Example: quiz answers

Monitoring and Evaluation in Conservation: a …

ReviewMonitoring and Evaluation in Conservation: aReview of Trends and ApproachesCAROLINE STEM, RICHARD MARGOLUIS, NICK SALAFSKY, AND MARCIA BROWNF oundations of success , 4109 Maryland Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20816, :There is growing recognition among conservation practitioners and scholars that good projectmanagement is integrally linked to well-designed Monitoring and Evaluation systems. Most conservation or-ganizations have attempted to develop and implement Monitoring and Evaluation systems, often with mixedresults. One problem seems to be that organizations are trying to build their systems from scratch, overlookinglessons learned from the many efforts to develop useful and practical Monitoring and Evaluation , we undertook a review of Monitoring and Evaluation approaches in conservation and other fields in-cluding international development, public health, family planning, education, social services, and , we present our results for the field of conservation .

Review Monitoring and Evaluation in Conservation: a Review of Trends and Approaches CAROLINE STEM,∗ RICHARD MARGOLUIS, NICK SALAFSKY, AND MARCIA BROWN Foundations of Success, 4109 …

Tags:

  Evaluation, Review, Success, Monitoring, Conservation, A review, Monitoring and evaluation in conservation

Information

Domain:

Source:

Link to this page:

Please notify us if you found a problem with this document:

Other abuse

Transcription of Monitoring and Evaluation in Conservation: a …

1 ReviewMonitoring and Evaluation in Conservation: aReview of Trends and ApproachesCAROLINE STEM, RICHARD MARGOLUIS, NICK SALAFSKY, AND MARCIA BROWNF oundations of success , 4109 Maryland Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20816, :There is growing recognition among conservation practitioners and scholars that good projectmanagement is integrally linked to well-designed Monitoring and Evaluation systems. Most conservation or-ganizations have attempted to develop and implement Monitoring and Evaluation systems, often with mixedresults. One problem seems to be that organizations are trying to build their systems from scratch, overlookinglessons learned from the many efforts to develop useful and practical Monitoring and Evaluation , we undertook a review of Monitoring and Evaluation approaches in conservation and other fields in-cluding international development, public health, family planning, education, social services, and , we present our results for the field of conservation .

2 We categorized the considerable variety of mon-itoring and Evaluation approaches into four broad purposes: basic research; accounting and certification;status assessment; and effectiveness measurement. We focus here on status assessment and effectiveness mea-surement. Specific lessons that emerged follow: different Monitoring and Evaluation needs require differentapproaches; conceptual similarities are widespread among prevailing approaches; inconsistent language im-pedes communication; confusion among Monitoring and Evaluation components hinders practitioner abilityto choose the appropriate component; and Monitoring only quantitative biological variables is that the conservation community continue support of collaborative initiatives to improve moni-toring and Evaluation , establish clear definitions of commonly used terms, clarify Monitoring and evaluationsystem components, apply available approaches appropriately, and include qualitative and social variables inmonitoring Words:adaptive management, management effectiveness, status assessmentMonitoreo y Evaluaci on en Conservaci on: una Revisi on de Tendencias y M etodosResumen.

3 Entre los practicantes y estudiosos de la conservaci on hay el reconocimiento creciente de que labuena gesti on de proyectos est aligada integralmente a sistemas de monitoreo y evaluaci on bien dise mayor a de las organizaciones de conservaci on han intentado desarrollar e implementar sistemas demonitoreo y evaluaci on, a menudo con resultados mixtos. Un problema parece ser que las organizaciones est antratando de construir sus sistemas a partir de cero, sin considerar lecciones aprendidas de los muchos esfuerzospara desarrollar m etodos de monitoreo y evaluaci on utiles y pr acticos. Por lo tanto, hicimos una revisi on dem etodos de monitoreo y evaluaci on en conservaci on y otros campos incluyendo desarrollo internacional,salud p ublica, planificaci on familiar, educaci on, servicios sociales y negocios. Aqu , presentamos nuestrosresultados para el campo de la conservaci on.

4 Clasificamos la considerable variedad de m etodos de monitoreoyevaluaci on en cuatro prop ositos generales: investigaci on b asica; contabilidad y certificaci on; evaluaci onde estatus y medidas de efectividad. Nos centramos en evaluaci on de estatus y medidas de efectividad. Laslecciones espec ficas que emergieron incluyen: necesidades diferentes de monitoreo y evaluaci on requierenm etodos diferentes; hay similitudes conceptuales en todos los m etodos prevalecientes; el lenguaje inconsistentebloquea la comunicaci on; la confusi on entre componentes de monitoreo y evaluaci on limita la habilidad depracticantes para elegir el componente apropiado y el monitoreo de solo variables biol ogicas cuantitativases insuficiente. Sugerimos que la comunidad de conservacionistas contin ue con el apoyo de iniciativas de Current address: 17 Avery Street, Saratoga Springs, NY 12866, , email submitted December 22, 2003; revised manuscript accepted July 21, Biology, Pages 295 309 Volume 19, No.

