Are there strategies where mapping is not required?
It is useful to assess the spatial impact of every strategy. Spatial analysis can be a powerful process and product for sharpening and implementing strategy. Teams are encouraged to be creative and resourceful in thinking about how even strategies that are often not spatially analyzed (e.g., policy or marketing strategies) might benefit from this mapping.
|
Strategy and Opportunity Mapping
|
Doesn't it take too much time to document what we have learned?
The imperative to increase the pace and scale of conservation, and to maximize the conservation return on scarce conservation funds, demands that we capture and disseminate conservation knowledge more effectively. Some of the challenges we face if we do not adequately capture what we learn include:
- Mistakes are repeated, learning is ad hoc and incremental, and conservation improves at a slow pace.
- We cannot adequately convey to supporters why they should invest in conservation projects.
- Managers and decision-makers may not have the right information to inform ongoing management actions, and program and project investments.
- Partners may be less inclined to work with us in the future if they do not receive information on the results of a project in which they invested time and energy
|
Share Advances in Knowledge Through Relevant Pathways
|
How are focal conservation challenges identified?
Focal conservation challenges are identified as part of the situation analysis in the next step, where the interactions in the socio-ecological system are explored. Some planning processes will have an initial set of focal challenges identified—in this case the focal challenges should have been identified through application of a science-based approach at a larger scale. For example, a group may run a planning process to address the challenge of securing freshwater for nature and people in Africa. A broad challenge has been identified as a starting point, but the situation analysis, including conversations with local communities and other key stakeholders, will help identify specific water-related challenges in the region of focus. Ideally, the selection of securing freshwater as a key challenge in Africa would have happened through a global or multi-regional science-based process that identified freshwater as a key challenge in Africa (see Appendix H for the Conservancy’s approach to this type of analysis).
|
Specify Planning Context
|
How can we know what our organization should be held accountable for if the goal can include outcomes from the collective actions of partners?
In step eight, the theory of change will explicitly identify who is responsible for completing the tasks required to achieve the outcome. You might also want to consider employing an approach called Outcome Mapping, which is compatible with the Theory of Change approach, and helps measure contributions to complex change processes. See the OM Practitioner Manual for guidance, and learn more about the approach at the OM website.
|
Draft a Minimum Goal Statement
|
How detailed (scale and accuracy) does the spatial information need to be for use in strategy mapping?
Seek the best information available, but sometimes even this data is coarse. We should have in mind two main questions. Does the information quality allow us to make a better assessment of the strategy than we could without the information? Can the uncertainty in data make it misleading? It is important to document data quality and keep uncertainties in mind when evaluating the potential impacts of a strategy. Ask yourself how an analysis would change if a data layer were removed. This will reveal whether conclusions are dependent on a particular data layer. If your strategy is highly dependent on a data layer that you consider unreliable, then seek a different approach to map your strategy.
|
Strategy and Opportunity Mapping
|
How do I identify potential negative impacts of strategies to stakeholders and vulnerable peoples (especially those not represented on the project team)?
First, identify different stakeholder and sub-stakeholder groups. Next, determine how they use the natural resources for their subsistence, income, cultural activities, etc. Then, determine how the conservation initiative will change natural resources for all groups and how this may impact vulnerable groups or may favor already powerful groups exacerbating power imbalances. Finally, engage representatives from stakeholder groups to aid in identifying consequences that are not immediately apparent.
|
Identify Candidate Strategies
|
If we can collect information with no defined user or purpose right now, but that might useful in the future, should we collect it?
Given resource constraints, monitoring should be limited to data for which there is an identified purpose. Even where data collection is cheap, data management and analysis incur costs that are often overlooked. Rather than collecting data for which there is not an identified need, focus on more completely assessing information needs to ensure that the data that are collected are the right data.
|
Define Measures and Create a Monitoring and Evaluation Plan
|
If we have a step in a theory of change or results chain that has not been identified as having a measures or monitoring need, is that a problem?
Not necessarily. Monitoring should be focused on filling information needs identified in step 1. In general, replication or leveraging a strategy will require building the evidence base to demonstrate the effectiveness of the strategy, and links for which evidence is lacking should be monitored. Some steps or links such as impacts resulting from intermediate outcomes are well known and documented already, and are rigorously inferred, and may not require monitoring.
|
Define Measures and Create a Monitoring and Evaluation Plan
|
Isn't it enough to publish or post what we have learned? Won't people find what they need online?
The vast amount of information available online means that it is often difficult and time-consuming to find the best information to meet a particular need. The adage “we don’t know what we don’t know” applies here, and human learning is fundamentally social. Through interaction with peers, practitioners are more quickly directed to the most relevant resources, learn how to apply the evidence in their own context, are introduced to new ideas and approaches, and are encouraged and empowered to find appropriate solutions to the specific challenges they face by building on the insights and experiences of others. Additionally, some
communications may need to happen in person. Take into account groups that may have limited access to other means of communication or who are more comfortable communicating face-to-face.
|
Share Advances in Knowledge Through Relevant Pathways
|
Should a situation analysis always have some links to people in it?
Yes. There are no systems on earth where we may work towards our mission that are not impacted by people, and very few where people are not impacted in any way by the state of the environment. However, it is also true that there will seldom be connections within a system between nature and all components of human well-being. Care should be given to be clear about exactly how people and nature are connected both positively and negatively.
|
Conduct a Situation Analysis
|
What are some examples of how to identify a minimum threshold?
