Tell us what to change or add.
Open a decision below. Check the area, period, inputs, result and proposed next step.
Use Change example to try different values. Use Data needed to check the fields and sources. The land-use change decision has its own comparison views.
Record your corrections below, then download your answers or print them.
Compare dated ecosystem-class areas and the supporting condition evidence.
Validation required
Fictional default example · 2025.
What the selected record shows. The recorded Sample matching forest/land-use class area changes from 100 to 90 ha. Net change is -10 ha; supplied gross loss is 18 ha and gross gain is 8 ha.
Next step. Check the matching source records before interpreting the change. Prepare change comparison in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.
Extent change alone does not measure ecosystem condition or identify its cause.
Net=later−earlier; percentage=100×net/earlier when earlier>0. Matched transitions must reproduce net=gain−loss. Net totals alone do not establish conversion.
Same boundary, definitions, observation basis and adequate map quality are required. Coverage changes and classification error are not proven land-use change. Example boundaries and transitions are fictional.
Other required records: Ecosystem class; mapped extent; condition indicator; dates; method; uncertainty.
Calculation appendix
Compare soil-carbon observations with matching sampling conventions.
Verified published formula · Soil-carbon stock with volume correction
What the selected record shows. The supplied 1.8% carbon, 1.25 g/cm³ bulk density, 0.3 m depth and 12% coarse fragments give 59.4 t C/ha under the stated fine-earth convention.
Next step. Check sampling comparability before using the stock comparison. Prepare carbon comparison in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.
Stock differences do not establish treatment effects without comparable samples.
(Organic carbon% /100) × bulk density × depth ×10000 × (1−coarse% /100). Confirm that the density and coarse-fragment conventions are mutually consistent.
A carbon concentration is not a stock. Change comparisons require consistent depth/mass, sampling, density convention and uncertainty review.
Other required records: Carbon fraction; bulk density; depth; coarse fragments; sampling design; date.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change · Good Practice Guidance for LULUCFInstitution publication · Section 4.3.3.5.4, equation 4.3.3, printed page 4.106, PDF page 18
The screen converts carbon percent to a fraction and uses the published coarse-fragment volume convention. Sampling and bulk-density conventions still need confirmation.
Check survey effort, protocol and coverage before comparing biodiversity observations.
What the selected record shows. Observed richness: 28 species. Review survey comparability.
Next step. Review survey comparability. Prepare biodiversity comparison in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.
Observed richness can differ because effort and detection conditions differ.
Show distinct observed species with survey effort, protocol, season and completed visits. No correction for detection is silently inferred.
Observed richness is not population size or occupancy. Comparable effort alone does not remove detection bias or establish a biodiversity trend.
Other required records: Survey event; protocol; effort; taxa; detections; season; sampling frame.
Check the inventories and pool definitions supporting a forest-carbon comparison.
Verified published component · Carbon stock-difference component
What the selected record shows. Carbon stock change: -850 t C.
Next step. Review the matched pools, area and observation periods. Prepare carbon comparison in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.
A stock estimate does not establish a verified emissions reduction or credit.
(Later carbon density − earlier carbon density) × same inventory area, with identical pools, method and boundaries.
Inventory plots, allometry and uncertainty remain required evidence. Stock change is not an issued carbon credit, additionality test or payable service.
Other required records: Inventory plots; tree measurements; allometry; pool coverage; carbon fraction; uncertainty.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change · 2006 IPCC Guidelines Volume 4 Chapter 2Institution publication · Section 2.3.1.1, equation 2.8, stock-difference method
The screen reports the period total. IPCC annualisation requires elapsed years. Pools, inventory inputs and local application still need confirmation.
Compare restoration opportunities using ecological, livelihood and rights evidence.
What the selected record shows. There is not enough information to choose this option. Obtain the records and evidence about conditions listed below. The supplied budget less cost is 300,000 LKR.
Next step. Obtain the missing records before choosing. Prepare evidence request in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.
Expected benefits remain assumptions until supported for the site.
Compare each alternative's stated benefit, adverse effects, domain evidence and mandatory constraints. Where cost and budget are supplied, budget balance = budget − option cost. A budget balance alone does not determine domain feasibility or select an option.
Other required records: Degradation; tenure; ecological potential; community priorities; costs; connectivity.
