An integrated sustainability decision-support framework Part II: Problem analysis

One of the main goals in decision-making for sustainable development is to identify and choose the most sustainable option among different alternatives. This process usually involves a large number of stakeholders with multiple, often conflicting objectives. Facilitating and resolving such difficult decision situations can be complex, so that a more formal and systematic approach to decision-making may be necessary. This paper proposes an integrated multiple criteria decision-support framework specifically developed to provide a systematic, step-by-step guidance to decision-makers. The framework, which is suitable for both corporate and public policy-making in the context of sustainable development, comprises three steps: problem structuring, problem analysis and problem resolution. This paper concentrates on problem analysis and resolution, where decision-makers articulate their preferences for different decision criteria. A suitable Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) technique, such as multi-objective optimisation, goal programming, value-based and outranking approaches, is then used to model the preferences. These techniques are discussed here in some detail, to provide guidance on the choice of the most appropriate MCDA method. Based on the outcome of preference modelling, which estimates the overall 'value' of each alternative being considered, decision-makers can then choose the 'best' or most sustainable option. Such an integrated decision-support framework is useful for providing structure to the debate, ensuring dialogue among decision-makers and showing trade-offs between conflicting objectives. In this way, it may be possible to create shared understanding about the issues, generate a sense of common purpose and, often, resolve 'difficult' decision problems.     

Use of Multicriteria Decision Analysis to Address Conservation Conflicts

Conservation conflicts are increasing on a global scale and instruments for reconciling competing interests are urgently needed. Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) is a structured, decision‐support process that can facilitate dialogue between groups with differing interests and incorporate human and environmental dimensions of conflict. MCDA is a structured and transparent method of breaking down complex problems and incorporating multiple objectives. The value of this process for addressing major challenges in conservation conflict management is that MCDA helps in setting realistic goals; entails a transparent decision‐making process; and addresses mistrust, differing world views, cross‐scale issues, patchy or contested information, and inflexible legislative tools. Overall we believe MCDA provides a valuable decision‐support tool, particularly for increasing awareness of the effects of particular values and choices for working toward negotiated compromise, although an awareness of the effect of methodological choices and the limitations of the method is vital before applying it in conflict situations. Uso de Análisis de Decisiones Multicriterio para Abordar Conflictos de Conservación     

An integrated sustainability decision-support framework Part I: Problem structuring

One of the main goals in decision-making for sustainable development is to identify and choose the most sustainable option from among different alternatives. This process usually involves a large number of stakeholders with multiple, often conflicting, objectives. Facilitating and resolving such difficult decision situations can be complex, so that a more formal and systematic approach to decision-making may be necessary. This two-part paper proposes an integrated multiple criteria decision-support framework specifically developed to provide systematic, step-by-step guidance to decision-makers. The framework, which is suitable for both corporate and public policy-making in the context of sustainable development, comprises three steps: problem structuring, problem analysis and problem resolution. In this paper, the focus is on problem structuring while Part II concentrates on problem analysis and resolution. Problem structuring includes identification of stakeholders, sustainability issues and indicators relevant for a particular decision problem. Sustainability indicators are used as decision criteria for identifying and choosing the most sustainable option. In the problem analysis step, decision makers articulate their preferences for different decision criteria. A suitable Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) technique, such as multi-objective optimisation, goal programming, value-based and outranking approaches, is then used to model the preferences. These techniques are discussed in Part II, which also gives guidance on the choice of the most appropriate MCDA method. Based on the outcome of preference modelling, which estimates the overall 'value' of each alternative being considered, decision-makers can then choose the 'best' or most sustainable option. Such an integrated decision-support framework is useful for providing structure to the debate, ensuring dialogue among decision-makers and showing trade-offs between conflicting objectives. In this way, it may be possible to create shared understanding about the issues, generate a sense of common purpose, and often, resolve 'difficult' decision problems.     

