Assessing diverse evidence to improve conservation decision‐making

Author:

Christie Alec P.123ORCID,Morgan William H.12,Salafsky Nick4ORCID,White Thomas B.1ORCID,Irvine Robyn5,Boenisch Nicolas6,Chiaravalloti Rafael M.7ORCID,Kincaid Kate1,Rezaie Ali Mohammad8,Yamashita Hiromi1910,Sutherland William J.12ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Conservation Science Group, Department of Zoology University of Cambridge Cambridge UK

2. BioRISC (Biosecurity Research Initiative at St Catharine's), St Catharine's College Cambridge UK

3. Downing College Cambridge UK

4. Foundations of Success Bethesda Maryland USA

5. Ecosystem Conservation Team, Parks Canada Agency Gatineau Canada

6. Foundations of Success Europe Eefde The Netherlands

7. Anthropology Department University College London London UK

8. Department of Civil Engineering University of Asia Pacific Dhaka Bangladesh

9. Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University Beppu‐City Oita Japan

10. Nagoya University Graduate School of Environmental Studies Aichi Japan

Abstract

AbstractMeeting the urgent need to protect and restore ecosystems requires effective decision‐making through wisely considering a range of evidence. However, weighing and assessing evidence to make complex decisions is challenging, particularly when evidence is of diverse types, subjects, and sources, and varies greatly in its quality and relevance. To tackle these challenges, we present the Balance Evidence Assessment Method (BEAM), an intuitive way to weigh and assess the evidence relating to the core assumptions underpinning the planning and implementation of conservation projects, strategies, and actions. Our method directly tackles the question of how to bring together diverse evidence whilst assessing its relevance, reliability, and strength of support for a given assumption, which can be mapped, for example to a Theory of Change. We consider how simple principles and safeguards in applying this method could help to respectfully, and equitably, include more local forms of knowledge when assessing assumptions, such as by ensuring diverse groups of individuals contribute and assess evidence. The method can be flexibly applied within existing decision‐making tools, platforms, and frameworks whenever assumptions (i.e., claims and hypotheses) are made. This method could greatly facilitate and improve the weighing of diverse evidence to make decisions in a range of situations, from local projects to global policy platforms.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Nature and Landscape Conservation,Environmental Science (miscellaneous),Ecology,Global and Planetary Change

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3