The business perspective in ecological restoration: issues and challenges

Much of the practice of restoration is conducted by businesses—contractors, consultants, designers, engineers. Restoration businesses interact with a variety of stakeholders to complete projects on time and on budget, and to achieve ecological and business objectives. Our research explores the business perspective in restoration; it is based on data collected from businesses (contractors, consultants, design engineers), agencies, and nongovernmental organizations involved in a Superfund cleanup project in Montana, one of the largest river restoration efforts ever. Our findings highlight several areas restoration businesses must navigate. First, restoration businesses must juggle potentially competing goals, maintaining ecological integrity while achieving profitability objectives. Second, these businesses must manage the risk that arises from variability in the natural environment as well as individuals' risk tolerances. Third, they must navigate the disconnect between “science” and “practice,” including how to best monitor restoration projects. Fourth, they must make decisions about new techniques and innovations. Fifth, on‐the‐ground implementation must acknowledge that personnels' motives and expertise might conflict with original plans. We discuss these findings in relation to relevant scholarly research, offering implications for theory and practice. For example, the business of ecological restoration requires learning over time to be profitable while achieving the desired ecological and social outcomes; restoration businesses leverage monitoring in pursuit of adaptive management and engage “frontline personnel” as important voices in the restoration process. Understanding the business of restoration adds an important perspective in the complex dynamics of social‐ecological systems.     

“Solution-Focused Risk Assessment”: A Proposal for the Fusion of Environmental Analysis and Action

For 30 years, more attention and resources have been expended on dissecting problems (risk assessment) than on evaluating actual solutions that reduce risks. The basic dogma holds that risk assessment must precede risk management. But there is an opposite and perhaps better way: the opening question should not be “How bad is the problem?” but “How good are the solutions we might apply to the problem?” Rethinking risk assessment in this context offers three classes of benefits over the status quo. First, it can help break the endless cycle of analysis: when the goal is to know enough to decide, rather than to know everything, natural stopping points emerge. Second, it can lead to more decisions that actually achieve risk reduction, rather than pronouncements about how much risk reduction would be optimal. Third, it can highlight ways to resolve multiple risks simultaneously, avoid needless and tragic risk-risk tradeoffs, and involve affected stakeholders in debating what should be done. Arguably, the longer the disembodied analysis of risk information is allowed to proceed, the more likely it is that the “problem” will be defined in a way that blunts the free-wheeling discussion of solutions, to the detriment of human health, the environment, and the economy.     

From Assessment to Policy: Lessons Learned from the U.S. National Assessment

The process of translating scientific information into timely and useful insights that inform policy and resource management decisions, despite the existence of uncertainties, is a difficult and challenging task. Policy-focused assessment is one approach to achieving this end. It is an ongoing process that engages both researchers and end-users to analyze, evaluate and interpret information from multiple disciplines to draw conclusions that are timely and useful for decision makers. This paper discusses key characteristics of a policy-focused assessment process, including (1) ongoing collaboration between the research, assessment, and stakeholder communities; (2) a focus on stakeholder information needs; (3) multidisciplinary approaches; (4) use of scenarios to deal with uncertainties; and (5) evaluation of risk management options. We illustrate the particular challenge to assessors of providing the specific types of insights stakeholders need to effectively influence policy decisions. And we discuss the role that assessment can play in formulating an agenda for future research. Examples from the U.S. National Assessment of “The Potential Consequences of Climate Variability and Change for the United States” are used to illustrate a policy-focused assessment process. For many of the participants, the first U.S. National Assessment was an extraordinary learning experience about how to develop better ways of conducting assessments.     