Investment and the Policy Process in Conservation Monitoring

Despite decades of discussion and implementation, conservation monitoring remains a challenge. Many current solutions in the literature focus on improving the science or making more structured decisions. These insights are important but incomplete in accounting for the politics and economics of the conservation decisions informed by monitoring. Our novel depiction of the monitoring enterprise unifies insights from multiple disciplines (conservation, operations research, economics, and policy) and highlights many underappreciated factors that affect the expected benefits of monitoring. For example, there must be a strong link between the specific needs of decision makers and information gathering. Furthermore, the involvement of stakeholders other than scientists and research managers means that new information may not be interpreted and acted upon as expected. While answering calls for sharply delineated objectives will clearly add focus to monitoring efforts, for practical reasons, high‐level goals may purposefully be left vague, to facilitate other necessary steps in the policy process. We use the expanded depiction of the monitoring process to highlight problems of cooperation and conflict. We critique calls to invest in monitoring for the greater good by arguing that incentives are typically lacking. Although the benefits of learning accrued within a project (e.g., improving management) provide incentives for investing in some monitoring, it is unrealistic, in general, to expect managers to add potentially costly measures to generate shared benefits. In the traditional linear model of the role of science in policy decisions, monitoring reduces uncertainty and decision makers are rational, unbiased consumers of the science. However, conservation actions increasingly involve social conflict. Drawing insights from political science, we argue that in high‐conflict situations, it is necessary to address the conflict prior to monitoring. Las Inversiones y el Proceso de Políticas en el Monitoreo de la Conservación Sanchirico et al.     

Considering science needs to deliver actionable science

Conservation practitioners, natural resource managers, and environmental stewards often seek out scientific contributions to inform decision-making. This body of science only becomes actionable when motivated by decision makers considering alternative courses of action. Many in the science community equate addressing stakeholder science needs with delivering actionable science. However, not all efforts to address science needs deliver actionable science, suggesting that the synonymous use of these two constructs (delivering actionable science and addressing science needs) is not trivial. This can be the case when such needs are conveyed by people who neglect decision makers responsible for articulating a priority management concern and for specifying how the anticipated scientific information will aid the decision-making process. We argue that the actors responsible for articulating these science needs and the process used to identify them are decisive factors in the ability to deliver actionable science, stressing the importance of examining the provenance and the determination of science needs. Guided by a desire to enhance communication and cross-literacy between scientists and decision makers, we identified categories of actors who may inappropriately declare science needs (e.g., applied scientists with and without regulatory affiliation, external influencers, reluctant decision makers, agents in place of decision makers, and boundary organization representatives). We also emphasize the importance of, and general approach to, undertaking needs assessments or gap analyses as a means to identify priority science needs. We conclude that basic stipulations to legitimize actionable science, such as the declaration of decisions of interest that motivate science needs and using a robust process to identify priority information gaps, are not always satisfied and require verification. To alleviate these shortcomings, we formulated practical suggestions for consideration by applied scientists, decision makers, research funding entities, and boundary organizations to help foster conditions that lead to science output being truly actionable.     

Shared ways of thinking in Brazil about the science–practice interface in ecology and conservation

The debate in the literature on the science–practice interface suggests a diversity of opinions on how to link science and practice to improve conservation. Understanding this diversity is key to addressing unequal power relations, avoiding the consideration of only dominant views, and identifying strategies to link science and practice. In turn, linking science and practice should promote conservation decisions that are socially robust and scientifically informed. To identify and describe the viewpoints of scientists and decision makers on how the science–practice interface should work in order to improve conservation decisions, we interviewed Brazilian scientists (ecologists and conservation scientists, n = 11) and decision makers (n = 11). We used Q methodology and asked participants to rank their agreement with 48 statements on how the science–practice interface should work in order to improve conservation decisions. We used principal component analysis to identify shared viewpoints. The predominant viewpoint, shared by scientists and decision makers, was characterized by valuing the integration of scientific and strategic knowledge to address environmental problems. The second viewpoint, held mostly by decision makers, was distinguished by assigning great importance to science in the decision-making process and calling for problem-relevant research. The third viewpoint, shared only by scientists, was characterized by an unwillingness to collaborate and a perception of scientists as producers of knowledge that may help decision makers. Most participants agreed organizations should promote collaboration and that actors and knowledge from both science and practice are relevant. Disagreements concerned specific roles assigned to actors, willingness to collaborate, and organizational and institutional arrangements considered effective to link science and practice. Our results suggest there is ample room for collaborations and that impediments lie mainly in existing organizations and formal institutional arrangements rather than in negative attitudes between scientists and decision makers.     

