Hi all,
One important blind spot when implementing environmental programs is the lack of adaptive management. As a result, practitioners often do not get the feedback they need to either stay the course or pivot. This is especially true when standard monitoring emphasizes outputs and outcomes, not the psychological and social changes that make behavior change durable.
The organization Rare is tackling this problem head-on by working with coastal fishers in the Philippines. Their pilot program features a new adaptive model that focuses on pulse monitoring, rather than traditional surveys, which provide only a static snapshot of what’s going on in a community. In other words, it is a way of checking in with and collecting real-time insights from communities while a program is being implemented instead of only evaluating it afterwards. Rare is interested in particular psycho-social indicators, like trust, perceived legitimacy of local institutions, and social norms, which are in flux when a program is being delivered. They piloted a mobile-based system in three towns in the Philippines, reaching nearly 1,000 fishers. They used interactive voice response (IVR) surveys in local dialects, hearing directly from the people at the heart of their work. Fishers would receive calls and provide feedback on questions they felt comfortable answering.
The pilot program has been relatively successful, as it works on any phone in the dialect of local fishers, it fits their routine by reaching them when it is most convenient, and it gives real-time behavioral insights necessary to adjust a program mid-stream. There are areas for improvement to the pilot program as well. It engaged only 6% of intended recipients, well below the 10 – 30% target window. This low participation rate was due to mistrust of automated calls, technical issues, and unclear benefits for fishers. In addressing unclear benefits, the program could have thought of non-financial incentives for fishers to participate.
If you are considering how to engage in real-time pulse monitoring as Rare has done, remember to make the value proposition explicit for your target audience/priority group. In other words, you should be able to clearly answer the question “What’s in it for me?”. No matter how well-designed your program or technology may be, it will not succeed unless people see a good reason to use it. In short, value trumps design.
Overall, Rare seems to be moving towards a more responsive model of program delivery, which is a positive development in the area of wildlife conservation. To learn more about Rare’s pilot program, click here.
One important blind spot when implementing environmental programs is the lack of adaptive management. As a result, practitioners often do not get the feedback they need to either stay the course or pivot. This is especially true when standard monitoring emphasizes outputs and outcomes, not the psychological and social changes that make behavior change durable.
The organization Rare is tackling this problem head-on by working with coastal fishers in the Philippines. Their pilot program features a new adaptive model that focuses on pulse monitoring, rather than traditional surveys, which provide only a static snapshot of what’s going on in a community. In other words, it is a way of checking in with and collecting real-time insights from communities while a program is being implemented instead of only evaluating it afterwards. Rare is interested in particular psycho-social indicators, like trust, perceived legitimacy of local institutions, and social norms, which are in flux when a program is being delivered. They piloted a mobile-based system in three towns in the Philippines, reaching nearly 1,000 fishers. They used interactive voice response (IVR) surveys in local dialects, hearing directly from the people at the heart of their work. Fishers would receive calls and provide feedback on questions they felt comfortable answering.
The pilot program has been relatively successful, as it works on any phone in the dialect of local fishers, it fits their routine by reaching them when it is most convenient, and it gives real-time behavioral insights necessary to adjust a program mid-stream. There are areas for improvement to the pilot program as well. It engaged only 6% of intended recipients, well below the 10 – 30% target window. This low participation rate was due to mistrust of automated calls, technical issues, and unclear benefits for fishers. In addressing unclear benefits, the program could have thought of non-financial incentives for fishers to participate.
If you are considering how to engage in real-time pulse monitoring as Rare has done, remember to make the value proposition explicit for your target audience/priority group. In other words, you should be able to clearly answer the question “What’s in it for me?”. No matter how well-designed your program or technology may be, it will not succeed unless people see a good reason to use it. In short, value trumps design.
Overall, Rare seems to be moving towards a more responsive model of program delivery, which is a positive development in the area of wildlife conservation. To learn more about Rare’s pilot program, click here.
