IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v220y2009i7p923-930.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating and managing wildlife impacts of climate change under uncertainty

Author

Listed:
  • Prato, Tony

Abstract

Wildlife managers face the daunting task of managing wildlife in light of uncertainty about the nature and extent of future climate change and variability and its potential adverse impacts on wildlife. A conceptual framework is developed for managing wildlife under such uncertainty. The framework uses fuzzy logic to test hypotheses about the extent of the wildlife impacts of past climate change and variability, and fuzzy multiple attribute evaluation to determine best compensatory management actions for adaptively managing the potential adverse impacts of future climate change and variability on wildlife. A compensatory management action is one that can offset some of the potential adverse impacts of climate change and variability on wildlife. Implementation of the proposed framework requires wildlife managers to: (1) select climate impact states, hypotheses about climate impact states, possible management actions for alleviating adverse wildlife impacts of climate change and variability, and future climate change scenarios; (2) choose biological attributes or indicators of species integrity; (3) adjust those attributes for changes in non-climatic variables; (4) define linguistic variables and associated triangular fuzzy numbers for rating both the acceptability of biological conditions under alternative management actions and the relative importance of biological attributes; (5) select minimum or maximum acceptable levels of the attributes and reliability levels for chance constraints on the biological attributes; and (6) define fuzzy sets on the extent of species integrity and biological conditions and select a fuzzy relation between species integrity and biological conditions. A constructed example is used to illustrate a hypothetical application of the framework by a wildlife management team. An overall best compensatory management action across all climate change scenarios is determined using the minimax regret criterion, which is appropriate when the management team cannot assign or is unwilling to assign probabilities to the future climate change scenarios. Application of the framework can be simplified and expedited by incorporating it in a web-based, interactive, decision support tool.

Suggested Citation

  • Prato, Tony, 2009. "Evaluating and managing wildlife impacts of climate change under uncertainty," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(7), pages 923-930.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:220:y:2009:i:7:p:923-930
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2009.01.010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380009000362
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2009.01.010?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Prato, Tony, 2003. "Multiple-attribute evaluation of ecosystem management for the Missouri River system," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 297-309, June.
    2. Barrett, C Richard & Pattanaik, Prasanta K, 1989. "Fuzzy Sets, Preference and Choice: Some Conceptual Issues," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(4), pages 229-253, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Prato, Tony, 2012. "Increasing resilience of natural protected areas to future climate change: A fuzzy adaptive management approach," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 242(C), pages 46-53.
    2. Bennett, Victoria J. & Fernández-Juricic, Esteban & Zollner, Patrick A. & Beard, Matthew J. & Westphal, Lynne & Fisher, Cherie L. LeBlanc, 2011. "Modelling the responses of wildlife to human disturbance: An evaluation of alternative management scenarios for black-crowned night-herons," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(15), pages 2770-2779.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Prato, Tony, 2007. "Assessing ecosystem sustainability and management using fuzzy logic," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 171-177, February.
    2. Guifang Yang & Zhenghong Chen, 2015. "RS-based fuzzy multiattribute assessment of eco-environmental vulnerability in the source area of the Lishui River of northwest Hunan Province, China," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 78(2), pages 1145-1161, September.
    3. Hojatollah Khedrigharibvand & Hossein Azadi & Dereje Teklemariam & Ehsan Houshyar & Philippe Maeyer & Frank Witlox, 2019. "Livelihood alternatives model for sustainable rangeland management: a review of multi-criteria decision-making techniques," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 11-36, February.
    4. Atousa Soltani & Roberta Dyck & Navid Hossaini & Asish Mohapatra & Kasun Hewage & Rehan Sadiq, 2016. "Human health assessment for remediation technologies (HEART): a multi-criteria decision analysis tool," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 7(2), pages 183-200, June.
    5. Georg KIRCHSTEIGER & Clemens PUPPE, 1994. "Intransitive Choices Based on Transitive Preferences: The Case of Menu-Dependent Information," Vienna Economics Papers vie9404, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.
    6. Tony Prato, 2008. "Accounting for risk and uncertainty in determining preferred strategies for adapting to future climate change," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 47-60, January.
    7. I. Linkov & F. K. Satterstrom & G. Kiker & T. P. Seager & T. Bridges & K. H. Gardner & S. H. Rogers & D. A. Belluck & A. Meyer, 2006. "Multicriteria Decision Analysis: A Comprehensive Decision Approach for Management of Contaminated Sediments," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(1), pages 61-78, February.
    8. H. J. Corsair & Jennifer Bassman Ruch & Pearl Q. Zheng & Benjamin F. Hobbs & Joseph F. Koonce, 2009. "Multicriteria Decision Analysis of Stream Restoration: Potential and Examples," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 387-417, July.
    9. Md Kutubuddin Dhali & Mery Biswas, 2019. "MCA on mechanism of river bed potholes growth: a study of middle Subarnarekha River basin, South East Asia," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 935-959, April.
    10. Perote-Pena, Juan & Piggins, Ashley, 2007. "Strategy-proof fuzzy aggregation rules," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 564-580, June.
    11. Hung, Ming-Lung & Yang, Wan-Fa & Ma, Hwong-Wen & Yang, Ya-Mei, 2006. "A novel multiobjective programming approach dealing with qualitative and quantitative objectives for environmental management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(4), pages 584-593, April.
    12. Hao Fanghua & Chen Guanchun, 2010. "A Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Group Decision-Making Model Based on Weighted Borda Scoring Method for Watershed Ecological Risk Management: a Case Study of Three Gorges Reservoir Area of China," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 24(10), pages 2139-2165, August.
    13. Kenyon, Wendy, 2007. "Evaluating flood risk management options in Scotland: A participant-led multi-criteria approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 70-81, October.
    14. Strager, Michael P. & Rosenberger, Randall S., 2006. "Incorporating stakeholder preferences for land conservation: Weights and measures in spatial MCA," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(4), pages 627-639, June.
    15. Sara Lelli, 2001. "Factor Analysis vs. Fuzzy Sets Theory: Assessing the Influence of Different Techniques on Sen's Functioning Approach," Public Economics Working Paper Series ces0121, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centrum voor Economische Studiën, Working Group Public Economics.
    16. Sell, Joachim & Koellner, Thomas & Weber, Olaf & Proctor, Wendy & Pedroni, Lucio & Scholz, Roland W., 2007. "Ecosystem services from tropical forestry projects - The choice of international market actors," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(5), pages 496-515, January.
    17. Wirtz, Kai W. & Baumberger, Nick & Adam, Susanne & Liu, Xin, 2007. "Oil spill impact minimization under uncertainty: Evaluating contingency simulations of the Prestige accident," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 417-428, March.
    18. Prato, Tony, 2012. "Increasing resilience of natural protected areas to future climate change: A fuzzy adaptive management approach," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 242(C), pages 46-53.
    19. Martin, David M. & Hermoso, Virgilio & Pantus, Francis & Olley, Jon & Linke, Simon & Poff, N. LeRoy, 2016. "A proposed framework to systematically design and objectively evaluate non-dominated restoration tradeoffs for watershed planning and management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 146-155.
    20. Conal Duddy & Juan Perote-Peña & Ashley Piggins, 2010. "Manipulating an aggregation rule under ordinally fuzzy preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 34(3), pages 411-428, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:220:y:2009:i:7:p:923-930. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.