@article {bnh-6255, title = {Navigating the fiery debate: the role of scientific evidence in eliciting policy and management responses for contentious plants in northern Australia}, journal = {Pacific Conservation Biology}, volume = {24}, year = {2018}, month = {08/2018}, pages = {318-328}, abstract = {

Australia{\textquoteright}s vast tropical savannas contain outstanding biodiversity and cultural values. The region supports many industries, with broad-scale pastoralism being the most widespread. Hundreds of plant species were introduced into northern Australia to support the pastoral industry; some species have since been termed {\textquoteleft}contentious{\textquoteright} or {\textquoteleft}conflict{\textquoteright} species due to their perceived positive value for industry but negative impacts on non-pastoral values when they invaded non-pastoral landscapes. Heated political and public debate ensued about the appropriate policy and management response to these species based on people{\textquoteright}s perceptions of values being altered by invasion by these species, and conflicting views on what constituted appropriate management actions to control their use and spread. Here we share our insights into the role of scientific evidence in progressing this debate, by quantifying the impacts of species on environmental, socioeconomic and cultural values. We reflect on the importance of science for underpinning evidence-based risk management tools, the outputs of which supported policy response by politicians and other policy decision-makers. We also assess the gap in translation from policy to coordinated on-ground action at the national scale, and provide our insights into the contribution that science can make to bridging this gap.

}, keywords = {conservation biology, conservation policy, invasive species, policy and planning, Savanna}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1071/PC18028}, url = {https://www.publish.csiro.au/pc/PC18028}, author = {Setterfield, SA and Rossiter-Rachor, Natalie and Vanessa M Adams} } @article {bnh-2505, title = {Using quantitative influence diagrams to map natural resource managers{\textquoteright} mental models of invasive species management}, journal = {Land Use Policy}, volume = {50}, year = {2016}, month = {01/2016}, chapter = {341}, abstract = {

Despite the significant effect that invasive species have on natural values, the number and extent of invasions continue to rise globally. At least three dominant reasons explain why policy development and implementation can fail: differences in managers{\textquoteright} mental models of invasive species management; cross-agency responsibility; and poor planning and management (i.e., planning{\textendash}implementation gap). We used a case study of cross-agency management of gamba grass (Andropogon gayanus) in Australia to explore the differences in organizational staffs{\textquoteright} mental models of management. The gamba grass invasion in northern Australia is continuing to expand and associated effects are increasing; coordinated action across agencies is needed to manage the expansion. Our aim was to examine how staff would represent their mental models as a diagram that we could compare between individuals and groups. We used cognitive mapping techniques to elicit models of 15 individuals from across 5 organizations, represented as an influence diagram, which shows the interrelationships that define a system. We compiled the individual influence diagrams to create a team model of management that captures the common connections across participants{\textquoteright} diagrams. The team model revealed that education, science, legislation, enforcement and property management plans were perceived to be the most important management tools to control or eradicate gamba grass. The Weed Management Branch was perceived to have the most central role in gamba grass management, while other organizations were perceived to have specific roles according to their core business. Significant positive correlations (i.e., shared perceptions) were observed across half of the participants, indicating that the some participants have shared models that could be used as a starting point for discussing the team model, clarifying roles and responsibilities, and potentially building consensus around a shared model. Dominant opportunities for improvement identified by participants were better use of management tools, namely education and enforcement, better coordination and collaboration between agencies and increased resourcing. Our research demonstrates the value and validity of using influence diagrams to explore managers{\textquoteright} mental models and to create a team model that could serve as a starting point for improved cross-agency natural resource management.\ 

}, url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837715003105}, author = {Katie Moon and Vanessa M Adams} }