This Guidebook is based on two basic purposes for conducting the evaluation:

The information generated by the evaluation will be used to adapt and improve the process, management, planning, accountability and overall impact of the co-management system. However, there may be more specific reasons for conducting the evaluation: perhaps there are already problems or issues that have been noticed; donors and government policymakers may need a review to highlight problems and to set priorities; or to promote better management policies and practices more generally. Leaders of the co-management system may wish to use the results of an evaluation to improve their performance or to report on achievements. Increased interest in evaluation is in part due to increased demand for accountability and transparency. Broadly speaking, an evaluation can:  

Both stakeholders and those who initiate and commission the evaluation should be clear about the purpose of conducting the evaluation. They should identify the specific questions they would like the evaluation to provide answers to. This will allow all those involved with the fisheries co-management system, and those in the evaluation team, to understand and agree on why the evaluation is being done. Moreover, the co-management system that is being evaluated needs to be clearly defined. It may be a system operating at a fishery, community or sector level, or it may be a spatially defined area (e.g. a territorial use right in fisheries or “TURF”).

The scale of the evaluation is identified as the fishery, community(s) or sector boundaries and territory under the co-management system. This information should be available in the fisheries co-management plan. It allows the evaluation process to have a clearly defined area or territory within which to undertake the evaluation and to accurately identify the stakeholders who are involved in the co-management system.