Ticking the box: Does a decision support framework for management planning improve protected area management effectiveness?

Abstract Protected area (PA) management aims to achieve long‐term positive conservation outcomes. Conservation management agencies, both public and private, are charged with demonstrating effectiveness to their stakeholders and funders. Protected area management effectiveness (PAME) assessment tools, like the management effectiveness tracking tool—South Africa (METT‐SA), often fall short in measuring these outcomes due to their simplified representation of complex management realities. We examined whether applying the Conservation Standards—an adaptive, evidence‐based decision support framework—could enhance PAME in South Africa. Using METT‐SA data from 38 statutory PAs in the Cape Floristic Region as a proxy for PAME, we examined changes in indicators across six management elements: context, planning, inputs, process, outputs, and outcomes. Following the implementation of the Conservation Standards, overall METT‐SA scores improved, driven by improving input and output indicators; however, outcome indicators, reflecting ecological condition, declined. Longer intervals between management planning, using the standards and subsequent assessments, positively influenced scores. While METT‐SA supported compliance with PA management requirements, it did not promote adaptive management. While the tool prompted the development of plans and attention to PA management elements, a risk of tool compliance and chasing indicators may overshadow adaptive, outcomes‐based management. The Conservation Standards can help reduce the subjectivity of assessments by making explicit management assumptions and measures of success. Since ecological processes are slow, a longer timeframe between PAME assessments could be considered. Strengthening links between PA management planning, adaptive management practice and PA effectiveness assessment can help improve the evaluation of conservation success.