Policy and practice around protected areas are poorly aligned with the basic purpose of protection, which is to make a difference. The difference made by protected areas is their impact, defined in program evaluation as the outcomes arising from protection relative to the counterfactual of no protection or a different form of protection. Although impact evaluation of programs is well established in fields such as medicine, education and development aid, it is rare in nature conservation. We show that the present weak alignment with impact of policy targets and operational objectives for protected areas involves a great risk: targets and objectives can be achieved while making little difference to the conservation of biodiversity. We also review potential ways of increasing the difference made by protected areas, finding a poor evidence base for the use of planning and management ‘levers’ to better achieve impact. We propose a dual strategy for making protected areas more effective in their basic role of saving nature, outlining ways of developing targets and objectives focused on impact while also improving the evidence for effective planning and management.
Making parks make a difference: poor alignment of policy, planning and management with protected-area impact, and ways forward
R. Pressey,P. Visconti,Paul J. Ferraro
Published 2015 in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
ABSTRACT
PUBLICATION RECORD
- Publication year
2015
- Venue
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
- Publication date
2015-11-05
- Fields of study
Political Science, Medicine, Environmental Science
- Identifiers
- External record
- Source metadata
Semantic Scholar, PubMed
CITATION MAP
EXTRACTION MAP
CLAIMS
- No claims are published for this paper.
CONCEPTS
- No concepts are published for this paper.