Evaluation of biodiversity policy instruments: what works and what doesn't?
回顾发现，常见保护工具的可信评估仍然稀缺，保护区能适度减少森林砍伐，但生态系统服务付费等政策证据更弱，呼吁开展更多评估以指导发展中国家生物多样性保护。
We review and confirm the claim that credible evaluations of common conservation instruments continue to be rare. The limited set of rigorous studies suggests that protected areas cause modest reductions in deforestation; however, the evidence base for payments for ecosystem services, decentralization policies and other interventions is much weaker. Thus, we renew our urgent call for more evaluations from many more biodiversity-relevant locations. Specifically, we call for a programme of research— Conservation Evaluation 2.0 —that seeks to measure how programme impacts vary by socio-political and bio-physical context, to track economic and environmental impacts jointly, to identify spatial spillover effects to untargeted areas, and to use theories of change to characterize causal mechanisms that can guide the collection of data and the interpretation of results. Only then can we usefully contribute to the debate over how to protect biodiversity in developing countries. Copyright 2012, Oxford University Press.