The assimilation of population models into ecological risk assessment (ERA) has been hindered by their range of complexity, uncertainty, resource investment, and data availability. Likewise, ensuring that the models address risk assessment objectives has been challenging. Recent research efforts have begun to tackle these challenges by creating an integrated modeling framework and decision guide to aid the development of population models with respect to ERA objectives and data availability. In the framework, the trade‐offs associated with the generality, realism, and precision of an assessment are used to guide the development of a population model commensurate with the protection goal. The decision guide provides risk assessors with a stepwise process to assist them in developing a conceptual model that is appropriate for the assessment objective and available data. We have merged the decision guide and modeling framework into a comprehensive approach, Population modeling Guidance, Use, Interpretation, and Development for Ecological risk assessment (Pop‐GUIDE), for the development of population models for ERA that is applicable across regulatory statutes and assessment objectives. In Phase 1 of Pop‐GUIDE, assessors are guided through the trade‐offs of ERA generality, realism, and precision, which are translated into model objectives. In Phase 2, available data are assimilated and characterized as general, realistic, and/or precise. Phase 3 provides a series of dichotomous questions to guide development of a conceptual model that matches the complexity and uncertainty appropriate for the assessment that is in concordance with the available data. This phase guides model developers and users to ensure consistency and transparency of the modeling process. We introduce Pop‐GUIDE as the most comprehensive guidance for population model development provided to date and demonstrate its use through case studies using fish as an example taxon and the US Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act and Endangered Species Act as example regulatory statutes. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2021;17:767–784. © 2020 SETAC. This article has been contributed to by US Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.

Estimating and projecting population trends using population viability analysis (PVA) are central to identifying species at risk of extinction and for informing conservation management strategies. Models for PVA generally fall within two categories, scalar (count-based) or matrix (demographic). Model structure, process error, measurement error, and time series length all have known impacts in population risk assessments, but their combined impact has not been thoroughly investigated. We tested the ability of scalar and matrix PVA models to predict percent decline over a ten-year interval, selected to coincide with the IUCN Red List criterion A.3, using data simulated for a hypothetical, short-lived organism with a simple life-history and for a threatened snail, Tasmaphena lamproides. PVA performance was assessed across different time series lengths, population growth rates, and levels of process and measurement error. We found that the magnitude of effects of measurement error, process error, and time series length, and interactions between these, depended on context. We found that high process and measurement error reduced the reliability of both models in predicted percent decline. Both sources of error contributed strongly to biased predictions, with process error tending to contribute to the spread of predictions more than measurement error. Increasing time series length improved precision and reduced bias of predicted population trends, but gains substantially diminished for time series lengths greater than 10–15 years. The simple parameterization scheme we employed contributed strongly to bias in matrix model predictions when both process and measurement error were high, causing scalar models to exhibit similar or greater precision and lower bias than matrix models. Our study provides evidence that, for short-lived species with structured but simple life histories, short time series and simple models can be sufficient for reasonably reliable conservation decision-making, and may be preferable for population projections when unbiased estimates of vital rates cannot be obtained.

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List Categories and Criteria is a quantitative framework for classifying species according to extinction risk. Population models may be used to estimate extinction risk or population declines. Uncertainty and variability arise in threat classifications through measurement and process error in empirical data and uncertainty in the models used to estimate extinction risk and population declines. Furthermore, species traits are known to affect extinction risk. We investigated the effects of measurement and process error, model type, population growth rate, and age at first reproduction on the reliability of risk classifications based on projected population declines on IUCN Red List classifications. We used an age-structured population model to simulate true population trajectories with different growth rates, reproductive ages and levels of variation, and subjected them to measurement error. We evaluated the ability of scalar and matrix models parameterized with these simulated time series to accurately capture the IUCN Red List classification generated with true population declines. Under all levels of measurement error tested and low process error, classifications were reasonably accurate; scalar and matrix models yielded roughly the same rate of misclassifications, but the distribution of errors differed; matrix models led to greater overestimation of extinction risk than underestimations; process error tended to contribute to misclassifications to a greater extent than measurement error; and more misclassifications occurred for fast, rather than slow, life histories. These results indicate that classifications of highly threatened taxa (i.e., taxa with low growth rates) under criterion A are more likely to be reliable than for less threatened taxa when assessed with population models. Greater scrutiny needs to be placed on data used to parameterize population models for species with high growth rates, particularly when available evidence indicates a potential transition to higher risk categories.

No abstract