Background and goals
To assist with designing future research programs and developing decision support tools, PRBO Conservation Science has conducted a needs assessment of restoration practitioners, public and private land managers, and policy makers to identify research topics and informational products that are important, but currently unavailable.
We asked respondents to rate the importance and availability of different sources of information they use to inform their decisions. Synthetic reviews and peer-reviewed publications both received high importance and availability ratings. Web-based tools received low importance and availability ratings. One-on-one interactions between ecologists and decision-makers received high importance ratings, similar to those of peer-reviewed publications and synthetic reviews, but their availability was rated lower than any other method of decision support. Our results suggest that the decision makers we surveyed are already using a wide variety of information, but that prioritizing one-on-one interactions between scientists and decision makers will enhance the delivery of all sources of information.
The survey and preliminary results
Original survey [PDF]
Power point presentation of all survey results [PDF]
Synthesis of results
Seavy, N. E., and C. A. Howell. Unpublished ms. How can we improve information delivery to support conservation and restoration decisions? [request preprint from author]
Examples of Synthetic Decision Support Tools
California Partners in Flight Habitat Conservation Plans [Website]
A Guide to Habitat Enhancement for Birds in the Sacramento Valley [Website]
Examples of Interactive Interactive Decision Support Tools
California Riparian Evaluation System [Website]
Predicted Bird Species Distribution in the Central Valley [Website]
Sacramento River Watershed Information Model [Website]
Sacramento Ecological Flows Tools [Website]
Relevant Literature
Alexander, J. D.,
N. E. Seavy, and P. Hosten. 2007. Using bird conservation plans to evaluate
ecological effects of fuels reduction in southwest Oregon oak woodland and
chaparral. Forest Ecology and Management 238:375-383.
Pullin, A. S. and
T. M. Knight. 2001. Effectiveness in conservation practice: Pointers from
medicine and public health. Conservation Biology 15:50-54.
Pullin, A. S. and
T. M. Knight. 2005. Assessing conservation management's evidence base: A survey
of management-plan compilers in the United Kingdom and Australia. Conservation
Biology 19:1989-1996.
Salafsky, N., R.
Margoluis, K. H. Redford, and J. G. Robinson. 2002. Improving the practice and
conservation: A conceptual framework and research agenda for conservation
science. Conservation Biology 16:1469-1479.
Sutherland, W. J., A. S. Pullin, P. M. Dolman, and T. M. Knight. 2004. The need for evidence-based conservation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 19:305-308.