For some challenges we face, there are scientifically defensible ways to identify how much improvement is ‘enough’, or sufficient to meet a desirable state. For example, consider a key challenge where a fish species of high conservation value is in decline, placing that species at risk of extinction and limiting local participation in the fishery, reducing employment and ruling out that ability to choose a fishing way of life. Ecological research may have identified a value of lambda (or some other population viability measure) that reflects a viable population trajectory. This value could be used as the minimum goal for the conservation outcome. Separately, social research or stakeholder discussions may have identified how large fisheries landings need to be to support local community engagement in the fishery at a level they feel fosters sufficient employment and allows all those who chose a fishing way of
life to be engaged in the fishery. This level of landings could be used as the minimum goal for the linked social outcome associated with the key challenge.
|
Draft a Minimum Goal Statement
|
What do I do if a strategy is determined to have a potential negative impact on a stakeholder group or vulnerable peoples?
Do not engage in strategies that you know will negatively impact vulnerable peoples. Such strategies should either be adjusted so that negative impact is no longer likely, or dropped if such adjustments cannot be made. If strategies are expected to have a negative impact on some target stakeholders that are not considered vulnerable, determine whether changes can be made to eliminate or minimize these impacts and if the conservation strategy is still justified given the negative impacts to these stakeholders. Exploration of these additional options may be best done in the results chain step where you can get more specific about the logical pathways through which negative impacts may occur, and explore additional strategy elements that may reduce such risks.
|
Identify Candidate Strategies
|
What extra precautions are required for research involving human subjects?
There is consensus in the research community about the ethics and appropriate protocols and standards for any research involving human subjects. Large universities have dedicated offices that provide this information for their academic comm unity (e.g., Stanford University, University of Washington, University of Minnesota), and federally funded projects and grants that include research on human subjects require ethical approval. Conservancy staff should follow the Conservancy’s Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for research involving human subjects, which applies to all research involving human subjects sponsored by the conservancy, whether conducted by Conservancy employees, volunteers or agents (such as a contractor), or by any third party using the Conservancy’s facilities. The SOP includes specific guidance for researchers on research principles, permissible research and approval requirements, risk, informed consent, data security, and government funding.
|
Define Measures and Create a Monitoring and Evaluation Plan
|
What if anticipated strategies can achieve more than the minimum threshold — should the goal reflect the maximum outcomes we hope to achieve?
No.
The point here is not to set the final goal you think you can achieve through a selected set of strategies, but to put a lower bound on how big of a change would be enough to warrant pursuing a strategy. This gives a reference point to compare strategies against, and ensures that any strategy (or set of strategies) selected has the potential to contribute to systemic change.
|
Draft a Minimum Goal Statement
|
What if negative impacts to vulnerable populations cannot be avoided or eliminated?
While it is not possible to always eliminate all negative impacts to people, it should always be possible to mitigate negative impacts to people. A thorough situation analysis and results chain should highlight where there may be negative impacts. Whenever there are significant risks to vulnerable populations, implement a thorough monitoring and evaluation plan to track and evaluate whether and how much people are negatively impacted by the conservation strategy. It is important to ensure that our practices respect the human rights as stated in international law, such as the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
|
Select Strategy or Strategies
|
What if no strategies can be identified that can achieve conservation or human well-being goals ?
Planners may either decide to invest resources toward trying to address other conservation challenges or may choose to pursue the best available strategy. The latter approach is only justifiable if additional strategies, including ones pursued by other organizations, are anticipated that could ultimately add up to achieve the goal.
|
Select Strategy or Strategies
|
What if spatial data are not available?
Do the best you can. There now exist global datasets for soils, land uses, populations, forest cover change, endangered species and many other elements of interest. Expert knowledge can be captured and made spatial with simple online tools. Even places initially assumed to lack data can be amenable to spatial analysis with a little creativity and effort.
|
Strategy and Opportunity Mapping
|
What is the difference between a conceptual model or situation analysis diagram and a results chain?
The conceptual model or situation analysis diagram describes the situation today, helping us to illuminate potential points of intervention and identify strategies, whereas the results chain starts with proposed conservation actions and illustrates how
they will cause changes that result in achieving your goal.
|
Construct Results Chains
|
What is the difference between a theory of change and a results chain?
A theory of change should be a simplified description of the detailed logic of the results chains; it should briefly and clearly state the case for the proposed body of work. Importantly, the theory of change provides additional information that augments the logic of the results chains by making a strong case for why the strategies will work now and why your organization is the right one to implement the proposed solutions. Finally, it also provides context about the conservation challenge and your team’s definition of success.
|
Articulate Theory of Change
|
When should partners and stakeholders be included in developing the situation analysis ?
Collaborative development of the situation analysis with partners and stakeholders is encouraged if:
- It has a clear strategic purpose;
- They will be needed to implement the project,
- It provides knowledge of the situation and landscape that could not otherwise be achieved; and/or
- If certain vulnerable populations stand to be impacted, such as indigenous peoples and local place-based communities. Including more organizations and people absent a clear strategic purpose can be time-consuming and unproductive, as can including them without a clear objective and plan for their engagement.
Partners and stakeholders should be included if, at a minimum:
- Time and resources can be provided for meaningful engagement;
- Joint planning and action is a clear priority for all parties;
- Achieving outcomes depends on working closely with those partners and stakeholders
AND at least one of the following is true:
- You are jointly delivering results for an identified outcome;
- Organizational budget decisions will impact partners or vice versa;
- You are jointly fundraising;
- You have MOUs, Teaming agreements and/or joint work plans in place;
- There is a risk of negative impact to vulnerable stakeholders.
|
Conduct a Situation Analysis
|
Why aren't conservation targets (species, systems, processes, services) selected as part of scoping?
Specific conservation targets, which are also referred to by the more general term, primary interests, are identified as part of the subsequent situation analysis step, unless they are defined a priori as part of a science-based definition of the topical scope. Human well-being interests should also be identified during the situation analysis.
|
Specify Planning Context
|
