Outcomes, not implementation, predict conservation success

Kapos, Valerie; Balmford, Andrew; Aveling, Rosalind; Bubb, Philip; Carey, Peter; Entwistle, Abigail; Mulliken, Teresa; Safford, Roger; Stattersfield, Alison J.; Walpole, Matt; Manica, Andrea

doi:10.1017/s0030605309990275

Cited by 88 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…et al, 2007). The unexpected outcomes between fox presence and malleefowl outcomes reinforce the importance of analysing and synthesizing existing data on changes in population or abundance for the threatened species or ecosystem of interest, rather than measuring the level of threat reduction achieved or actions implemented, assuming follow-on conservation benefits (Kapos et al, 2009).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unexpected outcomes of invasive predator control: the importance of evaluating conservation management actions

Walsh

Wilson

Benshemesh

et al. 2012

Animal Conservation

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Decisions regarding the implementation of conservation management actions should be based on the effectiveness of past investments. However, because of limited evaluation of existing data, actions may be prescribed without evidence of producing a beneficial conservation outcome. We analysed empirical data, collected over 23 years across southern Australia, on the impact of fox baiting on malleefowl to determine its effectiveness. We employed data from extensive monitoring surveys to evaluate the observed relationships between investment in fox control, fox baiting intensity, fox presence and two alternative measures of the malleefowl's response: the number of breeding pairs and population growth. This study is the first to quantify the return on investment from fox control in a conservation context. We discovered there is limited quantitative evidence for a benefit of fox baiting on malleefowl, despite it being the main management action implemented for this nationally threatened, well-studied and iconic species. We found that fox baiting did not significantly decrease the presence of foxes and fox presence was positively correlated with malleefowl conservation. Malleefowl breeding population size increased with investment in baiting, although this relationship depended on the number of years the site had been baited. Nonetheless, most sites had a negative relationship between investment and breeding population. In contrast, malleefowl population growth did not benefit from baiting, suggesting that fox baiting is generally not a cost-effective management action for the conservation of this species. This study provides a powerful example of why management decisions should be based on evidence, rather than ecological intuition. Even though the malleefowl is one of the best-monitored species of conservation concern in Australia, we are still uncertain how to cost-effectively manage this species. We emphasize the urgent need to assess what data we have and determine which species and what actions are most in need of evaluation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unexpected outcomes of invasive predator control: the importance of evaluating conservation management actions

Walsh

Wilson

Benshemesh

et al. 2012

Animal Conservation

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the absence of clear and measurable objectives, it is impossible to evaluate the degree to which this is achieved. Indeed, some studies have suggested that the setting of clear programme outcomes is a better indicator of the likelihood of the project's success than the degree to which its planned activities are implemented (Forgie et al 2001;Kapos et al 2009;Biddle & Koontz 2014). Although this issue has been reported in reviews of community-led conservation initiatives (e.g.…”

Section: Evaluating Success and Performance Of Projectsmentioning

confidence: 81%

“…However, a number of authors have cautioned against the use of outputs as indicators of a project's success unless there are robust causative mechanisms linking those outputs to desired outcomes (Tear et al 2005;Ferraro & Pattanayak 2006;Thomas & Koontz 2011). A general focus on outputs without evidence of these links assumes that output production will lead to positive environmental change, yet the degree of implementation of project actions can be a poor indicator of success (Kapos et al 2009). Where conservation is output-driven, there can be significant declines in levels of environmental protection compared with programmes where outcome-driven performance targets are used (Svancara et al 2005).…”

Section: Specifying Outcomes Vs Outputsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, Biddle and Koontz (2014) found that setting clear, outcomedriven goals may be a useful proxy measure of performance for collaborative resource management programmes. Furthermore, the setting of, and agreement of all partners on, programme outcomes as success criteria is an essential component of effective programme design (Kleiman et al 2000;Kapos et al 2009;Galbraith et al 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Shared visions: can community conservation projects’ outcomes inform on their likely contributions to national biodiversity goals?

Jones¹,

Kirk²

2018

NZ J Ecol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In New Zealand, as in other developed nations, community-led conservation groups work to maintain and restore ecosystems and conserve indigenous biodiversity. These groups receive support in the form of materials, technical advice and funding from central and local government and non-governmental organisations, who are required increasingly to demonstrate delivery of benefits or conservation returns on investments. However, there is little empirical evidence for the objective evaluation of the effectiveness of community-based programmes in achieving national conservation outcomes. In the absence of such evidence, we investigated whether information on community groups' desired outcomes, gleaned from a sample of applications to a major national fund, could indicate their likely contributions to the outcomes in the national New Zealand Biodiversity Strategy. We assessed groups' outcomes in terms of their alignment with those in the strategy and against SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound) project evaluation criteria. Of 89 individual project proposals, 53% contained one or more identifiable outcomes that were aligned to the national strategy; the remainder contained no clear, identifiable outcome statement. Project outcomes, where present, tended to focus on increasing awareness of and participation in conservation, and making positive changes to terrestrial and freshwater habitats and to indigenous species. In our sample, none of the aligned project outcomes met all five SMART criteria, only seven were measurable and only three were time-bound. The absence of clear outcome statements in many, and of measurable outcomes in most, community group applications means that funders would struggle to conclude anything about conservation returns on investments from the information provided. Without clear and measurable outcomes, empirical evaluation of projects' effectiveness is impossible. We suggest that funding providers can facilitate project evaluation by presenting requirements and advice for specifying project outcomes in applications. Furthermore, they should provide technical and financial support for identifying what to monitor and how to do so.

show abstract

“…Decision makers in conservation and restoration are often faced with the challenge of having to choose the right intervention to implement from among a suite of options; the right intervention being one where the decision maker has a high degree of certainty of its effectiveness. Effective conservation and restoration require knowledge of the effectiveness and impacts of specific actions, often based on evidence of how successful a given action has been in achieving objectives previously [4]. Widespread recognition of this need has resulted in a shift from experience-based approaches [5,6] with evidence-based practice emerging as a popular approach in the fields of conservation and restoration [7][8][9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying Challenges to Building an Evidence Base for Restoration Practice

Ntshotsho¹,

Esler

Reyers

2015

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Global acknowledgement of ecological restoration, as an important tool to complement conservation efforts, requires an effort to increase the effectiveness of restoration interventions. Evidence-based practice is purported to promote effectiveness. A central tenet of this approach is decision making that is based on evidence, not intuition. Evidence can be generated experimentally and in practice but needs to be linked to baseline information collection, clear goals and monitoring of impact. In this paper, we report on a survey conducted to assess practitioners' perceptions of the evidence generated in restoration practice in South Africa, as well as challenges encountered in building this evidence base. Contrary to a recent assessment of this evidence base which found weaknesses, respondents viewed it as adequate and cited few obstacles to its development. Obstacles cited were mostly associated with planning and resource availability. We suggest that the disparity between practitioners' perceptions and observed weaknesses in the evidence base could be a challenge in advancing evidence-based restoration. We explore opportunities to overcome this disparity as well as the obstacles listed by practitioners. These opportunities involve a shift from practitioners as users of scientific knowledge and evidence, to practitioners involved in the co-production of evidence needed to increase the effectiveness of restoration interventions.

show abstract

Outcomes, not implementation, predict conservation success

Cited by 88 publications

References 14 publications

Unexpected outcomes of invasive predator control: the importance of evaluating conservation management actions

Unexpected outcomes of invasive predator control: the importance of evaluating conservation management actions

Shared visions: can community conservation projects’ outcomes inform on their likely contributions to national biodiversity goals?

Identifying Challenges to Building an Evidence Base for Restoration Practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About