Capacity development is critical to long-term conservation success, yet we lack a robust and rigorous understanding of how well its effects are being evaluated. A comprehensive summary of who is monitoring and evaluating capacity development interventions, what is being evaluated and how, would help in the development of evidence-based guidance to inform design and implementation decisions for future capacity development interventions and evaluations of their effectiveness. We built an evidence map by reviewing peer-reviewed and grey literature published since 2000, to identify case studies evaluating capacity development interventions in biodiversity conservation and natural resource management. We used inductive and deductive approaches to develop a coding strategy for studies that met our criteria, extracting data on the type of capacity development intervention, evaluation methods, data and analysis types, categories of outputs and outcomes assessed, and whether the study had a clear causal model and/or used a systems approach. We found that almost all studies assessed multiple outcome types: most frequent was change in knowledge, followed by behaviour, then attitude. Few studies evaluated conservation outcomes. Less than half included an explicit causal model linking interventions to expected outcomes. Half of the studies considered external factors that could influence the efficacy of the capacity development intervention, and few used an explicit systems approach. We used framework synthesis to situate our evidence map within the broader literature on capacity development evaluation. Our evidence map (including a visual heat map) highlights areas of low and high representation in investment in research on the evaluation of capacity development.

Contemporary conservation professionals are part of a workforce focused on overcoming complex challenges under great time pressure. The characteristics of conservation work, and in particular the evolving demands placed on the workforce, mean that to remain effective these professionals need to enhance their skills and abilities continually. Currently, there are no sector-wide guidelines to promote systematic professional development that addresses both individual and organizational learning. This study builds upon existing knowledge from other sectors by examining professional development in conservation through an in-depth qualitative thematic analysis of interviews with 22 conservation professionals, resulting in an effectiveness framework for professional development in the conservation sector. Our findings indicate how individuals’ motivation to learn, proactivity, open-mindedness towards alternative information and views were considered preconditions for effective professional development. A balance between organizational goals and career ambitions was found essential to maintain this motivation to learn and vital for staff retention and preservation of institutional knowledge. Professional development plans may help distinguish between individual career aspirations and organizational objectives and aid a discussion between staff and management on how to balance the two. Leaders have the opportunity to remove barriers to effective professional development. We discuss solutions to overcome specific barriers, to promote an inclusive approach for diverse learners through provision of opportunities, effective learning design, and resource distribution for professional development. This effectiveness framework can be used by conservationists and conservation organizations to plan and decide on professional development.

Conservation professionals face cognitively and emotionally demanding tasks and a wide range of working conditions, including high levels of uncertainty (e.g. the socio-political contexts in which they must function, possible long hours and isolation from friends and family). Resilience (i.e. positive adaptation to professional challenges) can help individuals thrive in their roles. We interviewed 22 conservationists with professional experience working in low-income countries with high biodiversity and explored what helped and what hindered them in their work. We used thematic analysis to identify factors related to positive and negative psychological states and strategies to promote resilience at work. The results revealed factors that were associated with positive psychological states, including achievements and recognition for work. Organizational policies and administration, especially perceived unfairness regarding salaries, recruitment policies and promotion, were associated with negative psychological states, as were other factors related to the job context. Respondents shared their professional resilience strategies such as aligning work with one's values, and personal reflection and goal setting. We recommend that organizations support their employees in the process of building resilience by addressing basic needs and motivational factors.

South-east Asia is home to exceptional biodiversity, but threats to vertebrate species are disproportionately high in this region. The IUCN Species Survival Commission Asian Species Action Partnership aims to avert species extinctions. Strengthening individual and organizational capacity is key to achieving long-term, sustainable conservation impact, and is a core strategic intervention for the Partnership. To look at the needs and opportunities for developing capacity for species conservation in South-east Asia, we undertook a needs assessment with organizations implementing species conservation within this region. We conducted a review of available training opportunities, mapping them against a list of identified competences needed for species conservation to determine gaps in current training. Our assessments revealed an imbalance in the focus of training opportunities vs the actual competences needed for effective species conservation, and that training opportunities within South-east Asia are limited in number and highly competitive. These findings corroborate other similar reviews, particularly on capacity gaps in the Global South. We discuss the implications of our review and use the findings to generate recommendations.

Global perspectives on the pathways for developing capacity for conservation remain limited. Hindering the robustness of solutions is a dearth of opportunities to foster discussion and dialogue among capacity development practitioners, academics, partners, beneficiaries and donors. Additionally, little is known about donor perspectives on capacity development, and about pathways to developing a more sustainable investment in capacity development for conservation. The 2019 Capacity Building for Conservation Conference in London, UK, provided a unique opportunity to convene more than 150 capacity development practitioners from the global conservation community. The Conference included structured opportunities to hear donor perspectives on strengthening capacity development. Session leaders took detailed notes to document donor perspectives and the discussions around them. A thematic analysis of this empirical evidence resulted in the identification of four key themes with corresponding recommendations, consisting of (1) collaborative design of capacity development initiatives, (2) monitoring and evaluation, (3) longer-term and flexible investments, and (4) building strong relationships between donors and grantees. Given the Convention on Biological Diversity is currently drafting the long-term strategic framework for capacity development post-2020, and global calls to protect significant portions of our land- and seascapes, our recommendations are timely and may inform a way forward.