Impact network analysis: Evaluating the success of interventions
A peer-reviewed article of this Preprint also exists.
Author and article information
Abstract
The success of intervention projects in ecological systems depends not only on the quality of a management strategy, but also how that strategy plays out among decision makers. Impact network analysis (INA) is a framework for evaluating the likely regional success of interventions before, during, and after projects, for project implementers, policy makers, and funders. INA integrates across three key system components: (a) the quality of a management strategy and the quality of information about it, (b) the socioeconomic networks through which managers learn about the management strategy and decide whether to use it, and (c) the biophysical network that results from those decisions. A common example where INA can be useful is management of an invasive (or endangered) species or genotype. A management strategy to reduce (or increase) the probability of establishment of a species may or may not be adopted by each land manager in a region, depending on the quality of the management strategy and the information they have available about it. The resulting management landscape will determine whether the intervention project is successful, in terms of how much of the region the species can spread through and the resulting effects on the desired ecosystem services. INA can be applied in general to evaluate the success of immediate intervention strategies, and to contribute to fundamental understanding about what makes interventions successful.
Cite this as
2018. Impact network analysis: Evaluating the success of interventions. PeerJ Preprints 6:e27037v1 https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.27037v1note This preprint is not peer-reviewed. You may wish to reference the subsequent peer-reviewed version of this article.
Author comment
This is a preprint submission to PeerJ Preprints.
Sections
Additional Information
Competing Interests
The author declares that there are no competing interests.
Author Contributions
Karen A Garrett contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.
Data Deposition
The following information was supplied regarding data availability:
The current version of this article describes a methodology and does not include data or code at this point.
Funding
This work was supported by the CGIAR Research Program for Roots, Tubers and Bananas; the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change and Food Security (CCAFS); Bioversity International; USDA NIFA grant 2015-51181-24257; the USAID Feed the Future Haiti Appui à la Recherche et au Développement Agricole (AREA) project AID-OAA-A-15-00039; The Ceres Trust; NCR SARE Research and Education Grant LNC13-355; USDA APHIS grant 11–8453–1483-CA; US NSF Grant EF-0525712 as part of the joint NSF-NIH Ecology of Infectious Disease program; US NSF Grant DEB-0516046; and the University of Florida. The contents are the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID, other funders, or the United States Government. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
