Evaluating outcomes of conservation with multidimensional indicators of well-being

Many conservation interventions are hypothesized to be beneficial for both the environment and people's well-being, but this has rarely been tested rigorously. We examined the effects of adoption or nonadoption of a conservation intervention on 3 dimensions of people's well-being (material, relational, and subjective) over time. We focused on a fisheries bycatch management initiative intended to reduce environmental externalities associated with resource extraction. We collected panel data from fishers (n = 250) in villages with (adopters and nonadopters) and without (control) the conservation intervention 3 times over 2 years. We found no evidence that adoption reduced any of the 3 dimensions of well-being in the local populations affected by the intervention. There were modest improvements in material (t = -1.58) and subjective livelihood well-being (p = 0.04) for adopters relative to nonadopters over time. The variations in well-being experiences (in terms of magnitude of change) among adopters, nonadopters, and controls across the different domains over time affirmed the dynamic and social nature of well-being.

Automated summary

The study found that the adoption of a conservation intervention did not significantly improve the well-being of local populations, but adopters showed modest improvements in material and subjective livelihood well-being compared to nonadopters over time. Variations in well-being experiences among adopters, nonadopters, and controls across different domains affirmed the dynamic and social nature of well-being.