Prioritisation of wetlands of the Rangitikei catchment : a thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Applied Science in Natural Resource Management at Massey University

This study aimed to prioritise wetlands of the Rangitikei Catchment. The prioritisation will enable the Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council to apply its limited resources in an effective way to preserve the biodiversity of the wetlands of the catchment. A process was designed to achieve the project aim. The first step in the process was the establishment of two conservation goals: 1)Maintain species diversity, 2)Eliminate threats within wetlands. Secondly, the wetlands of the Rangitikei Catchment were surveyed to collect state and pressure information. 25 wetland sites were surveyed using the REWA survey method. Data collected was then analysed, first using the complementarity programme Sites V1.0. However, complementarity analysis did not achieve a clarified prioritisation of wetland sites because extreme variability was found among sites. In particular, complementarity analysis did not respond well to having two very different conservation goals of pressure and state. Therefore, 13 prioritisation criteria were employed based on elements of pressure and state. A method was devised to overcome problems of weighting criteria. True scores were converted to adjusted scores of 1 to 4 using the box and whisker division method. This method also allowed for easier replication and manipulation of data as well as clear visual representation, unlike other methods. A unique prioritisation framework was then devised which allowed multiple criteria (in this study pressure and state) to be assessed simultaneously. The framework also allowed the large amounts of data involved in the prioritisation process to be presented as a single priority ranking. The prioritisation framework is a relatively simple, repeatable and highly adaptable method. The framework does not compromise the contribution of each criterion to the overall value of the wetland. This resulted in prioritisation of the surveyed wetland sites of the Rangitikei Catchment and allowed achievement of the study's conservation goals. The box and whisker division method and prioritisation framework presented in the study are two unique methods that may be applied in future prioritisation programmes. Both methods provide simple and visual representations of the complex processes involved in the prioritisation of wetland sites and respond to multiple and opposing conservation goals. The nature of the prioritisation framework allows information to be added as it becomes available as well as accommodating the addition and expansion of conservation goals

The web-PLOP observation prioritisation system

We present a description of the automated system used by RoboNet to prioritise follow up observations of microlensing events to search for planets. The system keeps an up-to-date record of all public data from OGLE and MOA together with any existing RoboNet data and produces new PSPL fits whenever new data arrives. It then uses these fits to predict the current or future magnitudes of events, and selects those to observe which will maximise the probability of detecting planets for a given telescope and observing time. The system drives the RoboNet telescopes automatically based on these priorities, but it is also designed to be used interactively by human observers. The prioritisation options, such as telescope/instrument parameters, observing conditions and available time can all be controlled via a web-form, and the output target list can also be customised and sorted to show the parameters that the user desires. The interactive interface is available at http://www.artemis-uk.org/web-PLOP/Comment: 4 pages, Manchester Microlensing Conference, January 2008. To be published in the proceeding

Studying clinical reasoning, part 2: Applying social judgement theory

Part 1 of this paper (Harries and Harries 2001) examined the reasoning studies of the 1980s and 1990s and critiqued the ethnographic and informationprocessing approaches, based on stated information use. The need for an approach that acknowledged the intuitive nature of experienced thinkers’ reasoning was identified. Part 2 describes such an approach ± social judgement theory ± and presents a pilot application in occupational therapy research. The method used is judgement analysis. The issue under study is that of prioritisation policies in community mental health work. The results present the prioritisation policies of four occupational therapists in relation to managing community mental health referrals

Prioritisation for adaptation in tropical forest ecosystems : Working paper n°44

Under natural resource ecosystems shared across communities and nations, the distribution among stakeholders of risks and vulnerability to climate change is likely to be uneven on account of the nature of their stakes in the ecosystems, the degree of their dependence and the extent of degradation of the natural resources. Striving for a common adaptation strategy that safeguards the shared forest ecosystems and balances the interests of the multiple stakeholders would require a framework that encourages sharing and redistribution of ecosystem benefits and sharing of the potential climate risks and impacts on forests and stakeholders, taking into account the vulnerabilities of both ecosystems and people. This will constitute an important first step in reducing the burden of climate change on the weak and most vulnerable. Such a framework would also guide the decision making process, aid in redefining future activities especially when the risk situation changes, and help connect adaptation to sustainable national and regional development programmes through prioritisation of possible adaptation activities. This paper uses the experiences gained under the Tropical Forests and Climate Change Adaptation project of the Center for International Forest Research across three continents to propose a priority-setting process with active participation of multiple stakeholders in tropical ecosystems in developing countries perceived in their judgement to be crucial for adaptation to climate change. By attributing values to forest ecosystem goods and services for all stakeholders, prioritisation represents a common position by multiple stakeholders linking their interests and practices for a common purpose. (Résumé d'auteur

The Impact of Different Prioritisation Policies on Waiting Times: A Comparative Analysis of Norway and Scotland

