Interfacing Science and Management for the Nylsvley Nature Reserve

Interfacing Science and Management for the Nylsvley Nature Reserve Regina Xavier Bestbier A dissertation submitted to the Faculty of Science, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, for the Degree of Master of Science. Johannesburg, August 1998 DECLARATION I declare that this dissertation is my own, unaiderl work. It is being submitted for the degree of Master of Science at the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. It has not been submitted before for any degree or examination in any other University. Regina Xavier Bestbier 11til day of August, 199& Ii ABSTRACT Scientists possess knowledge and access to information that is critical to the management of natural resources, yet all too often this information is not effectively transferred and integrated into the management process. This lack of integration of scientific information into conservation management is a result of the barriers that exist between scientists and managers. Differences in the goals and reward systems of managers and scientists lead to managers feeling that scientists do not produce the "goods" that they require, Wh;l'! scientists claim that managers do not provide the questions for which they require answers. There is also a lack of forward thinking, goal-orientated management. As a result much of conservation management relies on irtuinvc, ad hoc decision-making which leads to It problem-by-problem curative approach (cf. adaptive management) as well as a lack of accountability and evaluation. The thesis of this study is that to overcome barriers between scientists and managers an interface must be developed between the two groups based on sound technology transfer principles (product development, transfer processes, consensus building, feedback, form and function) an,~ three primary elements - processes (which regulate the functioning of the interface), products (which are developed within the interface) and people (who 'drive' the interface), 'The overall aim of this study was to develop an interface to overcome barriers between scientists and managers at the Nylsvley Nature Reserve, Northern Province. Although much scientific information is availabJe for Nylsvley, it was not being transferred effectively to the managers. 1nere were no explicit protocols in place that identified operational goals to achieve the "vision" for the reserve. Also, there was very little 'organisational memory' to enable decision making at Nylsvley because of high staff turnover and poor information records. The interface developed in this study took the form of an 'objectives hierarchy'. The objectives hierarchy was developed to enable conservation organisations to translate policy (vision) into focused, purposeful action (operational goals), thus ensuring thatthe management iii is more goal orientated and providing scientists with the managers information requirements. This enables the scientists to provide the information that managers require, ir :le format that is most useful to them. Linked to the development of the objectives hierarchy for the Nylsvley Nature Reserve was the need for a mechanism to ensure 'organisational memory', Organisational memory is necessary to ensure continuity in the conservation management decision making environment, Thus a product from the interface was the Nylsvley Management Information System, a prototype computer program which ensures that the managers have access to information relevant for decision-making. Fundamental to the development of the interrace for Nylsvley was the development of informal collegia (networks), with contact inside and outside the conservation organisation. These informal collegia were necessary for overcoming bureaucratic resistence to change, and fc: building mutual respect and trust which was imperative for the development of a successful interface. iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 'Through wisdom a house is built; ~u understanding U Is established, D" '-now/edge the rooms .refilled w th all precious and pleasant riches: u Prcveebs 24:3-1, I would like to express my sincire thanks and appreciation to the following people and organisations: Prof Kevin Rogers, my supervisor, for his unfailing support, wisdom and friendship in "coaching" me, Stuart Bestbier for being a great sounding board and for his understanding and love, Numerous members from the Department of Agriculture, Land and Environment of the Northern Province for their support of this study, in particular Lizanne Nel, Johan Kruger and Rudolph de Vas, Prof Richard Pienaar, Prof Chris James and Dr Robbie Robinson - my postgraduate committee, for their advice and assistance, Dr Harry Biggs of tho Kruger National Park for his enthusiasm, advice and assistance, Dr John Fletcher and Craig Nicholson for their generous help and advice regarding things of a computer nature, The Foundation for Research Development and the University of the Witwatersrand for their financial support of the study, My parents, Aida and Jose de Ornelas, for their many sacrifices and support throughout my studies, and The Lord for giving me the grace and perseverance to complete this work. