Mainstreaming Impact Evaluation in Nature Conservation

Katherine R Baylis, Jordi Honey-Rosés, Jan Börner, Esteve Corbera, Driss Ezzine-de-Blas, Paul J. Ferraro, Renaud Lapeyre, U. Martin Persson, Alex Pfaff, Sven Wunder

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)58-64
Number of pages7
JournalConservation Letters
Volume9
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2016

Fingerprint

natural resources conservation
nature conservation
program evaluation
policy analysis
conservation practices
conservation programs
livelihood
natural resources
natural resource
evaluation
cost
effect
programme

Keywords

  • Biodiversity
  • Conservation policy
  • Impact evaluation
  • Payment for environmental services
  • Protected areas

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
  • Ecology
  • Nature and Landscape Conservation

Cite this

Baylis, K. R., Honey-Rosés, J., Börner, J., Corbera, E., Ezzine-de-Blas, D., Ferraro, P. J., ... Wunder, S. (2016). Mainstreaming Impact Evaluation in Nature Conservation. Conservation Letters, 9(1), 58-64. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12180

Mainstreaming Impact Evaluation in Nature Conservation. / Baylis, Katherine R; Honey-Rosés, Jordi; Börner, Jan; Corbera, Esteve; Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss; Ferraro, Paul J.; Lapeyre, Renaud; Persson, U. Martin; Pfaff, Alex; Wunder, Sven.

In: Conservation Letters, Vol. 9, No. 1, 01.01.2016, p. 58-64.

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate

Baylis, KR, Honey-Rosés, J, Börner, J, Corbera, E, Ezzine-de-Blas, D, Ferraro, PJ, Lapeyre, R, Persson, UM, Pfaff, A & Wunder, S 2016, 'Mainstreaming Impact Evaluation in Nature Conservation', Conservation Letters, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 58-64. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12180
Baylis KR, Honey-Rosés J, Börner J, Corbera E, Ezzine-de-Blas D, Ferraro PJ et al. Mainstreaming Impact Evaluation in Nature Conservation. Conservation Letters. 2016 Jan 1;9(1):58-64. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12180
Baylis, Katherine R ; Honey-Rosés, Jordi ; Börner, Jan ; Corbera, Esteve ; Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss ; Ferraro, Paul J. ; Lapeyre, Renaud ; Persson, U. Martin ; Pfaff, Alex ; Wunder, Sven. / Mainstreaming Impact Evaluation in Nature Conservation. In: Conservation Letters. 2016 ; Vol. 9, No. 1. pp. 58-64.
@article{96b3c393766a42bda113f9a210f076db,
title = "Mainstreaming Impact Evaluation in Nature Conservation",
abstract = "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.",
keywords = "Biodiversity, Conservation policy, Impact evaluation, Payment for environmental services, Protected areas",
author = "Baylis, {Katherine R} and Jordi Honey-Ros{\'e}s and Jan B{\"o}rner and Esteve Corbera and Driss Ezzine-de-Blas and Ferraro, {Paul J.} and Renaud Lapeyre and Persson, {U. Martin} and Alex Pfaff and Sven Wunder",
year = "2016",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/conl.12180",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "9",
pages = "58--64",
journal = "Conservation Letters",
issn = "1755-263X",
publisher = "John Wiley & Sons Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Mainstreaming Impact Evaluation in Nature Conservation

AU - Baylis, Katherine R

AU - Honey-Rosés, Jordi

AU - Börner, Jan

AU - Corbera, Esteve

AU - Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss

AU - Ferraro, Paul J.

AU - Lapeyre, Renaud

AU - Persson, U. Martin

AU - Pfaff, Alex

AU - Wunder, Sven

PY - 2016/1/1

Y1 - 2016/1/1

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - Biodiversity

KW - Conservation policy

KW - Impact evaluation

KW - Payment for environmental services

KW - Protected areas

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84958894126&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84958894126&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/conl.12180

DO - 10.1111/conl.12180

M3 - Comment/debate

AN - SCOPUS:84958894126

VL - 9

SP - 58

EP - 64

JO - Conservation Letters

JF - Conservation Letters

SN - 1755-263X

IS - 1

ER -