Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Webinar 1 sdm_overview_final_2013_9_9

248 views

Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Webinar 1 sdm_overview_final_2013_9_9

  1. 1. Brady J. Mattsson brady.mattsson@gmail.com Structured Decision Making to Improve Coastal Conservation for an Uncertain Future
  2. 2. Outline  Existing challenges & approaches  Introduce another way forward  Illustrative example  Problem definition in focus
  3. 3. Complexities of Coastal Conservation  Uncertainties: climate change, management effectiveness, budgets  Governance: multiple stakeholders & decision makers  Values: multiple, often competing objectives
  4. 4. Traditional approaches acceptable?  Independent silos of science & management  Examples:  Global climate models  Species translocation  Non/semi-transparent decisions
  5. 5. Why Integrate Science & Management?  Decisions are hard: scale & complexity  Multidimensional: biology, politics, econ.  Jumping to action before defining goals  Many psychological pitfalls when deciding  Often need transparent, structured approach
  6. 6. Outline  Existing challenges & approaches  Introduce another way forward  Illustrative example  Problem definition in focus
  7. 7. Decision Analysis  Roots in math, computer sci, and economics  Natural resource conservation applications  Formal, logical method for solving problems  Focus on achieving objectives  Quantitative toolkit to I.D. smart choices
  8. 8. OBJECTIVES Transparent Obscured SCIENCE Well Understood Uncertain Disputed SDM = Decision Analysis Conflict Resolution Joint Fact FindingAdaptive Management Approaches to Problem Solving Lee, K.N., 1994. Island Pr.
  9. 9. What is Structured Decision Making?  Utilizes decision analysis & toolkit  Useful for collaborative problem solving  Iterative framework, values focused  Identify & resolve impediments to decision
  10. 10. Hammond et al. 2002. Smart choices: a practical guide to making better life decisions. [BOOK] Problem Objectives Alternatives Consequences Trade-offs ` Decide & take action Runge et al. 2011. An overview of structured decision making, revised edition. [ONLINE VIDEOS] Conroy & Peterson 2013. Decision Making in Natural Resource Management: A Structured, Adaptive Approach. [BOOK]
  11. 11. Problem Objectives Alternatives Consequences Trade-offs Decide & take action ` Monitoring Learning Adaptive Management Adaptive phase B.K. Williams, J.M. Nichols, M.C. Runge
  12. 12. Rapid Prototyping Real World Abstraction of the problem (Decision framework) Problem framing Information Model Analysis Reality Check Revise & Repeat Figure by J.F. Cochrane & A.M. Starfield
  13. 13. When Structured Decision Making?  Objectives may be initially unclear  Underlying science may be quite uncertain  Wide range of conservation problems  Forest stand rotation scheduling  Recovery plan for endangered species  Conservation strategy for an ecoregion  Continental harvest plans for waterfowl
  14. 14. Outline  Existing challenges & approaches  Introduce another way forward  Illustrative example  Problem definition in focus
  15. 15. Tidal marsh conservation in the face of climate change: San Francisco Bay case study Mattsson, B., J. Takekawa, K. Thorne , D. Crouse J. Cummings, G. Block, V. Bloom, M. Gerhart, S. Goldbeck, J. O’Halloran, B. Huning, N. Peterson, C. Sloop, M. Stewart, K. Taylor, and L. Valoppi
  16. 16. Decision Question To conserve SFB tidal marshes in light of uncertainty about future climate change, what are the smartest courses of action?
