Judging adaptive management practices of U.S. agencies

© 2015 Society for Conservation Biology.

Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology. - 1989. - 30(2016), 2 vom: 26. Apr., Seite 268-75
1. Verfasser: Fischman, Robert L (VerfasserIn)
Weitere Verfasser: Ruhl, J B
Format: Online-Aufsatz
Sprache:English
Veröffentlicht: 2016
Zugriff auf das übergeordnete Werk:Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology
Schlagworte:Journal Article Norte América North America conservation planning law leyes planeación de la conservación politics and policy políticas y normas
LEADER 01000caa a22002652 4500
001 NLM252154029
003 DE-627
005 20250219011334.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 231224s2016 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1111/cobi.12616  |2 doi 
028 5 2 |a pubmed25n0840.xml 
035 |a (DE-627)NLM252154029 
035 |a (NLM)26306648 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rakwb 
041 |a eng 
100 1 |a Fischman, Robert L  |e verfasserin  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Judging adaptive management practices of U.S. agencies 
264 1 |c 2016 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a ƒaComputermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a ƒa Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
500 |a Date Completed 13.12.2016 
500 |a Date Revised 30.12.2016 
500 |a published: Print-Electronic 
500 |a Citation Status MEDLINE 
520 |a © 2015 Society for Conservation Biology. 
520 |a All U.S. federal agencies administering environmental laws purport to practice adaptive management (AM), but little is known about how they actually implement this conservation tool. A gap between the theory and practice of AM is revealed in judicial decisions reviewing agency adaptive management plans. We analyzed all U.S. federal court opinions published through 1 January 2015 to identify the agency AM practices courts found most deficient. The shortcomings included lack of clear objectives and processes, monitoring thresholds, and defined actions triggered by thresholds. This trio of agency shortcuts around critical, iterative steps characterizes what we call AM-lite. Passive AM differs from active AM in its relative lack of management interventions through experimental strategies. In contrast, AM-lite is a distinctive form of passive AM that fails to provide for the iterative steps necessary to learn from management. Courts have developed a sophisticated understanding of AM and often offer instructive rather than merely critical opinions. The role of the judiciary is limited by agency discretion under U.S. administrative law. But courts have overturned some agency AM-lite practices and insisted on more rigorous analyses to ensure that the promised benefits of structured learning and fine-tuned management have a reasonable likelihood of occurring. Nonetheless, there remains a mismatch in U.S. administrative law between the flexibility demanded by adaptive management and the legal objectives of transparency, public participation, and finality 
650 4 |a Journal Article 
650 4 |a Norte América 
650 4 |a North America 
650 4 |a conservation planning 
650 4 |a law 
650 4 |a leyes 
650 4 |a planeación de la conservación 
650 4 |a politics and policy 
650 4 |a políticas y normas 
700 1 |a Ruhl, J B  |e verfasserin  |4 aut 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology  |d 1989  |g 30(2016), 2 vom: 26. Apr., Seite 268-75  |w (DE-627)NLM098176803  |x 1523-1739  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:30  |g year:2016  |g number:2  |g day:26  |g month:04  |g pages:268-75 
856 4 0 |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12616  |3 Volltext 
912 |a GBV_USEFLAG_A 
912 |a SYSFLAG_A 
912 |a GBV_NLM 
912 |a GBV_ILN_350 
951 |a AR 
952 |d 30  |j 2016  |e 2  |b 26  |c 04  |h 268-75