An Approach for Incorporating Information on Chemical Availability in Soils into Risk Assessment and Risk-Based Decision Making,Prepared by: The New England Environmentally Acceptable Endpoints Workgroup

A regional workgroup comprised of individuals from regulatory agencies, uni versities, and consulting companies was formed to develop an approach for incor porating information on chemical availability in soils into risk assessment and risk based decision making. The approach consists of the following decision framework for including information on chemical availability: (1) Determine the usefulness of incorporating information on bioavailability; (2) Identify information needs from a conceptual model of exposure for the site and from exposure pathways judged critical to the assessment; (3) Identify soil factors that affect bioavailability; (4) Determine the type or form of information (measures and/or models) that can be used within the risk assessment and risk management process; (5) Select methods (measures and/or models) based on the “weight of evidence” or strength of the bioavailability information they will provide and how that information will be used for risk assessment and risk based decision making; (6) Incorporate information into the risk assessment and risk based decision making. These fac tors can be integrated into existing risk based approaches for site management such as Superfund, state approaches, and the ASTM Risk Based Corrective Action Process (RBCA). Consistent with risk assessment guidance, an assessment of chemical availability in soils must consider current as well as reasonably foresee able conditions. The approach recognizes that information on chemical availabil ity is contextual and depends on the receptor and pathway. Further, the value of information depends on how well it is accepted and/or validated for use in regulatory decision making. The workgroup identified four principles for select ing methods (measures and/or models) for obtaining information on chemical availability and for evaluating information on chemical availability for use in risk assessments: (1) soil chemical relevance, (2) pathway relevance, (3) receptor relevance, and (4) acceptance of the method.     

Comprehensive Realism's Weight-of-Evidence Based Distributional Dose-Response Characterization

Challenges to low-dose linearity and other default assumptions in cancer risk assessment and the limitations associated with NOAELs, LOAELs, and constant uncertainty factor values in the evaluation of noncancer health effects have stimulated the continued evolution of risk assessment methodologies. The increasing need for more realistic estimates of the dose-response relationship, better uncertainty characterization, and greater utilization of cost-benefit analyses have also contributed to this evolution. “Comprehensive Realism” is an emerging quantitative weight-of-evidence based risk assessment methodology for both cancer and noncancer health effects which utilizes probability distributions and decision analysis techniques to reflect more of the relevant human exposure data, more of the available and pertinent human and animal dose-response data, and the current state of knowledge about the relative plausibility of alternative dose-response analyses. A tree (like a decision tree and a probability tree) is used to decompose the dose-response assessment into component factors, to provide a structure for explicitly considering multiple alternatives for each factor, and to explicitly incorporate the current state of knowledge about the relative plausibility of these alternatives. Groundbreaking work has demonstrated the feasibility of weight-of-evidence based distributional characterizations, and provided initial examples. Computer software implementations are also available.     

Where is the Evidence for Assessing Evidence‐Based Restoration? Comments on Ntshotsho et al. (2010)

In their article “Assessing the evidence base for restoration in South Africa,” Ntshotsho et al. attempt to determine whether restoration in South Africa is evidence based by reporting on 10 projects' baseline data collection, goal setting, and monitoring. However, their contribution suffers from two major constraints. First, they confuse assessing the evidence base with assessing whether restoration is evidence based. Truly, assessing the evidence base would entail a systematic review of the quantity and quality of information available as well as the conclusions supported, perhaps in a meta‐analytical framework. Determining if restoration is evidence based would require a survey of project managers to evaluate if they take decisions based on scientific information. Second, Ntshotsho et al. do not clearly distinguish successfully achieving restoration project goals from successfully restoring ecosystems. They largely focus on projects' socioeconomic goals without emphasizing that these goals are, by definition, secondary to ecological goals in determining restoration success. Thus, Ntshotsho et al. provide neither a sound assessment of the evidence base for restoration nor whether restoration is evidence based. To evaluate and encourage evidence‐based restoration in South Africa, we recommend a simple assessment of the basis on which restoration managers make decisions, identification of factors precluding evidence‐based decision‐making, and development of platforms to evaluate the data collected in restoration programs to generate an evidence base from which to make defendable decisions.     

Practical Decision Methods for Watershed Management

Why are formal statistical methods for risk-based decision-making so seldom used in the practice of watershed management? I contend that complex formal methods, while internally consistent, are often inappropriate to real world decision-making. The primary purpose of risk analysis is to support risk management, and decision methods need to be effective not just in evaluating risk, but also in communicating risk among stakeholders and decision makers. Useful methods must be not only correct, but also readily communicable. Many formal risk-based decision methods have real obstacles to practical application in one of the following areas: (1) many important components of risk that matter to stakeholders are difficult to express in quantitative terms, and any method which turns “fuzzy” information and subjective opinion into hard numbers is prone to be regarded with suspicion; (2) methods which are not understandable and convincing to decision makers have little practical value; (3) a complex formal analysis will be seen as misguided or irrelevant if it does not represent the full spectrum of management goals. This paper compares the process of watershed management with the process of ecological risk assessment, highlighting similarities and key differences. A practical decision method which balances quantitative rigor with ability to communicate to and forge consensus among stakeholders is then outlined with reference to a successful case study.     