Balancing Emotion and Cognition: a Case for Decision Aiding in Conservation Efforts

Abstract: Despite advances in the quality of participatory decision making for conservation, many current efforts still suffer from an inability to bridge the gap between science and policy. Judgment and decision‐making research suggests this gap may result from a person's reliance on affect‐based shortcuts in complex decision contexts. I examined the results from 3 experiments that demonstrate how affect (i.e., the instantaneous reaction one has to a stimulus) influences individual judgments in these contexts and identified techniques from the decision‐aiding literature that help encourage a balance between affect‐based emotion and cognition in complex decision processes. In the first study, subjects displayed a lack of focus on their stated conservation objectives and made decisions that reflected their initial affective impressions. Value‐focused approaches may help individuals incorporate all the decision‐relevant objectives by making the technical and value‐based objectives more salient. In the second study, subjects displayed a lack of focus on statistical risk and again made affect‐based decisions. Trade‐off techniques may help individuals incorporate relevant technical data, even when it conflicts with their initial affective impressions or other value‐based objectives. In the third study, subjects displayed a lack of trust in decision‐making authorities when the decision involved a negatively affect‐rich outcome (i.e., a loss). Identifying shared salient values and increasing procedural fairness may help build social trust in both decision‐making authorities and the decision process.     

Application of decision tools to ethical analysis in biodiversity conservation

Achieving ethically responsible decisions is crucial for the success of biodiversity conservation projects. We adapted the ethical matrix, decision tree, and Bateson's cube to assist in the ethical analysis of complex conservation scenarios by structuring these tools so that they can implement the different value dimensions (environmental, social, and animal welfare) involved in conservation ethics. We then applied them to a case study relative to the decision-making process regarding whether or not to continue collecting biomaterial on the oldest of the two remaining northern white rhinoceroses (Ceratotherium simum cottoni), a functionally extinct subspecies of the white rhinoceros. We used the ethical matrix to gather ethical pros and cons and as a starting point for a participatory approach to ethical decision-making. We used decision trees to compare the different options at stake on the basis of a set of ethical desiderata. We used Bateson's cube to establish a threshold of ethical acceptability and model the results of a simple survey. The application of these tools proved to be pivotal in structuring the decision-making process and in helping reach a shared, reasoned, and transparent decision on the best option from an ethical point of view among those available.     

Exposing ecological and economic costs of the research‐implementation gap and compromises in decision making

The frequently discussed gap between conservation science and practice is manifest in the gap between spatial conservation prioritization plans and their implementation. We analyzed the research‐implementation gap of one zoning case by comparing results of a spatial prioritization analysis aimed at avoiding ecological impact of peat mining in a regional zoning process with the final zoning plan. We examined the relatively complex planning process to determine the gaps among research, zoning, and decision making. We quantified the ecological costs of the differing trade‐offs between ecological and socioeconomic factors included in the different zoning suggestions by comparing the landscape‐level loss of ecological features (species occurrences, habitat area, etc.) between the different solutions for spatial allocation of peat mining. We also discussed with the scientists and planners the reasons for differing zoning suggestions. The implemented plan differed from the scientists suggestion in that its focus was individual ecological features rather than all the ecological features for which there were data; planners and decision makers considered effects of peat mining on areas not included in the prioritization analysis; zoning was not truly seen as a resource‐allocation process and not emphasized in general minimizing ecological losses while satisfying economic needs (peat‐mining potential); and decision makers based their prioritization of sites on site‐level information showing high ecological value and on single legislative factors instead of finding a cost‐effective landscape‐level solution. We believe that if the zoning and decision‐making processes are very complex, then the usefulness of science‐based prioritization tools is likely to be reduced. Nevertheless, we found that high‐end tools were useful in clearly exposing trade‐offs between conservation and resource utilization.     

Modeling and analysis of nest-site selection by honeybee swarms: the speed and accuracy trade-off

Nest-site selection in honeybees is a process of social decision making in which the scout bees in a swarm locate several potential nest sites, evaluate them, and select the best one by means of competitive signaling. We develop a model of this process and validate that the model possesses the key features of the bees' decision-making process, as revealed by prior empirical studies. Next, we use the model to study the “design” of the nest-site selection process, with a focus on how certain behavioral parameters have been tuned by natural selection to achieve a balance between speed and accuracy. First, we study the effects of the quorum threshold and the dance decay rate. We show that evolution seems to have settled on values for these two parameters that seek a balance between speed and accuracy of decision making by minimizing the time needed to achieve a consensus and maximizing the probability that the best site is chosen. Second, we study the adaptive tuning of the tendency of bees to explore for vs be recruited to a site. We show that this tendency appears to be tuned to regulate the positive feedback process of recruitment to ensure both a reasonably rapid choice and a low probability of a poor choice. Finally we show that the probability of choosing the best site is proportional to its quality, but that this proportionality depends on its quality relative to other discovered sites.

