|
Indicators |
Broadening
Participation in Biological Monitoring: |
|
Background - In 1995 the United States signed on to the Montreal Process as a member country and agreed to adopt and develop the use of indicators to measure and advance sustainable forestry in the U.S. One aspect of sustainable forestry identified by the Montreal Process is the conservation of biodiversity. Diversity is important at all levels of biological organization (genetic, population-species, community-ecosystem and regional-landscape) and consists of structural, functional, and compositional attributes (for instance, age classes nutrient cycling, and successional-stage respectively). Hence, indicator variables for monitoring biodiversity would ideally be chosen at all levels of organization and for all three attributes of ecosystems. However, this is rarely possible with limited time and resources, hence selecting indicators that serve multiple purposes and are tightly correlated with attributes of concern will improve efficiency in a monitoring project. Selecting Indicators— Developing reliable and cost-effective indicators of forest health is a relatively recent and on-going pursuit in conservation biology. A major challenge is to refine the broad indicators established for assessing sustainable forestry at a large scale (across forest ecosystem types and ownerships) to be locally appropriate, credible indicators. Scientists and other stakeholders are developing several useful tools to aid in the process of selecting and using indicators. The following list provides several examples (see Appendix 1 for details):
After collaborators agree upon a project’s goals and objectives, they can select the specific indicators to measure the progress toward achieving those objectives. At this point it can be useful to explore the variety of sources of historical ecological conditions in the area in order to determine what indicators might be most sensitive to change. Local archives, county records, and older members of the community are all places to look for background data when selecting indicators. Stating explicitly what attribute of an indicator is to actually be measured (such as the spatial extent of habitat for a species of concern) can help ensure that the indicators selected will be appropriate. Choosing indicators with pre-existing baseline information also can reduce the project’s workload or build on existing knowledge. Selecting Measures— Once indicators have been selected, then determining how they will be measured and evaluated is the next step. Measurable characteristics that change in response to disturbance or threat might be especially pertinent to project goals. For example, if the selected indicator of ecosystem health was the population viability of a bird species threatened by nesting habitat loss, then an appropriate measure might be the abundance of currently used nests in the target area. A measurement variable can be broad, such as species richness, or narrow, such as the abundance of a single species or population. For a given indicator, there might be several variables to measure and different sampling designs or methods might be necessary for each. It is possible that at the research design stage, collaborators will realize that they do not have the resources to measure the indicators they have chosen, and thus might need to revise the project goals and choice of indicators to match their capacity. One approach suggested by the Manomet Center uses three types of measures for any biodiversity indicator (such as habitat for cavity-nesting birds): a condition measure (such as density of snags), a pressure measure (such as area of timber harvesting/year), and policy-response measure (such as the presence of a management plan for snags). These indicators are only beginning to be field tested so keep in mind that selecting indicators for biodiversity monitoring and sustainable forestry is a rapidly evolving area of science subject to change. Also, for narrowly focused biological monitoring projects, non-biological indicators like policy-response may not be appropriate. Likewise, broader studies may need additional indicators such as cultural use indicators (for example, presence of subsistence harvesting of a species). Considerations for Participatory Approaches— The level and involvement of different participants in the indicator and measures selection process is partly be determined by who initiates the monitoring project. For example, established monitoring projects might wish to invite local volunteers or small contractors to assist with data collection, even though the indicators and measures have already been selected and are no longer easily changed. Other types of monitoring projects involve community members, managers, scientists and other stakeholders from the beginning. Involving stakeholders can have many practical benefits. For example, involving local participants can improve the indicator selection process by drawing on their knowledge of local ecosystems. Knowledge such as where certain species exist, unusual ecosystem phenomenon, or existing cultural use patterns might be useful for selecting indicators that are practical, important, or essential to measure. A variety of other reasons exist for involving stakeholders, many of these advantages are listed in the Collaboration module. Every biological monitoring project will have some level of social, cultural, economic, managerial and political context that can affect, as well as be affected by, the project results. Having a decision process that involves stakeholders will likely improve the chance that appropriate and useful indicators and measures are selected.
|
|