scholarly journals Planning for Human-Wildlife Coexistence: Conceptual Framework, Workshop Process, and a Model for Transdisciplinary Collaboration

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvio Marchini ◽  
Katia M. P. M. B. Ferraz ◽  
Vania Foster ◽  
Thiago Reginato ◽  
Aline Kotz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
National Park ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Theory Of Change ◽  
Positive Interactions ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Agreed Definition

Coexistence, as a concept and as a management goal and practice, has attracted increasing attention from researchers, managers and decision-makers dedicated to understanding and improving human-wildlife interactions. Although it still lacks a universally agreed definition, coexistence has increasingly been associated with a broad spectrum of human-wildlife interactions, including positive interactions, transcending a conservation focus on endangered wildlife, and involving explicitly considerations of power, equity and justice. In a growingly complex and interconnected human-dominated world, the key to turning human-wildlife interactions into large-scale coexistence is thorough planning. We present an approach for evidence-based, structured, and participatory decision-making in planning for human-wildlife coexistence. More specifically, we propose (i) a conceptual framework for describing the situation and setting the goals, (ii) a process for examining the causes of the situation and creating a theory of change, and (iii) a model for transdisciplinary research and collaboration integrating researchers, decision-makers and residents along with the interests of wildlife. To illustrate the approach, we report on the workshop considering the Jaguars of Iguaçu, a conservation project whose strategy includes the improvement of the relationship between ranchers and jaguars outside Iguaçu National Park, Brazil.

scholarly journals A Framework for Evidence-Based Decision Making in Large-Scale Food Fortification Programs

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. 1802-1802
Author(s):  
Valerie Friesen ◽  
Mduduzi Mbuya ◽  
Lynnette Neufeld ◽  
Frank T Weiringa
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Program Design ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Food Fortification ◽  
Impact Pathway ◽  
Gates Foundation ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Evidence Based Decision Making

Abstract Objectives The use of evidence on program performance and potential for impact for decision making in food fortification programs is limited and often done in isolation from other micronutrient interventions. We present a framework for fortification stakeholders responsible for making program recommendations and decisions to facilitate and document evidence-based decision making. Methods First, we reviewed the literature to define the key decision makers and decisions necessary for effective fortification program design and delivery, informed by a clear impact pathway. Then we classified decisions by domain, identified data sources and criteria for their assessment, and adapted the GRADE Evidence to Decision framework to summarize the results. Finally, we considered how the framework would apply to different country programs to test its utility. Results Policymakers, particularly government ministries, and the food producers themselves are the most important decision makers in a fortification program, while technical support agencies, donor agencies, and the research community play important roles in translating data and evidence into contextualized recommendations that meet the needs of different decision makers. The main fortification decision types were classified into five domains across the impact pathway: 1) program design (need, food vehicle(s)); 2) program delivery (compliance, quality, coverage); 3) program impact (nutrient intake and status); 4) overlapping micronutrient interventions and/or under-served populations; and 5) decisions to continue or stop programs. Important criteria for the assessment of each decision type included priority, benefits/risks, equity, acceptability, and feasibility among others. Country examples illustrated the importance of coordinating decision-making in the context of overlapping micronutrient interventions to ensure continued safety and impact over time. Conclusions This framework is a practical tool to enable evidence-based decision making by fortification stakeholders. Using evidence in a systematic and transparent way can enable more effective program design, delivery, and ultimately health impacts. Funding Sources Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

CAN BAYESIAN METHODS MAKE DATA AND ANALYSES MORE RELEVANT TO DECISION MAKERS?

2001 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 114-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven H. Sheingold
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Bayesian Methods ◽  
Paradigm Shift ◽  
Relevant Information ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Critical Importance ◽  
Bayesian Approaches ◽  
Bayesian Analyses ◽  
And Performance

Decision making in health care has become increasingly reliant on information technology, evidence-based processes, and performance measurement. It is therefore a time at which it is of critical importance to make data and analyses more relevant to decision makers. Those who support Bayesian approaches contend that their analyses provide more relevant information for decision making than do classical or “frequentist” methods, and that a paradigm shift to the former is long overdue. While formal Bayesian analyses may eventually play an important role in decision making, there are several obstacles to overcome if these methods are to gain acceptance in an environment dominated by frequentist approaches. Supporters of Bayesian statistics must find more accommodating approaches to making their case, especially in finding ways to make these methods more transparent and accessible. Moreover, they must better understand the decision-making environment they hope to influence. This paper discusses these issues and provides some suggestions for overcoming some of these barriers to greater acceptance.

scholarly journals 18.H. Workshop: Bringing evidence during public health emergencies: addressing the challenge through HTA

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Emergency Preparedness ◽  
Public Health Emergency ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Public Health Emergencies ◽  
Response Planning ◽  
Emergency Preparedness And Response ◽  
Public Health Emergency Preparedness