“Decision-making” in conflicts of wild chimpanzees (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Pan troglodytes</Emphasis>): an extension of the Relational Model

>We examined the "decision-making" process of aggressive interactions within a community of wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus) in the Taï National Park, Côte d'Ivoire (West Africa). Costs and benefits were investigated for 876 dyadic aggressive interactions among 18 adults (including 4 independent adolescents) of either sex. An extended version of the Relational Model was developed to describe the dynamics of the "decision-making" process in Taï chimpanzees, which suggests that the net benefit determines the occurrence of conflicts. Both sexes fought more frequently for the resources that were most important to them, food for females and social contexts for males. Individuals used two different strategies according to their likelihood of winning the aggressive interaction, determined by the dominance relationship of the conflict partners. Dominant initiators had longer and more intense aggressive interactions, but they limited their social disadvantages by fighting non-cooperative partners. Subordinate initiators had shorter and less intense aggressive interactions, but risked more social costs, which they could reduce afterwards by reconciliation. Both strategies included a positive overall net benefit. The extended Relational Model fits the complexity of wild chimpanzee conflicts and allows for more flexibility in the "decision-making" compared to the original version.Communicated by E. Sterck     

Managing the Koala Problem: Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Abstract: There is a complex scientific, ethical, and cultural debate in Australia about how best to conserve koalas and their habitat. Despite the diverse array of management and research options promoted by scientists, wildlife agency staff, and koala advocates, there remains a gap in our acknowledgment of the social factors influencing decision making about koala conservation. Koala management research has generated valuable scientific knowledge about koala biology and ecology but has been weak about organizational and policy processes and about the cultures within which we produce, disseminate, and legitimize this kind of knowledge. We suggest that more effective koala conservation will result from making the political and cultural influences on decision making regarding the koala more explicit in research, management, and policy-making forums. Research must be conducted in the context of the cultural significance of the koala. The koala's survival depends on preserving the valuable lands that these creatures (and many others) inhabit. Ultimately, the koala symbolizes conflicting land-use values and illustrates the need for greater collaboration, cooperation, and trust among social and natural scientists in the conduct of koala conservation research, management, and policy.     

Better the nest site you know: decision-making during nest migrations by the Pharaoh’s ant

Animals frequently have to decide between alternative resources and in social insects these individual choices produce a colony-level decision. The choice of nest site is a particularly critical decision for a social insect colony to make, but the decision making process has still only been studied in a few species. In this study, we investigated nest selection by the Pharaoh’s ant, Monomorium pharaonis, a species renowned for its propensity to migrate and its use of multi-component trail pheromones to organise decision-making in other contexts. When presented with the choice of familiar and novel nests of equal quality in a Y set-up, colonies preferentially migrated towards the familiar nest, suggesting a form of colony-level ‘memory’ of potential nest sites. However, if the novel nest was superior to the familiar nest, then colonies began migrating initially to the familiar nest, but then redirected their migration to the superior quality novel nest. This may be an effective method of reducing colony exposure while searching for an optimum nest site. Branches that had previously led to a selected nest were attractive to ants in subsequent migrations, suggesting that trail pheromones mediate the decision making process. The adaptive, pheromone-based organisation of nest-site selection by Pharaoh’s ants matches their ephemeral environment and is likely to contribute to their success as a 'tramp' species.     

