Evaluating the efficacy of adaptive management approaches

Is there a formula for success?

Jamie E. McFadden, Tim L. Hiller, Richard AJ Tyre

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

70 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Within the field of natural-resources management, the application of adaptive management is appropriate for complex problems high in uncertainty. Adaptive management is becoming an increasingly popular management-decision tool within the scientific community and has developed into two primary schools of thought: the Resilience-Experimentalist School (with high emphasis on stakeholder involvement, resilience, and highly complex models) and the Decision-Theoretic School (which results in relatively simple models through emphasizing stakeholder involvement for identifying management objectives). Because of these differences, adaptive management plans implemented under each of these schools may yield varying levels of success. We evaluated peer-reviewed literature focused on incorporation of adaptive management to identify components of successful adaptive management plans. Our evaluation included adaptive management elements such as stakeholder involvement, definitions of management objectives and actions, use and complexity of predictive models, and the sequence in which these elements were applied. We also defined a scale of degrees of success to make comparisons between the two adaptive management schools of thought. Our results include the relationship between the adaptive management process documented in the reviewed literature and our defined continuum of successful outcomes. Our data suggest an increase in the number of published articles with substantive discussion of adaptive management from 2000 to 2009 at a mean rate of annual change of 0.92 (r2 = 0.56). Additionally, our examination of data for temporal patterns related to each school resulted in an increase in acknowledgement of the Decision-Theoretic School of thought at a mean annual rate of change of 0.02 (r2 = 0.6679) and a stable acknowledgement for the Resilience-Experimentalist School of thought (r2 = 0.0042; slope = 0.0013). Identifying the elements of successful adaptive management will be advantageous to natural-resources managers considering adaptive management as a decision tool.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1354-1359
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Environmental Management
Volume92
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2011

Fingerprint

adaptive management
stakeholder
Natural resources management
school
Natural resources
natural resource
Managers

Keywords

  • Adaptive management
  • Resilience
  • Structured decision-making
  • Uncertainty

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Environmental Engineering
  • Waste Management and Disposal
  • Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

Cite this

Evaluating the efficacy of adaptive management approaches : Is there a formula for success? / McFadden, Jamie E.; Hiller, Tim L.; Tyre, Richard AJ.

In: Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 92, No. 5, 01.05.2011, p. 1354-1359.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{4141e554ca6c47b093d545e36a66dd5d,
title = "Evaluating the efficacy of adaptive management approaches: Is there a formula for success?",
abstract = "Within the field of natural-resources management, the application of adaptive management is appropriate for complex problems high in uncertainty. Adaptive management is becoming an increasingly popular management-decision tool within the scientific community and has developed into two primary schools of thought: the Resilience-Experimentalist School (with high emphasis on stakeholder involvement, resilience, and highly complex models) and the Decision-Theoretic School (which results in relatively simple models through emphasizing stakeholder involvement for identifying management objectives). Because of these differences, adaptive management plans implemented under each of these schools may yield varying levels of success. We evaluated peer-reviewed literature focused on incorporation of adaptive management to identify components of successful adaptive management plans. Our evaluation included adaptive management elements such as stakeholder involvement, definitions of management objectives and actions, use and complexity of predictive models, and the sequence in which these elements were applied. We also defined a scale of degrees of success to make comparisons between the two adaptive management schools of thought. Our results include the relationship between the adaptive management process documented in the reviewed literature and our defined continuum of successful outcomes. Our data suggest an increase in the number of published articles with substantive discussion of adaptive management from 2000 to 2009 at a mean rate of annual change of 0.92 (r2 = 0.56). Additionally, our examination of data for temporal patterns related to each school resulted in an increase in acknowledgement of the Decision-Theoretic School of thought at a mean annual rate of change of 0.02 (r2 = 0.6679) and a stable acknowledgement for the Resilience-Experimentalist School of thought (r2 = 0.0042; slope = 0.0013). Identifying the elements of successful adaptive management will be advantageous to natural-resources managers considering adaptive management as a decision tool.",
keywords = "Adaptive management, Resilience, Structured decision-making, Uncertainty",
author = "McFadden, {Jamie E.} and Hiller, {Tim L.} and Tyre, {Richard AJ}",
year = "2011",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.10.038",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "92",
pages = "1354--1359",
journal = "Journal of Environmental Management",
issn = "0301-4797",
publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluating the efficacy of adaptive management approaches

T2 - Is there a formula for success?

