Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39417601›Full record

ReviewConservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology2025

Challenges in assessing the effects of environmental governance systems on conservation outcomes.

Raphael A Ayambire, Trina Rytwinski, Jessica J Taylor, Matthew W Luizza, Matthew J Muir, Cynthia Cadet, Derek Armitage, Nathan J Bennett, Jeremy Brooks, Samantha H Cheng and 8 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Challenges in assessing the effects of environmental governance systems on conservation outcomes.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors.

Raphael A AyambireDepartment of City Planning, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Trina RytwinskiCanadian Centre for Evidence-Based Conservation, Institute of Environmental and Interdisciplinary Science, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-6764-7309
Jessica J TaylorCanadian Centre for Evidence-Based Conservation, Institute of Environmental and Interdisciplinary Science, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Matthew W LuizzaInternational Affairs, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Falls Church, Virginia, USA.
Matthew J MuirInternational Affairs, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Falls Church, Virginia, USA.
Cynthia CadetCanadian Centre for Evidence-Based Conservation, Institute of Environmental and Interdisciplinary Science, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Derek ArmitageSchool of Environment, Resources and Sustainability, Faculty of Environment, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8921-1693
Nathan J BennettGlobal Science, World Wildlife Fund, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Jeremy BrooksSchool of Environment and Natural Resources, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Samantha H ChengGlobal Science, World Wildlife Fund, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Jenny MartinezInternational Affairs, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Falls Church, Virginia, USA.
Meenakshi NagendranInternational Affairs, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Falls Church, Virginia, USA.
Siri ÖckermanCanadian Centre for Evidence-Based Conservation, Institute of Environmental and Interdisciplinary Science, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-6678-4579
Shannon N RiveraInternational Affairs, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Falls Church, Virginia, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9350-3608
Anne SavageProyecto Titi, Inc., Orlando, Florida, USA.
David S WilkieWildlife Conservation Society, Bronx, New York, USA.
Steven J CookeCanadian Centre for Evidence-Based Conservation, Institute of Environmental and Interdisciplinary Science, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Joseph R BennettCanadian Centre for Evidence-Based Conservation, Institute of Environmental and Interdisciplinary Science, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3901-9513

Funding

Carleton University 187779Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada 315918U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 140F0420P0252
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Effective governance is crucial for the success of conservation projects aimed at protecting wildlife populations and supporting human well-being. However, few large-scale, comprehensive syntheses have been conducted on the effects of different environmental governance types on conservation outcomes (i.e., biological and ecological effectiveness or effects of conservation on human well-being), and clarity on the quantity and quality of evidence remains dispersed and ambiguous. We attempted a systematic map of the evidence on the effectiveness of different governance types to meet desired conservation outcomes in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. However, early in this effort, we observed a general lack of empirical research on the links between governance and conservation outcomes. To fill observed data gaps in the evidence base, we tried triangulating governance data from alternative sources (Protected Planet database) and pooling evidence from research conducted within the same conservation areas. Limited data were contained in the Protected Planet database, and governance types in conservation areas and landscapes were complex, making it difficult to use these approaches to assign governance types to conservation areas. To illustrate our observations from the failed systematic map attempt, we prepared a rapid evidence map that outlines a subset of the evidence base of articles linking governance types and governance principles with conservation outcomes. Only 3.2% (34 of 1067) of the articles we screened directly related conservation outcomes to governance type, and even fewer related governance principles to conservation outcomes. Based on our findings, we recommend improving the evidence base by supporting empirical research and increasing the availability and quality of governance data in freely accessible databases. These recommendations are critical for enhancing understanding of the role of governance in conservation projects and improving conservation outcomes.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesEnvironmental PolicyAfricaAsiaLatin Americaacciones de conservacióncogestióncogovernanceconservation actionsconservation interventionsevidence mapgestión compartidagestión de IPLCintervenciones de conservaciónIPLC governancemapa de evidenciasresultados socialesresultados socioecológicosshared governancesocial outcomessocioecological outcomes

Identifiers

PMID39417601
PMCPMC11780196

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.