Poverty and protected areas: An evaluation of a marine integrated conservation and development project in Indonesia

Gurney, Georgina G.; Cinner, Joshua E.; Ban, Natalie C.; Pressey, Robert L.; Pollnac, Richard Β.; Campbell, Stuart J.; Tasidjawa, Sonny; Setiawan, Fakhrizal

doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.04.003

Cited by 160 publications

(156 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

153

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…habitat cover [27]): aggregate poverty metrics (e.g. [32,37]) and policy interventions (e.g. terrestrial protected areas [28]; terrestrial ecosystem system services schemes [38]) arising from management decisions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating impact evaluation in the design and implementation of monitoring marine protected areas

Ahmadia

Glew

Provost

et al. 2015

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating impact evaluation in the design and implementation of monitoring marine protected areas

Ahmadia

Glew

Provost

et al. 2015

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Overall, further analysis would be required in order to draw reliable conclusions on the quality and appropriateness of all the evaluation approaches employed to the specific circumstances of each case study. On another note, little is currently understood about the trajectory of change in impacts over time (Woolcock 2009) and the prevalence of snapshot designs means that these are rarely captured fully (Gurney et al 2014;Woodhouse et al 2015) The final component of impact evaluation is data collection. A large majority of studies used a combination of data-collection methods.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…No significant change in prevalence of the snapshot design was detected over time (chi-square, χ 2 = 0.65, df = 2, P = 0.72). Twenty-three percent of studies had a control (Table 1), but the beforeafter-control-intervention design was only employed in one study (Gurney et al 2014). 'Other' study designs included gradients of proximity to the protected area.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Approaches Used to Evaluate the Social Impacts of Protected Areas

Lange

Woodhouse

Milner‐Gulland

2016

CONSERVATION LETTERS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Protected areas are a key strategy in conserving biodiversity, and there is a pressing need to evaluate their social impacts. Though the social impacts of development interventions are widely assessed, the conservation literature is limited and methodological guidance is lacking. Using a systematic literature search, which found 95 relevant studies, we assessed the methods used to evaluate the social impacts of protected areas. Mixed methods were used by more than half of the studies. Almost all studies reported material aspects of wellbeing, particularly income; other aspects were included in around half of studies. The majority of studies provided a snapshot, with only one employing a before-after-control-intervention design. Half of studies reported respondent perceptions of impacts, while impact was attributed from researcher inference in 1/3 of cases. Although the number of such studies is increasing rapidly, there has been little change in the approaches used over the last 15 years, or in the authorship of studies, which is predominantly academics. Recent improvements in understanding of best practice in social impact evaluation need to be translated into practice if a true picture of the effects of conservation on local people is to be obtained.

show abstract

“…However, much of the literature on understanding stakeholder perceptions about resource decline has used methods, including interviews and surveys [17,21,22,25] and questionnaires [7,26,27], which alone do not allow stakeholders the freedom to depict their complete mental models of the functioning of social-ecological systems. For example, Brewer (2012) used traditional interview techniques among stakeholders to elicit perceptions regarding what they thought reduced, fish stocks in the Solomon Islands and how they could be increased.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating Stakeholder Perceptions of Fish Decline: Making Sense of Multiple Mental Models

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Stakeholders have different educational backgrounds, personal experiences and priorities that contribute to different perceptions about what causes natural resource decline and how to sustain a resource. Yet stakeholders have a common interest, which is to keep the resource of interest from declining. Effective co-management requires sharing of perceptions pertaining to the sustainability of a resource and making decisions that benefit all stakeholders. Therefore, this study used modified causal networks, referred to here as mental models, to elicit and compare stakeholder perceptions about fish decline in the Danajon Bank, Philippines. Perceptions were elicited from three types of stakeholders, each composed of two or three elicitation groups: fishers, local government and environmental organizations. Data were also elicited through semi-structured discussions to investigate why perceptions differed and how stakeholders communicated with one another. Hierarchical clustering revealed two broad clusters of similar perceptions about drivers of fish decline: one being environmental groups and the second being local government and fisher groups. Stakeholder communication patterns revealed that communication was weakest between environmental groups and fishers. A likely contributing factor for the lack of shared perceptions was that knowledge-sharing was constrained by the small number of environmental personnel available to exchange information effectively with the much larger number of fishers and local government personnel. To better co-manage fish populations in Danajon Bank, we suggest modifications to the governance framework to improve knowledge-sharing and social and ecological outcomes.

show abstract

Poverty and protected areas: An evaluation of a marine integrated conservation and development project in Indonesia

Cited by 160 publications

References 53 publications

Integrating impact evaluation in the design and implementation of monitoring marine protected areas

Integrating impact evaluation in the design and implementation of monitoring marine protected areas

Approaches Used to Evaluate the Social Impacts of Protected Areas

Investigating Stakeholder Perceptions of Fish Decline: Making Sense of Multiple Mental Models

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About