home
The purpose of this discussion is to broaden the dialog of how
to deliver the concepts, products, and results from Gap Analysis
to society. As more and more state GAP projects near completion,
the unavoidable question then becomes, "where does all this
data go from here?" I briefly discuss the results of a
review of some recent uses of GAP data to illuminate early uses
of GAP as a technical innovation and, in that light, present some
important tenets of the adoption and diffusion of technical
innovations. I present these concepts as a framework to help
those struggling with the issue of "implementing" GAP,
especially at the state level.
GAP is on the verge of either becoming irrelevant to society or
becoming an accepted basic tool for managing biological diversity
across the broad array of related programs and activities, both
private and public. The answer to which one of these will prevail
hinges on how we go about the task of providing for its adoption
and diffusion into society. Admittedly, we have until now had no
choice but to focus on the development of GAP's science and
technology, on the development of state projects, and on
maintaining support for state projects. It's now time to focus on
the long-term issues of how GAP can maximize its potential by
bringing new knowledge to policy. The only way to do this is by
providing individuals with information based on good science.
This discussion is concerned with the "providing" part
of this equation, or the delivery of GAP to society. The
"good science" part has been and will continue to be
dealt with as an integral part of GAP.
At this point, it's important to briefly reiterate the original
vision and direction of GAP, because in the early adoption and
diffusion of the concept among natural resources professionals,
the desire for biologically sound land cover data has often
overshadowed its deeper meaning, sometimes resulting in
misunderstandings of what GAP is intended to do.
Gap Analysis is a scientific method for identifying the degree to
which native animal species and natural communities are or are
not represented in our present-day mix of conservation lands.
Those species and communities not adequately represented in areas
that are being managed for the long-term maintenance of native
species constitute conservation "gaps." The purpose of
the Gap Analysis Program (GAP) is to provide broad geographic
information on the status of ordinary species (those not
threatened with extinction or naturally rare) and their habitats
in order to prevent future conservation crises. To achieve this,
maps of natural land cover, vertebrate species distributions, and
land management are required in specific formats. The method was
originally intended as a first, coarse-scale step in the process
of special management area identification and selection, rather
than special management area design. Maximizing the use of GAP
products for other uses is also important, and this has been
central to the GAP philosophy of partnerships.
As it has turned out, GAP has served as an "information
catalyst" around which natural resources professionals and
their institutions are coalescing naturally. I hypothesize that
this represents a major new phenomenon in resources management,
made up of three parts. One part is simply a manifestation of the
information age within the natural resources field - our newfound
ability to model and visualize the living world using digital
technology and telecommunications. A second part stems from
advances in science, resulting in a better understanding of how
the natural world works. For example, the mechanisms by which the
different levels of biotic organization are linked - species,
natural communities, and large landscapes - are much better
understood; GAP is a management tool evolving from this science.
Third, diminishing natural and fiscal resources are causing
natural resources professionals, thus their institutions, to work
together in a more dynamic fashion. This is greatly facilitated
by having a common information base and having the ability to
share their data. This emerging phenomenon fits, coincidentally,
with the present-day trend of decentralized government. If state-
level policy is to be effective, sound multi-state biogeographic
information will be critical.
A Profile of Some Uses of GAP Thus Far
Recently, I reviewed 47 cases where GAP data were used for a
specific purpose, and I stratified these uses into eight general
categories. Of these cases, GAP information was used most often
for direct land management purposes, such as siting a ski resort
on public land or revising wildlife management plans. In most of
the cases where GAP information was used for direct land
management purposes, its users were driven by an immediate need
for explicit landscape-level maps that provide contextual
information on a variety of themes (such as the distribution of
species or the distribution of habitat types relative to a
proposed action or resource use decision). This underscores the
demand and the need for large-area contextual biogeographic
information for diverse applications, thus the use of Gap
Analysis products for purposes beyond its original intended
purpose.
The review of case histories also underscores the imperative for
state GAP projects to track the uses of their data. If state
projects do not yet have a database for tracking how their data
are being used, they should construct one now. This topic should
also be the focus for discussion among state project cooperators.
Cooperators should agree to report back to the GAP principal
investigator on how the data are being used, either broadly (used
in everyday operations to maintain certain amounts of habitat
types in a shifting mosaic) or specifically (used to evaluate a
proposal to enhance bighorn sheep habitat across five townships).
One of the greatest problems, of course, is that data
dissemination is not funded under state projects' research work
orders. So, when a request comes in to a state GAP project, the
data are provided pro bono, usually at the expense of completing
the project itself. For many project staff, responding to
requests for data is a distraction from the work of producing the
data, and it is an unfunded demand. What is the solution?
For now, we ask that the project personnel respond to requests as
best they can. Staff should make sure that the person requesting
the information realizes and appreciates that the work is in
progress and that because of this there are limitations to the
degree of response. At the same time, please do not just turn a
request down flat. Get those requesting the information to
understand the present situation. If the data they are asking for
is genuinely not ready for release, explain the details to them
so that they understand, while giving them a picture of what is
to come.
The question is often asked, "Where does GAP end?" The
NBS role is to work in partnership with other organizations to
develop, interpret, and disseminate scientific information about
the nation's biological resources. How all of this is manifested
is still developing. It is safe to say, though, that much will
depend on the state cooperators.
Eventually, we will find permanent homes for state- level data as
both dissemination and feedback nodes. Although the role that the
NBS plays in the long term is still developing, there is promise
in its incipient National Biological Information Infrastructure
(NBII) effort, as well as its State Partnerships program, both of
which are within the Division of Information and Technology. As
of now, most of us involved with GAP envision state-level
information nodes and continued research and development
activities among the state project cooperators. Additionally, the
EROS Data Center will serve as the long-term federal-level
archive for GAP and MRLC data. Ultimately, exactly how the
results from GAP are disseminated at the state level will depend
largely on the ongoing cohesion of state agencies, non-government
organizations, and universities within the states.
Within the NBS, GAP is one of the few programs that flows through
each of the three operational divisions In this sense, GAP is
contributing to the functional linkages among the NBS divisions.
There are still unsolved structural issues at the state level,
such as where GAP data will live, who will pay, and exactly how
updates will be done. These issues should be approached as the
problems of adoption and diffusion of technical innovations.
Because the degree to which GAP becomes useful to society is at
stake, and because many who have been focused on the data
development phase of GAP are not familiar with how technical
innovations (GAP) spread through society, Below is a review of
some of the basic concepts as articulated by Rogers (1983). These
principles are the basis for the successful agricultural
extension model, and they need to be the basis for any GAP
extension work.