  17. 17. Who are the Decision-makers? Policy – USFWS, USACE, Bay Conservation and Development Commission, SFB Regional Water Quality Control Board, EPA Planning – SFB Joint Venture, State Coastal Conservancy Land Management – FWS Refuges, DFG Wildlife Areas, NPS, East Bay Regional Parks No single, individual decision-maker for SFB tidal marsh restoration, management, and protection. SFB Joint Venture -- platform for coordination
  18. 18. What Is the Primary Objective?  Perpetuate tidal marsh ecosystem functions, services, and human benefits by maximizing resilience of the system.  Ecosystem functions – interactions of biota with the environment (nesting habitat, food webs)  Ecosystem services – indirect benefits to society from healthy ecosystems (water quality, carbon sequestration)  Human benefits – direct benefits to interest groups (fishing, recreation)  Resilience – capacity of ecosystem to respond to disturbance
  19. 19. A. Marsh migration (3a,3b,11,12,19) – upslope movement B. Climate restoration (4,6,7,8,13,21) – engineer and manage marshes considering SLR and extreme events C. Wildlife enhancement (16,17,18) – add habitat features, captive rearing, translocation D. Outreach (20) – education, involvement Group Alternatives (n=22) into Categories
  20. 20. Alternative Allocations & SLR (2010-2050) 0 20 40 60 80 100 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 %Allocation Year Status Quo Marsh Migration Climate Restoration Wildlife Static Restoration (Action 22) Sea-Level
  21. 21. 0 20 40 60 80 100 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 %Allocation Year Status Quo Marsh Migration Climate Restoration Wildlife Static Restoration (Action 22) 0 20 40 60 80 100 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 %Allocation Year Marsh Migration Marsh Migration Climate Restoration Wildlife Static Restoration (Action 22) 0 20 40 60 80 100 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 %Allocation Year Climate Restoration Marsh Migration Climate Restoration Wildlife Static Restoration (Action 22) 0 20 40 60 80 100 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 %Allocation Year Climate Restoration Sans Wildlife Marsh Migration Climate Restoration Wildlife Static Restoration (Action 22) Alternative Allocations & SLR (2010-2050)
  22. 22. Simplified Influence Diagram Human benefits Marsh ecosystem integrity Clapper Rail recovery Climate Marsh condition (e.g., acreage, elevation) Tidal marsh management actions Perpetuate tidal marsh ecosystem functions, services, and human benefits by maximizing resilience of the system.
  23. 23. Decision Analysis Toolkit Deterministic Stochastic Single Objective Numerical solutions Linear programming Integer programming Dynamic Programming Decision trees Simulation Bayesian Decision Network Stochastic Dynamic Prog. Multiple Objectives Even swaps SMART AHP Goal programming Decision trees (with MAU) Bayesian Decision Network SMART (with probabilities) AHP (with likelihoods) Figure by M.C. Runge
  24. 24. ‘Empty’ Bayes Decision Network Objectives: rail recovery, marsh integrity, human benefits Constraint: Budget Strategies: 5 alternative allocations External influences: storm events
  25. 25. Optimal Solution Under Uncertainty 0 20 40 60 80 100 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 %Allocation Year Status Quo Marsh Migration Climate Restoration Wildlife Static Restoration (Action 22) 0 20 40 60 80 100 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 %Allocation Year Climate Restoration Marsh Migration Climate Restoration Wildlife Static Restoration (Action 22)
  26. 26. Next Steps  Engage broader set of stakeholders & scientists  Revisit model structure & inputs  Consider additional focal species & tidal zones  Address finer, actionable spatial resolution  Expand response horizon to year 2100  Dynamic optimization or heuristics to find smartest spatiotemporal actions (e.g. Wilson et al 2011)  Crucial uncertainties reducible via adaptive management
  27. 27. Problem Objectives Alternatives Consequences Trade-offs Decide & take action ` Monitoring Learning Adaptive Management Adaptive phase B.K. Williams, J.M. Nichols, M.C. Runge
  28. 28. Outline  Existing challenges & approaches  Introduce another way forward  Illustrative example  Problem definition in focus
  29. 29. Defining Problems is Not Natural  When faced with a challenging situation, tendency is: “what should I do?”
  30. 30. Problem Definition is Essential …castles made of sand slip into the sea, eventually – J. Hendrix
  31. 31. Decision: Defined 1. An outcome of a cognitive process leading to selection of a course of action* among several alternatives 2. An irrevocable expenditure* of resources *Note:  No action is a decision  Priority list is NOT
  32. 32. Turning a Problem into a Decision Problem: “Bird species native to Hawaiian islands cannot disperse and risk extinction from sea level rise, invasive species, and hurricanes” Decision Statement: “How should we implement a management program to maximize the likelihood that native bird species persist on Hawaiian Islands?”
  33. 33. Identifying a Suitable Decision  Has the decision already been made?  Decision support needed?  Who are the decision makers and stakeholders?  Authority & resources to implement?  Open to SDM?
