Collaborative Forest Management (or CFM) has been undertaken in Uganda to address the serious loss of forest that has taken place over recent decades. CFM is seen to provide forest-adjacent communities a chance to participate in and benefit from forest management. As in Malawi, the government has laid a framework which requires the participation of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to implement it. The CFM framework shares many features with ACM, as outlined in this chapter. Using one community as a case, Egunyu has examined the four NGOs that support the implementation of CFM there, and in the process, compares CFM implementation with ACM as reported in the literature. She concludes that although there are significant differences between the ‘ideal forms’ of the two approaches, in implementation, they seem to converge around issues like conflict management, learning, and visioning.
Tag: community forestry
Capacity building for ACM: Lessons learned from training in distinct contexts
Capacity building should be an integral component of adaptive collaborative management (ACM) approaches to give participants the skills, awareness, and confidence to understand and implement ACM methods. This chapter examines our insights from 20 years of work in ACM by looking at three cases from Bolivia, Nicaragua, and Ghana in which we introduced ACM methods in distinct contexts to assist local stakeholders in addressing forest management challenges. In each case, an initial capacity-building phase was necessary to facilitate ACM processes. We argue that training should be approached through an ACM lens to generate social learning processes, placing experimentation and reflexivity at the core of such capacity-building programmes. Training in ACM is not simply about teaching a new methodology, it is about building an ethos of experimentation, learning and collaboration. Our goal in training was to create self-reinforcing cycles in which participants reflected on their learning so that they could consciously facilitate learning with others. This not only allowed us to gauge the effectiveness of the capacity-building exercises and whether key messages were being captured by trainees, but also to successfully introduce the ACM approach to ongoing initiatives.
Trust building in a multi-stakeholder forum in Jambi, Indonesia
Liswanti et al. begin with a literature review on the role of trust in multi-stakeholder forums (MSFs) – something widely considered important. They use the work of Stern and Baird, which identifies four bases of trust: (1) dispositional (based on personal traits, hearsay), (2) rational (based on expectation of outcomes resulting from action), (3) affinitive (based on feelings of shared values or connectedness), and (4) system-based (due to fair and transparent procedures). The authors briefly describe the site, the MSF, and their methods. They use Q-methodology, which involves asking respondents to express their agreement or disagreement with a series of locally developed value statements, relating to the MSF. The authors analyze these responses as to the ways they indicate trust and approval (or lack thereof) regarding the MSF. Although MSF functioning was not without challenges, this analysis attributes its impressive and long-lasting successes to its members’ effective cooperation, excellent and relatively unbiased facilitation, and a shared vision – all contributing to the growth of trust within the group.
Herding cats: Facilitation in social learning processes
The chapter unpacks good process facilitation based on long-term experience over three decades in Eastern and Southern Africa, Asia and the Caribbean. It elaborates how such facilitation competences can be developed within institutions and communities. Facilitation for change is the backbone of operationalising participation, engagement of people and collaboration. A successful intervention requires far more programme investment in developing good facilitation and process management capacity than typically planned.
Inclusive Business Model (IBM) in Gunungkidul, Yogyakarta: Training on bamboo management and craft-making to initiate Inclusive Business Model in the upstream of Bribin Watershed
Inclusive Business Model (IBM) in Pelatand Batudulang, Sumbawa: Initiation of Inclusive Business Model (IBM) for agroforestry best practices in Batudulang and Pelat, Sumbawa
Inclusive Business Model (IBM) fostering an integrated NTFP management: The Centre for Mutis Forest Honey Production and Marketing (Sentra Madu Mutis) in East Nusa Tenggara
Towards more inclusive community landscape governance: Drivers and assessment indicators in northern Ghana
Community-based approaches to landscape governance are considered more legitimate, equitable, and inclusive ways to manage natural resources and more effective in achieving conservation and livelihood goals than centralised and top-down approaches. In Ghana, the Wildlife Division of the Forestry Commission devolved decision-making authority over natural resources through the Community Resource Management Area (CREMA) governance system. While there is a growing body of literature on the CREMA governance model, few studies have examined the inclusiveness of its decision-making processes. This study aims to fill this gap by identifying the drivers that hinder or foster the inclusiveness of community governance in the Western Wildlife Corridor of northern Ghana and developing a set of inclusivity assessment indicators. Based on data collected through key informant interviews, focus group discussions, and observations, we found that several stakeholder groups remain at the margins of the CREMA governance system and feel excluded, particularly Fulani herders, women, and youth. Based on our findings and the literature, we present a set of assessment indicators for inclusive CREMA governance. However, these indicators are unlikely to be fully met because of persisting socio-cultural barriers and power asymmetries. We argue that measures such as capacity building, empowering marginalised social groups, promoting their participation in decision-making, and a bottom-up approach towards creating CREMAs are needed to improve the inclusiveness of CREMA governance. Beyond the CREMAs, the inclusivity indicators developed in this study have broad applicability to environmental and landscape governance.
Introduction – Multi-stakeholder forums and the promise of more equitable and sustainable land and resource use: perspectives from Brazil, Ethiopia, Indonesia, and Peru
Multi-stakeholder forums (MSFs) have become a popular mechanism in global development and conservation circles, given the urgency to find transformative approaches to address climate change and unsustainable development. In this current context, it is important to take stock of MSFs, an example of a participatory mechanism that is emerging as a new ‘solution’. The papers in this Special Issue of the International Forestry Review derive from a multi-country comparative research project carried out by the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) that aimed to understand how best to support MSFs organised for more sustainable land and resource use. The seven papers assess the potential of MSFs for more equitable decision-making in regard to land and resource use sustainability, and engage with scholarly debates over these forms of participation. The papers approach MSFs from different theoretical perspectives and analytical interests, yet all engage with issues that stem from the power inequalities that are inherent to these forums. The papers provide more evidence – and a warning – that to get closer to transformational change, we need MSFs that do more than simply bring people to the table.
Can multi-stakeholder forums influence good governance in communal forest management? Lessons from two case studies in Ethiopia
Following global trends, Multi-Stakeholder Forums (MSFs) have received attention as mechanisms for addressing deforestation and forest degradation in Ethiopia. However, little is understood on their influence on governance of forests. Based on qualitative research conducted in MSFs organized at Bale and Jamma-Urji in Oromia, Ethiopia, this paper examines how MSFs may influence the governance of communal forests. Results indicate that the majority of informants believe that MSFs improve participation, facilitate collaboration across sectors, and have potential to address power imbalances among stakeholders. Yet, failing to substantially engage the government in MSFs could either lower the success of the MSFs in bringing change in the governance of communal forests or limit the changes to the local community level. Embedding MSFs in government structures could increase the enforcement of MSF outcomes and enable resource mobilization. However, caution is required to prevent the government’s control over MSF processes and outcomes.