AU - McFadden, Jamie E.

AU - Hiller, Tim L.

AU - Tyre, Richard AJ

PY - 2011/5/1

Y1 - 2011/5/1

N2 - Within the field of natural-resources management, the application of adaptive management is appropriate for complex problems high in uncertainty. Adaptive management is becoming an increasingly popular management-decision tool within the scientific community and has developed into two primary schools of thought: the Resilience-Experimentalist School (with high emphasis on stakeholder involvement, resilience, and highly complex models) and the Decision-Theoretic School (which results in relatively simple models through emphasizing stakeholder involvement for identifying management objectives). Because of these differences, adaptive management plans implemented under each of these schools may yield varying levels of success. We evaluated peer-reviewed literature focused on incorporation of adaptive management to identify components of successful adaptive management plans. Our evaluation included adaptive management elements such as stakeholder involvement, definitions of management objectives and actions, use and complexity of predictive models, and the sequence in which these elements were applied. We also defined a scale of degrees of success to make comparisons between the two adaptive management schools of thought. Our results include the relationship between the adaptive management process documented in the reviewed literature and our defined continuum of successful outcomes. Our data suggest an increase in the number of published articles with substantive discussion of adaptive management from 2000 to 2009 at a mean rate of annual change of 0.92 (r2 = 0.56). Additionally, our examination of data for temporal patterns related to each school resulted in an increase in acknowledgement of the Decision-Theoretic School of thought at a mean annual rate of change of 0.02 (r2 = 0.6679) and a stable acknowledgement for the Resilience-Experimentalist School of thought (r2 = 0.0042; slope = 0.0013). Identifying the elements of successful adaptive management will be advantageous to natural-resources managers considering adaptive management as a decision tool.

AB - Within the field of natural-resources management, the application of adaptive management is appropriate for complex problems high in uncertainty. Adaptive management is becoming an increasingly popular management-decision tool within the scientific community and has developed into two primary schools of thought: the Resilience-Experimentalist School (with high emphasis on stakeholder involvement, resilience, and highly complex models) and the Decision-Theoretic School (which results in relatively simple models through emphasizing stakeholder involvement for identifying management objectives). Because of these differences, adaptive management plans implemented under each of these schools may yield varying levels of success. We evaluated peer-reviewed literature focused on incorporation of adaptive management to identify components of successful adaptive management plans. Our evaluation included adaptive management elements such as stakeholder involvement, definitions of management objectives and actions, use and complexity of predictive models, and the sequence in which these elements were applied. We also defined a scale of degrees of success to make comparisons between the two adaptive management schools of thought. Our results include the relationship between the adaptive management process documented in the reviewed literature and our defined continuum of successful outcomes. Our data suggest an increase in the number of published articles with substantive discussion of adaptive management from 2000 to 2009 at a mean rate of annual change of 0.92 (r2 = 0.56). Additionally, our examination of data for temporal patterns related to each school resulted in an increase in acknowledgement of the Decision-Theoretic School of thought at a mean annual rate of change of 0.02 (r2 = 0.6679) and a stable acknowledgement for the Resilience-Experimentalist School of thought (r2 = 0.0042; slope = 0.0013). Identifying the elements of successful adaptive management will be advantageous to natural-resources managers considering adaptive management as a decision tool.

KW - Adaptive management

KW - Resilience

KW - Structured decision-making

KW - Uncertainty

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79952067977&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79952067977&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.10.038

DO - 10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.10.038

M3 - Article

VL - 92

SP - 1354

EP - 1359

JO - Journal of Environmental Management

JF - Journal of Environmental Management

SN - 0301-4797

IS - 5

ER -