Challenge of weed risk assessment (WRA) for ecological restoration in China: The case of Rhus typhina L. and the new officially released weed risk assessment system

China has conducted many ecological restoration projects to alleviate environmental degradation, with numerous alien species having good adaptability widely used for fast effect. However, unsuitable plant selection may bring negative impacts and even cause biological invasion. Weed risk assessment (WRA) is therefore indispensable, yet it is often contentious especially concerning those species that has been widely utilized before weedy attributes were noted. In this paper, we take Rhus typhina L. as an example to illustrate how scientific researches and social factors can influence the evaluation of alien species and cause challenge to WRA. The evaluation of this species is not only a pure scientific issue but also influenced by many factors such as the introduction history, current utilization status in afforestation, and divergent underlying values varying through persons and sectors. These factors determined the kind of data to be assessed, which lead to different evaluations, therefore, causing challenge to its WRA. We further examined newly officially released WRA system in China from the invasion biology viewpoint, arguing that it had some major flaws in design and validation and need much improvement. Considering the human dimension and biological characters together, we suggest that the “black list” and “green list” approaches with rigorous expert assessment should be adopted simultaneously in alien species management in China.     

Overview: The future of ecological risk assessment

Risk assessment has become a popular tool to help solve ecological problems. The basic concept is not new and has been applied to diverse decision problems. The application to ecological problems, especially complex ecological problems, is fairly recent and controversial. The fundamental and most important elements of the controversy revolve around two key points: (1) a person's implicit “world view;”; and (2) the assumption of who (or what) receives the benefits and who (or what) pays the costs for ecological “decisions.”; A person's attitude toward risk assessment is, at least implicitly, defined by a world view. It is this world view that defines how each of us reacts to risk assessment applied to ecological problems. How the question of benefits and costs is defined also defines the appropriate use, if any, of ecological risk assessment. The future of ecological risk assessment will almost certainly follow the course of other analytical tools: enthusiastic support, rapid, widespread adoption and use; then disillusionment and rapid replacement with newer approaches, but with continued use for a greatly constrained set of ecological issues.     

Americans' Nanotechnology Risk Perception:

Although proposed nanotechnology applications hold great promise, little is known about the potential associated risks. This lack of clarity on the level of risk associated with nanotechnology has forced people to make decisions about consumption with incomplete information. A national random digit dialing telephone survey (N= 1014) was conducted in the United States to assess knowledge of nanotechnology and perception of risk in August 2006. This investigation looks critically at individuals' responses to questions about the balance of risks and benefits of nanotechnology, both at the outset of the survey and after respondents were given a brief introduction to the potential benefits and risks of the technology. Models were created to characterzise respondents who said they did not know how nanotechnology's risks and benefits balanced in the “preinformation” condition but who, in the postinformation condition, had a different opinion. Respondents who were highly educated, members of the Republican Party, or male were more likely to switch from “don't know” in the preinformation condition to “benefits outweigh risks” in the postinformation condition, whereas respondents who were less educated, members of the Democratic Party, or female were more likely to switch from “don't know” in the preinformation condition to “risks outweigh benefits” in the postinformation condition. This is the first study to our knowledge to develop a significant model of nanotechnology risk perception change, specifically with regard to gender differences. The power of information provision to sway opinions is also supported, highlighting the importance of developing educational efforts targeting vulnerable populations.     

