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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

‘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.     

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.     

Case studies of scenario analysis for adaptive management of natural resource and infrastructure systems

Management of natural resources and infrastructure systems for sustainability is complicated by uncertainties in the human and natural environment. Moreover, decisions are further complicated by contradictory views, values, and concerns that are rarely made explicit. Scenario analysis can play a major role in addressing the challenges of sustainability management, especially the core question of how to scan the future in a structured, integrated, participatory, and policy-relevant manner. In a context of systems engineering, scenario analysis can provide an integrated and timely understanding of emergent conditions and help to avoid regret and belated action. The purpose of this paper is to present several case studies in natural resources and infrastructure systems management where scenario analysis has been used to aide decision making under uncertainty. The case studies include several resource and infrastructure systems: (1) water resources (2) land-use corridors (3) energy infrastructure, and (4) coastal climate change adaptation. The case studies emphasize a participatory approach, where scenario analysis becomes a means of incorporating diverse stakeholder concerns and experience. This approach to scenario analysis provides insight into both high-performing and robust initiatives/policies, and, perhaps more importantly, influential scenarios. Identifying the scenarios that are most influential to policy making helps to direct further investigative analysis, modeling, and data-collection efforts to support the learning process that is emphasized in adaptive management.     

System Dynamics to Sustainable Water Resources Management in the Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer Under Water Supply Uncertainty1

Abstract: Water supply uncertainty continues to threaten the reliability of regional water resources in the western United States. Climate variability and water dispute potentials induce water managers to develop proactive adaptive management strategies to mitigate future hydroclimate impacts. The Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer in the state of Idaho is also facing these challenges in the sense that population growth and economic development strongly depend on reliable water resources from underground storage. Drought and subsequent water conflict often drive scientific research and political agendas because water resources availability and aquifer management for a sustainable rural economy are of great interest. In this study, a system dynamics approach is applied to address dynamically complex problems with management of the aquifer and associated surface‐water and groundwater interactions. Recharge and discharge dynamics within the aquifer system are coded in an environmental modeling framework to identify long‐term behavior of aquifer responses to uncertain future hydrological variability. The research shows that the system dynamics approach is a promising modeling tool to develop sustainable water resources planning and management in a collaborative decision‐making framework and also to provide useful insights and alternative opportunities for operational management, policy support, and participatory strategic planning to mitigate future hydroclimate impacts in human dimensions.     

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.     

Balancing Endangered Species and Ecosystems: A Case Study of Adaptive Management in Grand Canyon

/ Adaptive ecosystem management seeks to sustain ecosystems while extracting or using natural resources. The goal of endangered species management under the Endangered Species Act is limited to the protection and recovery of designated species, and the act takes precedence over other policies and regulations guiding ecosystem management. We present an example of conflict between endangered species and ecosystem management during the first planned flood on the Colorado River in Grand Canyon in 1996. We discuss the resolution of the conflict and the circumstances that allowed a solution to be reached. We recommend that adaptive management be implemented extensively and early in ecosystem management so that information and working relationships will be available to address conflicts as they arise. Though adaptive management is not a panacea, it offers the best opportunity for balanced solutions to competing management goals.     

ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT OF LARGE RIVERS WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE MISSOURI RIVER1

ABSTRACT: The technocratic approach for managing the Missouri River and other large rivers is not effective in resolving conflicts among competing uses of water and dealing with uncertainty about how river ecosystems respond to alternative management actions. Adaptive management offers an alternative way to address these and other issues. It has the potential to alleviate management gridlock and provide lasting solutions to management of the Missouri River and other large river ecosystems. In passive adaptive management, simulation models and expert judgment are combined to select a preferred management action. While passive adaptive management is relatively simple and inexpensive to use, it does not necessarily provide reliable information for making management decisions. Active adaptive management uses statistically designed experiments to test assumptions or hypotheses about ecosystem responses to management actions. It is best carried out by a collaborative working group. Active adaptive management has several advantages, but the inability to satisfy certain prerequisites for successful application makes it more difficult to implement in large river ecosystems. A second‐best approach is proposed here to select, implement, monitor, and evaluate a preferred management action and retain that action provided ecological conditions improve and socioeconomic indicators do not fall below established acceptability limits.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY IN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT DECISION MAKING1

