Cited by 19Evaluation and Performance AssessmentLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management

A framework for monitoring social process and outcomes in environmental programs

Chapman, Sarah·2014·Evaluation and Program Planning

Abstract

When environmental programs frame their activities as being in the service of human wellbeing, social variables need to be integrated into monitoring and evaluation (M&E) frameworks. This article draws upon ecosystem services theory to develop a framework to guide the M&E of collaborative environmental programs with anticipated social benefits. The framework has six components: program need, program activities, pathway process variables, moderating process variables, outcomes, and program value. Needs are defined in terms of ecosystem services, as well as other human needs that must be addressed to achieve outcomes. The pathway variable relates to the development of natural resource governance capacity in the target community. Moderating processes can be externalities such as the inherent capacity of the natural system to service ecosystem needs, local demand for natural resources, policy or socio-economic drivers. Internal program-specific processes relate to program service delivery, targeting and participant responsiveness. Ecological outcomes are expressed in terms of changes in landscape structure and function, which in turn influence ecosystem service provision. Social benefits derived from the program are expressed in terms of the value of the eco-social service to user-specified goals. The article provides suggestions from the literature for identifying indicators and measures for components and component variables, and concludes with an example of how the framework was used to inform the M&E of an adaptive co-management program in western Kenya.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2014.07.004

Cites

82 of 82 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Studying the effects of actions is necessary but it is important to also build understanding about systems' processes, socioeconomic dimensions, and context that influences the system.

    “Studying the effects of actions is necessary but it is important to also build understanding about systems' processes (e.g. Cundill and Fabricius, 2009), socioeconomic dimensions (e.g. Chapman, 2014), and context that influences the system (Morandi et al., 2014)”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 84 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chapman, S.
Affiliations
University of Cape Town (ZA)
Corresponding author
Chapman, Sarah
Venue
Evaluation and Program Planning
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-12
Volume
47
Pages
45-53
ISSN
0149-7189 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1979461416
Cited by
19
References
84
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2
FWCI
3.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Evaluation and Program Planning (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Evaluation and Performance Assessment
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Land Use and Ecosystem Services
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Keywords
ecosystem services, social outcomes, human well-being, adaptive co-management, program needs assessment, landscape structure and function, monitoring indicators, Western Kenya
MeSH terms
Conservation of Natural Resources, Cooperative Behavior, Environmental Health, Humans, Kenya, Research Design, Social Sciences, Socioeconomic Factors, Program Evaluation, Policy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review