Ziele und Grenzen der Quantifizierung genetischer Risiken

This present article deals with the question of how meaningful statistical risk assessments in genetic counseling may be for the decision-making process of individuals who ask for genetic advice. Even in some Mendelian diseases and generally in the case of multifactorial diseases it is not satisfactory to provide an a priori risk for all affected families. The question of whether a given person or his or her future children may develop the disease in question with severe, possibly untreatable symptoms may largely depend on individual circumstances. Accordingly, the inclusion of such circumstances in the assessment of an individual’s a posteriori risk may largely deviate upwards or downwards from this a priori risk. Currently, the lack of such data often prevents the quantification of an individual a posteriori risk; it is, however, obvious that individual risk assessment will play an increasing role in future genetic counseling. Besides a better understanding of individual environmental influences our growing insight into the impact of epigenetic changes will enforce a re-evaluation of individual risks. Epigenetic changes acquired during fetal development or early childhood may lead to lasting physiological changes and, accordingly, may significantly affect the risk of an individual to develop a certain disease during his or her later life. Due to the complexity of genetic and epigenetic networks it is as inappropriate to categorize mutated genes or alleles which increase the risk for a certain disease as “bad” or “sick” genes as it is to consider genes with apparently health-promoting properties as “good” or “healthy” genes. Such rhetoric may foster feelings of either guilt or superiority in individuals and may have an even more politically dangerous impact by encouraging neo-eugenic thinking. In contrast, the goal of non-directive genetic counseling is to provide individuals seeking advice with reliable information which helps them arrive at a personal decision. Given their personal circumstances this decision should be ethically acceptable and realistically allow them to cope with their problem in their future lives. As seen in cases of Mendelian diseases, such as sickle cell anemia or thalassemias, heterozygous carriers may have selective advantages, in this particular case a natural resistance against Malaria tropica. This example demonstrates that a genetic burden may not have only disadvantages but also advantages for the health of a whole population. This consideration may hold for many alleles which have been present in the gene pool of a population for many generations, although they contribute to a genetic predisposition for a multifactorial disease. In debates about the heritability of a given trait, the heritability coefficient has often been used as an argument for and against the predominant impact of genes on the trait in question. The authors wish to remind their readers that this coefficient reflects the genetic variation measured in a given population divided by the variation of all possible parameters which affect the phenotypic trait. It neither gives an answer about the absolute influence of genes and other factors on this trait nor does it provide information about how unforeseen changes in the environment may affect the heritability of the trait in the future. Contrary to a common misunderstanding in public discussion this coefficient does not allow any conclusion on the interaction of genetic, epigenetic and environmental factors involved in the development of the trait in question in an individual. Finally, in the closing section the authors highlight the opportunities of risk-adapted disease prevention.     

THE WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY: DECISION THEORY AND THE TIMING OF PROGNOSTIC TESTS FOR NEWBORN INFANTS

In many forms of severe acute brain injury there is an early phase when prognosis is uncertain, followed later by physiological recovery and the possibility of more certain predictions of future impairment. There may be a window of opportunity for withdrawal of life support early, but if decisions are delayed there is the risk that the patient will survive with severe impairment. In this paper I focus on the example of neonatal encephalopathy and the question of the timing of prognostic tests and decisions to continue or to withdraw life‐sustaining treatment. Should testing be performed early or later; and how should parents decide what to do given the conflicting values at stake? I apply decision theory to the problem, using sensitivity analysis to assess how different features of the tests or different values would affect a decision to perform early or late prognostic testing. I draw some general conclusions from this model for decisions about the timing of testing in neonatal encephalopathy. Finally I consider possible solutions to the problem posed by the window of opportunity. Decision theory highlights the costs of uncertainty. This may prompt further research into improving prognostic tests. But it may also prompt us to reconsider our current attitudes towards the palliative care of newborn infants predicted to be severely impaired.     

“Ecologically Acceptable Concentrations” When Assessing the Environmental Risks of Pesticides Under European Directive 91/414/EEC

Pesticides are authorized in the European Union under Directive 91/414/EEC. This is a two-stage process that involves EU-wide assessment for Annex I listing followed by individual Member State assessment. Recently the concept of an Ecologically Acceptable Concentration (EAC) has been used during both stages of environmental risk assessments. The EAC is a concentration at which no “unacceptable” ecological effects occur and has been interpreted as a concentration at which “acceptable” effects may be allowed to occur. This article reviews the implications of the EAC concept for pesticides risk assessment and proposes improvements to make its use more objective.     

