Eradicate, contain, or live with it? Collaborating with stakeholders to evaluate responses to invasive species

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    11 Citations (Web of Science)

    Abstract

    Significant heterogeneity exists in the public’s preferences and values for protecting agricultural ecosystems against invasive non-native species. Therefore, biosecurity decision-making is akin to conflict management characterised by not only technical, but also environmental, social and economic value judgements of different stakeholders. The key question then, is not whether values should be considered in the decision-making process—they are part of it anyway—but how they should be articulated and incorporated via a formal and structured analysis. In this paper, we propose to use Structured Decision Making (SDM) as a framework to incorporate diverse social values into response planning and management and demonstrate its use with three case studies. The first step of the process involves identifying the stakeholders in a response decision, followed by the critical step of systematically translating stakeholders’ major concerns into management objectives. Biosecurity decision-makers will also collaborate with the public to develop response alternatives and identify a preferred option by explicitly making trade-offs among different objectives. Ultimately, the SDM approach provides a transparent description of, and justification for, the response options considered and selected. © 2015, Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht and International Society for Plant Pathology.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)49-59
    Number of pages11
    JournalFood Security
    Volume8
    Issue number1
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1 Feb 2016

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Eradicate, contain, or live with it? Collaborating with stakeholders to evaluate responses to invasive species'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this