34 – Organisational perspectives on threatened species monitoring^415specificity of solutions needed. Summarising the strengths and weaknesses and
their relative importance across different programs can help to find practical
solutions and develop general principles for the design and implementation of
threatened species monitoring programs.
By understanding the range of issues encountered in planning and
implementing monitoring programs and their integration into broader
management and policy contexts, more focused efforts can be made to improve
threatened species monitoring programs. This chapter summarises a variety of
perspectives on the importance of threatened species monitoring, highlights key
aspects of decision making, processes and outcomes, and describes effective
elements and the major constraints of monitoring programs.
Methods
The lead authors (NR, BS, SL, DL) designed a 14-question, short-answer response
questionnaire that was sent to a targeted group of practitioners (the co-authors)
from a range of organisations. These were senior or well-established practitioners
from high-profile organisations directly involved with threatened species
monitoring programs that covered a diversity of taxa (e.g. birds, mammals, plants,
fish and reptiles) and environments (terrestrial, aquatic and marine). Practitioners
were grouped according to the type of organisation with which they were most
strongly affiliated. Seven practitioners were from ‘management agencies’, including
government agencies and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) that manage
reserves. Another seven were affiliated with ‘academic institutions’, and the
remaining four were from ‘non-management agencies’ that included non-
managing NGOs and consultancies.
One of the lead authors (NR) reviewed all responses to the questionnaire,
highlighting key points. From this process, four dominant themes relating to the
design and implementation of monitoring programs emerged. These were: (1)
purpose of threatened species monitoring; (2) decisions on which species to
monitor; (3) integration with management; and (4) program development and
implementation. These themes ref lect questions asked in the questionnaire with
some modifications. For example, some questions were grouped, and others were
not included because the information contained therein was considered less
informative. Not all practitioners answered all questions (responses were optional),
so the sample size varied between questions.
Within each theme, responses were summarised within the organisational
category of the respondent. These summaries were tested with co-authors for their
accuracy and then refined. In one case (Theme 1), categories were redefined and
data re-analysed based on feedback. This method, coined the Delphi method,
allows individuals to respond to questions, without inf luence by others; responses