How do you measure the impact of design and conservation strategies?

In evaluating the impact of design and conservation strategies, various key performance indicators (KPIs) can be employed. Metrics such as user satisfaction, environmental impact assessments, and resource efficiency are commonly utilized. Additionally, tracking changes in biodiversity, energy consumption, and community engagement provides valuable insights into the success of conservation efforts. These quantitative and qualitative measures help gauge the overall impact, allowing for informed adjustments and improvements in future strategies. Regular monitoring and feedback loops are essential components of a robust evaluation framework.

Agree with using SMART principles as an organizing framework. In addition, I find it usefull to create conceptual diagrams of what I expect to happen, specifically if a natural process is disrupted or changes as a result of my model. Realize that change occurs over time whether you perturb the system of not, so having a baseline or "no action" scenario modeled forward in time is useful to predict a direction and magnitude of the change.

While I generally agree that quantitative indicators are useful to track over time, I caution using money (Cost, price or financial benefit) as one of them. Especially now that we are becoming aware of environmental injustices of the past, property values reflect inequality over time. One can be fooled into thinking their project is successful based on cost:benefit analyses but if the benefits are related to inflated real estate values of waterfront properties for example, then the project will likely not be targeted toward the communities that need the most help.

Of the methods listed, I trust GIS and CAD over any statistical analysis. First of all, statistics can be manipulated to produce results that may not be true. Second, if you're going to communicate results to affected communities or the public, you don't want to use statistics. People don't trust them. Maps and drawings can be much more compelling and can illustrate statistical outcomes which place less emphasis on uncertainty.

As per above, maps and drawings with underlying quantitative or statistical underpinnings are great tools to communicate findings. Different scenarios, including the baseline or "no action" scenario must always be presented and discussed among the affected community so that potential benefits of a suite of actions can be fairly evaluated.

While adaptive management is a logical and scientifically supported approach, funding sources need to be set aside for this. In my experience, adaptive management costs rarely get recalculated into the final analysis of a project to either affirm or deny the expected benefits. This is especially true for projects that have procurement rules requiring the lowest bid contractor.