Step 3: Evaluate
Chapter 6 - How do we know if we are successful with our behavioural change campaigns and interventions?
Note: This chapter summarizes the key results of the KAP survey per country and suggests the indicators to track and evaluate the effectiveness of national campaigns in the Lower Mekong region countries and China over time.
KEY MESSAGES

The KAP scores provided inputs into the strategies for the behavioural change campaigns. Given the relatively low KAP Scores in Lao PDR, Myanmar and Cambodia, the interventions in these countries should focus on awareness and knowledge building. For countries with higher KAP scores like China, Vietnam and Thailand, campaigns could be more focused on influencing attitudes and removing potential barriers for action.

But how do we know if we are successful in these campaigns? The KAP scores offer robust data, benchmarks and proxy indicators to quantitatively prove the outcomes of the interventions. These indicators, complemented by further evaluation research, will help track if any behavioural changes have taken place and whether these changes have been bought about by the intervention or by other causes.
What is an 'Indicator'?
An indicator is “a measurable entity related to a specific information need such as the status of a target/factor, change in a threat, or progress toward an objective. A good indicator meets the criteria of being: measurable, precise, consistent and sensitive (Conservation Measures Partnership 2013)

6.1. Campaigns or interventions need to address barriers to achieve desired behavioural changes
Behavioural change across different groups (urban consumers, local producers, forest communities, government enforces, manufacturers, traders, etc) is needed to fight illegal logging effectively.
Based on the Knowledge, Attitude and Practices (KAP) survey conducted in Lower Mekong countries such as Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar, Thailand, Vietnam and China, the starting point for most countries is to achieve behavioural change is to build awareness, develop knowledge and strengthen enforcement. Each country has a different campaign strategy as they are in different stages of the KAP journey.
Recommended intervention/campaign for the desired behavioural change outcomes

Cambodia |
Image
![]() |
Situation |
|
Gaps/Barriers |
|
Media/Influencers |
|
Campaign Focus |
|
China |
Image
![]() |
Situation |
|
Gaps/Barriers |
|
Media/Influencers |
|
Campaign Focus |
|
Lao PDR |
Image
![]() |
Situation |
|
Gaps/Barriers |
|
Media/Influencers |
|
Campaign Focus |
|
Myanmar |
Image
![]() |
Situation |
|
Gaps/Barriers |
|
Media/Influencers |
|
Campaign Focus |
|
Thailand |
Image
![]() |
Situation |
|
Gaps/Barriers |
|
Media/Influencers |
|
Campaign Focus |
|
Viet Nam |
Image
![]() |
Situation |
|
Gaps/Barriers |
|
Media/Influencers |
|
Campaign Focus |
|
6.2. Developing indicators are necessary to track effectiveness the campaigns
How do we know if we our interventions successful? And how do we know if the changes are a result of the interventions we designed?
Illegal logging and trade are complex issues, and responses to them are generally characterised by a lack of data and evidence-based methodologies. This is especially true in this case when we are trying to measure outcomes of “soft” interventions that seek to effect incremental and difficult-to-measure changes in behaviour such as buying only sustainably sourced wood products (Lindgren 2019).
Aside from informing behavioural interventions and campaign strategies, the KAP scores used in this handbook also addresses the gap in lack of tools and proxy indicators for quantitatively measuring programmatic impact over time. Such quantitative indicators are best used in combination with qualitative impact evaluation research.
The gaps in evidence in programmatic interventions focusing on demand reduction and risk avoidance have pressured development practitioners to produce more robust data to quantitatively prove the outcomes of their programmes are effective and sustainable.
Conclusion
This chapter demonstrated how the KAP Score can both offer insights to the campaign strategies, as well as provide quantitative proxy indicators to measure the effectiveness of the interventions. When evaluating the campaign interventions, the KAP indicators are best used in combination with qualitative impact and evaluation research.