scholarly journals The state of capacity development evaluation in biodiversity conservation and natural resource management

Oryx ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Eleanor J. Sterling ◽  
Amanda Sigouin ◽  
Erin Betley ◽  
Jennifer Zavaleta Cheek ◽  
Jennifer N. Solomon ◽  
...  

Abstract 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.

Water Policy ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 9 (S2) ◽  
pp. 83-97 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Fabricius ◽  
S. Collins

Community-based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) focuses on the collective management of ecosystems to promote human well-being and aims to devolve authority for ecosystem management to the local (community) level. CBNRM therefore requires strong investments in capacity development of local institutions and governance structures. CBNRM has come under strong criticism for its failures to deliver real benefits to communities. In this paper we explore the reasons for the frequent failure of CBNRM. We postulate that good governance buffers CBNRM against unexpected change, notably conflicts, especially in the early stages when income generation, infrastructure development and capacity development have not yet taken place. We assess the key characteristics of CBNRM governance systems that could perform this buffering function, using case study examples from Macubeni, Nqabara, Makuleke and Richtersveld to support our propositions. In our case studies, 11 strategies have been used to increase the incidence of success of CBNRM: understand and describe the social-ecological system; establish and communicate a clear vision; build on local organizations; plan ahead; create rules for resource use and enforce them; communicate the vision, plan and rules; develop management capacity; finance the initial stages of the initiative; work within available legal frameworks; monitor and learn all the time; and create lasting incentives. Despite these strategies there are, however, a number of obstinate implementation challenges, related to governance shortcomings and external factors which management cannot control. We therefore propose seven additional strategies to promote good governance in CBNRM: 1. Develop knowledge networks that draw on the experience and wisdom of a wide range of key individuals. 2. Establish formalised decision-making structures (e.g. multi-level project steering committees) with clear constitutions and codes of conduct. 3. Clearly define and legitimise conflict resolution procedures. 4. Ensure acceptance of the governance structure by community members. 5. Obtain formal commitment to well-defined roles and responsibilities by key individuals. 6. Establish tangible incentives to key individuals for meeting their commitments. 7. Develop the capacity for facilitation to promote communication. Local communities, government and scientists have important roles to play in maintaining these knowledge and governance networks through adaptive co-management.


2001 ◽  
Vol 63 (4) ◽  
pp. 407-423 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer A Bellamy ◽  
Daniel H Walker ◽  
Geoffrey T McDonald ◽  
Geoffrey J Syme

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document