Abstract Evidence-based decision-making is central to public health. Implementing evidence-informed actions is most challenging during a public health emergency as in an epidemic, when time is limited, scientific uncertainties and political pressures tend to be high, and irrefutable evidence may be lacking. The process of including evidence in public health decision-making and for evidence-informed policy, in preparation, and during public health emergencies, is not systematic and is complicated by many barriers as the absences of shared tools and approaches for evidence-based preparedness and response planning. Many of today's public health crises are also cross-border, and countries need to collaborate in a systematic and standardized way in order to enhance interoperability and to implement coordinated evidence-based response plans. To strengthen the impact of scientific evidence on decision-making for public health emergency preparedness and response, it is necessary to better define mechanisms through which interdisciplinary evidence feeds into decision-making processes during public health emergencies and the context in which these mechanisms operate. As a multidisciplinary, standardized and evidence-based decision-making tool, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) represents and approach that can inform public health emergency preparedness and response planning processes; it can also provide meaningful insights on existing preparedness structures, working as bridge between scientists and decision-makers, easing knowledge transition and translation to ensure that evidence is effectively integrated into decision-making contexts. HTA can address the link between scientific evidence and decision-making in public health emergencies, and overcome the key challenges faced by public health experts when advising decision makers, including strengthening and accelerating knowledge transfer through rapid HTA, improving networking between actors and disciplines. It may allow a 360° perspective, providing a comprehensive view to decision-making in preparation and during public health emergencies. The objective of the workshop is to explore and present how HTA can be used as a shared and systematic evidence-based tool for Public Health Emergency Preparedness and Response, in order to enable stakeholders and decision makers taking actions based on the best available evidence through a process which is systematic and transparent. Key messages There are many barriers and no shared mechanisms to bring evidence in decision-making during public health emergencies. HTA can represent the tool to bring evidence-informed actions in public health emergency preparedness and response.

scholarly journals Novel Parameterized Distance Measures on Hesitant Fuzzy Sets with Credibility Degree and Their Application in Decision-Making

Symmetry ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
pp. 557 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jiaru Li ◽  
Fangwei Zhang ◽  
Qiang Li ◽  
Jing Sun ◽  
Janney Yee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Fuzzy Sets ◽  
Cardinal Number ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Distance Measures ◽  
Hesitant Fuzzy Set ◽  
Hesitant Fuzzy Sets ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Relationship

The subject of this study is to explore the role of cardinality of hesitant fuzzy element (HFE) in distance measures on hesitant fuzzy sets (HFSs). Firstly, three parameters, i.e., credibility factor, conservative factor, and a risk factor are introduced, thereafter, a series of novel distance measures on HFSs are proposed using these three parameters. These newly proposed distance measures handle the relationship between the cardinal number and the element values of hesitant fuzzy set well, and are suitable to combine subjective and objective decision-making information. When using these functions, decision makers with different risk preferences are allowed to give different values for these three parameters. In particular, this study transfers the hesitance degree index to a credibility of the values in HFEs, which is consistent with people’s intuition. Finally, the practicability of the newly proposed distance measures is verified by two examples.

The limits of evidence-based anti-bribery law

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin E. Davis
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Systematic Research ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Causal Relationships ◽  
Causal Inferences ◽  
Business Regulation

Evidence-based regulation is a term of art that refers to the process of making decisions about regulation based on evidence generated through systematic research. There is increasing pressure to treat evidence-based regulation as a global best practice, including in the area of anti-bribery law. Too little attention has been paid to the fact that under certain conditions evidence-based regulation is likely to be a less appealing method of decision making than the alternative – namely, relying on judgment. Those conditions are: it is difficult to collect data on either interventions or outcomes; accurate causal inferences are difficult to draw; there is little warrant for believing that the same causal relationships will apply in a new context; or the decision makers in question lack the capacity to undertake one of these tasks. These conditions are likely to be present in complex, transnational, decentralized, and dynamic forms of business regulation such as the global anti-bribery regime.

Sustainability balanced scorecard architecture and environmental performance outcomes: a systematic review

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Suaad Jassem ◽  
Zarina Zakaria ◽  
Anna Che Azmi
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Balanced Scorecard ◽  
Environmental Performance ◽  
Performance Outcomes ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Holistic Model ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Relationship