5 2, April 2005296 Monitoring and Evaluation in ConservationStem et on para mejorar el monitoreo y la evaluaci on; establecer definiciones claras de t erminos usadoscom unmente; clarificar componentes de sistemas de monitoreo y evaluaci on; aplicar m etodos disponiblesapropiadamente e incluir variables cualitativas y sociales en los esfuerzos de Clave:efectividad de gesti on, evaluaci on de estatus, manejo adoptivoIntroductionMonitoring and Evaluation (M&E) has taken on increas-ing importance as the conservation community has facedacontinuing struggle to demonstrate progress made to-wardprotecting the earth s biological resources. Practi-tioners and scholars in conservation recognize that goodmanagement goes beyond implementation effectivemanagement is integrally linked to well-designed moni-toring and Evaluation systems ( , Margoluis & Salafsky1998; Hockings et al.)

6 2000; Woodhill 2000). Monitoringand Evaluation can provide public and internal account-ability and help demonstrate impact, both increasinglyimportant functions in the current climate of budgetaryconstraints ( Hockings et al. 2000; Sawhill & Williamson2001). Monitoring and Evaluation answers questions re-lated to how well a project or strategy is working andidentifies the conditions under which a conservation ac-tion is likely to succeed or falter ( Hatry 1999; Blann &Light 2000). Moreover, M&E can serve as an early warn-ing system for potential problems and lead to ideas for po-tential remedial actions ( Hatry 1999; Rigby et al. 2000).In essence, M&E forms the basis for improved conservation is a relatively new discipline,numerous efforts have been made to develop useful andpractical Monitoring and Evaluation systems, often withmixed results. A primary problem seems to be that orga-nizations are trying to build their systems from scratch,overlooking many lessons learned from a long history ofefforts to develop useful and practical Monitoring andevaluation approaches in conservation and other , we undertook a review of M&E approachesnot only in conservation , but also in the fields of interna-tional development, public health and family planning,education and social services, and business.

7 Our objec-tive was to learn from the experiences of practitionersin these fields in measuring the success of their interven-tions. We hope to encourage the conservation commu-nity to look within and outside its boundaries to makethe most of what others have learned, and ultimately, toimprove programmatic efficiency and effectiveness. Wepresent one part of this overall research, providing a his-torical review of different M&E approaches in the field ofconservation and distilling some important lessons. (For adescription of the overall study and more detailed results,see )MethodsWereviewed more than 100 publications (including or-ganizational documents and reports, Web sites, journalarticles, and books) from the field of conservation as partof our overall review of more than 350 sources from allfields. (A database with information on many of thesepublications is available at ).

8 Weconcentrated primarily on M&E literature related toproject and program Evaluation . In addition, we inter-viewed key informants from four different conservationinstitutions to identify major approaches and innovationsin M&E and to obtain recommendations on key publica-tions to the literature to identify different ap-proaches and key trends in conservation M&E. We de-fine a Monitoring and Evaluation approach as aspecificprocessfordoing M&E, which is generally accompaniedbyaseries of steps or guidance. As such, the same ap-proach could incorporate biological data, social data, oracombination of the two. Thus, the primary distinctionbetween approaches lies in the steps that comprise theapproaches, not in the data that feed into them. Theo-retically, an approach would also not vary by whetherthe data come from western scientific or indigenoussources.

9 In reality, however, approaches that rely strictlyon indigenous data sources are probably less likely to beformally published. As a result, this review focuses onmore formal under the implicit assumption that doinggood M&E leads to better decision making and thereforeimproved conservation . Various publications documentspecific cases where this has occurred ( Environmen-tal Protection Agency 1999; Hockings 2003; Hockingset al. 2000; Margoluis et al. 2001). It was beyond thescope of this research, however, to assess how success -fully different M&E approaches have been implementedand whether they have resulted in improved is an immense amount of literature on M&E, es-pecially informal literature from nongovernmental orga-nizations (NGOs), programs, donors, and review focused on all these sectors, but we foundthe greatest amount of documentation in the NGO com-munity.

10 This is likely because NGOs are usually responsi-blefor project implementation. Although our review wasextensive, our primary aim was not to be exhaustive, butConservation BiologyVolume 19, No. 2, April 2005 Stem et and Evaluation in Conservation297rather to represent the major approaches and innovationsdocumented in the of M&E Approaches in ConservationWithin the conservation community, there is little clar-ity about the different functions Evaluation fulfills or theconditions under which different types of Evaluation aremost appropriate. Evaluation approaches vary by contextand stakeholder interests, thus serving multiple and oftenoverlapping purposes, including knowledge generation,program improvement, accountability, transparency, re-source allocation, advocacy, and impact assessment. Wemodified Mark et al. s (2000) framework to identify fourmain, albeit somewhat overlapping, purposes of evalua-tion: basic research, accounting and certification, statusassessment, and effectiveness measurement.


Related search queries