Premium
Uncertainty in Comparative Risk Analysis for Threatened Australian Plant Species
Author(s) -
Burgman Mark A.,
Keith David A.,
Walshe Terry V.
Publication year - 1999
Publication title -
risk analysis
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.972
H-Index - 130
eISSN - 1539-6924
pISSN - 0272-4332
DOI - 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1999.tb00430.x
Subject(s) - threatened species , context (archaeology) , protocol (science) , risk assessment , environmental resource management , risk analysis (engineering) , nature conservation , variety (cybernetics) , actuarial science , computer science , geography , business , ecology , economics , biology , artificial intelligence , medicine , computer security , alternative medicine , archaeology , pathology , habitat
Australian state and federal agencies use a broad range of methods for setting conservation priorities for species at risk. Some of these are based on rule sets developed by the International Union for the Conservation ofNature, while others use point scoring protocols to assess threat. All of them ignore uncertainty in the data. In this study, we assessed the conservation status of 29 threatened vascular plants from Tasmania and New South Wales using a variety of methods including point scoring and rule‐based approaches. In addition, several methods for dealing with uncertainty in the data were applied to each of the prioritysetting schemes. The results indicatethat the choice of a protocol for setting priorities and the choice of the way in which uncertainty is treated may make important differences to the resulting assessments of risk. The choice among methods needs to be rationalized within the management context in which it is to be applied. These methods are not a substitute for more formal risk assessment.