Cargando…
A niche for null models in adaptive resource management
As global systems rapidly change, our collective ability to predict future ecological dynamics will become increasingly important for successful natural resource management. By merging stakeholder objectives with system uncertainty, and by adapting actions to changing systems and knowledge, adaptive...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8794763/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35127044 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.8541 |
_version_ | 1784640893299458048 |
---|---|
author | Koons, David N. Riecke, Thomas V. Boomer, G. Scott Sedinger, Benjamin S. Sedinger, James S. Williams, Perry J. Arnold, Todd W. |
author_facet | Koons, David N. Riecke, Thomas V. Boomer, G. Scott Sedinger, Benjamin S. Sedinger, James S. Williams, Perry J. Arnold, Todd W. |
author_sort | Koons, David N. |
collection | PubMed |
description | As global systems rapidly change, our collective ability to predict future ecological dynamics will become increasingly important for successful natural resource management. By merging stakeholder objectives with system uncertainty, and by adapting actions to changing systems and knowledge, adaptive resource management (ARM) provides a rigorous platform for making sound decisions in a changing world. Critically, however, applications of ARM could be improved by employing benchmarks (i.e., points of reference) for determining when learning is occurring through the cycle of monitoring, modeling, and decision‐making steps in ARM. Many applications of ARM use multiple model‐based hypotheses to identify and reduce systematic uncertainty over time, but generally lack benchmarks for gauging discovery of scientific evidence and learning. This creates the danger of thinking that directional changes in model weights or rankings are indicative of evidence for hypotheses, when possibly all competing models are inadequate. There is thus a somewhat obvious, but yet to be filled niche for including benchmarks for learning in ARM. We contend that carefully designed “ecological null models,” which are structured to produce an expected ecological pattern in the absence of a hypothesized mechanism, can serve as suitable benchmarks. Using a classic case study of mallard harvest management that is often used to demonstrate the successes of ARM for learning about ecological mechanisms, we show that simple ecological null models, such as population persistence (N(t) (+1) = N(t) ), provide more robust near‐term forecasts of population abundance than the currently used mechanistic models. More broadly, ecological null models can be used as benchmarks for learning in ARM that trigger the need for discarding model parameterizations and developing new ones when prevailing models underperform the ecological null model. Identifying mechanistic models that surpass these benchmarks will improve learning through ARM and help decision‐makers keep pace with a rapidly changing world. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8794763 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-87947632022-02-04 A niche for null models in adaptive resource management Koons, David N. Riecke, Thomas V. Boomer, G. Scott Sedinger, Benjamin S. Sedinger, James S. Williams, Perry J. Arnold, Todd W. Ecol Evol Working Hypothesis As global systems rapidly change, our collective ability to predict future ecological dynamics will become increasingly important for successful natural resource management. By merging stakeholder objectives with system uncertainty, and by adapting actions to changing systems and knowledge, adaptive resource management (ARM) provides a rigorous platform for making sound decisions in a changing world. Critically, however, applications of ARM could be improved by employing benchmarks (i.e., points of reference) for determining when learning is occurring through the cycle of monitoring, modeling, and decision‐making steps in ARM. Many applications of ARM use multiple model‐based hypotheses to identify and reduce systematic uncertainty over time, but generally lack benchmarks for gauging discovery of scientific evidence and learning. This creates the danger of thinking that directional changes in model weights or rankings are indicative of evidence for hypotheses, when possibly all competing models are inadequate. There is thus a somewhat obvious, but yet to be filled niche for including benchmarks for learning in ARM. We contend that carefully designed “ecological null models,” which are structured to produce an expected ecological pattern in the absence of a hypothesized mechanism, can serve as suitable benchmarks. Using a classic case study of mallard harvest management that is often used to demonstrate the successes of ARM for learning about ecological mechanisms, we show that simple ecological null models, such as population persistence (N(t) (+1) = N(t) ), provide more robust near‐term forecasts of population abundance than the currently used mechanistic models. More broadly, ecological null models can be used as benchmarks for learning in ARM that trigger the need for discarding model parameterizations and developing new ones when prevailing models underperform the ecological null model. Identifying mechanistic models that surpass these benchmarks will improve learning through ARM and help decision‐makers keep pace with a rapidly changing world. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-01-13 /pmc/articles/PMC8794763/ /pubmed/35127044 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.8541 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Working Hypothesis Koons, David N. Riecke, Thomas V. Boomer, G. Scott Sedinger, Benjamin S. Sedinger, James S. Williams, Perry J. Arnold, Todd W. A niche for null models in adaptive resource management |
title | A niche for null models in adaptive resource management |
title_full | A niche for null models in adaptive resource management |
title_fullStr | A niche for null models in adaptive resource management |
title_full_unstemmed | A niche for null models in adaptive resource management |
title_short | A niche for null models in adaptive resource management |
title_sort | niche for null models in adaptive resource management |
topic | Working Hypothesis |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8794763/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35127044 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.8541 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT koonsdavidn anichefornullmodelsinadaptiveresourcemanagement AT rieckethomasv anichefornullmodelsinadaptiveresourcemanagement AT boomergscott anichefornullmodelsinadaptiveresourcemanagement AT sedingerbenjamins anichefornullmodelsinadaptiveresourcemanagement AT sedingerjamess anichefornullmodelsinadaptiveresourcemanagement AT williamsperryj anichefornullmodelsinadaptiveresourcemanagement AT arnoldtoddw anichefornullmodelsinadaptiveresourcemanagement AT koonsdavidn nichefornullmodelsinadaptiveresourcemanagement AT rieckethomasv nichefornullmodelsinadaptiveresourcemanagement AT boomergscott nichefornullmodelsinadaptiveresourcemanagement AT sedingerbenjamins nichefornullmodelsinadaptiveresourcemanagement AT sedingerjamess nichefornullmodelsinadaptiveresourcemanagement AT williamsperryj nichefornullmodelsinadaptiveresourcemanagement AT arnoldtoddw nichefornullmodelsinadaptiveresourcemanagement |