4.6 Article

Statistical matching for conservation science

Journal

CONSERVATION BIOLOGY
Volume 34, Issue 3, Pages 538-549

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/cobi.13448

Keywords

causal inference; conservation effectiveness; counterfactual; impact evaluation; spillover; spatial autocorrelation; autocorrelacion espacial; consecuencias indirectas; efectividad de la conservacion; evaluacion de impacto; hipotesis de contraste; inferencia causal; (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic); (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic); (sic)(sic)(sic); (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic); (sic)(sic)(sic); (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)

Funding

  1. FinCEAL programme
  2. Economic and Social Research Council [ES/I019650/1]
  3. Kone Foundation
  4. European Union's Horizon 2020 Marie Sklodowska-Curie programme [676108]
  5. Villum Fonden [VKR023371]
  6. Leverhulme Trust [RPG-2014-056]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The awareness of the need for robust impact evaluations in conservation is growing and statistical matching techniques are increasingly being used to assess the impacts of conservation interventions. Used appropriately matching approaches are powerful tools, but they also pose potential pitfalls. We outlined important considerations and best practice when using matching in conservation science. We identified 3 steps in a matching analysis. First, develop a clear theory of change to inform selection of treatment and controls and that accounts for real-world complexities and potential spillover effects. Second, select the appropriate covariates and matching approach. Third, assess the quality of the matching by carrying out a series of checks. The second and third steps can be repeated and should be finalized before outcomes are explored. Future conservation impact evaluations could be improved by increased planning of evaluations alongside the intervention, better integration of qualitative methods, considering spillover effects at larger spatial scales, and more publication of preanalysis plans. Implementing these improvements will require more serious engagement of conservation scientists, practitioners, and funders to mainstream robust impact evaluations into conservation. We hope this article will improve the quality of evaluations and help direct future research to continue to improve the approaches on offer.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available