TY - JOUR
T1 - Defining and using evidence in conservation practice
AU - Salafsky, Nick
AU - Boshoven, Judith
AU - Burivalova, Zuzana
AU - Dubois, Natalie S.
AU - Gomez, Andres
AU - Johnson, Arlyne
AU - Lee, Aileen
AU - Margoluis, Richard
AU - Morrison, John
AU - Muir, Matthew
AU - Pratt, Stephen C.
AU - Pullin, Andrew S.
AU - Salzer, Daniel
AU - Stewart, Annette
AU - Sutherland, William J.
AU - Wordley, Claire F.R.
N1 - Funding Information:
This paper has been developed under the auspices of the CMP. We thank CMP members and many other people who reviewed and provided comments on drafts, including Lash LaRue, Warren Lockwood, Andy Phenix, Caroline Stem, and two anonymous reviewers. W.J.S. and C.F.R.W. are funded by Arcadia Fund. The findings and conclusions in this article are those of the authors and do not represent the official views of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 The Authors.
PY - 2019/5
Y1 - 2019/5
N2 - There is growing interest in evidence-based conservation, yet there are no widely accepted standard definitions of evidence, let alone guidance on how to use it in the context of conservation and natural resource management practice. In this paper, we first draw on insights of evidence-based practice from different disciplines to define evidence as being the “relevant information used to assess one or more hypotheses related to a question of interest.” We then construct a typology of different kinds of information, hypotheses, and evidence and show how these different types can be used in different steps of conservation practice. In particular, we distinguish between specific evidence used to assess project hypotheses and generic evidence used to assess generic hypotheses. We next build on this typology to develop a decision tree to support practitioners in how to appropriately use available specific and generic evidence in a given conservation situation. Finally, we conclude with a discussion of how to better promote and enable evidence-based conservation in both projects and across the discipline of conservation. Our hope is that by understanding and using evidence better, conservation can both become more effective and attract increased support from society.
AB - There is growing interest in evidence-based conservation, yet there are no widely accepted standard definitions of evidence, let alone guidance on how to use it in the context of conservation and natural resource management practice. In this paper, we first draw on insights of evidence-based practice from different disciplines to define evidence as being the “relevant information used to assess one or more hypotheses related to a question of interest.” We then construct a typology of different kinds of information, hypotheses, and evidence and show how these different types can be used in different steps of conservation practice. In particular, we distinguish between specific evidence used to assess project hypotheses and generic evidence used to assess generic hypotheses. We next build on this typology to develop a decision tree to support practitioners in how to appropriately use available specific and generic evidence in a given conservation situation. Finally, we conclude with a discussion of how to better promote and enable evidence-based conservation in both projects and across the discipline of conservation. Our hope is that by understanding and using evidence better, conservation can both become more effective and attract increased support from society.
KW - adaptive management
KW - biodiversity
KW - environmental evidence
KW - evidence-based conservation
KW - evidencebased practice
KW - natural resource management
KW - project management
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85133169801&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85133169801&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/csp2.27
DO - 10.1111/csp2.27
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85133169801
SN - 2578-4854
VL - 1
JO - Conservation Science and Practice
JF - Conservation Science and Practice
IS - 5
M1 - e27
ER -