Structured Decision Making to Rank North American Wetlands Conservation Act Proposals within Joint Venture Regions

IF 0.9 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q4 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management Pub Date : 2022-05-31 DOI:10.3996/jfwm-21-089
Anastasia Krainyk, James E. Lyons, G. Soulliere, John M. Coluccy, Barry C. Wilson, M. G. Brasher, M. Al-Saffar, D. Humburg
{"title":"Structured Decision Making to Rank North American Wetlands Conservation Act Proposals within Joint Venture Regions","authors":"Anastasia Krainyk, James E. Lyons, G. Soulliere, John M. Coluccy, Barry C. Wilson, M. G. Brasher, M. Al-Saffar, D. Humburg","doi":"10.3996/jfwm-21-089","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The North American Wetlands Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 4401-4412) provided funding and administration for wetland management and conservation projects. The North American Wetland Conservation Fund, enabled in 1989 with the Act, provides financial resources. Resource allocation decisions are based, in part, on regional experts, particularly migratory bird Joint Ventures (JVs) (i.e., partnerships for cooperative planning and coordinated management of the continent’s waterfowl populations and habitats). The JVs evaluate funding proposals submitted with their respective regions each year and make funding recommendations to decision makers. Proposal evaluation procedures differ among JVs, however, it could be helpful to consider a transparent, repeatable, and data-driven framework for prioritization within regions. We used structured decision making and linear additive value models for ranking proposals within JV regions. We used two JVs as case studies and constructed two different value models using JV-specific objectives and weights. The framework was developed through a collaborative process with JV staff and stakeholders. Models were written in Microsoft Excel. To test these models, we used six NAWCA proposals submitted to the Upper Mississippi / Great Lakes Joint Venture in 2016 and seven proposals submitted to the Gulf Coast Joint Venture in 2017. We compared proposal ranks assigned by the value model to ranks assigned by each JV’s management board. Ranks assigned by the value model differed from ranks assigned by the board for the Upper Mississippi / Great Lakes Joint Venture, but not for the Gulf Coast Joint Venture. However, ranks from the value model could change markedly with different objective weights and value functions. The weighted linear value model was beneficial for ranking NAWCA proposals because it allows JVs to treat the ranking as a multiple objective problem and tailor the ranking to their specific regional concerns. We believe a structured decision making approach could be adapted by JV staff to facilitate a systematic and transparent process for proposal ranking by their management boards.","PeriodicalId":49036,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3996/jfwm-21-089","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The North American Wetlands Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 4401-4412) provided funding and administration for wetland management and conservation projects. The North American Wetland Conservation Fund, enabled in 1989 with the Act, provides financial resources. Resource allocation decisions are based, in part, on regional experts, particularly migratory bird Joint Ventures (JVs) (i.e., partnerships for cooperative planning and coordinated management of the continent’s waterfowl populations and habitats). The JVs evaluate funding proposals submitted with their respective regions each year and make funding recommendations to decision makers. Proposal evaluation procedures differ among JVs, however, it could be helpful to consider a transparent, repeatable, and data-driven framework for prioritization within regions. We used structured decision making and linear additive value models for ranking proposals within JV regions. We used two JVs as case studies and constructed two different value models using JV-specific objectives and weights. The framework was developed through a collaborative process with JV staff and stakeholders. Models were written in Microsoft Excel. To test these models, we used six NAWCA proposals submitted to the Upper Mississippi / Great Lakes Joint Venture in 2016 and seven proposals submitted to the Gulf Coast Joint Venture in 2017. We compared proposal ranks assigned by the value model to ranks assigned by each JV’s management board. Ranks assigned by the value model differed from ranks assigned by the board for the Upper Mississippi / Great Lakes Joint Venture, but not for the Gulf Coast Joint Venture. However, ranks from the value model could change markedly with different objective weights and value functions. The weighted linear value model was beneficial for ranking NAWCA proposals because it allows JVs to treat the ranking as a multiple objective problem and tailor the ranking to their specific regional concerns. We believe a structured decision making approach could be adapted by JV staff to facilitate a systematic and transparent process for proposal ranking by their management boards.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在合资区域内对北美湿地保护法案提案进行排序的结构化决策
《北美湿地保护法》(16 U.S.C. 4401-4412)为湿地管理和保护项目提供了资金和管理。1989年根据该法案成立的北美湿地保护基金提供财政资源。资源分配决策部分基于区域专家,特别是候鸟合资企业(即合作规划和协调管理大陆水禽种群和栖息地的伙伴关系)。合资企业每年对各自地区提交的资助提案进行评估,并向决策者提出资助建议。然而,合资企业的提案评估程序不同,考虑一个透明的、可重复的、数据驱动的框架来确定区域内的优先顺序可能会有所帮助。我们使用结构化决策和线性附加价值模型对合资企业区域内的建议进行排名。我们使用两家合资企业作为案例研究,并使用合资企业特定的目标和权重构建了两种不同的价值模型。该框架是通过与合资企业员工和利益相关者的合作过程制定的。模型是用Microsoft Excel编写的。为了测试这些模型,我们使用了2016年提交给密西西比河上游/五大湖合资企业的六份NAWCA提案和2017年提交给墨西哥湾沿岸合资企业的七份提案。我们将价值模型分配的建议级别与每个合资企业管理委员会分配的级别进行了比较。价值模型分配的级别不同于董事会为上密西西比/五大湖合资企业分配的级别,但墨西哥湾沿岸合资企业没有。然而,随着目标权重和价值函数的不同,价值模型的排名会发生显著变化。加权线性值模型有利于对NAWCA提案进行排名,因为它允许合资企业将排名视为一个多目标问题,并根据其具体的区域关注点定制排名。我们认为,合资企业的员工可以采用结构化的决策方法,以促进管理委员会对提案进行系统和透明的排名。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management
Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION-ECOLOGY
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
43
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management encourages submission of original, high quality, English-language scientific papers on the practical application and integration of science to conservation and management of native North American fish, wildlife, plants and their habitats in the following categories: Articles, Notes, Surveys and Issues and Perspectives. Papers that do not relate directly to native North American fish, wildlife plants or their habitats may be considered if they highlight species that are closely related to, or conservation issues that are germane to, those in North America.
期刊最新文献
Strangers in the blind: Identifying appropriate mentees and mentors for waterfowl hunter recruitment Simulation Modeling to Assess Line Transect Distance Sampling Under a Range of Translocation Scenarios Sampling duration and season recommendations for passive acoustic monitoring of bats after white-nose syndrome Striped Bass Morone saxatilis movement in a large southeastern river system Leveraging Angler Effort to Inform Fisheries Management: Using Harvest and Harvest Rate to Estimate Abundance of White Sturgeon
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1