eprintid: 10085589
rev_number: 29
eprint_status: archive
userid: 608
dir: disk0/10/08/55/89
datestamp: 2019-11-12 11:25:55
lastmod: 2021-08-02 22:49:48
status_changed: 2020-04-21 10:41:14
type: article
metadata_visibility: show
creators_name: Canessa, S
creators_name: Spitzen-van der Sluijs, A
creators_name: Stark, T
creators_name: Allen, B
creators_name: Bishop, P
creators_name: Bletz, M
creators_name: Briggs, C
creators_name: Daversa, D
creators_name: Gray, M
creators_name: Griffiths, R
creators_name: Harris, R
creators_name: Harrison, X
creators_name: Hoverman, J
creators_name: Jervis, P
creators_name: Muths, E
creators_name: Olson, D
creators_name: Price, S
creators_name: Richards-Zawacki, C
creators_name: Robert, J
creators_name: Rosa, G
creators_name: Scheele, B
creators_name: Schmidt, B
creators_name: Garner, T
title: Conservation decisions under pressure: lessons from an exercise in rapid response to wildlife disease
ispublished: pub
divisions: UCL
divisions: A01
divisions: B02
divisions: C08
divisions: D09
divisions: F99
note: © 2019 The Authors. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
abstract: Novel outbreaks of emerging pathogens require rapid responses to enable successful mitigation. We simulated a 1‐day emergency meeting where experts were engaged to recommend mitigation strategies for a new outbreak of the amphibian fungal pathogen Batrachochytrium salamandrivorans. Despite the inevitable uncertainty, experts suggested and discussed several possible strategies. However, their recommendations were undermined by imperfect initial definitions of the objectives and scope of management. This problem is likely to arise in most real‐world emergency situations. The exercise thus highlighted the importance of clearly defining the context, objectives, and spatial–temporal scale of mitigation decisions. Managers are commonly under pressure to act immediately. However, an iterative process in which experts and managers cooperate to clarify objectives and uncertainties, while collecting more information and devising mitigation strategies, may be slightly more time consuming but ultimately lead to better outcomes.
date: 2020-01
date_type: published
official_url: https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.141
oa_status: green
full_text_type: pub
language: eng
primo: open
primo_central: open_green
verified: verified_manual
elements_id: 1717659
doi: 10.1111/csp2.141
lyricists_name: Garner, Trenton
lyricists_id: TWJGA18
actors_name: Garner, Trenton
actors_id: TWJGA18
actors_role: owner
full_text_status: public
publication: Conservation Science and Practice
volume: 2
number: 1
article_number: e141
citation:        Canessa, S;    Spitzen-van der Sluijs, A;    Stark, T;    Allen, B;    Bishop, P;    Bletz, M;    Briggs, C;                                                                 ... Garner, T; + view all <#>        Canessa, S;  Spitzen-van der Sluijs, A;  Stark, T;  Allen, B;  Bishop, P;  Bletz, M;  Briggs, C;  Daversa, D;  Gray, M;  Griffiths, R;  Harris, R;  Harrison, X;  Hoverman, J;  Jervis, P;  Muths, E;  Olson, D;  Price, S;  Richards-Zawacki, C;  Robert, J;  Rosa, G;  Scheele, B;  Schmidt, B;  Garner, T;   - view fewer <#>    (2020)    Conservation decisions under pressure: lessons from an exercise in rapid response to wildlife disease.                   Conservation Science and Practice , 2  (1)    , Article e141.  10.1111/csp2.141 <https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.141>.       Green open access   
 
document_url: https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10085589/1/Garner_csp2.141.pdf