Wanting,liking and welfare: The role of affective states in proximate control of behaviour in vertebrates

Animals choose a course of action countless times each day. To do so, they need to prioritise their behaviour within a set of alternative actions and decide which of these actions to perform at any one time and for how long, that is, determine when the behaviour has reached its desired effect. This process has classically been called the proximate behavioural control mechanism. Several aspects contribute to this process: internal and external stimuli, the emotions that they elicit, motivation (wants), behavioural goals, valuation, decision‐making and its modulation by mood, and the assessment of behavioural outcomes (liking). I will address all these aspects in the form of an integrated conceptual model. In the process of behavioural control, options need to be valued, and I will refer to evidence showing that an affective hedonic process in respect to (future) reward and punishment heavily affects this value. Moreover, I view motivation, the force that finally drives a specific behavioural output, as being primarily influenced by affective states or even corresponding fully to them. Given the feedback in behavioural control by (dis‐)liking outcomes of behaviour, I reason that in respect to welfare it is more important for animals to reach proximate goals than to avoid negative stimuli. All behavioural choices are modulated, and I show how mood, a long‐term affective state, can cause such modulation. Proximate control of behaviour takes place in the brain, and I will briefly discuss how current and future brain research may elucidate how the brain computes these processes. Furthermore, the inclusion of affective states in the conceptual model raises the question of the subjective experience of animals, and I will address some of the important open questions in this area of research. I will conclude that neural studies cannot currently provide a detailed and general theory on the algorithms of proximate behavioural control. In parallel to further developing these approaches, I propose to strengthen a refined ethological approach with a focus on the states of “wanting” and “liking” in ecologically meaningful circumstances and with a strong ontogenetic (within species) and comparative (between species) component. I consider this ethological approach to be a highly promising step in understanding proximate behavioural control.     

Territory surveillance and prey management: Wolves keep track of space and time

Identifying behavioral mechanisms that underlie observed movement patterns is difficult when animals employ sophisticated cognitive‐based strategies. Such strategies may arise when timing of return visits is important, for instance to allow for resource renewal or territorial patrolling. We fitted spatially explicit random‐walk models to GPS movement data of six wolves (Canis lupus; Linnaeus, 1758) from Alberta, Canada to investigate the importance of the following: (1) territorial surveillance likely related to renewal of scent marks along territorial edges, to reduce intraspecific risk among packs, and (2) delay in return to recently hunted areas, which may be related to anti‐predator responses of prey under varying prey densities. The movement models incorporated the spatiotemporal variable “time since last visit,” which acts as a wolf's memory index of its travel history and is integrated into the movement decision along with its position in relation to territory boundaries and information on local prey densities. We used a model selection framework to test hypotheses about the combined importance of these variables in wolf movement strategies. Time‐dependent movement for territory surveillance was supported by all wolf movement tracks. Wolves generally avoided territory edges, but this avoidance was reduced as time since last visit increased. Time‐dependent prey management was weak except in one wolf. This wolf selected locations with longer time since last visit and lower prey density, which led to a longer delay in revisiting high prey density sites. Our study shows that we can use spatially explicit random walks to identify behavioral strategies that merge environmental information and explicit spatiotemporal information on past movements (i.e., “when” and “where”) to make movement decisions. The approach allows us to better understand cognition‐based movement in relation to dynamic environments and resources.     

An evolutionary interpretation of the “motivation to oviposit”

The ovipositional behavior of parasitoids and other insects is often described by phrases such as “motivation to oviposit” or “ovipositional drive”. This paper shows how an evolutionary (i.e. functional) interpretation can be given to such phrases. A detailed model for the parasitisation of Sycamore aphids by M. pseudoplatani is developed, using experiments by Collins and Dixon (1986). Two models are developed: i) one in which egg complement is the only state variable and ii) one in which egg complement and information concerning host densities are state variables. Comparisons of the behaviour of simulated parasitoids, using the decisions associated with the models, and the experiments suggest that both egg complement and information are important for the parasitoid's decision making. Accepting previously parasitized hosts may be optimal, and not simply an error in parasitoid perception. A number of other detailed predictions are made, such as the relative fitness of first and second eggs in superparasitized hosts and the nature of the memory of the parasitoid.     

