Evaluating the impacts of conservation interventions on human well-being: guidance for practitioners

Abstract

Practitioners should be clear on the purpose and aims of evaluation, as different methods are required to answer dif-ferent questions. For example, those wishing to demonstrate and measure how successful a project has been to funders may prefer to use study designs that make use of compari-sons to an unaffected site. Those looking to learn from their experiences and understand how and why impacts occurred may prefer a more thorough investigation of the causal pro-cesses using a theory-based design. These differences should be considered at an early stage in the design of evaluation. Interventions vary, not only in the resources, budgets and technical skills available, but also in their intrinsic attributes. The length of a project, and timescales of impacts, geo-graphical scale, the availability of controls and the social, political and cultural contexts should all influence design of evaluation. Whether you are a working conservationist trying to design an evaluation strategy or a funding body re-questing evidence of impact, these guidelines will help you to make sense of the complex landscape of evalu-ation design and understand the methodological options that are available. The guidelines are freely available and can be found at http://pubs.iied.org/IIED. Feedback is welcome.