Next Article in Journal
Lithium-Ion Batteries: Thermal Behaviour Investigation of Unbalanced Modules
Next Article in Special Issue
Conservation Messages in Speech Bubbles–Evaluation of an Environmental Education Comic Distributed in Elementary Schools in Madagascar
Previous Article in Journal
Ecosystem Services Evaluation and Its Spatial Characteristics in Central Asia’s Arid Regions: A Case Study in Altay Prefecture, China
Previous Article in Special Issue
Fostering Sustainable Energy Entrepreneurship among Students: The Business Oriented Technological System Analysis (BOTSA) Program at Eindhoven University of Technology
Open AccessArticle

Training Conservation Practitioners to be Better Decision Makers

Southeast Ecological Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, 7920 NW 71 Street, Gainesville, FL 32653, USA
Southeast Climate Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, 127H David Clark Labs, N.C. State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7617, USA
Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University, Grenåvej 14, DK-8410 Rønde, Denmark
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Armin Lude
Sustainability 2015, 7(7), 8354-8373;
Received: 1 May 2015 / Revised: 28 May 2015 / Accepted: 18 June 2015 / Published: 29 June 2015
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Environmental Education for Sustainable Development)
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. View Full-Text
Keywords: conservation; curriculum; ecology; education; decision analysis; decision making; decision science; natural resource management; sociology; training; uncertainty; values conservation; curriculum; ecology; education; decision analysis; decision making; decision science; natural resource management; sociology; training; uncertainty; values
MDPI and ACS Style

Johnson, F.A.; Eaton, M.J.; Williams, J.H.; Jensen, G.H.; Madsen, J. Training Conservation Practitioners to be Better Decision Makers. Sustainability 2015, 7, 8354-8373.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Article Access Map by Country/Region

Only visits after 24 November 2015 are recorded.
Search more from Scilit
Back to TopTop