IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v32y2009i2p138-147.html

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

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.

    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. Panagiotis Koudoumakis & George Botzoris & Angelos Protopapas, 2022. "Cohesion policy evaluation: Guidelines for selection of appropriate methods," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(5), pages 1062-1084, October.
    5. 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.
    6. Gausman, Jewel & Lloyd, Danielle & Kallon, Thomas & Subramanian, S.V. & Langer, Ana & Austin, S. Bryn, 2019. "Clustered risk: An ecological understanding of sexual activity among adolescent boys and girls in two urban slums in Monrovia, Liberia," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 224(C), pages 106-115.
    7. Alejandro Alvarado-Herrera & Enrique Bigne & Joaquín Aldas-Manzano & Rafael Curras-Perez, 2017. "A Scale for Measuring Consumer Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility Following the Sustainable Development Paradigm," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 140(2), pages 243-262, January.
    8. Dare, Lynn & Nowicki, Elizabeth, 2019. "Engaging children and youth in research and evaluation using group concept mapping," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 1-1.
    9. Maria Cerretta & Lidia Diappi, 2014. "Adaptive Evaluations in Complex Contexts: Introduction," SCIENZE REGIONALI, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2014(1 Suppl.), pages 5-22.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Menconi, M.E. & Tasso, S. & Santinelli, M. & Grohmann, D., 2020. "A card game to renew urban parks: Face-to-face and online approach for the inclusive involvement of local community," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. Rosas, Scott R. & Camphausen, Lauren C., 2007. "The use of concept mapping for scale development and validation in evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 125-135, May.
    19. Ryan, Scott & Wiles, Debra & Cash, Scottye & Siebert, Carl, 2005. "Risk assessments: empirically supported or values driven?," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 213-225, February.
    20. Olav Muurlink & Anthony M. Gould & Jean-Etienne Joullié, 2023. "Clustered Iconography: A Resurrected Method for Representing Multidimensional Data," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 52(2), pages 956-992, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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.