scholarly journals Biodiversity Indexes: Value and Evaluation Purposes

2018 ◽  
Vol 48 ◽  
pp. 01001
Author(s):  
Jatna Supriatna
Keyword(s):  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Similarity Index ◽  
Monitoring And Evaluation ◽  
Shannon Index ◽  
Harvard University ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Evaluation Systems ◽  
Number Of Species ◽  
Shannon’S Index ◽  
Living Species

Biodiversity is a word recently introduced by experts in the field of biology. This word became more meaningful after Edward O. Wilson of Harvard University introduced it in a book entitled Biodiversity, an extension of biological diversity, in 1989 [11]. In subsequent developments, it became very popular and used not only by environmental biologists but also by researchers, environmentalists, funders, educators, social experts, economists, policy makers, and many others, although many do not know what that means. Biodiversity includes variations within the biological community, where living species, and ecosystems, where communities are located, as well as interaction between them (Pri. The science of biodiversity has emerged rapidly since then included monitoring and evaluation systems which is measuring the value of biodiversity components, such as the number of species present, the population of species, a habitat or the sum of all such components within a given area or site. Such monitoring and evaluation may be carried out for a variety of reasons, included identification of a given area for biodiversity richness, evenness or healthy ecosystems. The richness is the number of species per sample, the more species present in a sample, the richer the sample. Evenness is a measure of the relative abundance of the different species making up the richness of an area. Two commonly used to measure biodiversity Simpson index Ds and Shannon’s index H’. Simpson’s index DS is similarity index (the higher the value the lower in diversity). While Shannon index is combining evenness and richness and less weighted on dominant species. Both indexes are more reflective in nature and can predict the environment health. Therefore, it may be good to have one of those biodiversity indexes to be used for UI GreenMetric to understand the environment healthiness in the campus.

The Encyclopedia of Life vs. the Brochure of Life: Exploring the relationships between the extinction of species and the inventory of life on Earth

Zootaxa ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 1965 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
JOSÉ ANTONIO GONZÁLEZ-OREJA
Keyword(s):  
Biological Diversity ◽  
First Century ◽  
Conservation Priorities ◽  
Biodiversity Crisis ◽  
Number Of Species ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Large Numbers ◽  
Living Species ◽  
Life On Earth

One of the most crucial questions of twenty-first century systematic biology deals with the determination of the real number of living species currently sharing the Earth with us (Cracraft 2002); answers vary widely, but commonly range between 3 and 100 million (see, for example, Stork 1997 or May 2002 and references therein). However, in terms of completeness and correctness, our current inventory of living species is certainly unsatisfactory (Dubois 2003), as the total number of species described so far is known to correspond to only a very small fraction of the Earth´s biodiversity. Indeed, large numbers of species remain to be discovered, primarily insects, small invertebrates and, above all, microorganisms (Chevalier et al. 1997). On the other hand, this gap of knowledge regarding the magnitude of the Earth´s biodiversity limits our capacity to properly manage the world´s biotic resources and conserve biological diversity in this so-called Century of Extinctions (Dubois 2003): the current biodiversity crisis is wiping out a significant fraction of living species at an alarming rate and, sadly, an unknown number of species is being forever lost before being discovered, described, and named. Likewise, conservation priorities are clearly constrained by our limited knowledge of the total biodiversity (Dubois 2003, Scotland et al. 2003).

Collecting High-Quality Data

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Kay Gugerty ◽  
Dean Karlan
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Social Desirability ◽  
Measurement Errors ◽  
Monitoring And Evaluation ◽  
Quality Data ◽  
Social Desirability Bias ◽  
High Quality ◽  
High Quality Data ◽  
Evaluation Systems ◽  
Demand Effect

Without high-quality data, even the best-designed monitoring and evaluation systems will collapse. Chapter 7 introduces some the basics of collecting high-quality data and discusses how to address challenges that frequently arise. High-quality data must be clearly defined and have an indicator that validly and reliably measures the intended concept. The chapter then explains how to avoid common biases and measurement errors like anchoring, social desirability bias, the experimenter demand effect, unclear wording, long recall periods, and translation context. It then guides organizations on how to find indicators, test data collection instruments, manage surveys, and train staff appropriately for data collection and entry.

