Skip to main content
Mainstreaming impact evaluation in nature conservation
Conservation Letters (2015)
  • Kathy Baylis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
  • Jordi Honey-Roses, University of British Columbia
  • Jan Boerner, University of Bonn
  • Esteve Corbera, Autonomous University of Barcelona
  • Driss Ezzine-de-Blas
  • Paul Ferraro, Georgia State University
  • Renaud Lapeyre
  • Martin Persson
  • Alex Pfaff, Duke University
  • Sven Wunder
An important part of conservation practice is the empirical evaluation of program and policy impacts. Understanding why conservation programs succeed or fail is essential for designing cost-effective initiatives and for improving the livelihoods of natural resource users. The evidence we seek can be generated with modern impact evaluation designs. Such designs measure causal effects of specific interventions by comparing outcomes with the interventions to outcomes in credible counterfactual scenarios. Good designs also identify the conditions under which the causal effect arises. Despite a critical need for empirical evidence, conservation science has been slow to adopt these impact evaluation designs. We identify reasons for the slow rate of adoption, and provide suggestions for mainstreaming impact evaluation in nature conservation.
  • Biodiversity,
  • Conservation Policy,
  • Evidence,
  • Impact Evaluation,
  • Policy Effectiveness,
  • Payment for Environmental Services,
  • Protected Areas
Publication Date
Citation Information
Kathy Baylis, Jordi Honey-Roses, Jan Boerner, Esteve Corbera, et al.. "Mainstreaming impact evaluation in nature conservation" Conservation Letters (2015)
Available at: