Title
Expanding Conservation Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Tools to Embrace Complexity.
Author(s)
Mahajan, Shauna Darling; Fox, Helen; Glew, Louise; Mascia, Michael; McElhinny, Katherine; McKinnon, Madeleine; Wilkie, David
Published
2017
Abstract
As conservation adapts to our globalized world, tools for monitoring, evaluation and learning (MEL) must evolve to account for the increasingly complex nature of conservation interventions, as well as the dynamic relationships between humans and the environment. We argue that a plurality of tools exists in both conservation science and practice, and that insights from the socialecological systems (SES) perspective can shape the evolution of current MEL tools. SES approaches can help MEL be more sensitive to non-linear change, uncertainty, and complexity, while still providing relevant insight into nature of causal relationships between conservation interventions and outcomes. We introduce, discuss the history of adoption and use, and identify advantages and limitations of concepts and tools from the SES perspective together with current practices in applied conservation MEL. As an example, we compare a traditional conservation planning and monitoring tool, linear conceptual models called ‘results chains,’ to a SES mapping tool, referred to as causal loop diagrams (CLDs). Using this comparison, we explore different ways of visualizing and understanding theories of change for community-based conservation interventions. SES research tools such as CLDs hold great potential for conservation MEL. We argue CLDs can be useful for highlighting nuanced feedbacks and dynamics between social and ecological components of a system, and for bringing a social-ecological resilience lens to conservation. We acknowledge there is no ‘one size fits all’ tool, rather different tools will be suitable for different MEL users and audiences, and for different contexts and types of interventions. Given this, we outline opportunities for SES thinking to infuse conservation MEL, and call both the conservation and SES research communities to bridge the divide between theory and practice, and co-develop tools and methods appropriate for adaptive management grounded in evidence.
Access Full Text
A full-text copy of this article may be available. Please email the WCS Library to request.
![]()
Back
PUB26865