Technical ReportPDF Available

Summary report: the cost-effectiveness protocol used to assist in the prioritisation of the second phase of Reef Trust investment. Final Report to the Department of the Environment.

Authors:
  • Berks Bucks and Oxon Wildlife Trust

Abstract and Figures

This report has been prepared by the Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS) for the Department of the Environment. It outlines the cost-effectiveness estimation process developed by AIMS that has informed the prioritisation of management interventions for investment under the second phase of Reef Trust. The Reef Trust is a Commonwealth Government programme designed to strategically deliver funding in the Great Barrier Reef and catchments, focusing on known critical areas for investment – improving water quality and coastal habitat along the Reef, controlling outbreaks of crown-of-thorns starfish, and protecting threatened and migratory species, particularly dugong and turtles. This report provides: (1) an overview of the cost-effectiveness estimation process; (2) a summary of the cost-effectiveness estimates of the nine proposed management interventions under the second phase of Reef Trust; (3) an interpretation of the cost-effectiveness estimates, including a prioritised list of proposed management interventions, ranked in order of cost-effectiveness, to assist the Environment Minister in making decisions on investment through the Reef Trust; and (4) advice on opportunities for improvement in any future application of the cost-effectiveness estimation process.
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
... Two versions of ADOPT have been developed, one Standard Version designed for studies conducted in developed countries and another Smallholder Version for developing country contexts. Since its development, ADOPT has been used by researchers to estimate the rate and peak levels of adoption of new cropping (Kuehne et al., 2012) and livestock systems (James and Harrison, 2016) by farmers, as well as by extension services and agricultural policy advisors (Addison and Walshe, 2015). For example, ADOPT was used to assess the adoptability of livestock greenhouse gas abatement techniques by ranchers in Australia. ...
Article
Full-text available
Considerable advancements are being made in containerized agricultural systems in the northern Canada. These systems are proving successful at overcoming the environmental constraints associated with cold climate food production and hold great promise for remote communities that suffer from high rates of food insecurity. However, if new technologies are to provide lasting and meaningful change for northern communities, critical attention needs to be directed to the variable and complex constraints that may limit their adoption and scalable success. To evaluate the potential uptake and use of containerized agriculture in northern Canada we employed the Adoption and Diffusion Outcome Prediction Tool. Twenty-two variables were ranked according to their influence on adoption. Six variables were then identified as being most constraining to the adoption of containerized agricultural systems, including upfront costs, expected profits, environmental impacts, complexity of the technology, trialability, and reversibility. We believe this type of pre-assessment is a critical, yet often over-looked step in technology transfer, and a necessary stage in assessing the scaling out potential for new food production technologies. This is particularly important for new food production technologies that demand significant financial investments that are wholly or partially irreversible.
... Kuehne et al. 2012;Botha et al., 2015;Blaesing 2013); use in training programs for extension agents (GRDC 2012); use by teams of research scientists and project practitioners (James and Harrison 2016;James et al. 2015;Farquarson et al. 2013;Kuehne et al. 2012) and use by policy advisers (e.g. Addison and Walshe 2015) to inform project design and funding priorities. It is our experience that before applying the ADOPT process, people associated with development or promotion of a practice are likely to overestimate its net relative advantage and adoption potential. ...
Article
Full-text available
There is much existing knowledge about the factors that influence adoption of new practices in agriculture but few attempts have been made to construct predictive quantitative models of adoption for use by those planning agricultural research, development, extension and policy. ADOPT (Adoption and Diffusion Outcome Prediction Tool) is the result of such an attempt, providing predictions of a practice's likely rate and peak level of adoption as well as estimating the importance of various factors influencing adoption. It employs a conceptual framework that incorporates a range of variables, including variables related to economics, risk, environmental outcomes, farmer networks, characteristics of the farm and the farmer, and the ease and convenience of the new practice. The ability to learn about the relative advantage of the practice, as influenced by characteristics of both the practice and the potential adopters, plays a central role. Users of ADOPT respond to 22 questions related to: a) characteristics of the practice that influence its relative advantage, b) characteristics of the population influencing their perceptions of the relative advantage of the practice, c) characteristics of the practice influencing the ease and speed of learning about it, and d) characteristics of the potential adopters that influence their ability to learn about the practice. ADOPT provides a prediction of the diffusion curve of the practice and sensitivity analyses of the factors influencing the speed and peak level of adoption. In this paper the model is described and its ability to predict the diffusion of agricultural practices is demonstrated using examples of new crop types, new cropping technology and grazing options. As well as providing predictions, ADOPT is designed to increase the conceptual understanding and consideration of the adoption process by those involved in agricultural research, development, extension and policy.