Human perspectives and conservation of grizzly bears in Banff National Park, Canada

Some conservation initiatives provoke intense conflict among stakeholders. The need for action, the nature of the conservation measures, and the effects of these measures on human interests may be disputed. Tools are needed to depolarize such situations, foster understanding of the perspectives of people involved, and find common ground. We used Q methodology to explore stakeholders' perspectives on conservation and management of grizzly bears (Ursus arctos horribilis) in Banff National Park and the Bow River watershed of Alberta, Canada. Twenty-nine stakeholders participated in the study, including local residents, scientists, agency employees, and representatives of nongovernmental conservation organizations and other interest groups. Participants rank ordered a set of statements to express their opinions on the problems of grizzly bear management (I-IV) and a second set of statements on possible solutions to the problems (A-C). Factor analysis revealed that participants held 4 distinct views of the problems: individuals associated with factor I emphasized deficiencies in goals and plans; those associated with factor II believed that problems had been exaggerated; those associated with factor III blamed institutional flaws such as disjointed management and inadequate resources; and individuals associated with factor IV blamed politicized decision making. There were 3 distinct views about the best solutions to the problems: individuals associated with factor A called for increased conservation efforts; those associated with factor B wanted reforms in decision-making processes; and individuals associated with factor C supported active landscape management. We connected people's definitions of the problem with their preferred solutions to form 5 overall problem narratives espoused by groups in the study: the problem is deficient goals and plans, the solution is to prioritize conservation efforts (planning-oriented conservation advocates); the problem is flawed institutions, the solution is to prioritize conservation efforts (institutionally-oriented conservation advocates); the problems have been exaggerated, but there is a need to improve decision-making processes (optimistic decision-process reformers); the problems have been exaggerated, but managers should more actively manage the landscape (optimistic landscape managers); and the problem is politicized decision making, solutions vary (democratizers). Although these 5 groups differed on many issues, they agreed that the population of grizzly bears is vulnerable to extirpation, human use of the area should be designed around ecological constraints, and more inclusive decision-making processes are needed. We used our results to inform a series of workshops in which stakeholders developed and agreed on new management strategies that were implemented by Parks Canada. Our research demonstrates the usefulness of Q method to illuminate people's perspectives and identify common ground in settings where conservation is contested.     

Resolving future fire management conflicts using multicriteria decision making

Management strategies to reduce the risks to human life and property from wildfire commonly involve burning native vegetation. However, planned burning can conflict with other societal objectives such as human health and biodiversity conservation. These conflicts are likely to intensify as fire regimes change under future climates and as growing human populations encroach farther into fire‐prone ecosystems. Decisions about managing fire risks are therefore complex and warrant more sophisticated approaches than are typically used. We applied a multicriteria decision making approach (MCDA) with the potential to improve fire management outcomes to the case of a highly populated, biodiverse, and flammable wildland–urban interface. We considered the effects of 22 planned burning options on 8 objectives: house protection, maximizing water quality, minimizing carbon emissions and impacts on human health, and minimizing declines of 5 distinct species types. The MCDA identified a small number of management options (burning forest adjacent to houses) that performed well for most objectives, but not for one species type (arboreal mammal) or for water quality. Although MCDA made the conflict between objectives explicit, resolution of the problem depended on the weighting assigned to each objective. Additive weighting of criteria traded off the arboreal mammal and water quality objectives for other objectives. Multiplicative weighting identified scenarios that avoided poor outcomes for any objective, which is important for avoiding potentially irreversible biodiversity losses. To distinguish reliably among management options, future work should focus on reducing uncertainty in outcomes across a range of objectives. Considering management actions that have more predictable outcomes than landscape fuel management will be important. We found that, where data were adequate, an MCDA can support decision making in the complex and often conflicted area of fire management.     

Nest-seeking rock ants (Temnothorax albipennis) trade off sediment packing density and structural integrity for ease of cavity excavation

We investigated excavation and nest site choice across sediment-filled cavities in the ant Temnothorax albipennis. Colonies were presented with sediment-filled cavities, covering a spectrum from ones that should be quick to excavate but will form a weak enclosing wall to those that should be slow to excavate but form a strong wall. Overall, colonies only showed a significant preference for cavities that were fastest to excavate over those that were slowest. The speed of decision making and moving appears paramount over the suitability of the sediment for forming an enclosing wall. The mechanism behind the choice is the differential between the rates at which alternatives are excavated and accumulate ants. The rates for a particular type of cavity were unaffected by the type with which it was paired. This suggests that there is no significant competition between sites during the decision-making process. Certain colonies were able consistently to discriminate across more closely matched alternatives. These colonies required a greater number of ants to be present and took longer before beginning to move. A race is run between alternatives to become habitable but the process may be tuned across colonies such that it may run for longer and an incorrect or split decision is less likely.     

