Uncertainty in Comparative Risk Analysis for Threatened Australian Plant Species Export

@article{citeulike:4503827, abstract = {Australian state and federal agencies use a broad range of methods for setting conservation priorities for species at risk. Some of these are based on rule sets developed by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, while others use point scoring protocols to assess threat. All of them ignore uncertainty in the data. In this study, we assessed the conservation status of 29 threatened vascular plants from Tasmania and New South Wales using a variety of methods including point scoring and rule-based approaches. In addition, several methods for dealing with uncertainty in the data were applied to each of the priority-setting schemes. The results indicate that the choice of a protocol for setting priorities and the choice of the way in which uncertainty is treated may make important differences to the resulting assessments of risk. The choice among methods needs to be rationalized within the management context in which it is to be applied. These methods are not a substitute for more formal risk assessment.}, author = {Burgman, Mark A. and Keith, David A. and Walshe, Terry V.}, citeulike-article-id = {4503827}, citeulike-linkout-0 = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1007073301150}, citeulike-linkout-1 = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/h479313441582w73}, day = {1}, doi = {10.1023/A:1007073301150}, journal = {Risk Analysis}, keywords = {acacia, conservation, inpro, models}, month = {August}, number = {4}, pages = {585--598}, posted-at = {2009-05-12 02:58:59}, priority = {2}, title = {Uncertainty in Comparative Risk Analysis for Threatened Australian Plant Species}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1007073301150}, volume = {19}, year = {1999} }

TY - JOUR ID - citeulike:4503827 L3 - citeulike-article-id:4503827 N2 - Australian state and federal agencies use a broad range of methods for setting conservation priorities for species at risk. Some of these are based on rule sets developed by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, while others use point scoring protocols to assess threat. All of them ignore uncertainty in the data. In this study, we assessed the conservation status of 29 threatened vascular plants from Tasmania and New South Wales using a variety of methods including point scoring and rule-based approaches. In addition, several methods for dealing with uncertainty in the data were applied to each of the priority-setting schemes. The results indicate that the choice of a protocol for setting priorities and the choice of the way in which uncertainty is treated may make important differences to the resulting assessments of risk. The choice among methods needs to be rationalized within the management context in which it is to be applied. These methods are not a substitute for more formal risk assessment. IS - 4 JF - Risk Analysis EP - 598 TI - Uncertainty in Comparative Risk Analysis for Threatened Australian Plant Species VL - 19 SP - 585 KW - acacia KW - conservation KW - inpro KW - models AU - Burgman, Mark AU - Keith, David AU - Walshe, Terry PY - 1999/08/01/ UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1007073301150 ER -