Prioritizing plant eradication targets by re-framing the project prioritization protocol (PPP) for use in biosecurity applications

Dodd, Aaron J.; Ainsworth, N.; Hauser, Cindy E.; Burgman, Mark A.; McCarthy, Michael A.

doi:10.1007/s10530-016-1335-7

Cited by 10 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Resource allocation among candidate projects can be prioritized by examining their ROIs, for which a wide range of prioritization and optimization tools are avail-able. Ranking-based project selection can be applied to sort projects with discrete ROI points (Joseph et al 2009;Dodd et al 2017). Mathematical optimization can be conducted on either continuous or discrete ROIs (McCarthy et al 2010;Cattarino et al 2016).…”

Section: Allocate Resources To Priority Activities (Module 2)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since the early 1990s, the State of Victoria, Australia, has operated a program that seeks to detect and ultimately eradicate high weed risk species before they become widespread (Dodd et al 2015). Dodd et al (2017) studied the optimal 20-year budget allocation to manage the hypothetical case in which 50 weed species from the Australian list have established infestation of various sizes in Victoria. Labor costs of different levels of management effort (monitoring or treatment rate: 1-3 times/year) were modeled with a stage-matrix model that tracks the size of infested area that needs treatment.…”

Section: Invasive Weeds In Australiamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The models considered decrease in probability of successful eradication under delayed or no management. The most costefficient effort for each project was then identified and used to prioritize the allocation of resources to minimize the overall weed risk (see Dodd et al [2017] for model details).…”

Section: Invasive Weeds In Australiamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Reallocating budgets among ongoing and emerging conservation projects

Dodd

Hauser

et al. 2020

Conservation Biology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conserving biodiversity and combating ecological hazards require cost-effective allocation of limited resources among potential management projects. Project priorities, however, can change over time as underlying social-ecological systems progress, novel priorities emerge, and management capabilities evolve. Thus, reallocation of ongoing investments in response to shifting priorities could improve management outcomes and address urgent demands, especially when additional funding is not available immediately. Resource reallocation, however, could incur transaction costs, require additional monitoring and reassessment, and be constrained by ongoing project commitments. Such complexities may prevent managers from considering potentially beneficial reallocation strategies, reducing long-term effectiveness. We propose an iterative project prioritization approach, based on marginal return-on-investment estimation and portfolio optimization, that guides resource reallocation among ongoing and new projects. Using simulation experiments in 2 case studies, we explored how this approach can improve efficacy under varying reallocation constraints, frequencies, costs, and rates of project portfolio change. Periodic budget reallocation could enhance the management of stochastically emerging invasive weeds in Australia and thus reduce the overall risk by up to 50% compared with a static budget. Reallocation frequency and the rate of new weed incursion synergistically increased the conservation gains achieved by allowing unconstrained reallocation. Conversely, budget reallocation would not improve the International Union for Conservation of Nature conservation status of threatened Australian birds due to slow rates of transition among conservation states; extinction risk could increase if portfolio reassessment is costly. Although other project prioritization studies may recommend periodic reassessment and reallocation, our findings revealed conditions when reallocation is valuable and demonstrated a structured approach that can help conservation agencies schedule and implement iterative budget-allocation decisions cost-effectively.

show abstract

Section: Allocate Resources To Priority Activities (Module 2)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Invasive Weeds In Australiamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reallocating budgets among ongoing and emerging conservation projects

Dodd

Hauser

et al. 2020

Conservation Biology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Fourth, the model we propose provides an alternative approach to biosecurity budget allocation, which often, instead, relies on project rankings (Heikkila ; Dodd et al . ), where the key ranking metric is a BCR (Pannell ; Pannell and Gibson ). Under a BCR ranking, decision‐makers typically proceed top‐down and set a threshold where projects with higher BCRs get the entire budget they ask for, and projects with lower BCRs receive much less or nothing – an outcome often known as the Noah's Ark solution (Martin ; Joseph et al .…”

Section: Policy Implications For Budget Allocation In Biosecuritymentioning

confidence: 99%

Budgeting and portfolio allocation for biosecurity measures

Kompas

Chu

Pham

et al. 2019

Aus J Agri & Res Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a practical model for optimally allocating a budget across different biosecurity threats and measures (e.g. prevention or border quarantine, active surveillance for early detection, and containment and eradication measures) to ensure the highest rate of return. Our portfolio model differs from the common principle, which ranks alternative projects by their benefit cost ratios and picks the one that generates the highest average benefit cost ratio. The model we propose, instead, aims to allocate shares of the budget to the species where it is most cost‐effective, and consequently determine the optimal scale of the control program for each threat under varying budget constraints. The cost‐effectiveness of each block of budget spent on a threat is determined by minimising its expected total cost, including the damages it inflicts, and the control expenditures incurred in preventing or mitigating damages. As an illustration, the model is applied to the optimal allocation of a budget across four of Australia's most dangerous pests and diseases: red imported fire ants; foot‐and‐mouth disease; papaya fruit fly; and orange hawkweed. The model can readily be extended to consider more species and activities, and more complex settings including cases where detailed spatial and temporal information needs to be considered.

show abstract

“…), well‐established species of plants (Tasker and Westwood , Dodd et al. ), mammals (Campbell and Donlan , Jones et al. ), and insects (Myers et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The failure of success: cyclic recurrences of a globally invasive pest

Zhao

Hui

Plant

et al. 2019

Ecological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the six decades since 1960, the oriental fruit fly, Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel), has been announced successfully eradicated in California by the U.S. Department of Agriculture a total of 564 times. This includes eradication declarations in one city a total of 25 different years, in 12 cities 8-19 different years, and in 101 cities 2-7 different years. We here show that the false negatives in declaring elimination success hinge on the easily achieved regulatory criteria, which have virtually guaranteed the failure of complete extirpation of this pest. Analyses of the time series of fly detection over California placed on a grid of 100-km 2 cells revealed (1) partial success of the eradication program in controlling the invasion of the oriental fruit fly; (2) low prevalence of the initial detection in these cells is often followed by high prevalence of recurrences; (3) progressively shorter intervals between years of consecutive detections; and (4) high likelihood of early-infested cells also experiencing the most frequent outbreaks. Facing the risk of recurrent invasions, such short-term eradication programs have only succeeded annually according to the current regulatory criteria but have failed to achieve the larger goal of complete extirpation of the oriental fruit fly. Based on the components and running costs of the current programs, we further estimated the efficiency of eradication programs with different combinations of eradication radius, duration, and edge impermeability in reducing invasion recurrences and slowing the spread of the oriental fruit fly. We end with policy implications including the need for agricultural agencies worldwide to revisit eradication protocols in which monitoring and treatments are terminated when the regulatory criteria for declaring eradication are met. Our results also have direct implications to invasion biologists and agriculture policy makers regarding long-term risks of short-term expediency.

show abstract

Prioritizing plant eradication targets by re-framing the project prioritization protocol (PPP) for use in biosecurity applications

Cited by 10 publications

References 60 publications

Reallocating budgets among ongoing and emerging conservation projects

Reallocating budgets among ongoing and emerging conservation projects

Budgeting and portfolio allocation for biosecurity measures

The failure of success: cyclic recurrences of a globally invasive pest

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About