We compare the distributional consequences of two different waiting times initiatives. The primary focus of Scotland’s recent waiting time reforms has been on reducing maximum waiting times through the imposition of high profile national targets. In Norway, the focus has been on appropriate prioritisation of referrals to hospital based on disease severity, the expected benefit of the treatment and cost-effectiveness. We use large, national administrative datasets from before and after each of these reforms and assign priority groups based on the maximum waiting times stipulated in Norwegian medical guidelines. To equalise case-mix over time, we use Exact Matching to weight the pre-reform patients to the patient composition in the post-reform period. We regress patient-level waiting times on patient characteristics and on a post-reform indicator interacted with the patient’s priority group. The analysis shows that the least-prioritised patients benefited most from both reforms. This was at the cost of longer waiting times for patients that should have been given higher priority in Norway, while Scotland’s high priority patients remained unaffected. This comparative analysis indicates that blanket waiting times initiatives may be more effective in reducing waiting times while preserving prioritisation between patients with different health needs.Waiting times; prioritisation; Norway; Scotland

DiSCmap : digitisation of special collections mapping, assessment, prioritisation. Final project report

Traditionally, digitisation has been led by supply rather than demand. While end users are seen as a priority they are not directly consulted about which collections they would like to have made available digitally or why. This can be seen in a wide range of policy documents throughout the cultural heritage sector, where users are positioned as central but where their preferences are assumed rather than solicited. Post-digitisation consultation with end users isequally rare. How are we to know that digitisation is serving the needs of the Higher Education community and is sustainable in the long-term? The 'Digitisation in Special Collections: mapping, assessment and prioritisation' (DiSCmap) project, funded by the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) and the Research Information Network (RIN), aimed to:- Identify priority collections for potential digitisation housed within UK Higher Education's libraries, archives and museums as well as faculties and departments.- Assess users' needs and demand for Special Collections to be digitised across all disciplines.- Produce a synthesis of available knowledge about users' needs with regard to usability and format of digitised resources.- Provide recommendations for a strategic approach to digitisation within the wider context and activity of leading players both in the public and commercial sector.The project was carried out jointly by the Centre for Digital Library Research (CDLR) and the Centre for Research in Library and Information Management (CERLIM) and has taken a collaborative approach to the creation of a user-driven digitisation prioritisation framework, encouraging participation and collective engagement between communities.Between September 2008 and March 2009 the DiSCmap project team asked over 1,000 users, including intermediaries (vocational users who take care of collections) and end users (university teachers, researchers and students) a variety of questions about which physical and digital Special Collections they make use of and what criteria they feel must be considered when selecting materials for digitisation. This was achieved through workshops, interviews and two online questionnaires. Although the data gathered from these activities has the limitation of reflecting only a partial view on priorities for digitisation - the view expressed by those institutions who volunteered to take part in the study - DiSCmap was able to develop:- a 'long list' of 945 collections nominated for digitisation both by intermediaries andend-users from 70 HE institutions (see p. 21);- a framework of user-driven prioritisation criteria which could be used to inform current and future digitisation priorities; (see p. 45)- a set of 'short lists' of collections which exemplify the application of user-driven criteria from the prioritisation framework to the long list (see Appendix X):o Collections nominated more than once by various groups of users.o Collections related to a specific policy framework, eg HEFCE's strategically important and vulnerable subjects for Mathematics, Chemistry and Physics.o Collections on specific thematic clusters.o Collections with highest number of reasons for digitisation

Allocating Vote: Biosecurity - Towards an "Economics-Based" Approach for Setting Priorities for the Importation of Risk Goods

The New Zealand government (through its agency the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, MAF) seeks to mitigate the potential negative impacts of importation through requiring commodities that may pose a risk to New Zealand's primary production systems, human health, indigenous flora, fauna or biodiversity to have an import health standard. Given, potential import opportunities exist in a wide variety of commodities from many different countries, the demand for import health standards far outweighs MAF's available resources to develop them. Therefore MAF must have a framework that prioritises which import health standards will be developed. This paper briefly presents the framework MAF is currently using to undertake the prioritisation of import health standards and then discusses how the current framework could evolve to become more 'economics-based'.Prioritisation, Biosecurity, multiple criteria decision making, Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety, Health Economics and Policy, International Relations/Trade,

Biodiversity protection prioritisation: a 25-year review

There are insufficient resources available globally, nationally and in many regions, to conserve all species, habitats and ecosystems. Prioritisation of targets or actions is a rational response to resource scarcity. Prioritisation can be directed at areas for reservation, species, habitats or ecosystems for management, and threat management actions. The scale at which prioritisation is applied is a fundamental decision, and the range includes global, national, regional and patch. Choice of scale influences availability of data and methods available for prioritisation. Since 1986 availability of data, computing power and expertise available have all improved globally and in many countries. Approaches to prioritisation have evolved during the past 25 years as researchers from several disciplines, including biology, ecology, decision sciences, mathematics and economics, have sought ways to achieve greater output from the resources available for biodiversity conservation. This review surveys the literature and groups prioritisation approaches into the following four categories: reserves and reserve selection, prescriptive costed biodiversity prioritisation, ranked costed biodiversity projects and contracted costed conservation actions. A concluding section considers the limitations of current prioritisation approaches and points to areas for further development