The use of routine monitoring and evaluation systems to assess a referral model of family planning and HIV service integration in Nigeria

AIDS ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 23 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. S97-S103 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nzapfurundi O Chabikuli ◽  
Dorka D Awi ◽  
Ogo Chukwujekwu ◽  
Zubaida Abubakar ◽  
Usman Gwarzo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Family Planning ◽  
Service Integration ◽  
Monitoring And Evaluation ◽  
Evaluation Systems ◽  
Routine Monitoring

Evaluating complex interventions: A theory-driven realist-informed approach

Evaluation ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 294-311 ◽  
Author(s):  
Boru Douthwaite ◽  
John Mayne ◽  
Cynthia McDougall ◽  
Rodrigo Paz-Ybarnegaray
Keyword(s):  
Complex Interventions ◽  
Monitoring And Evaluation ◽  
Practical Experience ◽  
Evaluation Systems ◽  
Program Monitoring ◽  
Evaluation Approach ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Theories Of Change ◽  
Design And Methods ◽  
After Action Reviews

There is a growing recognition that programs that seek to change people’s lives are intervening in complex systems, which puts a particular set of requirements on program monitoring and evaluation. Developing complexity-aware program monitoring and evaluation systems within existing organizations is difficult because they challenge traditional orthodoxy. Little has been written about the practical experience of doing so. This article describes the development of a complexity-aware evaluation approach in the CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems. We outline the design and methods used including trend lines, panel data, after action reviews, building and testing theories of change, outcome evidencing and realist synthesis. We identify and describe a set of design principles for developing complexity-aware program monitoring and evaluation. Finally, we discuss important lessons and recommendations for other programs facing similar challenges. These include developing evaluation designs that meet both learning and accountability requirements; making evaluation a part of a program’s overall approach to achieving impact; and, ensuring evaluation cumulatively builds useful theory as to how different types of program trigger change in different contexts.

scholarly journals Gender responsiveness diagnostic of national monitoring and evaluation systems – methodological reflections

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Madri S. Jansen van Rensburg ◽  
Caitlin Blaser Mapitsa
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Capacity Building ◽  
Diagnostic Tool ◽  
Monitoring And Evaluation ◽  
Capacity Development ◽  
Diagnostic Study ◽  
Evaluation Systems ◽  
National Monitoring ◽  
The Government ◽  
And Gender

Background: This article reflects on the implementation of a diagnostic study carried out to understand the gender responsiveness of the national monitoring and evaluation (M&E) systems of Benin, South Africa and Uganda. Carrying out the study found that the potential for integrating the cross-cutting systems of gender and monitoring and evaluation (M&E) are strong. At the same time, it highlighted a range of challenges intersecting these two areas of work. This article explores these issues, which range from logistical to conceptual.Objectives: This article aims to share reflections from the gender diagnostic study to enable more appropriate capacity building in the field of gender responsiveness in national M&E systems. Developing more sophisticated tools to measure gender responsiveness in complex contexts is critical. A better understanding of how gender and national M&E systems intersect is important to understanding firstly how we can more accurately measure the gender responsiveness of existing systems and secondly how better to engender capacity development initiatives.Method: As part of the Twende Mbele programme, Centre for Learning on Evaluation and Results (CLEAR) commissioned Africa Gender and Development Evaluator’s Network (AGDEN) to coordinate teams of researchers in Benin, Uganda, and South Africa to collaboratively develop the diagnostic tool, and then implement it by conducting a review of key documentation and to interview officials within the government wide monitoring and evaluation systems as well as the national gender machinery in each country.Results: The study found that the gender responsiveness of M&E systems across all three systems was unequal, but more importantly, it is important to do more work on how M&E and gender are conceptualised, to ensure this can be studied in a more meaningful way. To strengthen national monitoring and evaluation systems, gender responsiveness and equity must serve as a foundation for growth. However, intersection M&E with gender is complex, and riddled with gaps in capacity, conceptual differences, and challenges bringing together disparate and complex systems.Conclusion: A stronger understanding of the linkages between M&E and gender is an important starting place for bringing them together holistically.

The system of monitoring and evaluation of school nutrition

2020 ◽  
pp. 42-46
Author(s):  
L.N. Rozhdestvenskaya
Keyword(s):  
Monitoring And Evaluation ◽  
School Nutrition ◽  
Management Tool ◽  
Effective Management ◽  
National Plan ◽  
Management Tools ◽  
Evaluation Systems ◽  
Nutrition Programs ◽  
National School ◽  
Operational Management

The article summarizes international approaches to creating effective management tools that enable operational management of school nutrition programs of various scales — monitoring and evaluation systems. M&E system, as a project management tool, is the most relevant and appropriate way to reduce the level of uncertainty and ensure the effectiveness of management decisions, using the possibilities of digitalization. The paper suggests ways to create basic tools of the system for monitoring and evaluating national school nutrition programs and the national plan for the M&E system of the school nutrition program in Russia.

Policy monitoring and evaluation systems:

2018 ◽  
pp. 69-80
Author(s):  
Rômulo Paes-Sousa ◽  
Aline Gazola Hellmann
Keyword(s):  
Monitoring And Evaluation ◽  
Evaluation Systems
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document