Conservation Effectiveness

Conservation Effectiveness is a multi-part series investigating whether conservation strategies work or not. The series is the result of a collaboration between Mongabay staff reporters Shreya Dasgupta and Mike Gaworecki, and a team of conservation scientists led by tropical forest ecologist Zuzana Burivalova from Princeton University.

This page includes detailed methodology we’ve used, references to all studies included in the stories and links to downloadable data for each conservation strategy.

Detailed methodology
– How we reviewed the evidence for stories on forest certification, payments for ecosystem services, community-based forest management and terrestrial protected areas.
– How we reviewed the evidence for story on marine protected areas.

Downloadable data

• Data on forest certification (pdf)
• Data on payments for ecosystem services (PES) (pdf)
• Data on community-based forest management (pdf)
• Data on terrestrial protected areas (pdf)
• Data on marine protected areas (pdf)

References

• Studies reviewed for story on forest certification
• Studies reviewed for story on payments for ecosystem services (PES)
• Studies reviewed for story on community-based forest management
• Studies reviewed for story on terrestrial protected areas
• Studies reviewed for story on marine protected areas

Infographics

• Visualization of evidence on forest certification
• Visualization of evidence on payments for ecosystem services (PES)
• Visualization of evidence on community-based forest management
• Visualization of evidence on terrestrial protected areas
• Visualization of evidence on marine protected areas

Articles

• Community buy-in stamps out elephant poaching in Zambian park
  22 April 2019, 2:21 pm
• On a wing and a prayer? Evidence for ways to conserve bats (commentary)
  5 April 2019, 1:42 pm
• New maps show where humans are pushing species closer to extinction
  15 March 2019, 8:28 am
• Audio: The sounds of a rare New Zealand bird reintroduced to its native habitat
  20 February 2019, 12:05 pm
• Eavesdrop on forest sounds to effectively monitor biodiversity, researchers say
  3 January 2019, 7:52 pm
• The nature of conservation evidence: Imperfect, but good enough (commentary)
  4 December 2018, 12:17 pm
• Google searches reveal public interest in conservation is rising
  15 November 2018, 9:04 pm
• Forest communities pay the price for conservation in Madagascar
  25 July 2018, 1:13 pm
• Conservation Effectiveness series sparks action, dialogue
  23 April 2018, 1:09 pm
• Response to critique on Conservation Effectiveness series (commentary)
  17 April 2018, 1:03 pm
• Seek higher standards to honestly assess conservation effectiveness (commentary)
  17 April 2018, 1:03 pm
• Greenpeace International ends its Forest Stewardship Council membership
  30 March 2018, 3:44 am
• Do environmental advocacy campaigns drive successful forest conservation?
  29 March 2018, 1:07 pm
• FSC-certified timber importer failed to check legality of shipment from Cameroon
  19 March 2018, 3:39 am
• Ecotourism payments for more wildlife sightings linked to conservation benefits in Laos
  5 March 2018, 11:01 am
• Restoration optimism: Bringing nature back (commentary)
  13 February 2018, 12:18 pm
• The ups and downs of marine protected areas: Examining the evidence
  25 January 2018, 3:00 pm
• Do protected areas work in the tropics?
  18 December 2017, 1:08 pm
• Experience or evidence: How do big conservation NGOs make decisions?
  21 November 2017, 1:10 pm
• Does community-based forest management work in the tropics?
  2 November 2017, 3:49 pm
• Cash for conservation: Do payments for ecosystem services work?
  12 October 2017, 2:23 pm
• Does forest certification really work?
  21 September 2017, 2:11 pm
• What works in conservation? In-depth series starts next week
  15 September 2017, 1:19 pm
• Conservation community failing to use evidence to make decisions, scientists say
  31 July 2017, 11:21 am

Commentaries

• Restoration optimism: Bringing nature back (commentary)