... Decision makers from the public and private sector are beginning to explicitly consider the protection that "green" infrastructure such as salt marshes, reefs, mangroves, and dunes can provide to coastal areas. Governments from the USA to Australia are requiring evaluation of and are investing in green infrastructure approaches for protecting communities and built infrastructure (Addison and Walshe 2015;Bridges et al. 2015;Commonwealth of Australia 2015;FEMA 2015;NOAA 2015;NSTC 2015). Multilateral institutions such as the Inter-American Development Bank provide loans and grants to member states in Latin America and the Caribbean to protect natural habitats for improved coastal resilience to sea-level rise and storms. ...
Article
Full-text available
Coastal protection of communities and property using “green infrastructure” approaches is gaining popularity as the science and practice improve. Guidance is limited for decision makers interested in taking action to protect shorelines. Here, we offer practical guidance for decision makers interested in moving beyond generalities for coastal protection strategies. We present three case examples from the U.S. Gulf of Mexico and in Belize, each posing different questions, and thus using different approaches, to evaluate whether green infrastructure strategies could be useful. For basic questions about where habitat-based approaches are likely to add value, index-based models are useful in identifying priority areas for habitat protection or restoration. Process-based models are best used to examine strategies where the interest is in the likely magnitude of value from gray and green infrastructure approaches. Process-based models in coastal Texas demonstrate that marsh habitats are spatially variable in their ability to reduce the height and costs of levees necessary to protect property from storms and sea-level rise. Such spatial variation in the value of green infrastructure can be readily incorporated in a variety of decisions, allowing action now, before more science and lessons from applications emerge.
Article
Full-text available
Decision-making for conservation management often involves evaluating risks in the face of environmental uncertainty. Models support decision-making by (1) synthesizing available knowledge in a systematic, rational and transparent way and (2) providing a platform for exploring and resolving uncertainty about the consequences of management decisions. Despite their benefits, models are still not used in many conservation decision-making contexts. In this article, we provide evidence of common objections to the use of models in environmental decision-making. In response, we present a series of practical solutions for modellers to help improve the effectiveness and relevance of their work in conservation decision-making. Global review. We reviewed scientific and grey literature for evidence of common objections to the use of models in conservation decision-making. We present a set of practical solutions based on theory, empirical evidence and best-practice examples to help modellers substantively address these objections. We recommend using a structured decision-making framework to guide good modelling practice in decision-making and highlight a variety of modelling techniques that can be used to support the process. We emphasize the importance of participatory decision-making to improve the knowledge-base and social acceptance of decisions and to facilitate better conservation outcomes. Improving communication and building trust are key to successfully engaging participants, and we suggest some practical solutions to help modellers develop these skills. If implemented, we believe these practical solutions could help broaden the use of models, forging deeper and more appropriate linkages between science and management for the improvement of conservation decision-making.
Article
Full-text available
Impact evaluations assess the degree to which changes in outcomes can be attributed to an intervention rather than to other factors. Such attribution requires knowing what outcomes would have looked like in the absence of the intervention. This counterfactual world can be inferred only indirectly through evaluation designs that control for confounding factors. Some have argued that environmental policy is different from other social policy fields, and thus attempting to establish causality through identification of counterfactual outcomes is quixotic. This chapter argues that elucidating causal relationships through counterfactual thinking and experimental or quasi-experimental designs is absolutely critical in environmental policy, and that many opportunities for doing so exist. Without more widespread application of such approaches, little progress will be made on building the evidence base in environmental policy. © Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Chapter
This book outlines the creative process of making environmental management decisions using the approach called Structured Decision Making. It is a short introductory guide to this popular form of decision making and is aimed at environmental managers and scientists. This is a distinctly pragmatic label given to ways for helping individuals and groups think through tough multidimensional choices characterized by uncertain science, diverse stakeholders, and difficult tradeoffs. This is the everyday reality of environmental management, yet many important decisions currently are made on an ad hoc basis that lacks a solid value-based foundation, ignores key information, and results in selection of an inferior alternative. Making progress - in a way that is rigorous, inclusive, defensible and transparent - requires combining analytical methods drawn from the decision sciences and applied ecology with deliberative insights from cognitive psychology, facilitation and negotiation. The authors review key methods and discuss case-study examples based in their experiences in communities, boardrooms, and stakeholder meetings. The goal of this book is to lay out a compelling guide that will change how you think about making environmental decisions. Visit www.wiley.com/go/gregory/sdm to access the figures and tables from the book. © 2012 R. Gregory, L. Failing, M. Harstone, G. Long, T. McDaniels, and D. Ohlson.
