Cargando…
Developing and enhancing biodiversity monitoring programmes: a collaborative assessment of priorities
1. Biodiversity is changing at unprecedented rates, and it is increasingly important that these changes are quantified through monitoring programmes. Previous recommendations for developing or enhancing these programmes focus either on the end goals, that is the intended use of the data, or on how t...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5008152/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27642189 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12423 |
_version_ | 1782451322733199360 |
---|---|
author | Pocock, Michael J. O. Newson, Stuart E. Henderson, Ian G. Peyton, Jodey Sutherland, William J. Noble, David G. Ball, Stuart G. Beckmann, Björn C. Biggs, Jeremy Brereton, Tom Bullock, David J. Buckland, Stephen T. Edwards, Mike Eaton, Mark A. Harvey, Martin C. Hill, Mark O. Horlock, Martin Hubble, David S. Julian, Angela M. Mackey, Edward C. Mann, Darren J. Marshall, Matthew J. Medlock, Jolyon M. O'Mahony, Elaine M. Pacheco, Marina Porter, Keith Prentice, Steve Procter, Deborah A. Roy, Helen E. Southway, Sue E. Shortall, Chris R. Stewart, Alan J. A. Wembridge, David E. Wright, Mark A. Roy, David B. |
author_facet | Pocock, Michael J. O. Newson, Stuart E. Henderson, Ian G. Peyton, Jodey Sutherland, William J. Noble, David G. Ball, Stuart G. Beckmann, Björn C. Biggs, Jeremy Brereton, Tom Bullock, David J. Buckland, Stephen T. Edwards, Mike Eaton, Mark A. Harvey, Martin C. Hill, Mark O. Horlock, Martin Hubble, David S. Julian, Angela M. Mackey, Edward C. Mann, Darren J. Marshall, Matthew J. Medlock, Jolyon M. O'Mahony, Elaine M. Pacheco, Marina Porter, Keith Prentice, Steve Procter, Deborah A. Roy, Helen E. Southway, Sue E. Shortall, Chris R. Stewart, Alan J. A. Wembridge, David E. Wright, Mark A. Roy, David B. |
author_sort | Pocock, Michael J. O. |
collection | PubMed |
description | 1. Biodiversity is changing at unprecedented rates, and it is increasingly important that these changes are quantified through monitoring programmes. Previous recommendations for developing or enhancing these programmes focus either on the end goals, that is the intended use of the data, or on how these goals are achieved, for example through volunteer involvement in citizen science, but not both. These recommendations are rarely prioritized. 2. We used a collaborative approach, involving 52 experts in biodiversity monitoring in the UK, to develop a list of attributes of relevance to any biodiversity monitoring programme and to order these attributes by their priority. We also ranked the attributes according to their importance in monitoring biodiversity in the UK. Experts involved included data users, funders, programme organizers and participants in data collection. They covered expertise in a wide range of taxa. 3. We developed a final list of 25 attributes of biodiversity monitoring schemes, ordered from the most elemental (those essential for monitoring schemes; e.g. articulate the objectives and gain sufficient participants) to the most aspirational (e.g. electronic data capture in the field, reporting change annually). This ordered list is a practical framework which can be used to support the development of monitoring programmes. 4. People's ranking of attributes revealed a difference between those who considered attributes with benefits to end users to be most important (e.g. people from governmental organizations) and those who considered attributes with greatest benefit to participants to be most important (e.g. people involved with volunteer biological recording schemes). This reveals a distinction between focussing on aims and the pragmatism in achieving those aims. 5. Synthesis and applications. The ordered list of attributes developed in this study will assist in prioritizing resources to develop biodiversity monitoring programmes (including citizen science). The potential conflict between end users of data and participants in data collection that we discovered should be addressed by involving the diversity of stakeholders at all stages of programme development. This will maximize the chance of successfully achieving the goals of biodiversity monitoring programmes. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5008152 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-50081522016-09-16 Developing and enhancing biodiversity monitoring programmes: a collaborative assessment of priorities Pocock, Michael J. O. Newson, Stuart E. Henderson, Ian G. Peyton, Jodey Sutherland, William J. Noble, David G. Ball, Stuart G. Beckmann, Björn C. Biggs, Jeremy Brereton, Tom Bullock, David J. Buckland, Stephen T. Edwards, Mike Eaton, Mark A. Harvey, Martin C. Hill, Mark O. Horlock, Martin Hubble, David S. Julian, Angela M. Mackey, Edward C. Mann, Darren J. Marshall, Matthew J. Medlock, Jolyon M. O'Mahony, Elaine M. Pacheco, Marina Porter, Keith Prentice, Steve Procter, Deborah A. Roy, Helen E. Southway, Sue E. Shortall, Chris R. Stewart, Alan J. A. Wembridge, David E. Wright, Mark A. Roy, David B. J Appl Ecol Biodiversity Monitoring 1. Biodiversity is changing at unprecedented rates, and it is increasingly important that these changes are quantified through monitoring programmes. Previous recommendations for developing or enhancing these programmes focus either on the end goals, that is the intended use of the data, or on how these goals are achieved, for example through volunteer involvement in citizen science, but not both. These recommendations are rarely prioritized. 2. We used a collaborative approach, involving 52 experts in biodiversity monitoring in the UK, to develop a list of attributes of relevance to any biodiversity monitoring programme and to order these attributes by their priority. We also ranked the attributes according to their importance in monitoring biodiversity in the UK. Experts involved included data users, funders, programme organizers and participants in data collection. They covered expertise in a wide range of taxa. 3. We developed a final list of 25 attributes of biodiversity monitoring schemes, ordered from the most elemental (those essential for monitoring schemes; e.g. articulate the objectives and gain sufficient participants) to the most aspirational (e.g. electronic data capture in the field, reporting change annually). This ordered list is a practical framework which can be used to support the development of monitoring programmes. 