Skip to content

Research at St Andrews

Developing and enhancing biodiversity monitoring programmes: a collaborative assessment of priorities

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Author(s)

Michael J. O. Pocock, Stuart E. Newson, Ian G. Henderson, Jodey Peyton, William J. Sutherland, David G. Noble, Stuart G. Ball, Björn C. Beckmann, Jeremy Biggs, Tom Brereton, David J. Bullock, Stephen T. Buckland, Mike Edwards, Mark A. Eaton, Martin C. Harvey, Mark O. Hill, Martin Horlock, David S. Hubble, Angela M. Julian, Edward C. Mackey & 15 others Darren J. Mann, Matthew J. Marshall, Jolyon M. Medlock, Elaine M. O'Mahony, Marina Pacheco, Keith Porter, Steve Prentice, Deborah A. Procter, Helen E. Roy, Sue E. Southway, Chris R. Shortall, Alan J. A. Stewart, David E. Wembridge, Mark A. Wright, David B. Roy

School/Research organisations

Abstract

Biodiversity is changing at unprecedented rates, and it is increasingly important that these changes are quantified through monitoring programmes. Previous recommendations for developing or enhancing these programmes focus either on the end goals, that is the intended use of the data, or on how these goals are achieved, for example through volunteer involvement in citizen science, but not both. These recommendations are rarely prioritized.
We used a collaborative approach, involving 52 experts in biodiversity monitoring in the UK, to develop a list of attributes of relevance to any biodiversity monitoring programme and to order these attributes by their priority. We also ranked the attributes according to their importance in monitoring biodiversity in the UK. Experts involved included data users, funders, programme organizers and participants in data collection. They covered expertise in a wide range of taxa.
We developed a final list of 25 attributes of biodiversity monitoring schemes, ordered from the most elemental (those essential for monitoring schemes; e.g. articulate the objectives and gain sufficient participants) to the most aspirational (e.g. electronic data capture in the field, reporting change annually). This ordered list is a practical framework which can be used to support the development of monitoring programmes.
People's ranking of attributes revealed a difference between those who considered attributes with benefits to end users to be most important (e.g. people from governmental organizations) and those who considered attributes with greatest benefit to participants to be most important (e.g. people involved with volunteer biological recording schemes). This reveals a distinction between focussing on aims and the pragmatism in achieving those aims.
Synthesis and applications. The ordered list of attributes developed in this study will assist in prioritizing resources to develop biodiversity monitoring programmes (including citizen science). The potential conflict between end users of data and participants in data collection that we discovered should be addressed by involving the diversity of stakeholders at all stages of programme development. This will maximize the chance of successfully achieving the goals of biodiversity monitoring programmes.
Close

Details

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)686-695
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Applied Ecology
Volume52
Issue number3
Early online date2 Apr 2015
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2015

    Research areas

  • Biodiversity , Citizen science, Monitoring, Participatory monitoring, Survey, Volunteer, Surveillance

Discover related content
Find related publications, people, projects and more using interactive charts.

View graph of relations

Related by author

  1. Assessing factors associated with changes in the numbers of birds visiting gardens in winter: are predators partly to blame?

    Swallow, B. T., Buckland, S. T., King, R. & Toms, M. P., 11 Oct 2019, In : Ecology and Evolution. Early View, 11 p.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  2. Review of potential line-transect methodologies for estimating abundance of dolphin stocks in the eastern tropical Pacific

    Lennert-Cody, C. E., Buckland, S. T., Gerrodette, T., Webb, A., Barlow, J., Fretwell, P. T., Maunder, M. N., Kitakado, T., Moore, J. E., Scott, M. D. & Skaug, H. J., 25 Jan 2019, In : Journal of Cetacean Research and Management. 19, p. 9-21 13 p.

    Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

  3. Model selection with overdispersed distance sampling data

    Howe, E. J., Buckland, S. T., Després-Einspenner, M-L. & Kühl, H. S., Jan 2019, In : Methods in Ecology and Evolution. 10, 1, p. 38-47

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  4. Distance sampling

    Buckland, S. T., Miller, D. L. & Rexstad, E., 2019, Quantitative Analyses in Wildlife Science. Brennan, L., Marcot, B. & Tri, A. (eds.). Johns Hopkins University Press, p. 97-112

    Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

  5. Corrigendum: The number and distribution of polar bears in the western Barents Sea

    Aars, J., Marques, T. A., Lone, K., Andersen, M., Wiig, Ø., Fløystad, I. M. B., Hagen, S. B. & Buckland, S. T., 22 May 2018, In : Polar Research. 37, 1, 1457880.

    Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate

Related by journal

  1. Journal of Applied Ecology (Journal)

    Jason Matthiopoulos (Editor)
    2007 → …

    Activity: Publication peer-review and editorial work typesEditor of research journal

Related by journal

  1. Empirical determination of severe trauma in seals from collisions with tidal turbine blades

    Onoufriou, J., Brownlow, A., Moss, S., Hastie, G. & Thompson, D., 14 May 2019, In : Journal of Applied Ecology. Early View, 13 p.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  2. Harbour seals avoid tidal turbine noise: implications for collision risk

    Hastie, G. D., Russell, D. J. F., Lepper, P., Elliott, J., Wilson, B., Benjamins, S. & Thompson, D., Mar 2018, In : Journal of Applied Ecology. 55, 2, p. 684-693 10 p.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  3. Marine mammals and sonar: dose-response studies, the risk-disturbance hypothesis and the role of exposure context

    Harris, C. M., Thomas, L., Falcone, E., Hildebrand, J., Houser, D., Kvadsheim, P., Lam, F-P. A., Miller, P., Moretti, D. J., Read, A., Slabbekoorn, H., Southall, B. L., Tyack, P. L., Wartzok, D. & Janik, V. M., Jan 2018, In : Journal of Applied Ecology. 55, 1, p. 396-404

    Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

  4. Counting chirps: acoustic monitoring of cryptic frogs

    Measey, G. J., Stevenson, B. C., Scott, T., Altwegg, R. & Borchers, D. L., Jun 2017, In : Journal of Applied Ecology. 54, 3, p. 894-902 9 p.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  5. Seals and shipping: quantifying population risk and individual exposure to vessel noise

    Jones, E. L., Hastie, G. D., Smout, S., Onoufriou, J., Merchant, N. D., Brookes, K. L. & Thompson, D., Dec 2017, In : Journal of Applied Ecology. 54, 6, p. 1930-1940

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

ID: 192901494

Top