Reconciling Expert Opinions: A Path to Consistent Ecosystem Viability Assessments

The conservation of threatened ecosystems often hinges on expert judgment, yet divergent perspectives among specialists can lead to inconsistent decisions [2,3]. In a recent study, Dorrough et al. [4] examined how variations in expert opinions impact assessments of ecosystem viability and collapse, using Australia’s critically endangered Box-Gum Grassy Woodlands (BGGW) as a case study.