Comparing predictions of extinction risk using models and subjective judgement

Models of population dynamics are commonly used to predict risks in ecology, particularly risks of population decline. There is often considerable uncertainty associated with these predictions. However, alternatives to predictions based on population models have not been assessed. We used simulation models of hypothetical species to generate the kinds of data that might typically be available to ecologists and then invited other researchers to predict risks of population declines using these data. The accuracy of the predictions was assessed by comparison with the forecasts of the original model. The researchers used either population models or subjective judgement to make their predictions. Predictions made using models were only slightly more accurate than subjective judgements of risk. However, predictions using models tended to be unbiased, while subjective judgements were biased towards over-estimation. Psychology literature suggests that the bias of subjective judgements is likely to vary somewhat unpredictably among people, depending on their stake in the outcome. This will make subjective predictions more uncertain and less transparent than those based on models. (C) 2004 Elsevier SAS. All rights reserved.

[1]  Mark N. Maunder Population viability analysis based on combining Bayesian, integrated, and hierarchical analyses , 2004 .

[2]  P. Foley,et al.  Predicting Extinction Times from Environmental Stochasticity and Carrying Capacity , 1994 .

[3]  Amy W. Ando,et al.  On the Use of Demographic Models of Population Viability in Endangered Species Management , 1998 .

[4]  Hugh P. Possingham,et al.  Reliability of Relative Predictions in Population Viability Analysis , 2003 .

[5]  Hugh P. Possingham,et al.  Competing harvesting strategies in a simulated population under uncertainty , 2001 .

[6]  Ilkka Hanski,et al.  Metapopulation Dynamics: From Concepts and Observations to Predictive Models , 1997 .

[7]  David B. Lindenmayer,et al.  Multi-aged mountain ash forest, wildlife conservation and timber harvesting , 1998 .

[8]  Michael A. McCarthy,et al.  Extinction dynamics of the helmeted honeyeater: effects of demography, stochasticity, inbreeding and spatial structure , 1996 .

[9]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[10]  Stephen P. Ellner,et al.  Precision of Population Viability Analysis , 2002, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[11]  H. Resit Akçakaya,et al.  Critiques of PVA Ask the Wrong Questions: Throwing the Heuristic Baby Out with the Numerical Bath Water , 2002, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[12]  D. Lindenmayer,et al.  A framework for the improved management of threatened species based on Population Viability Analysis (PVA) , 1994 .

[13]  David B. Lindenmayer,et al.  How accurate are population models? Lessons from landscape-scale tests in a fragmented system , 2002 .

[14]  J. Day,et al.  Testing the Accuracy of Population Viability Analysis , 2001 .

[15]  Gerd Gigerenzer,et al.  How to Improve Bayesian Reasoning Without Instruction: Frequency Formats , 1995 .

[16]  M. McCarthy,et al.  A method for validating stochastic models of population viability : a case study of the mountain pygmy-possum (Burramys parvus) , 2000 .

[17]  David B. Lindenmayer,et al.  TESTING SPATIAL PVA MODELS OF AUSTRALIAN TREECREEPERS (AVES: CLIMACTERIDAE) IN FRAGMENTED FOREST , 2000 .

[18]  Scott Ferson,et al.  Logistic sensitivity and bounds for extinction risks , 1996 .

[19]  M. Gilpin,et al.  Metapopulation Biology: Ecology, Genetics, and Evolution , 1997 .

[20]  Brian Dennis,et al.  ALLEE EFFECTS: POPULATION GROWTH, CRITICAL DENSITY, AND THE CHANCE OF EXTINCTION , 1989 .

[21]  D. Ludwig Is it meaningful to estimate a probability of extinction , 1999 .

[22]  Stephen P. Ellner,et al.  When is it meaningful to estimate an extinction probability , 2000 .

[23]  Brian Dennis,et al.  Estimation of Growth and Extinction Parameters for Endangered Species , 1991 .

[24]  Michael A. McCarthy,et al.  The Allee effect, finding mates and theoretical models , 1997 .

[25]  Paul McErlain-Ward Science and the Endangered Species Act , 1996 .

[26]  Judith L. Anderson Embracing Uncertainty: The Interface of Bayesian Statistics and Cognitive Psychology , 1998 .

[27]  M. Burgman Population Viability Analysis for Bird Conservation: Prediction, Heuristics, Monitoring and Psychology , 2000 .

[28]  B. Taylor,et al.  The Reliability of Using Population Viability Analysis for Risk Classification of Species , 1995 .

[29]  S. Ellner,et al.  Stochastic matrix models for conservation and management: A comparative review of methods , 2001 .

[30]  Hugh P. Possingham,et al.  Do life history traits affect the accuracy of diffusion approximations for mean time to extinction , 2002 .

[31]  Colin J. Thompson,et al.  Expected minimum population size as a measure of threat , 2001 .

[32]  Justin G. Cook,et al.  The international whaling commission's revised management procedure as an example of a new approach to fishery management , 1995 .

[33]  Scott Ferson,et al.  Risk assessment in conservation biology , 1993 .

[34]  H. Resit Akçakaya,et al.  Predictive accuracy of population viability analysis in conservation biology , 2000, Nature.