An important part of conservation practice is the empirical evaluation of program and policy impacts. Understanding why conservation programs succeed or fail is essential for designing cost-effective initiatives and for improving the livelihoods of natural resource users. The evidence we seek can be generated with modern impact evaluation designs. Such designs measure causal effects of specific interventions by comparing outcomes with the interventions to outcomes in credible counterfactual scenarios. Good designs also identify the conditions under which the causal effect arises. Despite a critical need for empirical evidence, conservation science has been slow to adopt these impact evaluation designs. We identify reasons for the slow rate of adoption and provide suggestions for mainstreaming impact evaluation in nature conservation.

No abstract

-Honey bee colony losses are a major concern in the USA and across the globe. Long-term data on losses are critical for putting yearly losses in context. for the whole year. While total winter loss was one of the lowest reported in 8 years, 66 % of all beekeepers had higher losses than they deemed acceptable.honey bee / survey / mortality / colony losses / USA

Managed honey bee colony losses are of concern in the USA and globally. This survey, which documents the rate of colony loss in the USA during the 2015-2016 season, is the tenth report of winter losses, and the fifth of summer and annual losses. Our results summarize the responses of 5725 valid survey respondents, who collectively managed 427,652 colonies on 1 October 2015, an estimated 16.1% of all managed colonies in the USA. Responding beekeepers reported a total annual colony loss of 40.5% [95% CI 39.8-41.1%] between 1 April 2015 and 1 April 2016. Total winter colony loss was 26.9% [95% CI 26.4-27.4%] while total summer colony loss was 23.6% [95% CI 23.0-24.1%], making this the third consecutive year when summer losses have approximated to winter losses. Across all operation types, 32.3% of responding beekeepers reported no winter losses. Whilst the loss rate in the winter of 2015-2016 was amongst the lowest winter losses recorded over the ten years this survey has been conducted, 59.0% (n = 3378) of responding beekeepers had higher losses than they deemed acceptable. Encuesta nacional 2015-2016 sobre pé rdidas anuales de colonias de la abeja de la miel manejada en los EE.UU Las pérdidas de colonias de abejas manejadas son preocupantes en los Estados Unidos y en el mundo. Esta encuesta, que documenta la tasa de pérdida de colonias en los EE.UU. durante la temporada 2015-2016, es el décimo informe de las pérdidas de invierno, y el quinto de las pérdidas de verano y anuales. Nuestros resultados resumen las respuestas de 5.725 encuestados válidos, quienes colectivamente manejaron 427.652 colonias el 1 de octubre de 2015, un 16.1% de todas las colonias manejadas en los Estados Unidos. Los apicultores respondieron con una pérdida total de colonias anual del 40.5% [IC del 95%: 39.8-41.1%] entre el 1 de abril de 2015 y el 1 de abril de 2016. La pérdida total de colonias de invierno fue del 26.9% [IC del 95%: 26.4-27.4%], y las de verano del 23.6% [IC del 95%: 23.0-24.1%], lo que lo convierte en el tercer año consecutivo en que las pérdidas del verano se han aproximado a las pérdidas de invierno. En todos los tipos de operaciones, el 32.3% de los apicultores que respondieron no reportaron pérdidas de invierno. Mientras que la tasa de pérdidas en el invierno de 2015-2016 fue una de las pérdidas de invierno más bajas registradas durante los diez años que se han realizado esta encuesta, el 59.0% (n = 3.378) de los apicultores que respondieron tuvieron mayores pérdidas de las que consideraban aceptables.

No abstract