Article
Management of threatened and endangered species would seem to be a perfect context for adaptive management. Many of the decisions are recurrent and plagued by uncertainty, exactly the conditions that warrant an adaptive approach. But although the potential of adaptive management in these settings has been extolled, there are limited applications in practice. The impediments to practical implementation are manifold and include semantic confusion, institutional inertia, misperceptions about the suitability and utility, and a lack of guiding examples. In this special section of the Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management, we hope to reinvigorate the appropriate application of adaptive management for threatened and endangered species by framing such management in a decision-analytical context, clarifying misperceptions, classifying the types of decisions that might be amenable to an adaptive approach, and providing three fully developed case studies. In this overview paper, I define terms, review the past application of adaptive management, challenge perceived hurdles, and set the stage for the case studies which follow.
Article
Context. A framework was developed to help investors improve the delivery of environmental benefits from environmental programs. The framework, Investment Framework for Environmental Resources (INFFER), assists environmental managers to design projects, select delivery mechanisms and rank competing projects on the basis of benefits and costs. Aims. To identify design requirements for an environmental investment framework on the basis of consideration of lessons from practical experience, and established theory from decision analysis and economics. Methods. The design and delivery of the framework are based on extensive experience from working with environmental managers and policy makers. In addition, the developers have paid close attention to the need for processes that are theoretically rigorous, resulting in a tool that allows valid comparison of projects for different asset types, of different scales and durations. Key results. From the practical experience outlined, several important lessons and implications are identified, including the need for simplicity, training and support of users, trusting relationships with users, transparency, flexibility, compatibility with the needs and contexts of users, and supportive institutional arrangements. Use of a theoretically correct metric to rank projects can deliver dramatically improved environmental values relative to a commonly used weighted additive metric. Conclusions. Practical and theoretical considerations have strong implications for the design of a practical, effective and accurate tool to support decision making about environmental project priorities.
Article
The management of endangered species under climate change is a challenging and often controversial task that incorporates input from a variety of different environmental, economic, social, and political interests. Yet many listing and recovery decisions for endangered species unfold on an ad hoc basis without reference to decision-aiding approaches that can improve the quality of management choices. Unlike many treatments of this issue, which consider endangered species management a science-based problem, we suggest that a clear decision-making process is equally necessary. In the face of new threats due to climate change, managers' choices about endangered species require closely linked analyses and deliberations that identify key objectives and develop measurable attributes, generate and compare management alternatives, estimate expected consequences and key sources of uncertainty, and clarify trade-offs across different dimensions of value. Several recent cases of endangered species conservation decisions illustrate our proposed decision-focused approach, including Gulf of Maine Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) recovery framework development, Cultus Lake sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) management, and Upper Columbia River white sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus) recovery planning. Estructuración de Decisiones para Manejar Especies Amenazadas y en Peligro en un Clima Cambiante.
Article
Research on the adoption of rural innovations is reviewed and interpreted through a cross-disciplinary lens to provide practical guidance for research, extension and policy relating to conservation practices. Adoption of innovations by landholders is presented as a dynamic learning process. Adoption depends on a range of personal, social, cultural and economic factors, as well as on characteristics of the innovation itself. Adoption occurs when the landholder perceives that the innovation in question will enhance the achievement of their personal goals. A range of goals is identifiable among landholders, including economic, social and environmental goals. Innovations are more likely to be adopted when they have a high 'relative advantage' (perceived superiority to the idea or practice that it supersedes), and when they are readily trialable (easy to test and learn about before adoption). Non-adoption or low adoption of a number of conservation practices is readily explicable in terms of their failure to provide a relative advantage (particularly in economic terms) or a range of difficulties that landholders may have in trialing them.