↓ Skip to main content

Adaptive Management as an Effective Strategy: Interdisciplinary Perceptions for Natural Resources Management

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Management, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 Mendeley
Title
Adaptive Management as an Effective Strategy: Interdisciplinary Perceptions for Natural Resources Management
Published in
Environmental Management, November 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00267-016-0785-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lindsay M. Dreiss, Jan-Michael Hessenauer, Lucas R. Nathan, Kelly M. O’Connor, Marjorie R. Liberati, Danielle P. Kloster, Janet R. Barclay, Jason C. Vokoun, Anita T. Morzillo

Abstract

Adaptive management is a well-established approach to managing natural resources, but there is little evidence demonstrating effectiveness of adaptive management over traditional management techniques. Peer-reviewed literature attempts to draw conclusions about adaptive management effectiveness using social perceptions, but those studies are largely restricted to employees of US federal organizations. To gain a more comprehensive insight into perceived adaptive management effectiveness, this study aimed to broaden the suite of disciplines, professional affiliations, and geographic backgrounds represented by both practitioners and scholars. A questionnaire contained a series of questions concerning factors that lead to or inhibit effective management, followed by another set of questions focused on adaptive management. Using a continuum representing strategies of both adaptive management and traditional management, respondents selected those strategies that they perceived as being effective. Overall, characteristics (i.e., strategies, stakeholders, and barriers) identified by respondents as contributing to effective management closely aligned with adaptive management. Responses were correlated to the type of adaptive management experience rather than an individual's discipline, occupational, or regional affiliation. In particular, perceptions of characteristics contributing to adaptive management effectiveness varied between respondents who identified as adaptive management scholars (i.e., no implementation experience) and adaptive management practitioners. Together, these results supported two concepts that make adaptive management effective: practitioners emphasized adaptive management's value as a long-term approach and scholars noted the importance of stakeholder involvement. Even so, more communication between practitioners and scholars regarding adaptive management effectiveness could promote interdisciplinary learning and problem solving for improved resources management.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 88 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 18%
Student > Master 16 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 5%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 18 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 20 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 14%
Social Sciences 6 7%
Engineering 5 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 5%
Other 19 22%
Unknown 22 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 November 2016.
All research outputs
#14,782,490
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Management
#1,321
of 1,913 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,072
of 317,533 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Management
#13
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,913 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,533 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.