Defining and Measuring Success in Conservation

Calibrating conservation: new tools for measuring success

“…The CCF framework and evaluation tool help users to identify and assess intermediate or "key" outcomes that precede, and may be easier to measure than, changes in threat or biological status. Results from a preliminary trial of these tools (Kapos et al in press) suggest that key outcomes are useful predictors of changes to the probability of persistence of conservation targets (conservation effect), and that they perform this function far better than commonly reported measures of project implementation. Thus, the CCF tools can help practitioners to identify the likely impacts of their actions, despite constraints of time frames and scarce resources, even for projects still in progress and for interventions such as capacity building or policy‐related work where biological impacts are not commonly measured.…”

The Conservation Impact of the American Society of Primatologists' Conservation Small Grant Program

“…A final lesson learned concerns the important issue of hesitancy in reporting project shortcomings. Admittedly, we were surprised that so many of the survey respondents in our study were willing to discuss the specific factors that impeded success of their projects, given the general reluctance in the overall conservation community to share less successful experiences (Kapos et al 2010). We should encourage and enable scholars and practitioners alike to share their successes as well their failures (see, for example, Webber et al 2007), as such information is critical for the design, implementation, and assessment of future primate conservation endeavors.…”

“…While improved status of the target species may be the ultimate outcome (and measure) of the conservation success (impact) of a project, conservation practitioners and scholars acknowledge that such a result often requires considerable time depth as "biological outcomes often respond slowly to interventions" (Ferraro and Pattanayk 2006;p.486). Accordingly, evaluation efforts should also focus on basal outcomes (for example, enhanced conservation skills of field assistants in a capacitybuilding project) that can result in intermediate or "key" outcomes (for example, improved quantity or quality of conservation action as a result of capacity building) (Kapos et al 2010). Intermediate outcomes are typically easier to measure than changes in the target species' status and the threats it faces, and have been found to be useful predictors of the likelihood of the species' persistence (Kapos et al 2008(Kapos et al , 2010.…”

“…Accordingly, evaluation efforts should also focus on basal outcomes (for example, enhanced conservation skills of field assistants in a capacitybuilding project) that can result in intermediate or "key" outcomes (for example, improved quantity or quality of conservation action as a result of capacity building) (Kapos et al 2010). Intermediate outcomes are typically easier to measure than changes in the target species' status and the threats it faces, and have been found to be useful predictors of the likelihood of the species' persistence (Kapos et al 2008(Kapos et al , 2010. Although our results indicate that ASP funded projects have largely produced basal outcomes, some intermediate outcomes are also apparent (for example, increased enforcement efforts and the application of research results in conservation practice such as through the building of habitat corridors to improve dispersal).…”

Practitioner and scientist perceptions of successful amphibian conservation

“…These are categorized in Kapos et al. (, , ) as species and site management, sustainable resource use, education and awareness, capacity building, research, and government policy. From the same list, respondents then picked their top 3 statements, thus providing a measure of popularity.…”