A systems approach to the evaluation of natural resource management initiatives

More than just trees: Assessing reforestation success in tropical developing countries

“…Systems theory and tools can provide a way forward in the development of integrated reforestation assessment. They have been widely applied to assist in understanding complex social, economic and environmental systems (Clayton and Radcliffe, 1996;Bellamy et al, 2001) by relating both ecological and socio-economic components (Mansourian et al, 2005b).…”

Evaluating Governance Arrangements and Decision Making for Natural Resource Management Planning: An Empirical Application of the Governance Systems Analysis Framework

“…A number of empirically and theoretically-grounded frameworks have been used to analyse and evaluate aspects of natural resource governance including their constituent strategies, plans, programs, and institutions (Althaus et al, 2007;Bellamy et al, 2001;Connick & Innes, 2003;Curtis et al, 1998;Hajkowicz, 2009;Vogel, 2011;Walter Turnbull, 2005). There have been also been a number of Australian Governmentdriven evaluations of the efficacy of NRM policies and programs since the mid 1990s ( ANAO, 1997ANAO, , 2008NHT, 2000;SSCRRAT, 2010;Walter Turnbull, 2005).…”

Developing Evaluation Indicators to Improve the Process of Coproducing Usable Climate Science

“…We tested the indicators using two case studies, which allowed us to identify several lessons about evaluating coproduction from employing the objectives and indicators framework (including evaluation early in the project, evaluation from the perspective of the researcher as well as the stakeholder, impacts of external factors on projects, and identifying conceptual uses of information and measures) and coproducing climate science knowledge (more nuanced understanding of stakeholder roles and the importance of involving stakeholders early in the research design). We will refine these indicators and heed the call for more empirical research in this field (Bellamy et al 2001;Cvitanovic et al 2015;Fazey et al 2014). We plan to continue to test and refine the indicators and develop metrics through additional case studies representing a diversity of resource management sectors and types of research teams.…”

“…We focused our literature search (see literature review) on research concentrating on evaluation or assessment of collaborative research, coproduction of knowledge, or societal impacts of science-using a process analogous to snowball sampling (Given 2008) by using the search tool ''Web of Knowledge'' to identify journal articles and books cited by or within several key works in the field (e.g., Lemos and Morehouse 2005;Dilling and Lemos 2011;Bellamy et al 2001;Reed 2008;Fazey et al 2014;Walter et al 2007;Cvitanovic et al 2015;Feldman and Ingram 2009;McNie 2007) that helped us trace the similarities and differences in proposed metrics and indicators as ideas evolved through the literature. We also used keyword searches on several terms (i.e., evaluation, assessing science, participatory methods, coproduction, collaborative research, usability of science, observation theory, program theory, and utilization theory).…”

“…While significant research has identified key principles that support this kind of collaborative effort (Lemos and Morehouse 2005;McNie 2013;Reed et al 2014), those studying the field of coproduction continue to struggle with a lack of empirical evidence to support the principles (Hegger and Dieperink 2014), provide greater detail about how to apply the principles (Reed et al 2014;van Kerkhoff and Lebel 2015), evaluate the processes and outcomes from collaborative research (Bellamy et al 2001;Fazey et al 2014;Meadow et al 2015), and go beyond a set of best practices to effectively measure these key principles and their importance in the coproduction process.…”