IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ordeca/v20y2023i4p295-310.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using Decision Analysis to Determine the Feasibility of a Conservation Translocation

Author

Listed:
  • Laura M. Keating

    (Wilder Institute/Calgary Zoo, Calgary, Alberta T2E 7V6, Canada)

  • Lea Randall

    (Wilder Institute/Calgary Zoo, Calgary, Alberta T2E 7V6, Canada)

  • Rebecca Stanton

    (Wilder Institute/Calgary Zoo, Calgary, Alberta T2E 7V6, Canada)

  • Casey McCormack

    (Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Coeur d’Alene, Idaho 83815)

  • Michael Lucid

    (Selkirk Wildlife Science LLC, Sandpoint, Idaho 83864)

  • Travis Seaborn

    (Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho 83844)

  • Sarah J. Converse

    (U.S. Geological Survey, Washington Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, School of Environmental and Forest Sciences & School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195)

  • Stefano Canessa

    (Division of Conservation Biology, University of Bern, 3012 Bern, Switzerland; International Union for Conservation of Nature Species Survival Commission Conservation Translocation Specialist Group, Calgary, Alberta T2N 1N4, Canada)

  • Axel Moehrenschlager

    (International Union for Conservation of Nature Species Survival Commission Conservation Translocation Specialist Group, Calgary, Alberta T2N 1N4, Canada)

