1. Analysis and Management of Vertebrate Populations & Communities March 6, 2015 1 Introduction to Structured Decision-Making

2. Objectives 2 Recognize what we mean when we say “decision” Understand the difference between how humans typically make decisions and structured decision making Articulate why structured decision making may lead to “better” or more rational and transparent decisions Explain the PrOACT approach to decision making Understand a bit about how SDM relates to adaptive management, joint fact finding, and conflict resolution

3. What is structured decision making? Aspects fundamental to all decision problems  A perceived need to accomplish some objectives  Several alternatives, one of which must be selected  The consequences associated with alternatives are different  Uncertainty usually about the consequences of each alternative  The possible consequences are not all equally valued What you want What you can do What you “know” 3

4. What is structured decision making? 4 The structuring of a decision problem  in terms of choices, outcomes, and values  to identify the choice that is most likely to meet the objectives Decisions involve  predicting outcomes from alternative choices  valuing those outcomes The first part is the (objective) role of science; the second part is the (subjective) role of society

5. Thinking like a decision maker What is the nature of the decision? (the problem to be addressed) Who is the decision maker (DM) and under what authority do they act? Why does the DM care about the outcomes? When and where? (the scale or scope of the decision) How? (the possible actions) 5

6. A focus on values 6 Value-focused  Objectives (values) are discussed first, and drive the rest of the analysis  In contrast to our intuitive decision-making, which usually jumps to evaluating the alternatives “the decision context and the fundamental objectives that frame a decision situation must be compatible” (Keeney 1992).  Objectives should be sufficient to fully evaluate all the alternatives  Alternatives should be sufficient to describe all the various ways in which the objectives could be achieved

7. Why SDM? 7 Decision problems in conservation are often complex, involving multiple objectives, high stakes, and limited resources A need for decision making that is:  More likely to achieve objectives  Deliberative, thorough, robust to uncertainty  Transparent, explicit, able to be documented, replicable Science does not decide and we cannot “get the politics out of management”

8. When SDM? 8 Keeney 2004. Making better decision makers. Decision Analysis 1:193-204.

9. What is a decision? 9 Choosing one action among alternatives More than a preference, its actually deciding what to do A commitment of resources

10. PrOACT 10 Problem framing Objectives Actions Consequences Trade-offs Hammond, J. S., R. L. Keeney, and H. Raiffa. 1999. Smart Choices: A Practical Guide to Making Better Life Decisions. Broadway Books, New York, N.Y.

11. 11 PrOACT example

12. Problem statement 12 Over half of the manatees counted during statewide synoptic surveys are found at warm-water discharges from power plants during winter; these plants can go off- line temporarily or permanently, resulting in potentially catastrophic levels of mortality due to the cold. How to transition manatees from dependence on a small number of industrial sites to sites that are independent of or less reliant on manmade technology?

13. Objectives 13 Max P(long-term persistence) Min cold- related mortality Min losses from disease or red tide Min boat strikes Max available food resources Min reliance on power- plant effluent Min dense concentrations of manatees Min overlap in distributions of boats & manatees Min # of manatees exposed to <18°C Max # of non- industrial warm-water sites Fundamental objective Means objectives

14. Actions 14 Max P(long-term persistence) Min cold- related mortality Min losses from disease or red tide Min boat strikes Max available food resources Min reliance on power- plant effluent Min dense concentration of manatees Min overlap in distributions of boats & manatees Min # of manatees exposed to <18°C Max # of non- industrial warm-water sites Fundamental objective Means objectives Reduce power- plant effluent Induce haloclines Create passive thermal refuges Remove barriers to natural springs Maintain flows in natural springs

15. Consequences 15 Core Biological Model Other analyses of ecological, economic, and sociological data Expert opinion

16. Tradeoffs 16 OBJECTIVES Manatee persistence Cost Collatoral Damage Regulatory burdenSocial Benefits Pr(n≥2000)= 0.95 $ Actions ↓Acres of SAV Regulated acs. No-entry acs. Affected boat-hrs ↓prop. value Net income # of visitors ALTERNATIVES MaxMin Max WT AVG No action1.003.903.003.673.633.253.501.50 1.77 Technologically Lite2.203.10 2.883.003.133.002.101.902.42 Intermediate3.601.902.202.00 1.752.003.403.203.07 Technologically Heavy3.201.101.701.50 1.781.503.003.402.64

17. Psychology of decision making 17 How people typically make decisions (“Descriptive” decision making - from cognitive sciences)  Reflects many natural mental tendencies, limitations Cognitive adaptations for a complex world  Mental short-cuts, rules of thumb (heuristics) help us get through life, mostly successfully (e.g., “Blink” in popular literature)

18. Psychology of decision making 18 But these tendencies bias our perceptions and often divert us from reaching truly optimal decisions Humans typically “satisfice” or only look cursorily at options to pick something that’s “just good enough” or satisfactory – not a careful or thorough search

19. Structured decision making 19 “Normative” or “prescriptive” decision making A rational framework for making decisions; to get as close to objectives as possible Techniques to aid in “solving the right problem” and finding those optimal solutions Help avoid limitations of psychological biases

20. What makes decisions hard? 20 The objectives may be complex or contradictory, or in dispute Sometimes you don’t know all the possible actions The consequences may behighly uncertain Even knowing all the other components, the best choice may be difficult to determine (compute)

21. Making good decisions 21 What makes a decision good is the process by which it was generated, not necessarily the ultimate outcome (which you can’t control due to uncertainty) But you can fully control the process by which the decision was made, and establish a process that is expected to perform better than any other process A rational person given the same information can see that you tried to find the best solution, given what you were trying to achieve and the constraints outside your control

22. A way of thinking 22 Structured decision making is, more than anything, a mental discipline  A commitment to a rigorous way of analyzing decisions It does not necessarily require a lot of time or money  Your investment of effort depends on the problem at hand “Insights about a decision, not definitive choices about what to do, are the key products of focused thinking and analysis.” (R. Keeney 2004)

23. Not everything is a nail 23 OBJECTIVES Clear Conflicting OUTCOMES Well Understood UncertainDisputed Structured Decision Making Conflict Resolution Joint Fact Finding Adaptive Management

24. What to remember 24 Get the problem framing right  better to have a fuzzy decision for the correct problem than an optimal decision for the wrong problem Separate values and outcomes  Decision analysts must be “honest brokers” (R. Pielke, Jr.) Most interesting conservation problems are hard; frustration is inevitable Seek to create decision processes that:  Facilitate communication among stakeholders  Provide a clear connection between actions and objectives  Provide an efficient use of conservation resources and information  Are transparent, deliberative, rational, reproducible