Did we achieve what we aimed for? Assessing the outcomes of a human–carnivore conflict mitigation and coexistence project in Europe

Abstract

Monitoring and evaluation practices, demanded by nature conservation project donors, often focus on practical outputs, leaving the assessment of intended short and medium‐term outcomes and long‐term impacts challenging. This study employs a merger of the conflict intervention triangle model (CITM) and its three dimensions relationship, substance, and process, together with the logical framework approach (LFA) within the context of a human–wildlife conflict and coexistence (HWCC) project (LIFE EuroLargeCarnivores) in order to assess project correlated outcomes on stakeholder level over time.Two stakeholder surveys were conducted across 14 project partner countries, capturing baseline perceptions in 2018 and assessing changes in 2021. To assess the actual influence of the project with its focus on conflict mitigation, we applied an ex post counterfactual analysis. Results indicate positive developments in all dimensions of the CITM. The influence of the project is demonstrated by statistically significant differences in response behavior between participants and non‐participants of project interventions. The overall outcome regarding beliefs in satisfactory future management of increasing large carnivore populations, is more intricate. Significant differences are observed among three selected main stakeholder categories over the project's timeframe. While nature conservationists maintain high confidence levels, confidence of hunters and livestock raisers declined. However, results for participants of project interventions depict a significantly lower decline in confidence compared to non‐participants. Based on our findings, we provide insights how to efficiently evaluate outcomes of HWCC projects, offering recommendations for wildlife conservation practitioners. We conclude that HWCC projects are important also and especially in times of unfavorable frame conditions. Rigorous evaluation methods are essential to ensure efficient use of resources in order to maximize the outcomes of HWCC projects. The study highlights the need for long‐term evaluation to assess broader impacts at country, regional, and sector levels.