Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41292143›Full record

ArticleConservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology2026

Evaluating past and future contributions of conservation programs to species recovery.

Rebeca E Young, H Resit Akçakaya, Elizabeth L Bennett, Michael Hoffmann, Michael A Hudson, Barney Long, Thalassa McMurdo Hamilton, Kelsey Neam, Megan A Owen, Richard P Young and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 2026. 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. Evaluating past and future contributions of conservation programs to species recovery.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026
    Article
  2. A global indicator of species recovery.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025
    Article
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

11 authors.

Rebeca E YoungDurrell Wildlife Conservation Trust, Trinity, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6292-5813
H Resit AkçakayaDepartment of Ecology and Evolution, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York, USA.
Elizabeth L BennettWildlife Conservation Society, Bronx, New York, USA.
Michael HoffmannZoological Society of London, London, UK.
Michael A HudsonDurrell Wildlife Conservation Trust, Trinity, UK.
Barney LongRe:wild, Washington, DC, USA.
Thalassa McMurdo HamiltonZoological Society of London, London, UK.
Kelsey NeamRe:wild, Washington, DC, USA.
Megan A OwenSan Diego Zoo Wildlife Alliance, San Diego, California, USA.
Richard P YoungNature Positive, Bath, UK.
Molly K GraceDepartment of Biology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Funding

San Diego Zoo Wildlife Alliance
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Impact evaluation of conservation actions is a crucial step in global efforts to curb the biodiversity crisis. Through robust impact evaluation, practitioners can assess the effectiveness of conservation strategies and optimize the use of limited resources. Despite a proliferation of methods and tools for evaluating conservation impact, no standardized method exists to assess and compare the impact, and global contribution, of species recovery programs. To address this gap, we devised an evaluation framework, based on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Green Status of Species (GSS), a global standard for measuring species recovery. We sought to provide a way for conservation program delivery partners to evaluate the effectiveness of their programs in contributing to global species recovery. We adapted 2 scenarios used in GSS assessments to estimate the impact of worldwide conservation actions on a species (the counterfactual current scenario and the future without conservation scenario), in order to propose a new assessment: the program GSS, a method allowing conservation practitioners to estimate the past and potential future impacts of a conservation program relative to the global impact. To identify the strengths and limitations of applying the GSS method at the program level and to gather proof of concept for our adaptation, we tested the proposed method on 16 species recovery programs. The program GSS approach identified past or future impacts of program actions on species status in 9 of the programs assessed. The detectability of program impact and the relative impact of the program compared with global impact were influenced by time since program establishment and program scope (i.e., proportion of a species' population or distribution included in the program). Our framework for program GSS assessments can provide practitioners with a standard, straightforward, and cost-effective way to communicate conservation successes and expected future impacts. Results from our program GSS framework can be compared with the global recovery of a species (conservation legacy and conservation impact) and thus indicate a program's contribution to the recovery of the entire species.

Indexed as

BiodiversityConservation of Natural ResourcesProgram Evaluationconservation impactEstado Verde de las Especies de la UICNevaluación de impactosevaluación de programasimpact evaluationimpacto de la conservaciónIUCNIUCN Green Status of Specieslista rojaprogramprogramaprogram evaluationrecuperación de especiesred listspecies recoveryUICN世界自然保护联盟(IUCN)世界自然保护联盟物种绿色状况保护影响影响评估物种恢复红色名录项目项目评估

Identifiers

PMID41292143
PMCPMC13036293

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.