Dear Counterfactual Enthusiasts,
Welcome to the first edition of the bi-annual SCB IEWG Research Briefings, where we explore the latest insights in conservation impact evaluation. Our featured papers highlight both the promise and the challenges of applying robust counterfactual impact evaluation approaches to conservation policy and practice. This edition has been timed to arrive shortly before ICCB 2025, with the aim of sparking reflection and dialogue ahead of the conference. We hope it encourages you to engage with these ideas – and with each other – as we collectively advance the science and practice of conservation evaluation.
Enjoy!
Protected Areas: Mixed Results, Global Lessons
Mixed effectiveness of global protected areas in resisting habitat loss uses cutting-edge causal inference to show that protected areas have varied effects – and that context matters. The paper highlights that one-size-fits-all solutions may fall short in the face of diverse land-use dynamics.
Rethinking Responsibility for Impact
An impact evaluation of conservation investments targeting long-distance migratory species shifts the lens from evaluating conservation actions to assessing conservation investments – using synthetic controls to measure the impact of funding on shorebird populations across the Pacific Americas Flyway. This is a rare large-scale evaluation of migratory species – and a call for smarter funding strategies and better monitoring.
When Bans Backfire
Banning Wildlife Trade Can Boost the Unregulated Trade of Threatened Species applies synthetic difference-in-differences to explore the unintended effects of wildlife trade bans. The key message? Policy design must account for behavioral spillovers and incentive shifts to avoid shifting problems elsewhere.
Logging Without Loss?
Forest concessions and eco-certifications in the Peruvian Amazon challenges expectations: while eco-certification showed no significant effect, logging concessions may have reduced forest loss. A compelling case for local context and nuanced analysis.
DIGGING INTO COUNTERFACTUAL METHODS
Causal Inference Made Accessible
Foundations and Future Directions for Causal Inference in Ecological Research provides a rare bridge between technical precision and usability. With clear visuals, workflows and decision trees, this guide is a must for ecologists aiming to use causal methods effectively.
Matching Methods, Misplaced Claims?
Causal claims, causal assumptions and protected area impact critiques a high-profile Nature study, highlighting how weak causal assumptions and inadequate control for time-varying factors can inflate claims of success. A sharp reminder to scrutinize methodological robustness.
🌟 Spotlight: SCB IEWG Special Issue
Featuring contributions from our community, this trio of papers offers new directions for rigorous and inclusive impact evaluation.
Experimentation in Practice
Lessons learned from 10 years of embedding experimentation in agri-environmental programs in the U.S. offers insights from inside government programs. It shows the organizational and political barriers to embedding rigorous evaluation—and the trade-offs between learning and showing success.
Designing RCTs for Conservation
RCTs in the wild presents a helpful typology for randomized trials in ecological settings, combining behavioral and environmental considerations. For those designing field trials, it’s a practical and thoughtful resource.
Inclusive Conservation in Namibia
Pathways to more inclusive and effective black rhino conservation draws on a decade of experience using process tracing and adaptive management to align anti-poaching efforts with local values. A model of socially grounded, evidence-informed conservation.
📚 Final Word
Taken together, these articles underscore the progress and ongoing challenges of applying counterfactual thinking in conservation impact evaluation. They show that while the methods are advancing, their interpretation and application demand both rigor and caution. Let’s continue challenging ourselves and our assumptions to advance evidence-based biodiversity conservation that really benefits both people and nature.
Until next time,
The SCB Impact Evaluation Working Group (IEWG)
With a contribution from Diogo Verissimo
If you have any comments or suggestions about this newsletter, please email: teamcounterfactual@gmail.com
