(PAME) Evaluation Tools

PAME evaluations have been defined as an “assessment of how well protected areas are being managed – primarily the extent to which management is protecting values and achieving objectives and objectives” (Hockings et al., 2006). A wide variety of PAME tools have been developed using the WCPA framework including one of the most widely used tools globally, the Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool (METT). The METT reviews indicators of effectiveness across six categories of the WCPA Framework (i.e., context, planning, inputs, process, outputs, outcomes), thus providing a comprehensive overview of management effectiveness. Each category includes questions with tiered answers to choose from that demonstrate increasingly greater levels of management effectiveness. Many regions have also modified the METT tool to fit more local scenarios. 

Assessment tools can be used on a regular basis (e.g., during regular review or adaptive management phases) to track progress of a wide variety of management actions and identify gaps or barriers that need to be addressed. This information can help managers understand and communicate progress and outcomes and prioritize how resources are allocated. Many of these tools are self-assessment surveys that can be carried out by a group of site managers and stakeholders. They include a series of questions against which progress towards specific management objectives is scored. Where possible, other data sources are encouraged to be utilized to better inform specific components such as progress toward conservation outcomes. For example, ecological or socio-economic monitoring results. 

Undertaking PAME Evaluations

Implementing a PAME Evaluation requires time, commitment, and courage to honestly assess how the site is doing. Evaluations should be implemented with an open mind so both challenges and failures can be viewed as learning opportunities for growth and improvement. They can also demonstrate success and provide key insights that may have otherwise been missed during day-to-day management. MPA planning and management is complex so learning and adapting is vital for management effectiveness. The WCPA framework includes an approach to completing a PAME evaluation:

• Define the objectives of the assessment (e.g., to support a management plan update, to communicate findings to donors) and scope of the evaluation (e.g., are you looking at one site or multiple?)

• Choose a methodology and process. Much of an evaluation approach is dependent on the purpose of the evaluation and the capacity to complete the evaluation. Repeating evaluation methods that have been used in the past will help identify trends and progress so where possible, it’s good to stick with existing tools. In some cases, tools and methods may be dictated by external factors (e.g., MPA networks, national reporting requirements, or donor requirements). 

The evaluation approach will also be dictated by capacity level including time, data sources, expertise, and resources available. 

It’s possible to carry out a PAME evaluation even when limited resources are available. At its simplest form, this can include discussions among a management team or self-assessment survey that relies only on qualitative information. More robust PAME evaluations can include quantitative data as well as quantitative field data from monitoring efforts (defined during management planning) to inform how management actions achieved short-, medium-, and long-term results that were expected. The methods should match the purpose and capacity of the site. More data is not necessarily better. Rather, all data should provide key insights into progress and help guide decision making. More robust methods can be developed over time where capacity is limited. 

Deciding on who will be involved is also part of the methodology. 

Some evaluations are carried out by external facilitators, some by management bodies, and some through stakeholder participatory processes. Involving stakeholders in PAME discussions may be useful to encourage broader perspectives and reflection on progress of site management and to create transparency with decision-making. 

• Implement the evaluation. Implementing a PAME evaluation includes compiling data sources that inform how management actions achieved expected results d. It also includes reviewing results to identify gaps and challenges, or emerging issues that require modifications to management approaches. 

• Analyze, communicate, and implement results. Completing evaluations is only valuable if the information is used to improve and adapt management. Insights provided through PAME evaluations can guide decision-making to continue activities that are making progress toward the objectives and change activities that are not. This can have implications for prioritizing what gets implemented and how time and funding are utilized to improve chances of success. Just as with planning, part of adaptive management includes collecting and sharing information from stakeholders. Before major modifications are made to management objectives or actions, it’s encouraged that key stakeholders be engaged to provide input. Changes made to management strategies and actions should be reflected through the management plan update process and demonstrate findings of the evaluation that lead to revisions. 

Types of PAME Tools:

1. Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool (METT): Reviews effectiveness across six categories: context, planning, inputs, process, outputs, outcomes.

2. Other PAME Tools: Include self-assessment surveys and external reviews tailored to local scenarios.

Implementation Tips

• Even with limited resources, simple discussions or self-assessment surveys can provide valuable insights.

• More robust evaluations can include quantitative data from monitoring efforts.

• Data should guide decision-making and inform management plan updates.