IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v32y2009i2p138-147.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using conceptual models as a planning and evaluation tool in conservation

Author

Listed:
  • Margoluis, Richard
  • Stem, Caroline
  • Salafsky, Nick
  • Brown, Marcia

Abstract

Conservation projects are dynamic interventions that occur in complex contexts involving intricate interactions of social, political, economic, cultural, and environmental factors. These factors are constantly changing over time and space as managers learn more about the context within which they work. This complex context poses challenges for planning and evaluating conservation project. In order for conservation managers and evaluation professionals to design good interventions and measure project success, they simultaneously need to embrace and deconstruct contextual complexity. In this article, we describe conceptual models--a tool that helps articulate and make explicit assumptions about a project's context and what a project team hopes to achieve. We provide real-world examples of conceptual models, discuss the relationship between conceptual models and other evaluation tools, and describe various ways that conceptual models serve as a key planning and evaluation tool. These include, for example, that they document assumptions about a project site and they provide a basis for analyzing theories of change. It is impractical to believe that we can completely eliminate detail or dynamic complexity in projects. Nevertheless, conceptual models can help reduce the effects of this complexity by helping us understand it.

Suggested Citation

  • Margoluis, Richard & Stem, Caroline & Salafsky, Nick & Brown, Marcia, 2009. "Using conceptual models as a planning and evaluation tool in conservation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 138-147, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:32:y:2009:i:2:p:138-147
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149-7189(08)00077-3
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Trochim, William M. K., 1989. "An introduction to concept mapping for planning and evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 1-16, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lee, Jongmyoung & Hong, Sunwook & Jang, Yong Chang & Lee, Mi Jeong & Kang, Daeseok & Shim, Won Joon, 2015. "Finding solutions for the styrofoam buoy debris problem through participatory workshops," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 182-189.
    2. Corrado Battisti, 2018. "Preparing students for the operational environmental career: an integrated project-based road map for academic programs," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 8(4), pages 573-583, December.
    3. Juanjo Galan, 2020. "Towards A Relational Model for Emerging Urban Nature Concepts: A Practical Application and an External Assessment in Landscape Planning Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-21, March.
    4. Gino D. Marinucci & George Luber & Christopher K. Uejio & Shubhayu Saha & Jeremy J. Hess, 2014. "Building Resilience against Climate Effects—A Novel Framework to Facilitate Climate Readiness in Public Health Agencies," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-26, June.
    5. Portman, M.E., 2015. "Marine spatial planning in the Middle East: Crossing the policy-planning divide," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 8-15.
    6. Foote, J. & Midgley, G. & Ahuriri-Driscoll, A. & Hepi, M. & Earl-Goulet, J., 2021. "Systemic evaluation of community environmental management programmes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 288(1), pages 207-224.
    7. Gippoliti, Spartaco & Battisti, Corrado, 2017. "More cool than tool: Equivoques, conceptual traps and weaknesses of ecological networks in environmental planning and conservation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 686-691.
    8. Samantha H Cheng & Madeleine C McKinnon & Yuta J Masuda & Ruth Garside & Kelly W Jones & Daniel C Miller & Andrew S Pullin & William J Sutherland & Caitlin Augustin & David A Gill & Supin Wongbusaraku, 2020. "Strengthen causal models for better conservation outcomes for human well-being," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-15, March.
    9. Portman, Michelle E. & Notarbartolo-di-Sciara, Giuseppe & Agardy, Tundi & Katsanevakis, Stelios & Possingham, Hugh P. & Di-Carlo, Giuseppe, 2013. "He who hesitates is lost: Why conservation in the Mediterranean Sea is necessary and possible now," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 270-279.
    10. Chapman, Sarah, 2014. "A framework for monitoring social process and outcomes in environmental programs," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 45-53.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jabbar, Amina M. & Abelson, Julia, 2011. "Development of a framework for effective community engagement in Ontario, Canada," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(1), pages 59-69, June.
