Editing Adaptive management (section)

== Effectiveness ==
It is difficult to test the effectiveness of adaptive management in comparison to other management approaches. One challenge is that once a system is managed using one approach it is difficult to determine how another approach would have performed in exactly the same situation.<ref name=":2">{{Cite journal|last1=Holden|first1=Matthew H.|last2=Ellner|first2=Stephen P.|date=2016-07-01|title=Human judgment vs. quantitative models for the management of ecological resources|journal=Ecological Applications|volume=26|issue=5|pages=1553–1565|doi=10.1890/15-1295|pmid=27755756|issn=1939-5582|arxiv=1603.04518|bibcode=2016EcoAp..26.1553H |s2cid=1279459}}</ref> One study tested the effectiveness of formal passive adaptive management in comparison to human intuition by having natural resource management students make decisions about how to harvest a hypothetical fish population in an online computer game. The students on average performed poorly in comparison to the computer programs implementing passive adaptive management.<ref name=":2" /><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://psmag.com/sometimes-even-bad-models-make-better-decisions-than-people-4956bade3990#.cnenr5clc|title=Sometimes, Even Bad Models Make Better Decisions Than People|date=2016-03-11|newspaper=Pacific Standard|access-date=2016-12-22}}{{dead link|date=September 2017 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref>

Collaborative adaptive management is often celebrated as an effective way to deal with natural resource management under high levels of conflict, uncertainty and complexity.<ref name=":3">{{Cite journal|last=Beratan|first=Kathi|date=2014-03-28|title=Summary: Addressing the Interactional Challenges of Moving Collaborative Adaptive Management From Theory to Practice|journal=Ecology and Society|volume=19|issue=1|doi=10.5751/ES-06399-190146|issn=1708-3087|doi-access=free}}</ref> The effectiveness of these efforts can be constrained by both social and technical barriers. As the case of the [[Glen Canyon Dam|Glenn Canyon Dam]] Adaptive Management Program in the US illustrates, effective collaborative adaptive management efforts require clear and measurable goals and objectives, incentives and tools to foster collaboration, long-term commitment to monitoring and adaptation, and straightforward joint fact-finding protocols.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Susskind|first1=Lawrence|last2=Camacho|first2=Alejandro E.|last3=Schenk|first3=Todd|date=2011-10-31|title=A critical assessment of collaborative adaptive management in practice|journal=Journal of Applied Ecology|volume=49|issue=1|pages=47–51|doi=10.1111/j.1365-2664.2011.02070.x|issn=0021-8901|doi-access=}}</ref> In Colorado, USA, a ten-year, [[ranch]]-scale (2590 ha) experiment began in 2012 at the [[Agricultural Research Service]] (ARS) Central Plains Experimental range to evaluate the effectiveness and process of collaborative adaptive management <ref name=":3" /> on [[rangeland]]s. The Collaborative Adaptive Rangeland Management or “CARM” project monitors outcomes from yearling steer grazing management on 10, 130 ha pastures conducted by a group of conservationists, ranchers, and public employees, and researchers. This team compares ecological monitoring data tracking profitability and conservation outcomes with outcomes from a “traditional” management treatment: a second set of ten pastures managed without adaptive decision making but with the same stocking rate. Early evaluations of the project by social scientists offer insights for more effective adaptive management.<ref name=":4">{{Cite journal|last1=Wilmer|first1=Hailey|last2=Derner|first2=Justin D.|last3=Fernández-Giménez|first3=María E.|last4=Briske|first4=David D.|last5=Augustine|first5=David J.|last6=Porensky|first6=Lauren M.|date=September 2018|title=Collaborative Adaptive Rangeland Management Fosters Management-Science Partnerships|journal=Rangeland Ecology & Management|volume=71|issue=5|pages=646–657|doi=10.1016/j.rama.2017.07.008|bibcode=2018REcoM..71..646W |s2cid=90148819|issn=1550-7424}}</ref> First, trust is primary and essential to learning in adaptive management, not a side benefit. Second, practitioners cannot assume that extensive monitoring data or large-scale efforts will automatically facilitate successful collaborative adaptive management. Active, long-term efforts to build trust among scientists and stakeholders are also important. Finally, explicit efforts to understand, share and respect multiple types of manager knowledge, including place-based ecological knowledge practiced by local managers, is necessary to manage adaptively for multiple conservation and livelihood goals on rangelands.<ref name=":4" /> Practitioners can expect adaptive management to be a complex, non-linear process shaped by social, political and ecological processes, as well as by data collection and interpretation.