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]