarine Research Reserves

The need for cross-disciplinary scientific inquiries that facilitate improved natural resource management outcomes through increased understanding of both the biophysical and human dimensions of management issues has been widely recognized. Despite this broad recognition, a number of obstacles and barriers still sometimes challenge the successful implementation of cross-disciplinary approaches. Improving understanding of these challenges and barriers will help address them and thereby foster appropriate and effective utilization of cross-disciplinary approaches to solve natural resource management challenges. This research uses a case study analysis of the United States National Estuarine Research Reserve System to improve understanding of the critical factors that influence practitioners’ decisions related to incorporating social science into their natural resource management work. The case study research is analyzed and evaluated within a Theory of Planned Behavior framework to (1) determine and describe the factors that predict practitioners’ intent to incorporate social science into their natural resource related activities and (2) recommend potential strategies for encouraging and enabling cross-disciplinary approaches to natural resource management. The results indicate that National Estuarine Research Reserve practitioners’ decisions related to incorporating social science are primarily influenced by (1) confidence in their own capability to incorporate social science into their work and (2) beliefs about whether the outcomes of incorporating social science into their work would be valuable or beneficial.     

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.     

Applying voting theory in natural resource management: a case of multiple-criteria group decision support

Voting theory has a lot in common with utility theory, and especially with group decision-making. An expected-utility-maximising strategy exists in voting situations, as well as in decision-making situations. Therefore, it is natural to utilise the achievements of voting theory also in group decision-making. Most voting systems are based on a single criterion or holistic preference information on decision alternatives. However, a voting scheme called multicriteria approval is specially developed for decision-making situations with multiple criteria. This study considers the voting theory from the group decision support point of view and compares it with some other methods applied to similar purposes in natural resource management. A case study is presented, where the approval voting approach is introduced to natural resources planning and tested in a forestry group decision-making process. Applying multicriteria approval method was found to be a potential approach for handling some challenges typical for forestry group decision support. These challenges include (i) utilising ordinal information in the evaluation of decision alternatives, (ii) being readily understandable for and treating equally all the stakeholders in possession of different levels of knowledge on the subject considered, (iii) fast and cheap acquisition of preference information from several stakeholders, and (iv) dealing with multiple criteria.     

Carrying capacity as "Informed Judgment": the values of science and the science of values

Contemporary park and wilderness carrying capacity frameworks rely on formulation of standards of quality, which are defined as minimum acceptable resource and social conditions. Formulation of standards of quality involves elements of both science and values, and both of these elements must be integrated into informed judgments on the part of park and wilderness managers. That is, managers must ultimately make value-based judgments about the maximum acceptable level of visitor-caused impacts to the resource base and the quality of the visitor experience. However, such judgments should be as informed as possible by scientific data on the relationships between visitor use and resulting impacts and the degree to which park and wilderness visitors and other interest groups judge such impacts to be acceptable. Such information represents the “values of science” to managing carrying capacity in parks and wilderness. A growing body of literature has begun to address the corresponding “science of values,” and how this type of information might be integrated in park and wilderness management. Visitor-based research has employed normative theory and techniques to explore the acceptability of a range of resource and social impacts related to visitor use, and findings from these studies are being integrated into a body of knowledge and applied in management decision-making. Conceptual and methodological extensions of the normative approach are currently being explored in a variety of park and wilderness contexts, and new theoretical and empirical approaches are being adapted to address trade-offs inherent in carrying capacity. In these ways, the science of values is progressing to meet the opportunities and challenges of the values of science to park and wilderness management. The concept of carrying capacity, along with the theoretical and methodological approaches described in this paper, can be extended to a large number of natural resource and environmental issues.     

‘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.     

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.     

Luring anglers to enhance fisheries

Current fisheries management is, unfortunately, reactive rather than proactive to changes in fishery characteristics. Furthermore, anglers do not act independently on waterbodies, and thus, fisheries are complex socio-ecological systems. Proactive management of these complex systems necessitates an approach--adaptive fisheries management--that allows learning to occur simultaneously with management. A promising area for implementation of adaptive fisheries management is the study of luring anglers to or from specific waterbodies to meet management goals. Purposeful manipulation of anglers, and its associated field of study, is nonexistent in past management. Evaluation of different management practices (i.e., hypotheses) through an iterative adaptive management process should include both a biological and sociological survey to address changes in fish populations and changes in angler satisfaction related to changes in management. We believe adaptive management is ideal for development and assessment of management strategies targeted at angler participation. Moreover these concepts and understandings should be applicable to other natural resource users such as hunters and hikers.     

Evaluating Participatory Modeling: Developing a Framework for Cross-Case Analysis

Participatory modeling is increasingly recognized as an effective way to assist collective decision-making processes in the domain of natural resource management. This article introduces a framework for evaluating projects that have adopted a participatory modeling approach. This evaluation framework—known as the “Protocol of Canberra”—was developed through a collaboration between French and Australian researchers engaged in participatory modeling and evaluation research. The framework seeks to assess the extent to which different participatory modeling initiatives not only modify perceptions among and interactions between participants, but also contribute to collective decision-making. The article discusses the development of the framework and it’s application to three case-studies, two from Australia and one from the Pacific Island of the Republic of Kiribati. The article concludes with some comments for future use of the framework in a range of participatory modeling contexts.