4. People's ranking of attributes revealed a difference between those who considered attributes with benefits to end users to be most important (e.g. people from governmental organizations) and those who considered attributes with greatest benefit to participants to be most important (e.g. people involved with volunteer biological recording schemes). This reveals a distinction between focussing on aims and the pragmatism in achieving those aims. 5. Synthesis and applications. The ordered list of attributes developed in this study will assist in prioritizing resources to develop biodiversity monitoring programmes (including citizen science). The potential conflict between end users of data and participants in data collection that we discovered should be addressed by involving the diversity of stakeholders at all stages of programme development. This will maximize the chance of successfully achieving the goals of biodiversity monitoring programmes. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2015-06 2015-04-02 /pmc/articles/PMC5008152/ /pubmed/27642189 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12423 Text en © 2015 The Authors. Journal of Applied Ecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Biodiversity Monitoring Pocock, Michael J. O. Newson, Stuart E. Henderson, Ian G. Peyton, Jodey Sutherland, William J. Noble, David G. Ball, Stuart G. Beckmann, Björn C. Biggs, Jeremy Brereton, Tom Bullock, David J. Buckland, Stephen T. Edwards, Mike Eaton, Mark A. Harvey, Martin C. Hill, Mark O. Horlock, Martin Hubble, David S. Julian, Angela M. Mackey, Edward C. Mann, Darren J. Marshall, Matthew J. Medlock, Jolyon M. O'Mahony, Elaine M. Pacheco, Marina Porter, Keith Prentice, Steve Procter, Deborah A. Roy, Helen E. Southway, Sue E. Shortall, Chris R. Stewart, Alan J. A. Wembridge, David E. Wright, Mark A. Roy, David B. Developing and enhancing biodiversity monitoring programmes: a collaborative assessment of priorities |
title | Developing and enhancing biodiversity monitoring programmes: a collaborative assessment of priorities |
title_full | Developing and enhancing biodiversity monitoring programmes: a collaborative assessment of priorities |
title_fullStr | Developing and enhancing biodiversity monitoring programmes: a collaborative assessment of priorities |
title_full_unstemmed | Developing and enhancing biodiversity monitoring programmes: a collaborative assessment of priorities |
title_short | Developing and enhancing biodiversity monitoring programmes: a collaborative assessment of priorities |
title_sort | developing and enhancing biodiversity monitoring programmes: a collaborative assessment of priorities |
topic | Biodiversity Monitoring |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5008152/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27642189 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12423 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pocockmichaeljo developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT newsonstuarte developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT hendersoniang developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT peytonjodey developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT sutherlandwilliamj developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT nobledavidg developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT ballstuartg developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT beckmannbjornc developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT biggsjeremy developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT breretontom developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT bullockdavidj developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT bucklandstephent developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT edwardsmike developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT eatonmarka developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT harveymartinc developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT hillmarko developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT horlockmartin developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT hubbledavids developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT julianangelam developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT mackeyedwardc developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT manndarrenj developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT marshallmatthewj developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT medlockjolyonm developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT omahonyelainem developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT pachecomarina developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT porterkeith developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT prenticesteve developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT procterdeboraha developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT royhelene developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT southwaysuee developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT shortallchrisr developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT stewartalanja developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT wembridgedavide developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT wrightmarka developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities AT roydavidb developingandenhancingbiodiversitymonitoringprogrammesacollaborativeassessmentofpriorities |