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract . iii Acknowledgements v Table of Contents vi List of Figures , x List of Tables xi Chapter One. Introduction and Approach 12 1.1 Introduction " 12 1.2 Objectives and Approach 13 1.3 Structure of thesis 16 Chapter Two. Barriers and Bridges between Scientists and Managers in Conservation 17 2.1 Introduction 17 2.2 A contrast of the different "worlds" of science and management . 18 2.2.1 The different cultures 19 2.2.2 How can sciencecontribute to conservation management? 24 2.2.3 Conservationmanagementcontext 26 Ecologicalparadigms and management approaches 26 Adaptive management 29 Organisationaldynamics 32 The role of individuals in management 34 2.3 What are the "barriers" between scientists and managers? 36 2.4 Creating bridges to overcomethe barriers between scientists and managers 38 2.4.1 Scientific brokers . .. 39 2.4.2 The role of scientists wi.hin conservation organisations 39 2.4.3 Networking , 40 2.4.4 Better science- better impact 41 2.4.5 Modelling , 41 2.4.5 A technologicalinterface 42 2.5 A structured interfaceas a bridge between scientists and managers 43 2.5.1 Processes within the interface 45 2.5.2 Products of the interface 45 2.5.3 People of the interface. .. 46 2.6 The next step. .. 48 Chapter Three. NylsvleyNature Reserve: A Case Study 49 3.1 Introduction 49 3.2 Approach used to identifybarriers at Nylsvley 49 3.3 The Nyl River System. .. 50 3.4 The evolution ofNylsvley Nature Reserve's management and research 52 3.1.1 The innovativephase. .. 52 3.4.2 The consolidationphase - the 70's and the 80's 53 3.4.3 "Creative" destruction - the turbulent 90's 55 3.4.4 Renewal into the 21st century? 58 3.5 Barriers and bridges at Nylsvley . 58 3.5.1 Barriers. _ 58 3.5.2 Potential bridges to overcome the barriers 59 Chapter Four. Protocols and Procedures for Developing an ObjectivesHierarchy 60 4.1 Introduction. 60 4.2 Developing the protocols and procedures . 60 4.2.1 The participants 61 4.2.2 Preparing for the workshop 61 4.2.3 TIleworkshop process 62 4.2.4 The workshop "products" . .. 66 4.3 Protocol for developingan objectives hierarchy 67 4.4 TIle procedure 74 4.5 Protocol for a goal maintenance system 77 4.6 Conclusion 80 vii References " 129 Personal Communications 142 Appendix A. Interviewees 143 AppendixB. Participants of the Workshop held in 1996 144 Appendix C. Workshop Agenda . , 14(' Appendix D, Red Data Waterfowl ..................................•.. 148 Appendix E, Nylsvley Management: Information System: User's Manual. 150 AppendixF. Setup disks for the Nylsvley Management Information System. 151 ix References . • . .. 129 Personal Communications 142 Appendix A. Interviewees . , ...•. 143 AppendixB. Participants of the Workshop held in 1996 .. ,................. 144 AppendixC. Workshop Agenda 146 AppendixD. Red Data Waterfowl 148 Apperdix E. Nylsvley Management Information System: User's Manual. 150 Appendix F, Setup disks for the NylsvJey Management Informar JII System. 151 ix LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1 A conceptual diagram illustrating the objectives of this study, how they are related and the approaches taken fa achieve them 15 Figure 2.1 A contrast of the moces of operation in the science of ecology and the practice of conservation . .................•........ 21 Figure 2.2 A contrast of tile "old" and "new" ecological paradigms 28 Figure 2.3 Holling's four-phase adaptive cycle that typify human organisations established to manage resources , 32 Figure 2.4 A conceptual model of the interface between scientists and managers .. 44 Figure 3.1 The Nyl River floodplain, its tributaries, towns and the reserve 51 Figure 4.1 Boardroom layout for conducting long sessions in workshops 63 Figure 4.2 Translating an organisation's vision into operational goals 67 Figure 4.3 Contrasting negotiation strategies 76 Figure 4.4 An idealised goal maintenance system 77 Figure 4.5 Achieving the goals 78 Figure 4.6 Auditing and revising the goals 79 Figure5.l Objectives hierarchy for the Nylsvley Nature Reserve 103 Figure 5.2 Conservation objectives and sub-objectives for Nylsvley Nature Reserve 104 FigureS.3 Research and Education objectives and sub-objectives for Nylsvley Nature Reserve. • . 105 Figure 5.4 Ecotourism, Resource Use and Administrative objectives and sub-objectives for Nylsvley Nature Reserve , 106 Figure 6.1 The Nyl River Floodplain form with examples of some of the types of nodes and links used in the NMIS . 116 Figure 6.2 Elements used for backward and forward navigation in the Nl\.fIS ... 120 x LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1 Contrasting the cultures of ecologists and conservation managers ..... 20 Table 5.1 Initial evaluation of'the strengths ofNylsvley Nature Reserve and Nyl River Floodplain ............................•.............. 93 Table 5.2 Determinants of, and constraints (inside the organisation) and threats (outside the organisation) to, the strengths of the Nylsvley Nature Reserve .... 98 xi CHAPTER ONE Introduction 1.1 Introduction The science of ecology has great potential for generating broad and fundamental understanding about complex natural phenomena as it is an integrative science (Likens, 1995).

Load more