It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Individual-based models (IBMs) are increasingly used in marine conservation research, making this is an ideal time to assess IBM use in marine policy. IBMs can contribute important information to marine management and policy questions, as they offer complex methods of understanding ecosystems and animal behaviour, by allowing for heterogeneity in both individuals and environments. A review of 108 international peer-review publications utilizing marine IBMs was conducted using Web of Science (WoS). It was determined that 55% of the WoS articles claimed that the IBMs were relevant or important to marine conservation policy or management. A relevant English-language policy document was located for 83% of the IBMs, but only 32% were cited, while 85% of the same policy documents cited a different, non-IBM, modelling method. A separate survey of 175 policy documents from the Government of Canada was conducted. Of the 60 that contained citations, zero documents cited an IBM, while 75% cited a different modelling method. Of 407 webpages reviewed from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the New Zealand Department of Conservation, and the UK Government website, only 4% referenced IBMs. This research demonstrates that, despite claims of usefulness by researchers, IBMs are not used to inform policy, while other model methods are commonly cited. Modellers should not assume that their model will inherently be useful for policy and should instead ensure that they are: 1) addressing a policy need; and 2) making the information accessible to policymakers by crafting a communication plan and/or joining a relevant boundary organization.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details

1 Department of Environmental Science and Policy, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, USA
2 Department of Computational & Data Sciences, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, USA
3 College of Education and Human Development, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, USA
4 Centre for Ecology & Conservation, Penryn Campus, University of Exeter, Cornwall, UK