In this bumper issue* of Decision Point we explore a wide range of topics surrounding good environmental decision making – from the many trade-offs we need to consider when making a good decision to the ingredients that go into a good decision-making process.
The trade-offs include whether it’s better to go for high target-persistence (aiming for high probabilities for a species to persist into the future) for a few species or setting lower target-persistence for many species; considering the properties of irreplaceability vs importance when planning biodiversity areas; and incorporating cost and feasibility into decisions about coastal restoration.
The theme of a good decision-making process include stories on learning from past restoration efforts; appreciating the value of model-based algorithms in management decisions; and mapping an argument to draw out hidden assumptions.
And then there are a crop of stories that tell us a little about environmental decision science itself. These include the process by which we highlight emerging conservation issues through horizon scanning and the unconscious gender bias that permeates science (and we outline what CEED has been doing to address this issue).
*So, it’s a bumper issue indeed; more so because this issue runs for 20 pages (instead of 16) in order to incorporate a few hang-over stories from last year. And while pointing out this difference, it’s worth telling our readers that because of changed funding, Decision Point will only be coming out every second month (five times a year instead of ten: February, April, June, August and October). The other months will see the publication of a new magazine called Science for Saving Species. It’s the magazine of the new National Environmental Science Programme (NESP) Threatened Species Recovery Hub. Some of the NESP TSR researchers are involved in CEED so there are many connections between the two networks.