ABSTRACT: Watershed management decision making is a complex process. Cooperation and communication among federal, state, and local stakeholders is required while balancing biophysical and socioeconomic concerns. The public is taking part in environmental decisions, and the need for technology transfer from public agencies to stakeholders is increasing. Information technology has had a profound influence on watershed management over the past decade. Advances in data acquisition through remote sensing, data utilization through geographic information systems (GIS), and data sharing through the Internet have provided watershed managers access to more information for management decisions. In the future, applications incorporating hydrologic simulation models, GIS, and decision support systems will be deployed through the Internet. In addition to challenges in making complex modeling technology available to diverse audiences, new information technology issues, such as interoperability, Internet access, and security, are introduced when GIS, simulation models, and decision support systems are integrated in an Internet environment. This paper presents a review of current use of information technology in watershed management decision making and a discussion of issues created when developing Internet based, integrated watershed management decision support systems. A prototype spatial decision support system (SDSS) for rangeland watershed management was developed using web services, which are components that communicate using text based messages, thus eliminating proprietary protocols. This new framework provides an extensible, accessible, and interoperable approach for SDSS.     

Disciplined Planning,Structured Participation,and Collaborative Modeling — Applying Shared Vision Planning to Water Resources

Participatory planning applied to water resources has sparked significant interest and debate during the last decade. Recognition that models play a significant role in the formulation and implementation of design and management strategies has encouraged the profession to consider how such models can be best implemented. Shared Vision Planning (SVP) is a disciplined planning approach that combines traditional water resources planning methodologies with innovations such as structured public participation and the use of collaborative modeling, resulting in a more complete understanding and an integrative decision support tool. This study reviews these three basic components of SVP and explains how they are incorporated into a unified planning approach. The successful application of SVP is explored in three studies involving planning challenges: the National Drought Study, the Lake Ontario‐St. Lawrence River Study, and the Apalachicola‐Chattahoochee‐Flint/Alabama‐Coosa‐Tallapoosa River Basin Study. The article concludes by summarizing the advantages and limitations of this planning approach.     

Integrated resource management systems: Coupling expert systems with data-base management and geographic information systems

Decision making in natural resource management is becoming increasingly information-intensive because of the rising public concerns about resource conservation and environmental quality. The volume of information that must be analyzed and the complexity of the decision-making process demands that computerized systems be developed to provide decision support services. An integrated systems approach that couples data-base management, geographic information systems, and expert systems is needed. We refer to such an approach as integrated resource management automation (IRMA) and describe a prototype system that is currently being tested in the Nicolet National Forest. This type of information system is likely to play an increasingly important role in the management of natural resources in the future.     

Water Management Decision Making in the Face of Multiple Forms of Uncertainty and Risk

In the Wasatch Range Metropolitan Area of Northern Utah, water management decision makers confront multiple forms of uncertainty and risk. Adapting to these uncertainties and risks is critical for maintaining the long‐term sustainability of the region's water supply. This study draws on interview data to assess the major challenges climatic and social changes pose to Utah's water future, as well as potential solutions. The study identifies the water management adaptation decision‐making space shaped by the interacting institutional, social, economic, political, and biophysical processes that enable and constrain sustainable water management. The study finds water managers and other water actors see challenges related to reallocating water, including equitable water transfers and stakeholder cooperation, addressing population growth, and locating additional water supplies, as more problematic than the challenges posed by climate change. Furthermore, there is significant disagreement between water actors over how to best adapt to both climatic and social changes. This study concludes with a discussion of the path dependencies that present challenges to adaptive water management decision making, as well as opportunities for the pursuit of a new water management paradigm based on soft‐path solutions. Such knowledge is useful for understanding the institutional and social adaptations needed for water management to successfully address future uncertainties and risks.