Expert judgment and uncertainty regarding the protection of imperiled species

Abstract Decisions concerning the appropriate listing status of species under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) can be controversial even among conservationists. These decisions may determine whether a species persists in the near term and have long‐lasting social and political ramifications. Gi...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Conservation Biology
Main Authors: Heeren, Alexander, Karns, Gabriel, Bruskotter, Jeremy, Toman, Eric, Wilson, Robyn, Szarek, Harmony
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2016
Subjects:
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12838
https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.1111%2Fcobi.12838
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/wol1/doi/10.1111/cobi.12838/fullpdf
id crwiley:10.1111/cobi.12838
record_format openpolar
spelling crwiley:10.1111/cobi.12838 2024-09-30T14:45:37+00:00 Expert judgment and uncertainty regarding the protection of imperiled species Heeren, Alexander Karns, Gabriel Bruskotter, Jeremy Toman, Eric Wilson, Robyn Szarek, Harmony 2016 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12838 https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.1111%2Fcobi.12838 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/wol1/doi/10.1111/cobi.12838/fullpdf en eng Wiley http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor Conservation Biology volume 31, issue 3, page 657-665 ISSN 0888-8892 1523-1739 journal-article 2016 crwiley https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12838 2024-09-03T04:23:37Z Abstract Decisions concerning the appropriate listing status of species under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) can be controversial even among conservationists. These decisions may determine whether a species persists in the near term and have long‐lasting social and political ramifications. Given the ESA's mandate that such decisions be based on the best available science, it is important to examine what factors contribute to experts’ judgments concerning the listing of species. We examined how a variety of factors (such as risk perception, value orientations, and norms) influenced experts’ judgments concerning the appropriate listing status of the grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) population in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. Experts were invited to complete an online survey examining their perceptions of the threats grizzly bears face and their listing recommendation. Although experts’ assessments of the threats to this species were strongly correlated with their recommendations for listing status, this relationship did not exist when other cognitive factors were included in the model. Specifically, values related to human use of wildlife and norms (i.e., a respondent's expectation of peers’ assessments) were most influential in listing status recommendations. These results suggest that experts’ decisions about listing, like all human decisions, are subject to the use of heuristics (i.e., decision shortcuts). An understanding of how heuristics and related biases affect decisions under uncertainty can help inform decision making about threatened and endangered species and may be useful in designing effective processes for protection of imperiled species. Article in Journal/Newspaper Ursus arctos Wiley Online Library Conservation Biology 31 3 657 665
institution Open Polar
collection Wiley Online Library
op_collection_id crwiley
language English
description Abstract Decisions concerning the appropriate listing status of species under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) can be controversial even among conservationists. These decisions may determine whether a species persists in the near term and have long‐lasting social and political ramifications. Given the ESA's mandate that such decisions be based on the best available science, it is important to examine what factors contribute to experts’ judgments concerning the listing of species. We examined how a variety of factors (such as risk perception, value orientations, and norms) influenced experts’ judgments concerning the appropriate listing status of the grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) population in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. Experts were invited to complete an online survey examining their perceptions of the threats grizzly bears face and their listing recommendation. Although experts’ assessments of the threats to this species were strongly correlated with their recommendations for listing status, this relationship did not exist when other cognitive factors were included in the model. Specifically, values related to human use of wildlife and norms (i.e., a respondent's expectation of peers’ assessments) were most influential in listing status recommendations. These results suggest that experts’ decisions about listing, like all human decisions, are subject to the use of heuristics (i.e., decision shortcuts). An understanding of how heuristics and related biases affect decisions under uncertainty can help inform decision making about threatened and endangered species and may be useful in designing effective processes for protection of imperiled species.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Heeren, Alexander
Karns, Gabriel
Bruskotter, Jeremy
Toman, Eric
Wilson, Robyn
Szarek, Harmony
spellingShingle Heeren, Alexander
Karns, Gabriel
Bruskotter, Jeremy
Toman, Eric
Wilson, Robyn
Szarek, Harmony
Expert judgment and uncertainty regarding the protection of imperiled species
author_facet Heeren, Alexander
Karns, Gabriel
Bruskotter, Jeremy
Toman, Eric
Wilson, Robyn
Szarek, Harmony
author_sort Heeren, Alexander
title Expert judgment and uncertainty regarding the protection of imperiled species
title_short Expert judgment and uncertainty regarding the protection of imperiled species
title_full Expert judgment and uncertainty regarding the protection of imperiled species
title_fullStr Expert judgment and uncertainty regarding the protection of imperiled species
title_full_unstemmed Expert judgment and uncertainty regarding the protection of imperiled species
title_sort expert judgment and uncertainty regarding the protection of imperiled species
publisher Wiley
publishDate 2016
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12838
https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.1111%2Fcobi.12838
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/wol1/doi/10.1111/cobi.12838/fullpdf
genre Ursus arctos
genre_facet Ursus arctos
op_source Conservation Biology
volume 31, issue 3, page 657-665
ISSN 0888-8892 1523-1739
op_rights http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor
op_doi https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12838
container_title Conservation Biology
container_volume 31
container_issue 3
container_start_page 657
op_container_end_page 665
_version_ 1811646163804225536