Skip to main content

Table 1 Potential outcomes of systematic conservation planning arranged according to capitals.

From: Absence of evidence for the conservation outcomes of systematic conservation planning around the globe: a systematic map

Capital Definition Outcome sub-category
Natural The stock and flow of goods and services provided by ecosystems, including the diversity of species, regulating processes, and supporting services [87] Reduction in loss or degradation of natural values
Persistence of biodiversity
Maintenance of ecosystem services
Financial The gain or loss of cash, property or assets that represent the economic value of an individual or organization Transparency in conservation investments
Efficiency of operations
Maximised benefit given limited budget
Leverage of additional funds or in-kind support
Social Represents the relationships and interactions between individuals and groups [88] Collaboration among agencies
Coordination between different actors
Trust in planning process
Sharing datasets between agencies
Shared vision
Attitudes of stakeholders
Power dynamics between stakeholders
Human Knowledge or skills that enable people to develop strategies to achieve their objectives [89] Raised awareness of biodiversity or conservation
New knowledge of ecological or social values
Learning applied in future plans
Institutional Capacity, structure, or functioning of institutions through formal (e.g. laws) or informal means (e.g. local governance practices) [90] Influence on future decision making by organisation or partners
Self-sustaining strategies
Role of implementing agency
Consideration of conservation issues in decision making by other sectors
Integration of priorities into policies, conventions or legislation
Influence on resource-use planning
Protected areas expanded
  1. Representativeness was removed as an example of a natural capital outcome [58]