Table 1. Revised practice instructions for adaptive management planning projects.

Standard Procedure
Revised Procedure

Project Establishment


Project Establishment

(1) Establish the process as an adaptive management planning project, leaving lead agencies and other stakeholders’ commitments to implementing consensus decisions relatively vague.
(1) Establish the process as a negotiation leading to a formal agreement that is to be conducted using adaptive management procedures to provide analytical rigor to the consideration of options.
(2) Identify facilitators who are capable of facilitating dialogue amongst stakeholders, and specifically facilitating multiparty, multidisciplinary analysis of socioecological systems.
(2) Identify facilitators capable of facilitating negotiations amongst stakeholders in ways that will help them explore their underlying interests, using multiparty, multidisciplinary analysis of socioecological systems as a vehicle for this.
(3) Rough out the general scope of the project. This occurs in conversations between the lead agency and the facilitators.
(3) Rough out the general scope of the project. This occurs in conversations between the lead agency and the facilitators.
(4) Identify and invite stakeholder representatives and experts to participate in adaptive management workshops.
(4) Identify and invite stakeholder representatives and experts to participate in adaptive management workshops, and in shuttle diplomacy, or informal mediation if that proves helpful.

Scoping Workshop Sessions


Scoping Workshop Sessions

(5) Why are we here? An exploration of the participant’s sense of the intent of the project.
(5) Why are we here? An exploration of the participant’s sense of the intent of the project.
(6) What are the management problems that need to be addressed?
(6) What are the management problems that need to be addressed?
(7) What boundaries in space and time, and in the range of issues considered, are appropriate?
(7) What boundaries in space and time, and in the range of issues considered, are appropriate?
(8) What actions might effectively deal with the problems?
(8) What actions might effectively deal with the problems?
(9) What indicators would measure success or failure in solving the problems?
(9) What indicators would measure success or failure in solving the problems?

(10) What interests underlie the choice of indicators?

(11) Review: Do we need to add to the lists of problems, actions, and indicators, or review the boundaries to explore possible impacts on stakeholders’ interests?

Structure Workshop Sessions


Structure Workshop Sessions

(10) Identify major subsystems.
(12) Identify major subsystems.
(11) Describe interfaces between them, e.g., with a high-level flow diagram or interaction matrix.
(13) Describe interfaces between them, e.g., with a high-level flow diagram or interaction matrix.
(12) Describe the structure of each subsystem, e.g., with a flow diagram or a more detailed interaction matrix.
(14) Describe the structure of each subsystem, e.g., with a flow diagram or a more detailed interaction matrix.

(15) Review subsystem descriptions in light of stakeholders’ interests, and ask: Are there other creative ways in which we could look after stakeholders’ interests, including the interests of other kinds of organisms that should be included?
(13) If a quantitative model is being built, describe processes quantitatively using equations that describe how outputs are derived from inputs.
(16) If a quantitative model is being built, describe processes quantitatively using equations that describe how outputs are derived from inputs.
(14) Build a quantitative model, if this is required, using these equations as the specification.
(17) If a quantitative model is being built, build it incrementally, dialoguing frequently with stakeholders about what will add the most value to their investigations and negotiations. The structure and dynamics phases of the process can be interleaved helpfully. (see Beck and Fowler 2001, Highsmith 2002 for overviews of how this can be done).

Dynamics Workshop Sessions


Dynamics Workshop Sessions

(15) Explore dynamics, and specifically the effects of alternative assumptions and alternative management choices, in a “scenario gaming” environment.
(18) Explore dynamics, and specifically the effects of alternative assumptions and alternative management choices, in a “scenario gaming” environment. Emphasize the conceptual model alongside the quantitative model so that left field suggestions can be explored more easily by varying the conceptual model.
(16) Negotiate a path ahead, using “gaming” as a catalyst for, and point of reference in, negotiations.
(19) Negotiate a path ahead, using “gaming” as a catalyst for, and point of reference in, negotiations.

(20) If a consensus is reached or there is widespread agreement, stakeholders formalize their commitments to each other in a Memorandum of Understanding, or a Statement of Joint Intent, or a similar agreement.

Implementation


Implementation

(17) Lead agency and other stakeholders follow through on their commitments.
(21) Lead agency and other stakeholders follow through on their commitments.

(22) Formal review of implementation of the initial agreement, and negotiation of a further agreement that carries ecosystem management forward.