ub.xmlui.mirage2.page-structure.muninLogoub.xmlui.mirage2.page-structure.openResearchArchiveLogo
    • EnglishEnglish
    • norsknorsk
  • Velg spraakEnglish 
    • EnglishEnglish
    • norsknorsk
  • Administration/UB
View Item 
  •   Home
  • Fakultet for biovitenskap, fiskeri og økonomi
  • Institutt for arktisk og marin biologi
  • Artikler, rapporter og annet (arktisk og marin biologi)
  • View Item
  •   Home
  • Fakultet for biovitenskap, fiskeri og økonomi
  • Institutt for arktisk og marin biologi
  • Artikler, rapporter og annet (arktisk og marin biologi)
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Identifying key needs for the integration of social-ecological outcomes in arctic wildlife monitoring

Permanent link
https://hdl.handle.net/10037/17299
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13257
Thumbnail
View/Open
article.pdf (1.055Mb)
Accepted manuscript version (PDF)
Date
2018-11-24
Type
Journal article
Tidsskriftartikkel
Peer reviewed

Author
Wheeler, Helen Claire; Berteaux, Dominique; Furgal, Chris; Cazelles, Kevin; Yoccoz, Nigel Gilles; Grémillet, David
Abstract
For effective monitoring in social–ecological systems to meet needs for biodiversity, science, and humans, desired outcomes must be clearly defined and routes from direct to derived outcomes understood. The Arctic is undergoing rapid climatic, ecological, social, and economic changes and requires effective wildlife monitoring to meet diverse stakeholder needs. To identify stakeholder priorities concerning desired outcomes of arctic wildlife monitoring, we conducted in‐depth interviews with 29 arctic scientists, policy and decision makers, and representatives of indigenous organizations and nongovernmental organizations. Using qualitative content analysis, we identified and defined desired outcomes and documented links between outcomes. Using network analysis, we investigated the structure of perceived links between desired outcomes. We identified 18 desired outcomes from monitoring and classified them as either driven by monitoring information, monitoring process, or a combination of both. Highly cited outcomes were make decisions, conserve, detect change, disseminate, and secure food. These reflect key foci of arctic monitoring. Infrequently cited outcomes (e.g., govern) were emerging themes. Three modules comprised our outcome network. The modularity highlighted the low strength of perceived links between outcomes that were primarily information driven or more derived (e.g., detect change, make decisions, conserve, or secure food) and outcomes that were primarily process driven or more derived (e.g., cooperate, learn, educate). The outcomes expand monitoring community and disseminate created connections between these modules. Key desired outcomes are widely applicable to social–ecological systems within and outside the Arctic, particularly those with wildlife subsistence economies. Attributes and motivations associated with outcomes can guide development of integrated monitoring goals for biodiversity conservation and human needs. Our results demonstrated the disconnect between information‐ and process‐driven goals and how expansion of the monitoring community and improved integration of monitoring stakeholders will help connect information‐ and process‐derived outcomes for effective ecosystem stewardship.
Description
This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Wheeler, H. C., Berteaux, D., Furgal, C., Cazelles, K., Yoccoz, N. G. & Grémillet, D. (2018). Identifying key needs for the integration of social–ecological outcomes in arctic wildlife monitoring. Conservation Biology, 33(4), 861-872., which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13257 . This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Use of Self-Archived Versions.
Publisher
Wiley
Citation
Wheeler HC, Berteaux D, Furgal C, Cazelles, Yoccoz NG, Grémillet D. Identifying key needs for the integration of social-ecological outcomes in arctic wildlife monitoring. Conservation Biology. 2019;33(4):861-872
Metadata
Show full item record
Collections
  • Artikler, rapporter og annet (arktisk og marin biologi) [1634]
©2018 Society for Conservation Biology

Browse

Browse all of MuninCommunities & CollectionsAuthor listTitlesBy Issue DateBrowse this CollectionAuthor listTitlesBy Issue Date
Login

Statistics

View Usage Statistics
UiT

Munin is powered by DSpace

UiT The Arctic University of Norway
The University Library
uit.no/ub - munin@ub.uit.no

Accessibility statement (Norwegian only)