The place of nature in conservation conflicts

Conservation conflicts are gaining importance in contemporary conservation scholarship such that conservation may have entered a conflict hype. We attempted to uncover and deconstruct the normative assumptions behind such studies by raising several questions: what are conservation conflicts, what justifies the attention they receive, do conservation-conflict studies limit wildlife conservation, is scientific knowledge stacked against wildlife in conservation conflicts, do conservation-conflict studies adopt a specific view of democracy, can laws be used to force conservation outcomes, why is flexibility needed in managing conservation conflicts, can conservation conflicts be managed by promoting tolerance, and who needs to compromise in conservation conflicts? We suggest that many of the intellectual premises in the field may defang conservation and prevent it from truly addressing the current conservation crisis as it accelerates. By framing conservation conflicts as conflicts between people about wildlife or nature, the field insidiously transfers guilt, whereby human activities are no longer blamed for causing species decline and extinctions but conservation is instead blamed for causing social conflicts. When the focus is on mitigating social conflicts without limiting in any powerful way human activities damaging to nature, conservation-conflict studies risk keeping conservation within the limits of human activities, instead of keeping human activities within the limits of nature. For conservation to successfully stop the biodiversity crisis, we suggest the alternative goal of recognizing nature's right to existence to maintenance of ecological functions and evolutionary processes. Nature being a rights bearer or legal person would imply its needs must be explicitly taken into account in conflict adjudication. If, even in conservation, nature's interests come second to human interests, it may be no surprise that conservation cannot succeed.     

Mechanistic understanding of human–wildlife conflict through a novel application of dynamic occupancy models

Crop and livestock depredation by wildlife is a primary driver of human–wildlife conflict, a problem that threatens the coexistence of people and wildlife globally. Understanding mechanisms that underlie depredation patterns holds the key to mitigating conflicts across time and space. However, most studies do not consider imperfect detection and reporting of conflicts, which may lead to incorrect inference regarding its spatiotemporal drivers. We applied dynamic occupancy models to elephant crop depredation data from India between 2005 and 2011 to estimate crop depredation occurrence and model its underlying dynamics as a function of spatiotemporal covariates while accounting for imperfect detection of conflicts. The probability of detecting conflicts was consistently <1.0 and was negatively influenced by distance to roads and elevation gradient, averaging 0.08–0.56 across primary periods (distinct agricultural seasons within each year). The probability of crop depredation occurrence ranged from 0.29 (SE 0.09) to 0.96 (SE 0.04). The probability that sites raided by elephants in primary period t would not be raided in primary period t + 1 varied with elevation gradient in different seasons and was influenced negatively by mean rainfall and village density and positively by distance to forests. Negative effects of rainfall variation and distance to forests best explained variation in the probability that sites not raided by elephants in primary period t would be raided in primary period t + 1. With our novel application of occupancy models, we teased apart the spatiotemporal drivers of conflicts from factors that influence how they are observed, thereby allowing more reliable inference on mechanisms underlying observed conflict patterns. We found that factors associated with increased crop accessibility and availability (e.g., distance to forests and rainfall patterns) were key drivers of elephant crop depredation dynamics. Such an understanding is essential for rigorous prediction of future conflicts, a critical requirement for effective conflict management in the context of increasing human–wildlife interactions.     

Phenotypic manipulation reveals sexual conflict over precopula duration

Sexual conflict is common in nature, but detailed behavioral studies on the role female resistance behavior plays in shaping mating patterns are rare. I manipulated female resistance to examine its effects on pairing dynamics in two ecologically different freshwater amphipods. I found evidence for female behavior playing a role in both the outcome of pre-pairing interactions and the initiation of pairing in both species. In these species, the male optimum pairing duration is greater than the value preferred by females or compromised pairing durations observed under natural conditions, thus indicating sexual conflict. Furthermore, the proportion of male–female encounters producing male grasping was greater and the duration of such interactions was longer when female resistance was reduced. Thus, sexual conflict over pairing duration may select simultaneously for female resistance and for male persistence both of which mediate the outcome of pre-pairing interactions in Hyalella. Contact precopulatory mate guarding and the interactions that precede it are common components of crustacean and insect mating systems, suggesting that such conflicts may play an important role in the evolution of mating traits in many taxa.