1. Week 2: Scientific evaluation Evaluating outcomes of environmental projects ESM 102 Lab Winter 2015

2. Chapter 21 Defining a scientific evaluation process Evaluation of personal progress Multiple-participant project evaluation Engaging in the solution of environmental problems produces new knowledge Shift from accumulating knowledge to designing solutions Challenges for evaluating complex projects

3. Science Rigorous – follow all leads to completion Repeatable – enough detail provided for others to redo the experiment Shared for peer review – community improves results Iterative – modify and repeat

4. Scientific method Supports general science Steps - ◦ Gather information ◦ Develop questions ◦ Formulate testable hypotheses ◦ Measure and report results ◦ Peer review with suggestions for improvement

5. Evaluation Are we meeting the project objectives Are we doing the right things, not just doing things right? ◦ Value judgments need to be made ◦ This should be done in the initial phases of any project – not after its done

6. General CriteriaExample key questions Value statementIs the value proposition clear enough to the entire community? Background and introductory information Are the narratives broad enough and from diverse viewpoints or do they look artificially constrained or pointing to some predetermined outcome (Goldilocks Scenarios)? GoalsAre these stated clearly and do they bring in issues that engage a broad range of stakeholders ObjectivesAre these stated as hypotheses for management? Technical specifications Were the technical objectives met? BudgetWas the project financially sound? New knowledgeWhat was the new knowledge that was created? Was it useful? Was it used? Did the community learn? Were new areas of knowledge identified as needs? AdaptationDid the overall project demonstrate that it was able to adapt to new knowledge or uncertainty? SustainabilityWas the capacity to create ongoing management created and functioning?