Checklists, Boxes and Tables

Table 1.1

Summary of studies looking at inefficiencies or potential gains in investment from using evidence.

16

Table 1.2

How the components of decision making shown in Figure 1.4 become more precise as thinking moves around and inwards around the hexagon towards making a decision.

18

Table 1.3

Suggested questions for determining the extent of good practice.

21

Table 2.1

Some common distinguishing features that can be used to classify different types of evidence.

34

Table 2.2

Some examples of evidence and their suggested classification based on Table 2.1.

35

Table 2.3

Criteria for classifying evidence weight scores, as shown in Figure 2.1.

37

Table 2.4

Types of financial costs and benefits of conservation interventions.

44

Table 2.5

Comparison of the effectiveness of six experimental and quasi-experimental methods.

58

Table 2.6

A classification, with examples, of the elements of most statements.

61

Table 4.1.

Suggested possible content, with examples, for presenting different means of searching for evidence.

98

Table 4.2

The terms used to describe study designs in Conservation Evidence summaries.

101

Table 4.3

Conversion of weights of single pieces of evidence (from multiplying three axes) into descriptions of evidence strengths.

107

Table 4.4

Converting the combined evidence into statements of the strength of evidence.

108

Table 4.5

The Strategic Evidence Assessment model.

109

Table 4.6

Terms suggested by the IPCC (2005) for referring to probabilities.

110

Table 4.7

Examples of ‘weasel’ terms whose likelihood is ambiguous.

110

Table 4.8

The different main elements of summarising evidence described in this chapter with an illustrative sentence.

113

Table 4.9

Example of tabular presentation of evidence for a proposed project that plans to introduce natural grazing with ponies to the montado habitat in Iberia to increase biodiversity.

115

Table 4.10

Summary of current evidence for analytical questions relating to the theory of change shown in Figure 4.7.

123

Table 4.11

A conditional probability table for the Sprinkler node given the three states of the Weather node.

125

Table 5.1

Some of the most common sources of bias.

140

Table 5.2

Summary of strategies for improving individual experts’ judgements.

145

Table 5.3

Summary of strategies for improving group judgements.

152

Table 6.1

Types of interactions with communities.

184

Table 6.2

Groups that may be impacted by interventions and other key figures.

185

Table 6.3.

An example of a stakeholder analysis.

188

Table 7.1

Potential actions concerning wide-scale and local changes.

202

Table 7.2

Examples of diversity within environmental horizon scanning.

209

Table 8.1

Summary of tools described in this chapter.

240

Table 8.2.

A list of fundamental questions that can be used to quickly sketch a decision.

244

Table 8.3

A consequences table for seven different river management options (including no change with the river continuing to deteriorate) assessed under six criteria. Evidence is shown in relation to the current status.

252

Table 8.4

As for Table 8.3 but with options C (expensive), F (flooding) and the tourism criterion (not important) all removed.

254

Table 8.5

As for Table 8.4 but with dominated options B and E removed along with water quality (as no longer differs).

254

Table 8.6

As for Table 8.5 but with D’s moderate gain in fish swapped for a 2% reduction in flood risk and G’s considerable benefits in fish swapped for a 5% reduction in flood risk.

256

Table 8.7

As for Table 8.6 but with A’s increase in flood risk considered equivalent $5 cost, D’s reduction in flood risk considered equivalent to $290 savings and G’s equivalent to $75 savings.

256

Table 8.8

The consequence table with the preferred option D but with a new option (H) added, which is now considered the overall preferred option.

257

Table 8.9

Strategy table for an imaginary series of programmes.

258

Table 9.1

Examples of wording to describe different evidence support when omitting evidence sources.

275

Table 9.2

Evidence Use Capability Maturity Model.

276

Table 9.3

Evidence used during different stages of creating agricultural schemes to benefit biodiversity including whether the necessary information is already collated and easily available (YES, PARTLY, NO) and how evidence gaps were filled.

281

Table 9.4

Example text describing range of approaches for evidence checking.

292

Table 10.1

The different stages of a project life cycle (see Figure 10.1) at which data can be collected, with examples of the type of data at each stage.

310

Table 11.1

A taxonomy of reasons for project failure.

344

Table 11.2

Summary of learning from failure methods.

348

Table 11.3

Identifying significant species within Ingleby Farms using IUCN Red List, National lists and the status on farms.

352

Table 11.4

The Whitley Fund for Nature evidence summary table used for shortlisted projects.

361