Comparing stakeholder perspectives and biodiversity models in assessing scenarios of management change

Abstract

Bringing together local, contextualised knowledge with generalised, scientific knowledge is seen as best practice in decision making for biodiversity management. However, there is the potential for conflict if predictions from these different viewpoints do not concur. We tested whether the predictions of stakeholders for biodiversity changes agreed with or differed from those based on simple models based on biodiversity data and species' ecological preferences- for this we used six sites to test the impact of four different woodland management scenarios on two proxies (spring flowers, dominant weed species). The scenarios were: "Management Plan" based on the current goals for site management, "Biodiversity Conservation" where the main goal for site management focussed on improving habitats and species conservation, "People Engagement" where site management encouraged the use of the woodland and its resources and "Low Budget" where resources were constrained to keeping the site safe for access. Stakeholder predictions were elicited during workshops involving deliberative discussions and repeated scoring of scenario effects. The biodiversity occurrence data model was developed using species occurrence data and predicted responses to disturbance based on habitat preferences. Worksop scorings were relatively consistent across sites ranking the scenario Biodiversity Management just ahead of Management Plan and People Engagement, with Low Budget scoring consistently much lower. The modelling spread the predicted results of the scenarios, so that for spring flowers Management Plan ranked substantially lower than Biodiversity Conservation and People Engagement reflecting the lower levels of disturbance under the former. For dominant weed species, "People Engagement" ranked lower than Biodiversity Management and Management Plan reflecting the reduced concentration on dominant weed species control under the former scenario. As for the stakeholder scorings, the Low Budget" scenario ranked much lower than the others. Effective decision-making requires taking account of different sources of knowledge. The study described here highlights the general similarities between local, contextualised knowledge and a more generalised, ecological approach to predicting change, though there were important differences. Customising models to the site level is likely to be unrealistic in terms of the resources needed, so there is likely to be a tension between different sources of knowledge and reconciling these will remain a challenge. This reconciliation will be helped by developing appropriate workshop questions to cover the multi-faceted nature and responses of biodiversity.

Keywords

Community engagement; Contextualised knowledge; Dialogue; Scientific knowledge; Woodland management

Published in

Journal of Environmental Management
2025, volume: 377, article number: 124541

SLU Authors

• Fischer, Anke

  • Department of Urban and Rural Development, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
    

UKÄ Subject classification

Environmental Sciences and Nature Conservation
Environmental Economics and Management

Publication identifier

• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2025.124541

Permanent link to this page (URI)

https://res.slu.se/id/publ/140856