|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{document}}[[category:planning]][[category:restoration]]
| | #redirect[[file:Boevers 2008 adaptive management large-scale restoration.pdf]] |
| '''Boevers, J. 2008. Lessons learned from programmatic adapative management of large-scale coastal ecosystem restoration. Thesis, University of Washington. 120 pp.'''
| |
| | |
| ==Notes==
| |
| *Developed for the [[PSNERP]] program, and warns of institutional barriers to adaptive management.
| |
| | |
| ==Abstract==
| |
| Adaptive management (AM) is considered a best management practice for
| |
| ecosystem restoration, yet successful examples of adaptive management
| |
| approaches for large-scale ecosystem restoration programs are few. I
| |
| conducted a multi-case study analysis of three restoration programs in the US
| |
| to identify how AM is organized and implemented at the program level. I
| |
| developed seven criteria for programmatic adaptive management based on the
| |
| literature. The programs were evaluated against these criteria using evidence
| |
| drawn from program documents, AM artifacts and interviews with program
| |
| representatives. Through the analysis I identified a set of lessons learned for
| |
| future applications of adaptive management for large-scale restoration. Many
| |
| lessons emerged from this study, including: the importance of formal
| |
| institutional structures dedicated to AM; the necessity of system-wide
| |
| modeling and monitoring to facilitate AM; the importance of stakeholders in
| |
| the AM process; the value of leadership being committed to an AM approach;
| |
| the need for interagency cooperation; and the significance of institutional
| |
| capacity to realize an AM process. The final discussion includes a series of
| |
| recommendations for future restoration planners who want to incorporate
| |
| adaptive management in a restoration program.
| |
