A guide to qualitative attribution methods for evaluation in conservation

Knowledge of what conservation interventions improve biodiversity outcomes, and in which circumstances, is imperative. Experimental and quasi-experimental methods are increasingly used to establish causal inference and build the evidence base on the effectiveness of interventions, but their ability to provide insight into how and under what conditions an intervention should be implemented to improve biodiversity outcomes faces limitations. A suite of attribution methods that leverage qualitative methods for causal inference is available but underutilized in conversation impact evaluation. This article provides a guide to 5 such qualitative attribution methods: contribution analysis, process tracing, realist evaluation, qualitative comparative analysis, and most significant change. It defines and introduces each method and then illustrates how they could be applied through a case study of community conservancies in Namibia. This guide provides examples of how qualitative attribution methods can advance knowledge of what works, in which contexts, and why in biodiversity conservation.     

Leaching of the organophosphorus nematicide fosthiazate

Fosthiazate is an organophosphorus nematicide which was recently included in Annex I of the Directive 91/414/EEC under the clause that it should be used with special care in soils vulnerable to leaching. Thus, the leaching of fosthiazate was investigated in columns packed with three different soils which represented situations of high (site 2), intermediate (site 1) and low (site 3) leaching potential. The recommended dose of fosthiazate was applied at the surface of the soil columns and fosthiazate fate and transport was investigated for the next two months. Fosthiazate concentrations in the leachate collected from the bottom of the columns packed with soil from site 2 exceeded 0.1 microgl(-1) in most cases. This soil was characterized as acidic, indicating longer fosthiazate persistence, with low organic matter content, indicating weak adsorption, thus representing a situation vulnerable to leaching. In contrast, the lowest concentrations of fosthiazate in the leachate were evident in the columns packed with soil from site 3. This soil was characterized as alkaline, indicating faster degradation, with higher organic matter content, indicating stronger adsorption, thus representing a situation not favoring leaching of fosthiazate. The highest concentration of fosthiazate in the leachate from the columns packed with soil from site 2 was 3.44 microgl(-1) compared to 1.17 and 0.16 microgl(-1), which were the corresponding maximum values measured in columns packed with soil from sites 1 and 3, respectively. The results of the current study further suggest that fosthiazate is mobile in soil and can leach under conducive soil conditions like acidic soils with low organic matter content.     

PM<Subscript>10</Subscript> and Ultrafine Particles Counts In-Vehicle and On-Road in the Athens Area

This work presents the first results of a study concerning on-road and in-vehicle exposure to particulate matter in the area of Athens. PM₁₀ concentration measurements were conducted by TSI DustTrak, while driving along routes with different characteristics of traffic density, during September 2003–March 2004. Concurrent measurements of the ultrafine particles (UFPs) number concentration were also conducted, by condensation particle counter during part of the days. Pedestrian exposure to PM₁₀ and UFPs was also studied through stationary measurements on the kerbside of selected roads on November 2003 and February 2004. A major avenue, a heavy-trafficked road across a children hospital and two central roads, one in a residential and one in a commercial area were selected for measurement. The results indicate that every day commuters are exposed to significant concentration levels. Higher exposures were observed in heavy-trafficked areas and during rush hours. Mean PM₁₀ in-vehicle and on-road concentrations ranged from 30–320 μg/m³ and 70–285 μg/m³, respectively. The ultrafine particles number concentrations were in the range of 5.0 × 10⁴–17.3 × 10⁴ particles/cm³ in-vehicle and 3.1 × 10⁴–7.3 × 10⁴ particles/cm³ on the kerbside of a central residential road. Both PM₁₀ and UFPs concentrations presented repeated short-term peak exposures. The results clearly point out the importance of the road microenvironment (in-vehicle and on kerbside) for population exposure in urban areas.