The nominal group technique in ecology &amp; conservation: Application and challenges

Hugé, Jean; Mukherjee, Nibedita

doi:10.1111/2041-210x.12831

Cited by 85 publications

(67 citation statements)

References 35 publications

(139 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The moderator collates all the information and creates a list of unique items. Subsequently, the participants are asked to prioritize these items following a collective (hence group) discussion (Hugé & Mukherjee, 2017). The Delphi technique is a group-based, anonymous and iterative technique with controlled feedback.…”

Section: Decisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We need a clear understanding of which methods are most suitable and in which context. For example, techniques such as the Nominal Group Technique or Delphi technique (Hugé & Mukherjee, ) improve decision‐making compared to face‐to‐face meetings (Graefe & Armstrong, ). These methods originate in diverse and specific academic disciplines or “silos,” making them generally relatively unknown and underused in ecology and conservation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparison of techniques for eliciting views and judgements in decision‐making

Zabala²,

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract1. Decision-making is a complex process that typically includes a series of stages: identifying the issue, considering possible options, making judgements and then making a decision by combining information and values. The current status quo relies heavily on the informational aspect of decision-making with little or no emphasis on the value positions that affect decisions.2. There is increasing realization of the importance of adopting rigorous methods for each stage such that the information, views and judgements of stakeholders and experts are used in a systematic and repeatable manner. Though there are several methodological textbooks which discuss a plethora of social science techniques, it is hard to judge the suitability of any given technique for a given decision problem.3. In decision-making, the three critical aspects are "what" decision is to be made, "who" makes the decisions and "how" the decisions are made. The methods covered in this paper focus on "how" decisions can be made. We compare six tech- 4. Based on structured reviews of 423 papers covering all six methods, we compare the conceptual and logistical characteristics of the methods, and map their suitability for the different stages of the decision-making process. While interviews and FGD are well-known, techniques such the Nominal Group technique and Q methodology are relatively under-used. In situations where conflict is high, we recommend using the Q methodology and Delphi technique to elicit judgements. Where

show abstract

Section: Decisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of techniques for eliciting views and judgements in decision‐making

Zabala²,

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this context, this special feature of Methods in Ecology and Evolution provides a series of clear guidelines to qualitative methods commonly used in conservation or natural resource management research to elicit, process and use knowledge from stakeholders or experts. For four methods-interviews (Young et al, 2017), focus groups (Nyumba, Wilson, Derrick, & Mukherjee, 2017), nominal group technique (Hugé & Mukherjee, 2017) Worryingly, a common strong message from the articles on interviews (Young et al, 2017), focus groups and MCDA (Esmail & Geneletti, 2017) is that these methods are often poorly justified and inadequately reported in the conservation literature. For example pilot interviews represent an important stage in designing interviews, and should be requested by ethics committees.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this context, this special feature of Methods in Ecology and Evolution provides a series of clear guidelines to qualitative methods commonly used in conservation or natural resource management research to elicit, process and use knowledge from stakeholders or experts. For four methods—interviews (Young et al., ), focus groups (Nyumba, Wilson, Derrick, & Mukherjee, ), nominal group technique (Hugé & Mukherjee, ) and multi‐criteria decision analysis (MCDA) (Esmail & Geneletti, )—guidelines are drawn from reviews of relevant literature with the articles giving overview of how the methods have been used in conservation research over the past two decades. A fifth paper (Mukherjee et al., ) critically analyses and compares six qualitative methods, also including the Delphi process (Mukherjee et al., ) and Q‐methodology Zabala and Pascual () for their use in conservation decision making.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Qualitative methods for ecologists and conservation scientists

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract1. Conservation of biodiversity involves dealing with problems caused by humans, by applying solutions that comprise actions by humans. Understanding human attitudes, knowledge and behaviour are thus central to conservation research and practice.2. The special feature brings together authors from a range of disciplines (ecology, human geography, political science, land economy, management) to examine a set of qualitative techniques used in conservation research: Interviews, Focus group discussion, The Nominal Group Technique and multi-criteria decision analysis.3. These techniques can be used for a range of purposes-most notably to understand people's perspectives, values and attitudes and to gather information about approaches to management of species, ecosystems or natural resources. Incorporating human values, perceptions, judgements and knowledge into conser-vation decision making is an important role for qualitative techniques; they provide robust means for submitting this information or knowledge as evidence.5. The articles in this special feature highlight a worrying extent of poor justification and inadequate reporting of qualitative methods in the conservation literature.6. To improve and encourage greater use of these techniques in conservation science, we urge improved reporting of rationales and methods, along with innovation, adaptation and further testing of the methods themselves.

show abstract

Looking beyond the horizon: An early warning system to keep marine mammal information relevant for conservation

Agardy¹,

Cody

Hastings

et al. 2019

Aquatic Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Important marine mammal areas (IMMAs) are discrete portions of habitat, important to marine mammal species, that have the potential to be delineated and managed for conservation. Although IMMAs are not a blueprint for marine protected areas or other conservation designations, they are useful for providing a foundation for marine spatial planning and systematic conservation planning that can then lead to protected areas or special spatial regulations. To be most useful for supporting management and conservation, however, the information coming out of IMMAs needs to reflect current conditions. An ‘early warning system’ is proposed with a generic set of indicators to flag when marine mammal species in IMMAs require management interventions due to changing distributions or decreasing populations. Rather than signifying that quantitative thresholds have been reached, these indicators comprise alerting information derived from visual or acoustic census, satellite imagery analysis, whale‐watching logs, or increases in mortality reported by stranding networks that can trigger additional targeted research. Although it is possible that in some regions data will be sufficient to provide quantifiable indicators, the system is meant to rely on existing data sources, and be adaptable to the circumstances of each region. Regional expert groups can utilize early warning system information and feed it into IMMA‐related spatial planning in two ways: by nominating additional areas of interest, and by providing a scientific rationale for revising IMMA boundaries, to be considered at the next decadal IMMA regional expert workshop. IMMA‐driven consolidation of information that is as current as possible will prove valuable for enhancing regional cooperation to conserve marine mammals, and will be useful as countries implement new protected areas to conserve marine mammals and other marine biodiversity.

show abstract

The nominal group technique in ecology & conservation: Application and challenges

Cited by 85 publications

References 35 publications

Comparison of techniques for eliciting views and judgements in decision‐making

Comparison of techniques for eliciting views and judgements in decision‐making

Qualitative methods for ecologists and conservation scientists

Looking beyond the horizon: An early warning system to keep marine mammal information relevant for conservation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About