Rising demand for transparency, efficiency and accountability in natural resource and conservation organizations has led to an increasing use of decision analytic (DA) frameworks to solve challenging ecological problems. Ecological problem solving involves both predicting outcomes of alternative actions (role of scientists) and valuing those outcomes (role of decision-makers and society). Although approaches vary considerably, they all generally include: (1) properly framing the decision-problem, (2) articulating objectives, (3) specifying feasible alternative actions, (4) predicting outcomes under uncertainty, and (5) evaluating trade-offs among conflicting or competing objectives. This approach has been successfully applied in various ecological and environmental problems (i.e., harvest regulations, species reintroductions, pest or invasive species management, fire and forest management, hydropower and reservoir management, and reserve design), leading to more explicit understanding of the role of ecological models and hypotheses in ecological decisions.
Results/Conclusions
We give a brief introduction to the application of DA in ecology and conservation over the last two decades. Increasingly, conservation practitioners turn to applied ecologists in efforts to “let the science decide” and as a result ecologists are pressured to build the “right” models to illuminate the best course of action. Using a DA framework, we describe how applied ecologists can increase the usefulness of research projects and predictive models for conservation practitioners. Specifically, we highlight how applied ecologists can engage with decision makers using a taxonomy of uncertainty in order to understand how information gained (research or predictive models) can lead to improved conservation outcomes. Additionally, DA frameworks can provide insights into real trade-offs that managers commonly encounter, such as delaying action to gain information and acting in the face of uncertainty. Lastly, we emphasize how a failure to explicitly recognize difficult trade-offs among objectives (ecological, recreational, economical) can result in the apparent promise of win-win solutions that fail to incorporate the diverse social realities of managing public resources under uncertainty with limited funds.