PurposeThis study aims to assess the current state of research on the use of sustainability balanced scorecards (SBSCs), as they relate to environmental performance-related outcomes. It also seeks to present a conceptual framework proposing relationships between SBSC and environmental performance.Design/methodology/approachThis paper conducts a systematic literature review of articles published in double-blind peer-reviewed journals that are listed on Scopus and/or Web of Science databases.FindingsThe first part of the paper reveals that two architectures of SBSC appear to be dominant in the literature (SBSC-4 where sustainability parameters are integrated with the four perspectives of the balanced scorecard and SBSC-5 where sustainability is shown as an additional standalone fifth perspective). The next part of the paper presents a conceptual model relating SBSC as decision-making tools to environmental performance outcomes. The paper also indicates that SBSC knowledge mediates the above relationships. Furthermore, based on the theory of expert competence, the presence of experts possibly moderates the relationship between SBSC architecture and environmental performance outcomes.Research limitations/implicationsThe literature indicates a lack of consensus on establishing a clear linkage on the relationship between SBSC architecture and environmental performance outcomes. As a result, a holistic conceptual framework where SBSC knowledge acts as a mediator and presence of experts as a moderator may be able to provide a more consistent relationship between SBSC architecture and environmental performance outcomes.Practical implicationsThe conceptual framework proposed provides factors to be considered by decision makers, for effective outcomes when aiming to achieve environmental stewardship objectives.Social implicationsEnvironmental performance by business organisations have come under close scrutiny of stakeholders. As a result, the holistic model proposed in the current study may pave the path for decision-makers to achieve superior environmental outcomes, leading to greater satisfaction of stakeholders such as the communities that are impacted by the business operations of an organisation.Originality/valueThis is the first paper to propose a model for future research regarding the link between SBSC and environmental performance outcomes – with expert managers acting as moderators and SBSC knowledge acting as a mediator.

Introduction

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
William B. Rouse
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Competitive Advantage ◽  
Computational Models ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Leading Indicators ◽  
Tipping Points ◽  
Decision Making Models

Chapter 1 provides the introduction to this book. Predictions can seldom specify what will happen, so, inevitably, one addresses what might happen. There are often many possible futures, with leading indicators and potential tipping points for each scenario. Computational models can be used to explore designs of systems and policies to determine whether these designs will likely be effective and to aid in decision-making. Models are means to ends rather then ends in themselves. Decision-makers seldom crave models. They want their questions answered in an evidence-based manner. Decision-makers want insights that provide them with a competitive advantage. They want to understand possible futures to formulate robust and resilient strategies for addressing these futures.

Health Impacts of Large-Scale Floods: Governmental Decision-Making and Resilience of the Citizens

2008 ◽  
Vol 23 (S2) ◽  
pp. s70-s73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dick Q.P. Fundter ◽  
Bas Jonkman ◽  
Steve Beerman ◽  
Corsmas L.P.M. Goemans ◽  
Rosanna Briggs ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Health Impact ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Chronic Illnesses ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Natural Resistance ◽  
First Year ◽  
The Public ◽  
Life Saving

AbstractDuring the 15th World Congress on Disaster and Emergency Medicine in Amsterdam, May 2007 (15WCDEM), a targeted agenda program (TAP) about the public health aspects of large-scale floods was organized. The main goal of the TAP was the establishment of an overview of issues that would help governmental decision-makers to develop policies to increase the resilience of the citizens during floods. During the meetings, it became clear that citizens have a natural resistance to evacuations. This results in death due to drowning and injuries. Recently, communication and education programs have been developed that may increase awareness that timely evacuation is important and can be life-saving. After a flood, health problems persist over prolonged periods, including increased death rates during the first year after a flood and a higher incidence of chronic illnesses that last for decades after the flood recedes. Population-based resilience (bottom-up) and governmental responsibility (top-down) must be combined to prepare regions for the health impact of evacuations and floods. More research data are needed to become better informed about the health impact and consequences of translocation of health infrastructures after evacuations. A better understanding of the consequences of floods will support governmental decision-making to mitigate the health impact. A top-10 priority action list was formulated.

scholarly journals Avoiding impacts on biodiversity through strengthening the first stage of the mitigation hierarchy

Oryx ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 316-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Phalan ◽  
Genevieve Hayes ◽  
Sharon Brooks ◽  
David Marsh ◽  
Pippa Howard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Technical Knowledge ◽  
Political Will ◽  
Building Capacity ◽  
Mitigation Hierarchy ◽  
Conservation Organizations

AbstractThe mitigation hierarchy is a decision-making framework designed to address impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services through first seeking to avoid impacts wherever possible, then minimizing or restoring impacts, and finally by offsetting any unavoidable impacts. Avoiding impacts is seen by many as the most certain and effective way of managing harm to biodiversity, and its position as the first stage of the mitigation hierarchy indicates that it should be prioritized ahead of other stages. However, despite an abundance of legislative and voluntary requirements, there is often a failure to avoid impacts. We discuss reasons for this failure and outline some possible solutions. We highlight the key roles that can be played by conservation organizations in cultivating political will, holding decision makers accountable to the law, improving the processes of impact assessment and avoidance, building capacity, and providing technical knowledge. A renewed focus on impact avoidance as the foundation of the mitigation hierarchy could help to limit the impacts on biodiversity of large-scale developments in energy, infrastructure, agriculture and other sectors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document