Allocating Resources Between Taking Action, Assessing Status, and Measuring Effectiveness of Conservation Actions

Salzer, Daniel; Salafsky, Nick

doi:10.3375/0885-8608(2006)26[310:arbtaa]2.0.co;2

Cited by 44 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The development and long-term implementation of a sound monitoring and evaluation system are often believed to be only possible at the expense of other urgent activities due to a lack of resources. Available resources need to be allocated strategically to address the most pressing site-specific conservation needs (Salzer and Salafsky, 2006;Marsh et al, 2007). The public provision of data that are collected at site will then surely lag behind more urgent allegiances.…”

Section: Lack Of Personnel and Technical Capacity (Unpublished Or Nonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multi-level discrepancies with sharing data on protected areas: What we have and what we need for the global village

Bertzky

Stoll-Kleemann

2009

Journal of Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Lack Of Personnel and Technical Capacity (Unpublished Or Nonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multi-level discrepancies with sharing data on protected areas: What we have and what we need for the global village

Bertzky

Stoll-Kleemann

2009

Journal of Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Because the threat was so clearly identified, projects were effective in spending most of their resources taking action. It would not have made sense to spend vast amounts of resources on evaluation, although project managers might do well to periodically obtain satellite imagery of the area to track whether illegal roads are being built into the park (example based on Salzer and Salafsky 2006).…”

Section: Monitoring and Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Debt-for-Nature Swaps in Action: Two Case Studies in Peru

Gockel¹,

Gray²

2011

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Debt-for-nature swaps are a major source of global funding for nature conservation and have been touted as a win-win solution to the problem of how to finance conservation. This paper examines how the United States' debt-for-nature-swap program, the Tropical Forest Conservation Act, works in the field. We provide an introduction to the technical aspects of the debt-for-nature swap mechanism, then describe how the program operates on the ground, using the United States-Peru swap as an example. We focus on two case studies that are largely representative of the Tropical Forest Conservation Act's work in Peru: 1) ProNaturaleza's project in the Pacaya Samiria National Reserve, and 2) five distinct projects centered around reducing illegal logging in and around Alto Purús National Park. We explore the range of programs financed through swaps, as well as whether debt-for-nature swap projects meet their goals of strengthening civil society and increasing local capacity. We also discuss the efficacy of debt-for-nature swap monitoring, which tends to privilege fiscal evaluations of area protected over direct conservation outcomes. Although Tropical Forest Conservation Act projects may well have conservation effects, the current methods of measuring success do not reflect the types of conservation impacts of Tropical Forest Conservation Act projects.

show abstract

“…According to Salzer & Salafsky (2006) there are two major reasons for undertaking monitoring and evaluation. The first is to assess the status of biodiversity, and the second is to measure the effectiveness of management actions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Species prioritization for monitoring and management in regional multiple species conservation plans

Regan

Hierl

Franklin

et al. 2007

Diversity and Distributions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Successful conservation plans are not solely achieved by acquiring optimally designed reserves. Ongoing monitoring and management of the biodiversity in those reserves is an equally important, but often neglected or poorly executed, part of the conservation process. In this paper we address one of the first and most important steps in designing a monitoring program – deciding what to monitor. We present a strategy for prioritizing species for monitoring and management in multispecies conservation plans. We use existing assessments of threatened status, and the degree and spatial and temporal extent of known threats to link the prioritization of species to the overarching goals and objectives of the conservation plan. We consider both broad and localized spatial scales to capture the regional conservation context and the practicalities of local management and monitoring constraints. Spatial scales that are commensurate with available data are selected. We demonstrate the utility of this strategy through application to a set of 85 plants and animals in an established multispecies conservation plan in San Diego County, California, USA. We use the prioritization to identify the most prominent risk factors and the habitats associated with the most threats to species. The protocol highlighted priorities that had not previously been identified and were not necessarily intuitive without systematic application of the criteria; many high‐priority species have received no monitoring attention to date, and lower‐priority species have. We recommend that in the absence of clear focal species, monitoring threats in highly impacted habitats may be a way to circumvent the need to monitor all the targeted species.

show abstract

Allocating Resources Between Taking Action, Assessing Status, and Measuring Effectiveness of Conservation Actions

Cited by 44 publications

References 1 publication

Multi-level discrepancies with sharing data on protected areas: What we have and what we need for the global village

Multi-level discrepancies with sharing data on protected areas: What we have and what we need for the global village

Debt-for-Nature Swaps in Action: Two Case Studies in Peru

Species prioritization for monitoring and management in regional multiple species conservation plans

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About