Check local evidence for proposed tree-crop combinations.
What the selected record shows. The required evidence is incomplete for this agroforestry design case. The items below identify what must be obtained or reconciled.
Next step. Obtain the missing evidence listed below. Prepare evidence request in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.
A checklist does not establish crop or ecological compatibility.
Check each required item and retain its reference. A documented item is not a scientific, legal or institutional approval.
Evidence completeness alone cannot establish suitability, eligibility, safety, permission or method validity.
Other required records: Species traits; crop needs; soil; rainfall; shade; farmer objectives; market access.
Check whether a study design can address its stated intervention question.
What the selected record shows. The required evidence is incomplete for this research design case. The items below identify what must be obtained or reconciled.
A documented design still needs appropriate specialist review.
Check whether the question has a defined outcome, appropriate study design, comparison, baseline/follow-up, sampling, confounding and attrition evidence. Do not manufacture an effect estimate from missing design information.
The arithmetic alone does not establish causation. Design, parallel trends, confounding, attrition, uncertainty and adverse effects need appropriate evidence.
Other required records: Hypothesis; treatment; comparison; baseline; sample size; confounders; outcomes.
Compare proposed survey effort across environmental strata.
Cost alone does not establish precision or a defensible sample allocation.
Other required records: Sampling frame; strata; variance estimates; costs; access; target precision.
Check ecological definitions before records from different sources are combined.
What the selected record shows. The required evidence is incomplete for this data harmonization case. The items below identify what must be obtained or reconciled.
Similar terms do not establish equivalent concepts or compatible measurements.
Other required records: Source variables; definitions; units; methods; taxonomic references; steward review.
Compare an independently reproduced model result with its stated expectation.
What the selected record shows. Difference: -10 m³/season. Investigate reproduction difference.
Next step. Investigate reproduction difference. Prepare reproduction-check note in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.
Agreement does not establish model validity or fitness for a new use.
Reproduced minus expected result, within an explicitly supplied absolute tolerance, using the same exact input/method versions and a separate checker. Retain originals, code, parameters and environment evidence.
Other required records: Model version; training data; held-out validation; parameters; performance; uncertainty.
Compare water-outcome changes in managed and comparison observations.
Verified published formula · Difference-in-differences arithmetic
What the selected record shows. Treatment change: 17; comparison change: 7; difference in changes: 10 m³/season. This comparison alone does not establish causation or benefit.
Difference in changes alone does not establish a land-management effect.
(Treatment after−before) − (comparison after−before), using the same outcome definition and periods.
Other required records: Treatment sites; control catchments; rainfall; streamflow; baseline; follow-up.
World Bank · Impact Evaluation in Practice Second EditionInstitution publication · Chapter 7, table 7.2, printed page 140, PDF page 170
The formula is verified. Causal interpretation still requires a defensible study design, comparison and assumptions.
Reconcile ecosystem extent separately from recorded physical service flows.
What the selected record shows. Closing ecosystem extent: 794 ha.
Next step. Review the extent or flow definitions and matching source records. Prepare account comparison in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.
Extent, annual service flow and monetary value cannot be combined as one quantity.
Closing extent = opening + additions − reductions. Record the period service flow separately; do not add a flow to an asset stock or multiply by an arbitrary PES rate.
Keep extent, condition, physical service flows and monetary accounts distinct. A defensible valuation method, price year and accounting boundary are needed for monetary results. Ecosystem extent in hectares and annual water-provisioning flow in cubic metres are separate accounts. A measured flow does not identify its ecosystem contribution or assign a monetary value.
Other required records: Ecosystem extent; condition; service flow; beneficiaries; accounting area; period.
Compare livelihood, conservation and water-management choices using their trade-offs.
A budget comparison does not establish the best landscape outcome.
Other required records: Options; ecological outcomes; livelihood effects; water effects; costs; constraints.
Compare proposed measurement improvements and their uncertainty evidence.
Cost does not identify which input drives uncertainty without sensitivity evidence.
Other required records: Pool estimates; parameter uncertainty; measurement error; sensitivity; sampling costs.
Retain conflicting scientific and community observations for a source review.
What the selected record shows. The original record says “Study question: primary register entry”; the comparison says “Study question: conflicting source return”. Their matching meaning has not been established. Obtain the source definitions and supporting records before reconciling them.
