Previous PageTable Of ContentsNext Page

Annex 9 : CRITERIA and INDICATORS (working groups results) 

In order to find out the specific criteria and indicators for the different phases of the nfp process, the process was presented graphically and divided in phases: i) Organization of the process ii) Analysis and iii) Programme development iv) Implementation and v) Monitoring and evaluation. For more detailed information please see (National Forest Programmes site on FAO web site, under Forestry).

 It was agreed that only the three first phases, related to the formulation of the nfp, will be considered in 2003 meeting. Each group took one of the following phases : i) Organization of the process ii) Analysis and iii) Programme development

 Stakeholders were classified in 4 groups of importance/power in each phase of the nfp process :


High Importance/High Power – HI/HP

High Importance/Less Power – HI/LP

Low Importance/High Power – LI/HP

Low Importance/Less Power – LI/LP


The task was to discuss various stakeholder types –

What is at stake for them

How they benefit from participation and

How the nfp process benefits from their contribution

In what category they fall

Whitch of these are critical in the decision-making process; need to be consulted; at least informed

How to draw their participation (approaches that work)

Select the criteria to assess their participation

Find indicators for these criteria




Working group 1 : Phase I – Organization of the Process



Forest Owners (private-small)


Community organizations

Local government

National NGOs

Small scale forest industry

Indigenous People

Forest workers




Forest owners (private-large)

National gouvernments/ National Forest autorities

Large forest industry


Forest administrations

Forest workers



Other users

Academic&research (developping country)




International NGOs (IUCN,WWF)

Other ministries

International Organizations





Activate the actors (potential and existing)


Who was absent before and is engaged now?

Who was least heard before and is engaged now?

Actors clearly recognize their interest

Active actors (of activity)

New actors identified

Actors recognize their role(s)

Initiating actor (s) make others aware of potential goal/priority conflicts

Mechanization of process & affects the goals of different actors

Reconciliation of global – national – local priorities


Actors who need to be involved are!


All HI/HP included

Most HI/LP

Most LI/HP involved

Process is comfortable for the newcomers

Directly affected actors are engaged and committed to the process


Participatory Mechanism for Decision Making

Agenda/plan of process establishe d

Stakeholder analysis


% of initiatives approved



Diversification in Actors

# groups of actors

Recognition of conflicts of goals & way to identify/discuss


Equity (fair representation)

System of empowerment of low power actors existing


Incentives & Motivation – Lose more if not participate

Risks in non-participation identified (& made clear)


Organizational Capacity

Structure established for nfp process

Moderators trained


(see next “What” list)

Resource Availability

Budget available for meetings

Human resources for the process: quantity/quality



Informed consent

Actors agree to aide by commitments madder

Institutionalized process for actors to work together


(See other “How” list)

Information Sharing

Access to information is guaranteed

Information generated and disseminated to all stakeholders


Transparency Accountability

Regular mechanism for feedback established

The steps to be following in the process are known by all

Roles of stakeholders are well-known by all

The mechanism of the process is well-known by the stakeholders


(no column)

Commitment to Continue the Process

Number of activities carried out by different stakeholders

The participatory process is maintained


Awareness of the Process

Public opinion on the NFP process and SFM

What is in the media


LOOSE cards : “Forum – shopping”; “Veto” power; Manipulation of the process

Working group 2 : Phase II - Analysis



Female/male farmers


Ministry of planning

Labor force

Local community

Rural poor


Local government

Small forest entreprise




Ministry of Finance

Civil society

Private sector –corporate

Ministry of Forestry

Research institutions/universities




General public

Environmental NGOs

Civil society



Private land owners

Ministry of planning = $, €

Donor community

Other ministries

Elected official (national/subnational/regional level)

Regional associations/organizations

Trade partners






Voluntary participation


Inclusive participation


Political will and financial resources

Approaches to ensure, draw and sustain stakeholder participation

Political willingness

Financial support of participation of HI/LP stakeholder group

Process accepted by society at all levels



Adequate financial support to enable the process

Political support for participation in NFP exists

Planning of the process prior to launching


Financial statements backed by budgetary allocation

Proportion of domestic funding

Budget allocation level for nfp

Audit allocation ring fenced

Numbers of new statues and regulations

Number of statements and engagements by ministries, etc.