    2. Laura Borge & Stefanie Bröring, 2020. "What affects technology transfer in emerging knowledge areas? A multi-stakeholder concept mapping study in the bioeconomy," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 430-460, April.
    3. Mohammed Abdullatif Almulla & Mahdi Mohammed Alamri, 2021. "Using Conceptual Mapping for Learning to Affect Students’ Motivation and Academic Achievement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-17, April.
    4. Caroline Schlinkert & Marleen Gillebaart & Jeroen Benjamins & Maartje P. Poelman & Denise de Ridder, 2020. "Snacks and The City: Unexpected Low Sales of an Easy-Access, Tasty, and Healthy Snack at an Urban Snacking Hotspot," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-17, October.
    5. Goldman, Alyssa W. & Kane, Mary, 2014. "Concept mapping and network analysis: An analytic approach to measure ties among constructs," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 9-17.
    6. Sutherland, Stephanie & Katz, Steven, 2005. "Concept mapping methodology: A catalyst for organizational learning," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 257-269, August.
    7. Urban, Jennifer Brown & Hargraves, Monica & Trochim, William M., 2014. "Evolutionary Evaluation: Implications for evaluators, researchers, practitioners, funders and the evidence-based program mandate," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 127-139.
    8. Sofia Patsali, 2019. "Opening the black box of university-suppliers' co-invention: some field study evidence," Working Papers of BETA 2019-46, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    9. Luis Miranda-Gumucio & Ignacio Gil-Pechuán & Daniel Palacios-Marqués, 2013. "An exploratory study of the determinants of switching and loyalty in prepaid cell phone users. An application of concept mapping," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 7(4), pages 603-622, December.
    10. Shern, David L. & Trochim, William M. K. & LaComb, Christina A., 1995. "The use of concept mapping for assessing fidelity of model transfer: An example from psychiatric rehabilitation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 143-153.
    11. Van Holen, Frank & Van Loock, Julie & Belenger, Laurence & Vanderfaeillie, Johan, 2017. "Concept mapping the needs of grandmothers who take care of their grandchildren in formal foster care in Flanders," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 159-167.
    12. Poole, Dennis L. & Duvall, Deborah & Wofford, Bethany, 2006. "Concept mapping key elements and performance measures in a state nursing home-to-community transition project," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 10-22, February.
    13. Klenk, Nicole L. & Hickey, Gordon M., 2011. "A virtual and anonymous, deliberative and analytic participation process for planning and evaluation: The Concept Mapping Policy Delphi," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 152-165, January.
    14. Rosas, Scott R. & Ridings, John W., 2017. "The use of concept mapping in measurement development and evaluation: Application and future directions," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 265-276.
    15. Péladeau, Normand & Dagenais, Christian & Ridde, Valéry, 2017. "Concept mapping internal validity: A case of misconceived mapping?," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 56-63.
    16. Erin Lebow-Skelley & Sarah Yelton & Brandi Janssen & Esther Erdei & Melanie A. Pearson, 2020. "Identifying Issues and Priorities in Reporting Back Environmental Health Data," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-19, September.
    17. Southern, Donna M. & Young, Doris & Dunt, David & Appleby, Natalie J. & Batterham, Roy W., 2002. "Integration of primary health care services: perceptions of Australian general practitioners, non-general practitioner health service providers and consumers at the general practice-primary care inter," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 47-59, February.
    18. Brown, Jason D. & Ivanova, Viktoria & Mehta, Nisha & Skrodzki, Donna & Gerrits, Julie, 2013. "Social needs of aboriginal foster parents," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 1886-1893.
    19. Shewchuk, Richard M. & O'Connor, Stephen J. & Williams, Eric S. & Savage, Grant T., 2006. "Beyond rankings: Using cognitive mapping to understand what health care journals represent," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(5), pages 1192-1204, March.
    20. Marc Paul Verhougstraete & Sydney Brothers & Wayne Litaker & A Denene Blackwood & Rachel Noble, 2015. "Lessons Learned from Implementing a Wet Laboratory Molecular Training Workshop for Beach Water Quality Monitoring," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-13, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:32:y:2009:i:2:p:138-147. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.