Training Conservation Practitioners to be Better Decision Makers

Fred A. Johnson, Mitchell J. Eaton, James H. Williams, Gitte H. Jensen and Jesper Madsen
Additional contact information
Fred A. Johnson: Southeast Ecological Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, 7920 NW 71 Street, Gainesville, FL 32653, USA
Mitchell J. Eaton: Southeast Climate Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, 127H David Clark Labs, N.C. State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7617, USA
James H. Williams: Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University, Grenåvej 14, DK-8410 Rønde, Denmark
Gitte H. Jensen: Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University, Grenåvej 14, DK-8410 Rønde, Denmark
Jesper Madsen: Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University, Grenåvej 14, DK-8410 Rønde, Denmark

Sustainability, 2015, vol. 7, issue 7, 1-20

Abstract: Traditional conservation curricula and training typically emphasizes only one part of systematic decision making ( i.e. , the science), at the expense of preparing conservation practitioners with critical skills in values-setting, working with decision makers and stakeholders, and effective problem framing. In this article we describe how the application of decision science is relevant to conservation problems and suggest how current and future conservation practitioners can be trained to be better decision makers. Though decision-analytic approaches vary considerably, they all involve: (1) properly formulating the decision problem; (2) specifying feasible alternative actions; and (3) selecting criteria for evaluating potential outcomes. Two approaches are available for providing training in decision science, with each serving different needs. Formal education is useful for providing simple, well-defined problems that allow demonstrations of the structure, axioms and general characteristics of a decision-analytic approach. In contrast, practical training can offer complex, realistic decision problems requiring more careful structuring and analysis than those used for formal training purposes. Ultimately, the kinds and degree of training necessary depend on the role conservation practitioners play in a decision-making process. Those attempting to facilitate decision-making processes will need advanced training in both technical aspects of decision science and in facilitation techniques, as well as opportunities to apprentice under decision analysts/consultants. Our primary goal should be an attempt to ingrain a discipline for applying clarity of thought to all decisions.

Keywords: conservation; curriculum; ecology; education; decision analysis; decision making; decision science; natural resource management; sociology; training; uncertainty; values (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2015
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/7/8354/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/7/8354/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:7:y:2015:i:7:p:8354-8373:d:51824

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().