Training Conservation Practitioners to be Better Decision Makers
| Autor: | Jesper Madsen, Gitte Høj Jensen, Mitchell J. Eaton, James Henty Williams, Fred A. Johnson |
|---|---|
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Rok vydání: | 2015 |
| Předmět: |
0106 biological sciences
Decision support system Decision theory Geography Planning and Development lcsh:TJ807-830 lcsh:Renewable energy sources curriculum 010501 environmental sciences Management Monitoring Policy and Law 010603 evolutionary biology 01 natural sciences decision making law.invention conservation ecology education decision analysis decision science natural resource management sociology training uncertainty values law jel:Q Business decision mapping lcsh:Environmental sciences 0105 earth and related environmental sciences lcsh:GE1-350 Decision engineering Renewable Energy Sustainability and the Environment Management science lcsh:Environmental effects of industries and plants Evidential reasoning approach jel:Q0 jel:Q2 Decision problem jel:Q3 jel:Q5 lcsh:TD194-195 jel:O13 CLARITY jel:Q56 Decision analysis |
| Zdroj: | Sustainability, Vol 7, Iss 7, Pp 8354-8373 (2015) Sustainability Volume 7 Issue 7 Pages 8354-8373 Johnson, F A, Eaton, M, Williams, J H, Jensen, G H & Madsen, J 2015, ' Training conservation practitioners to be better decision makers ', Sustainability, vol. 7, no. 7, pp. 8354-8373 . https://doi.org/10.3390/su7078354 |
| ISSN: | 2071-1050 |
| Popis: | 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. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|