  34. 34. What is the Decision?  Type: Allocation of resources? Choosing among options? Series of linked choices?  Frequency, timing, spatial scope?  Constraints? Legal, regulatory, other? Dissolvable?  Key sources of uncertainty?
  35. 35. Collaborative Decision Making: Roles  Coordinators: champion SDM process/implementation  Coaches: neutral, SDM experts  Stakeholders: can influence or are influenced by decision  Technical advisors: modelers, analysts, biologists, etc.  (Facilitators: neutral, maintain team cohesiveness)
  36. 36. Prototyping Concept
  37. 37. Building Capacity for Decision Analysis  National Conservation Training Center (USA)  http://nctc.fws.gov/courses/SDM/home.html  Adaptive Management Conference Series (USA)  NERP Environmental Decisions hub (Australia)  www.nerpdecisions.edu.au/  Others?
  38. 38. Objectives Trade-offs Donothing Allactions Allhighpriority Allexceptlandaq. Allmed/high #5butnolandaq. #3butnolandaq. 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Score Management strategy alternative Suitable Potential *
  39. 39. Objectives Hierarchy Marsh ecosystem processes Marsh migration Buffer extreme events Marsh ecosystem function Marsh ecosystem services Human benefits Revenue for marsh conservation Marsh elevation Sediment dynamics Marsh 1’ productivity Marsh food web Flood mitigation Carbon sequestration Water qualityErosion mitigation Population integrity Recreation Property values Aesthetics Human survival Shore stabilization Biodiversity Perpetuate ecosystem functions and services Fundamental Objectives Legend
  40. 40. Qualitative vs. Quantitative Analysis Qualitative only Plus Quantitative Cost/time investment Lower Higher Transparency Risk of litigation Lower Higher Higher Lower Capacity to learn Lower Higher $ Translocation & habitat LADU persist Kaho’olawe approval Sea-level rise Catastrophes $ Translocation & habitat LADU persist Kaho’olawe approval Sea-level rise Catastrophes Max potential…
  41. 41. SFB Potential Inundation Current conditions: 310 km2 vulnerable to 100-yr floods, most behind levees 50-cm SLR: 372 km2 or 20% increase by 2053 or 40 yrs 150-cm SLR: 495 km2 or 60% increase by 2105 or 100 yrs with much uncertainty about the rate (Knowles 2010, SFEWS)
  42. 42. Giselle Block, FWS R8 I&M Valary Bloom, FWS R8 Recovery Branch Debby Crouse, Apprentice Coach, FWS Endangered Spp. Jonathan Cummings, Apprentice Coach, Univ. Vermont Matt Gerhart, State Coastal Conservancy Steve Goldbeck, Bay Conservation & Development Commission Jaime O’Halloran, U. S. Army Corp of Engineers Beth Huning, SFB Joint Venture Brady Mattsson, Coach, USGS Western Ecological Research Center Nadine Peterson, State Coastal Conservancy Christina Sloop, SFB Joint Venture Mendel Stewart, FWS – SFB National Wildlife Refuges John Takekawa, Coordinator, USGS Western Ecological Research Center Karen Taylor, Co-coordinator, CA Dept. of Fish & Game Karen Thorne, Coordinator, USGS Western Ecological Research Center Laura Valoppi, South Bay Salt Ponds Restoration Project Workshop Participants
  43. 43. Eliciting Predicted Outcomes
  44. 44. Eliciting Utilities
  45. 45. 1. Do nothing – walk away 2. Status quo -- keep existing strategy with its nominal climate adaptation 3. Acquire upslope habitat for marsh migration from undeveloped lands 4. Engineering solutions for future restorations 5. Retrofit ongoing or post-construction restoration sites 6. Design marshes with flexibility to facilitate future SLR adaptation 7. Manage with conservation reserves or easements versus fee title 8. Remove development to facilitate marsh expansion 9. Captive breeding program for T&E 10. Create artificial habitat elements and structures for T&E 11. Develop community outreach, education, and involvement Outside-the-Box Actions • Build a water control structure at the Golden Gate to stop the tide • Mendel’s bucket brigade – each person scoops 2.5 million buckets and dumps them inland to lower sea level – problem solved! Alternative Actions (n=22)

×