Evaluating the impact of conservation interventions is critical to understanding whether interventions are working. A range of approaches are available to evaluate conservation impact, with suitability depending on context.
Quantitative approaches are typically used due to perceptions around greater rigour and broader acceptance, but qualitative approaches can generate distinct and complementary insights. We drew on case studies to highlight the value of qualitative approaches to impact evaluation. Fundamentally, they allow us to understand why change is occurring. These approaches can be flexible and rigorous, enable evaluation of assumptions and incorporate different perspectives to illuminate different ways of seeing change, helping to ‘make sense’ of real-world complexity. We advocate for mainstreaming these methods in conservation evaluations, both independently and alongside quantitative approaches.
This paper was developed by a group of early-career researchers (ECRs) brought together through the Interdisciplinary Conservation Network (ICN), an initiative of the Interdisciplinary Centre for Conservation Science (ICCS), to explore qualitative impact evaluation in conservation. This group included both researchers and practitioners from diverse disciplines and backgrounds. The group was led by William Sharkey (University of Edinburgh) and Lena Jeha (ZSL), with mentorship from Diogo Veríssimo (University of Oxford), and included PhD student Ash Simkins of the University of Cambridge's Department of Zoology and Conservation Research Institute.
See full paper in special issue of Conservation Science and Practice, Bridging the Impact Evaluation Research-Practice Gap in Conservation: https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.70102