Next step. Resolve source disagreement. Prepare source comparison in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.
Different descriptions do not establish that either knowledge source is wrong.
Compare original definitions, identifiers, units and versions against documented equivalence evidence. Preserve conflicts and unresolved mappings; do not subtract category labels or silently merge records.
Other required records: Study question; community evidence; scientific evidence; consultations; consent; limitations.
Identify groups with no confirmed representation in research records.
What the selected record shows. 30 participants are known to be uncovered; 5 have unknown coverage. 65% are confirmed covered.
Next step. Check the records behind the uncovered and unknown groups. Prepare coverage follow-up in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.
Coverage does not establish consent, representativeness or equitable outcomes.
100 × distinct covered eligible units / eligible frame. Known uncovered = frame − covered − unknown.
Count each eligible unit once for the selected service and period. Received messages, attendance, adoption and outcomes are separate measures.
Other required records: Sampling frame; participation; consented group attributes; missing groups; research scope.
Check repeat-observation tasks against the required windows and resources.
What the selected record shows. Planned duration: 3 days. Resolve overlapping resource bookings.
Next step. Resolve overlapping resource bookings. Prepare schedule review in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.
A schedule does not secure long-term funding or guarantee observations.
Check start/end order, operating window, effort, predecessor completion and overlapping bookings for the same resource. A conflict is flagged; no optimal schedule is invented.
Other required records: Monitoring sites; required visits; funding; staff; access; equipment lifespan.
Check research-output rights, audience and disclosure conditions.
What the selected record shows. The required evidence is incomplete for this open science case. The items below identify what must be obtained or reconciled.
The example does not authorise sharing or publish a research product.
Other required records: Dataset rights; participant consent; sensitive species; license; publication approval.
Identify evidence-product requests whose response date has passed.
What the selected record shows. Open days past due: 29 days. Follow up overdue case.
Next step. Follow up overdue case; confirm the missing condition evidence. Prepare evidence request in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.
Age alone does not determine scientific importance or user priority.
Open age = assessment date − received date. Days past due = max(0, assessment date − recorded due date) for open cases. Show documented critical conditions separately.
Example due dates are not legal service standards. Do not alter statutory deadlines by silently subtracting pauses, or infer severity from age alone.
Other required records: Decision requests; evidence maturity; product deadlines; analyst capacity; audience.
Compare recommendation uptake and outcome records.
What the selected record shows. Treatment change: 17; comparison change: 7; difference in changes: 10 %. This comparison alone does not establish causation or benefit.
Uptake and a later outcome do not establish a causal research effect.
Other required records: Recommendation cohort; institutional decisions; implementation; outcomes; alternative explanations.
Check which existing source fields can supply the decision inputs.
Existing form reference: 4e74cc389edc2305
Existing form reference: 678a3e2dcda3b2df
Existing form reference: 4404e8d7fb7938f5
Existing form reference: 34f3d59c2619b006
Existing form reference: 1d5963784380e5d7
Existing form reference: c7953153a5200702
Existing form reference: 2fd8102b7732d899
Existing form reference: 8645ce85db37fa03
Existing form reference: ce03929a51b9da64
Existing form reference: 5d4e57af1e6712f1
Existing form reference: e6af681e07c8efdc
Existing form reference: a9b8c8efe788ee9a
Your institution has its own document and image library. Use the same library for reports, photos and other evidence.
Open this screen for CIFOR-ICRAF and Research PartnersSee the presentation example
Files added in the prototype stay in this browser. Public sharing is an access preview. Existing public reference links already work online.
Data structure keeps the existing source tree, records, charts and map. Manage structure adds a place to propose changes to definitions.
An entity type means a kind of thing or event, such as a reservoir or an inspection. Drafts stay in this browser. A demo approval does not change real definitions, data, chart links or sharing rights.
User management shows example profiles for each institution. People and Roles and access let you review the proposed account screens.
These are interface previews only. They create no account, send no email and change no access. Use example details in the preview. Institution verification does not grant a real permission.
We currently use public data and published reports where available. Please confirm whether your institution can provide data directly, so we can avoid retyping or reading figures from PDFs.
Do not enter passwords, access keys or private account details.
Use the Download answers button at the top of this page. Share the downloaded file or printed copy through your agreed review channel. Nothing is sent automatically.