Managing uncertainty in decision-making for conservation science

被引:2
|
作者
Ben-Haim, Yakov [1 ]
机构
[1] Technion Israel Inst Technol, Fac Mech Engn, IL-32000 Haifa, Israel
关键词
conservation decisions; decision methodology; info-gaps; reproductive output function; robustness; uncertainty; ROBUST DECISIONS; MANAGEMENT; INTRODUCTIONS; BIODIVERSITY; NETWORKS;
D O I
10.1111/cobi.14164
中图分类号
X176 [生物多样性保护];
学科分类号
090705 ;
摘要
Science-based decision-making is the ideal. However, scientific knowledge is incomplete, and sometimes wrong. Responsible science-based policy, planning, and action must exploit knowledge while managing uncertainty. I considered the info-gap method to manage deep uncertainty surrounding knowledge that is used for decision-making in conservation. A central concept is satisficing, which means satisfying a critical requirement. Alternative decisions are prioritized based on their robustness to uncertainty, and critical outcome requirements are satisficed. Robustness is optimized; outcome is satisficed. This is called robust satisficing. A decision with a suboptimal outcome may be preferred over a decision with a putatively optimal outcome if the former can more robustly achieve an acceptable outcome. Many biodiversity conservation applications employ info-gap theory, under which parameter uncertainty but not uncertainty in functional relations is considered. I considered info-gap models of functional uncertainty, widely used outside of conservation science, as applied to conservation of a generic endangered species by translocation to a new region. I focused on 2 uncertainties: the future temperature is uncertain due to climate change, and the shape of the reproductive output function is uncertain due to translocation to an unfamiliar region. The value of new information is demonstrated based on the robustness function, and the info-gap opportuneness function demonstrates the potential for better-than-anticipated outcomes.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] RATIONAL DECISION-MAKING IN UNCERTAINTY - DISCUSSION
    KRELLE, W
    ZEITSCHRIFT FUR BETRIEBSWIRTSCHAFT, 1976, 46 (07): : 522 - 523
  • [32] Leadership and decision-making under uncertainty
    von Ameln, Falko
    GIO-GRUPPE-INTERAKTION-ORGANISATION-ZEITSCHRIFT FUER ANGEWANDTE ORGANISATIONSPSYCHOLOGIE, 2021, 52 (04): : 567 - 577
  • [33] Clinical decision-making: coping with uncertainty
    West, AF
    West, RR
    POSTGRADUATE MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2002, 78 (920) : 319 - 321
  • [34] Fair Decision-making Under Uncertainty
    Zhang, Wenbin
    Weiss, Jeremy C.
    2021 21ST IEEE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON DATA MINING (ICDM 2021), 2021, : 886 - 895
  • [35] POLITICAL DECISION-MAKING UNDER UNCERTAINTY
    JENSEN, A
    NATIONALOKONOMISK TIDSSKRIFT, 1980, 118 (03): : 379 - 389
  • [36] DISTRIBUTED DECISION-MAKING UNDER UNCERTAINTY
    NOBLE, DF
    1989 IEEE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SYSTEMS, MAN, AND CYBERNETICS, VOLS 1-3: CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS, 1989, : 713 - 718
  • [37] DECISION-MAKING WITH UNCERTAINTY IN ATTRIBUTE SAMPLING
    Pendrill, Leslie R.
    Kallgren, Hakan
    ADVANCED MATHEMATICAL AND COMPUTATIONAL TOOLS IN METROLOGY VII, 2006, 72 : 212 - 220
  • [38] Decision-Making under Criteria Uncertainty
    Kureychik, V. M.
    Safronenkova, I. B.
    INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES IN BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY 2018, PTS 1-4, 2018, 1015
  • [39] THE EFFECT OF INFORMATION UNCERTAINTY ON DECISION-MAKING
    WADA, M
    JAPANESE PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH, 1987, 29 (03) : 147 - 152
  • [40] DECISION-MAKING UNDER ENVIRONMENTAL UNCERTAINTY
    FAUCHEUX, S
    FROGER, G
    ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 1995, 15 (01) : 29 - 42