Yet in conservation, too many strategies are still chosen based on trends, intuition, or tradition—not on what science actually shows.
A few weeks ago, I posted about this challenge and highlighted the Conservation Effectiveness platform. Now, a group of us, led by Zuzana Burivalova, has published a related paper:
- We’ve made Conservation Effectiveness open to the entire conservation community.
- Anyone can now add peer-reviewed studies on what works—and what doesn’t.
- The platform now grows dynamically, reflecting real-world results faster than traditional reviews.
Why does this matter? Because in conservation, incomplete or outdated evidence doesn’t just waste money—it puts ecosystems, livelihoods, and trust at risk.
By opening Conservation Effectiveness to the broader community, we’re aiming to help solve a long-standing problem: the underuse of evidence in conservation.
In the first year of open contributions, nearly a third of relevant studies found through systematic searches were added by users. It’s a strong start—but only the beginning.
Importantly, the platform doesn’t just cherry-pick success stories. It captures studies with positive, neutral, and negative outcomes—normalizing the idea that learning from what doesn’t work is just as critical as celebrating what does.
All are essential for learning. All are essential for doing better.
For decision-makers, funders, and communities, this means easier access to a broader, more balanced picture of what we know—and where uncertainty remains.
For scientists and journalists, it’s a new tool for finding real-world examples without reinventing the wheel while helping their work reach intended audiences.
We recognize that some will feel only systematic reviews should be published. Systematic reviews remain critical for rigor. But by complementing them with a dynamic, open platform, we can surface useful evidence more quickly—without waiting years for formal syntheses.
Conservation isn’t about selling perfect narratives. It’s about grappling with complexity—and making smarter decisions with the knowledge we have, while actively filling the gaps we don’t.
It’s great to be part of an effort that invites everyone in the field to shape a more open, inclusive, and useful evidence base.
Conservation is complex. There are no silver bullets. But by collectively building and maintaining a living evidence base, we can make smarter, more effective decisions—and avoid repeating the same mistakes.
If you make or fund conservation decisions, care about how conservation evolves, or want to contribute, check out the platform: conservationeffectiveness.org
🔬Zuzana Buřivalová, Gwendolyn A. Richardson, Bennett Rabach, Sharif A. Mukul, Rhett A. Butler (2025). An open-contributions platform for evidence on forest conservation. Ecological Solutions and Evidence. Volume 6, Issue 2 April–June 2025