Publication of policy documents

Hours of parliamentary discussions



Raise awareness on the importance of the nfp process and participation

Approaches to ensure, draw and sustain stakeholder participation

Define the point of  critical importance

Explain well the starting point and limits (+purpose)

Define objectives (what is the expected results – why)

Improved capacity, skills to participate, equal access to information

Raise awareness

Awareness campaign prior to participation



Sufficient understanding among all stakeholders for informed participation

Final objective of process is clear to participants


Positive survey response

Degree of participation in nfp process



Approaches to ensure, draw and sustain stakeholder participation

Ensure feedback to maintain participation

Give feedback on their participation

Create/ facilitate an environment of trust




Stakeholders are kept involved in the process with a chance to comment and influence decision-making


Adequate mechanisms are in place



Various Communication Approaches

Approaches to ensure, draw and sustain stakeholder participation

Roundtable discussions

Promote more horizontal linkages

Reaching marginalized groups

Effective communication

Hold local meetings

Select representation sample of specific HI/LP

Access to accurate information

Use adequate communication tools

Use “market research”

Guidelines/mechanisms shared by all partners



Feedback mechanisms established and sustain participation

Effective communication strategy exists



Stakeholders able to explain objectives of nfp process

Effective communication strategy exists

70% of stakeholders have access to relevant information


Asking for Local information along with technical expertise

Approaches to ensure, draw and sustain stakeholder participation

Design specific tasks

Engage in work groups

Small scale approaches within wider context

Focus group discussions

Working groups

Task Forces

Advisory committee

Adequate use of language

Invite written contributions



Local recommendations are documented

Realistic and comprehensive information generated in the process


Locally organized meetings in all administrative units

Minutes of local workshops

Field information complemented with available expertise and statistical data

Synthesis report on the results of the process


Training and capacity building

Approaches to ensure, draw and sustain stakeholder participation

Identify work through gatekeepers

Social learning

Civic education or training

Capacity building in MSP

Train facilitators to reach HI/LP



Organizational capacity of stakeholders enables efficient participation

Capacity to conduct participatory analysis exists


# of training sessions in participatory methods

# of participants voluntary involved in stakeholder meetings


Voice through representation

Approaches to ensure, draw and sustain stakeholder participation

Mechanisms of representative bodies developed/improved

Develop representative bodies (core funds, training)

Build capacity of representatives of HI/LP

Forget about gender biases in forestry sector



Fair representation of stakeholders at national level

Local stakeholders contribute to strategic analysis



% stakeholder group members satisfied with their group input

# or % group/categories of stakeholders participating

% of stakeholder representative satisfied with the outcomes


Provide incentives, benefits and stimulate motivation

Approaches to ensure, draw and sustain stakeholder participation

Recognition of groups’ contribution


Show them benefits (added value) by participating

Social mobilization (HI/LP)


Explain the importance of their participation (motivation)


Help increase their self esteem

Give responsibility

The process has to result for all stakeholders/partners



Long-term incentives for participating are clear

Different interests are not marginalized in the process

Contributions of stakeholders are integrated and debated



Working group 3 : Phase III – Programme Development



Ministry of Environment

Marginalised groups

Local NGOs

Other ministries

Local government


Private sector

Small private industry/entrepreneurs



Forestry administration

Ministry of finance

Banking institutions


Logging companies


WB-implementation review team



Extension services (local)

General public




Chiefs of villages


International NGOs







(conflict management, consensus building)


(communication – feedback)




Stakeholder groups/objective of their participation


Approaches to ensure their participation



Transparency in decision making


Stakeholders recognized by others


Equity in benefits and cost


Awareness raising &interest formation


Use of radio – information – phone ins.



Powerful message+high level ‘hook’


Support to the disadvantaged groups


Form/manage coalition of interest


Program dev. structure : e.g. wk/group, Task Force


Communication/network strategies


Series of consultative meetings/



Special meetings/focus groups (closed)


Par. Action Research


Demonstrate credibility (listen&respond)


Institutional analysis

Exposing gaps->needs for change


Strategic focus groups


Review of iniciatives (qualitative assessment)


District level vosioning “ground truthing”


Address questions others are trying to answer


Make participation plan


An informed process for all – info packages – leaflets, brochures, status reports



Transparency in decision making



Indicators in poverty reduction frameworks


Public statements/press quotes


Awareness raising &interest formation


Evaluation reports, impact assessment



Study tours





Parlimentary retreats


Option papers, scenario analysis


Hi-ranking (Ministers) Steering Committee


Inter-sectoral ministerial task force




Country specific stekeholders profile


Conflict meeting


Make participation plan


An informed process for all – info packages – leaflets, brochures, status reports



Transparency in decision making


Keep them well informed



Open meetings



Awareness raising &interest formation


Communication linkage to decision making


Medias involvement


An informed process for all – info packages – leaflets, brochures, status reports



Transparency in decision making



Keep them well informed



< p class=MsoNormal>Launches/seminars/lunches/study tours


Awareness raising &interest formation



Public workshops/




Problem-driven approach


An informed process for all – info packages – leaflets, brochures, status reports









Access to the process



Level of endorsement of the FPS



Credibility (legitimacy)


Level of realism



Human&financial resources

Capacity building




Number of meetings/variety of groups

Continuity of participation of groups

Positive perception individuals can influence decision

Scale and impact of weaknesses in forest governance considered

Number of press releases, Information and documentation shared

Procedures for feed-back instituted

Number of conflict arising

Presence of an independent conflict management mechanism (ombusman)

Mandate and resources given to nfp coordination unit


Previous PageTop Of PageNext Page