摘要：Collaborative Adaptive Management (CAM) program stakeholders informally assess program progress throughsubjective assessments regularly. Each stakeholder does this by individually selecting objective progress indicators based ontheir needs, values, and preferences. They do this even though there may be a stakeholder group agreed-on set of progressobjectives. Individual stakeholder indicators may be a subset of the group set or outside of the agreed-on set. This is becausemany factors influence behavior, and stakeholders may act differently in group settings as opposed to individual settings. Theseassessments can provide valuable information about stakeholder needs that are not being met, and potential motivations forstakeholders circumventing a CAM process. They can also provide information, beyond the normal measures, about theimportance of system components and relationships that are keys to progress and action. Progress is important to continuedsupport for these publically funded CAM programs. The Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program (AMP) and theMissouri River Recovery Program (MRRP) were used to explore the idea of integrating stakeholder assessments into CAMprogress measurement. A study using a framework with AMP stakeholders was conducted to measure progress, whereas examplesfrom MRRP were used to explain how the framework could be used to understand real scenarios of stakeholder behavior relatedto unmet needs and individual measures of progress. Integration of stakeholder attitudes and behavior in CAM progress evaluationcan yield important results. Stakeholders' attitudes and corresponding behaviors can affect a CAM program's progress. Gatheringdata on their attitudes can help decision makers understand stakeholders' perceptions of progress and avoid potential blocks toprogress. There are differences among stakeholders in the indicators they consider as relevant to the assessment of progress.Elucidating these differences can provide useful information about system components and relationships that are important topublic support of a CAM program and progress. One of the sources of differences in progress assessments among stakeholderscomes from their diverse perceptions about the desired and current states of the social–ecological systems. Stakeholder behaviorcan be inconsistent between group and individual settings. Individually they may make plans, based on their assessments, thatdo not conform to the group plan because of their unique interests and preferences. The results of this study need to be furthertested. The framework should be used through multiple cycles to determine whether the information gathered with this approachresults in additional progress as compared with past approaches. In particular, it would be helpful to test whether gathering suchinformation resulted in a decrease in stakeholders electing to go outside of the CAM process to get their needs met
关键词：adaptive management; Adaptive Management Working Group; AMP; AMWG; attitudes; behavior; collaborative;adaptive management; Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program; Missouri River Recovery Program; MRRP; progress;stakeholders
