A
NARRATIVE VALUE
Certainty
●●○ medium
ABCDEFG
There is no confirmed −; independently verified + decide the position (A). No unreachable strike-through.= non-additive meter
As of: 2026-Q4Status: ActiveCeiling reason: No confirmed −
History2026-Q4AHistory grows each quarter
Cheetah Conservation Fund (CCF): Put a dog with the herd, and the cheetah is not shot. The letter is A; certainty is medium. Unconfirmed concerns are placed under “Watching.” (As of 2026-Q4; estimate based on public information.)
Main narrative
To a Namibian farmer the cheetah was vermin that took livestock. If you know no other method, shooting is the method. Nine in ten wild cheetahs live outside protected areas, in the places where they come into conflict with people. In 1990 Dr Laurie Marker moved to Namibia and founded the Cheetah Conservation Fund.
What she brought was not a gun but a dog. The livestock guarding dog programme, begun in 1994, raises large dogs such as Anatolian shepherds with the herd from puppyhood so that they bark and drive off a predator that approaches. Cheetahs are timid; barked at, they leave. Nothing has to be killed. More than 800 dogs have been placed, and a study drawing on some of the longest-running research in Africa reported a 91% fall in livestock losses. Placement requires mandatory training for the owner, and CCF visits afterwards to check the dog's health and how it is working. There is still a queue of farmers waiting. Fewer than 7,500 cheetahs remain in the wild, and the IUCN lists the species as Vulnerable.
One person’s story (N1)
+ A single story
To a Namibian farmer the cheetah was vermin, and if you know no other method, shooting is the method. The livestock guarding dog programme CCF began in 1994 raises large dogs with the herd from puppyhood so that they bark and drive off an approaching predator; cheetahs are timid and leave when barked at. More than 800 dogs have been placed, and a study drawing on some of the longest-running research in Africa reported a 91% fall in livestock losses. Placement requires training for the owner, with follow-up visits. Nature of sources: independent (reporting of the study and conservation media) plus the annual report.
Source nature: Africa Geographic / Cheetah Conservation Fund / T1 academic / peer-reviewed study reported. Positive effects are not used to offset negatives.
Positive / negative effects
+ effects
- The positive side of this assessment rests on the single story (N1) above and its source. A per-item ledger of positive effects has not yet been compiled for this organization.T1 academic / peer-reviewed study reported
Watching (unconfirmed; not counted in the assessment)- Placement limited and farmers waiting
- no reach against habitat loss
- lack of a current national population estimate
Looking ahead (not included in the assessment)- Continuing dog placement and building out tools for human-wildlife coexistence.
A second look
How many dogs can be placed depends on breeding and funding, and farmers continue to wait. A guarding dog protects livestock; it does not stop the loss of habitat itself. No current Namibian population estimate for cheetahs could be found. How the dogs themselves are treated across their own lives is a separate question worth watching.
Sources
+N1Africa Geographic / Cheetah Conservation Fund｜2026｜🔗
How to read this assessment
A Independently verified +, with no confirmed −
B Leans +, with independent backing
C Mixed. A confirmed − sets the ceiling, or much is unverified
D A serious confirmed − sets the ceiling
E A serious − reaches the core of the organization
F Serious and systemic, with little redeeming +
G Only extreme cases
Out of scope An entity whose core purpose is illegal
On hold Independent evidence is scarce on both + and −
- Reachable upper bound (ceiling): a confirmed − sets the ceiling, and independently verified + decide the position within it. + do not cancel out −.
- The weight of evidence is not symmetric: only confirmed − are counted; the volume of disputes or allegations goes under “Watching.” + are counted from independent evidence, while an organization’s own PR is treated as “reference.”
- Size is not value: scale is not used in the assessment. Matters that stay within money or competition—investors, shareholders, sanctions, trade secrets—are also excluded.
- The letter (assessment) and certainty (how reliable the information is) are separate axes.
This is a translation; the Japanese version is authoritative. The assessments here are generated automatically by AI based on published criteria. The operator does not alter individual results. Because they are AI-generated they may contain errors, and they are opinion and commentary, not statements of fact. Where evidence is insufficient, the entry is marked “On hold.” Requests for correction are accepted via the form.
Terms: Narrative Value = an assessment (A–G) of the distance between the narrative an organization tells and its reality / Ceiling meter = a visualization of the reachable upper bound / Watching = unconfirmed matters not counted / Protected stakeholders = people, animals, nature, and future generations. | Generated by: AI | As of: 2026-Q4 | Back to top