Ecological Risk Assessment in Water Resource Management

The US EPA published guidelines for the application of ecological risk assessment (ERA) in the USA in 1998 (US EPA 1998). The process diagram derived by Murray and Claassen (1999) in an evaluation of the US EPA framework is discussed in the context of the South African National Water Act. The evaluation discusses the various steps involved in an ERA and how it can be applied in the implementation of the National Water Act. It is concluded that the application of ERA can make a significant contribution towards sustainable water resource management. Two requirements for this are the need for more demonstration projects and that capacity be developed in risk assessment and risk-based decision making.     

Limitations to the Use of Species-Distribution Models for Environmental-Impact Assessments in the Amazon

Species-distribution models (SDM) are tools with potential to inform environmental-impact studies (EIA). However, they are not always appropriate and may result in improper and expensive mitigation and compensation if their limitations are not understood by decision makers. Here, we examine the use of SDM for frogs that were used in impact assessment using data obtained from the EIA of a hydroelectric project located in the Amazon Basin in Brazil. The results show that lack of knowledge of species distributions limits the appropriate use of SDM in the Amazon region for most target species. Because most of these targets are newly described and their distributions poorly known, data about their distributions are insufficient to be effectively used in SDM. Surveys that are mandatory for the EIA are often conducted only near the area under assessment, and so models must extrapolate well beyond the sampled area to inform decisions made at much larger spatial scales, such as defining areas to be used to offset the negative effects of the projects. Using distributions of better-known species in simulations, we show that geographical-extrapolations based on limited information of species ranges often lead to spurious results. We conclude that the use of SDM as evidence to support project-licensing decisions in the Amazon requires much greater area sampling for impact studies, or, alternatively, integrated and comparative survey strategies, to improve biodiversity sampling. When more detailed distribution information is unavailable, SDM will produce results that generate uncertain and untestable decisions regarding impact assessment. In many cases, SDM is unlikely to be better than the use of expert opinion.     

Using value of information to prioritize research needs for migratory bird management under climate change: a case study using federal land acquisition in the United States

In response to global habitat loss, many governmental and non‐governmental organizations have implemented land acquisition programs to protect critical habitats permanently for priority species. The ability of these protected areas to meet future management objectives may be compromised if the effects of climate change are not considered in acquisition decisions. Unfortunately, the effects of climate change on ecological systems are complex and plagued by uncertainty, making it difficult for organizations to prioritize research needs to improve decision‐making. Herein, we demonstrate the use of qualitative value of information analysis to identify and prioritize which sources of uncertainty should be reduced to improve land acquisition decisions to protect migratory birds in the face of climate change. The qualitative value of information analysis process involves four steps: (i) articulating alternative hypotheses; (ii) determining the magnitude of uncertainty regarding each hypothesis; (iii) evaluating the relevance of each hypothesis to acquisition decision‐making; and (iv) assessing the feasibility of reducing the uncertainty surrounding each hypothesis through research and monitoring. We demonstrate this approach using the objectives of 3 U.S. federal land acquisition programs that focus on migratory bird management. We used a comprehensive literature review, expert elicitation, and professional judgement to evaluate 11 hypotheses about the effect of climate change on migratory birds. Based on our results, we provide a list of priorities for future research and monitoring to reduce uncertainty and improve land acquisition decisions for the programs considered in our case study. Reducing uncertainty about how climate change will influence the spatial distribution of priority species and biotic homogenization were identified as the highest priorities for future research due to both the value of this information for improving land acquisition decisions and the feasibility of reducing uncertainty through research and monitoring. Research on how changes in precipitation patterns and winter severity will influence migratory bird abundance is also expected to benefit land acquisition decisions. By contrast, hypotheses about phenology and migration distance were identified as low priorities for research. By providing a rigorous and transparent approach to prioritizing research, we demonstrate that qualitative value of information is a valuable tool for prioritizing research and improving management decisions in other complex, high‐uncertainty cases where traditional quantitative value of information analysis is not possible. Given the inherent complexity of ecological systems under climate change, and the difficulty of identifying management‐relevant research priorities, we expect this approach to have wide applications within the field of natural resource management.