Abstract

Conservation translocations, intentional movements of species to protect against extinction, have become widespread in recent decades and are projected to increase further as biodiversity loss continues worldwide. The literature abounds with analyses to inform translocations and assess whether they are successful, but the fundamental question of whether they should be initiated at all is rarely addressed formally. We used decision analysis to assess northern leopard frog reintroduction in northern Idaho, with success defined as a population that persists for at least 50 years. The Idaho Department of Fish and Game was the decision maker (i.e., the agency that will use this assessment to inform their decisions). Stakeholders from government, indigenous groups, academia, land management agencies, and conservation organizations also participated. We built an age-structured population model to predict how management alternatives would affect probability of success. In the model, we explicitly represented epistemic uncertainty around a success criterion (probability of persistence) characterized by aleatory uncertainty. For the leading alternative, the mean probability of persistence was 40%. The distribution of the modelling results was bimodal, with most parameter combinations resulting in either very low (<5%) or relatively high (>95%) probabilities of success. Along with other considerations, including cost, the Idaho Department of Fish and Game will use this assessment to inform a decision regarding reintroduction of northern leopard frogs. Conservation translocations may benefit greatly from more widespread use of decision analysis to counter the complexity and uncertainty inherent in these decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Laura M. Keating & Lea Randall & Rebecca Stanton & Casey McCormack & Michael Lucid & Travis Seaborn & Sarah J. Converse & Stefano Canessa & Axel Moehrenschlager, 2023. "Using Decision Analysis to Determine the Feasibility of a Conservation Translocation," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 295-310, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ordeca:v:20:y:2023:i:4:p:295-310
    DOI: 10.1287/deca.2023.0472
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/deca.2023.0472
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/deca.2023.0472?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sandra Hoffmann & Paul Fischbeck & Alan Krupnick & Michael McWilliams, 2007. "Elicitation from Large, Heterogeneous Expert Panels: Using Multiple Uncertainty Measures to Characterize Information Quality for Decision Analysis," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 4(2), pages 91-109, June.
    2. Andrew Speirs‐Bridge & Fiona Fidler & Marissa McBride & Louisa Flander & Geoff Cumming & Mark Burgman, 2010. "Reducing Overconfidence in the Interval Judgments of Experts," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(3), pages 512-523, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nathan F. Dieckmann & Ellen Peters & Robin Gregory, 2015. "At Home on the Range? Lay Interpretations of Numerical Uncertainty Ranges," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(7), pages 1281-1295, July.
    2. Robert F. Bordley, 2009. "Combining the Opinions of Experts Who Partition Events Differently," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 38-46, March.
    3. Yizhong Huan & Lingqing Wang & Mark Burgman & Haitao Li & Yurong Yu & Jianpeng Zhang & Tao Liang, 2022. "A multi‐perspective composite assessment framework for prioritizing targets of sustainable development goals," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(5), pages 833-847, October.
    4. Daniela Di Cagno & Daniela Grieco, 2019. "Measuring and Disentangling Ambiguity and Confidence in the Lab," Games, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-22, February.
    5. L. Robin Keller & Kelly M. Kophazi, 2008. "From the Editors..," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 57-59, June.
    6. Vicki Bier, 2020. "The Role of Decision Analysis in Risk Analysis: A Retrospective," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2207-2217, November.
    7. Rakesh K. Sarin, 2013. "From the Editor —Optimal Betting, Reducing Unnecessary Mammography in Breast Cancer Diagnosis, Product Line Design, and Value of Information," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 10(3), pages 187-188, September.
    8. Timothy McDaniels & Tamsin Mills & Robin Gregory & Dan Ohlson, 2012. "Using Expert Judgments to Explore Robust Alternatives for Forest Management under Climate Change," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(12), pages 2098-2112, December.
    9. Solveig Höfer & Alex Ziemba & Ghada El Serafy, 2020. "A Bayesian approach to ecosystem service trade-off analysis utilizing expert knowledge," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 67-83, March.
    10. L. Robin Keller, 2009. "From the Editor..," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 1-3, March.
    11. Mark C. Quigley & Luke G. Bennetts & Patricia Durance & Petra M. Kuhnert & Mark D. Lindsay & Keith G. Pembleton & Melanie E. Roberts & Christopher J. White, 2019. "The provision and utility of earth science to decision-makers: synthesis and key findings," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 349-367, September.
    12. Kesten Green & J. Scott Armstrong & Andreas Graefe, 2007. "Methods to Elicit Forecasts from Groups: Delphi and Prediction Markets Compared," Foresight: The International Journal of Applied Forecasting, International Institute of Forecasters, issue 8, pages 17-20, Fall.
    13. Alison Peel & Michelle Jenks & Moni Choudhury & Rosemary Lovett & Juan Carlos Rejon-Parrilla & Andrew Sims & Joyce Craig, 2018. "Use of Expert Judgement Across NICE Guidance-Making Programmes: A Review of Current Processes and Suitability of Existing Tools to Support the Use of Expert Elicitation," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 16(6), pages 819-836, December.
    14. Hatswell, David Todd & Ramiah, Vikash & Wallace, Damien & Krishna, P.P. Nithi & Muschert, Glenn & Biju, A.V. Nair & Reddy, Krishna, 2024. "The influence of trauma insurance on quality of life among cancer survivors," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    15. Bonaccorsi, Andrea & Apreda, Riccardo & Fantoni, Gualtiero, 2020. "Expert biases in technology foresight. Why they are a problem and how to mitigate them," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    16. repec:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:5:p:783-797 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Robin Gregory & Theresa Satterfield & David R. Boyd, 2020. "People, Pipelines, and Probabilities: Clarifying Significance and Uncertainty in Environmental Impact Assessments," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(2), pages 218-226, February.
    18. Gregory F. Nemet & Laura Diaz Anadon & Elena Verdolini, 2017. "Quantifying the Effects of Expert Selection and Elicitation Design on Experts’ Confidence in Their Judgments About Future Energy Technologies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(2), pages 315-330, February.
    19. David R. Mandel & Robert N. Collins & Evan F. Risko & Jonathan A. Fugelsang, 2020. "Effect of confidence interval construction on judgment accuracy," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(5), pages 783-797, September.
    20. Simon Kloker & Tim Straub & Christof Weinhardt, 2019. "Moderators for Partition Dependence in Prediction Markets," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(4), pages 723-756, August.
    21. Michael C. Runge & Clark S. Rushing & James E. Lyons & Madeleine A. Rubenstein, 2023. "A Simplified Method for Value of Information Using Constructed Scales," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 220-230, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ordeca:v:20:y:2023:i:4:p:295-310. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.