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 http://www.fao.org/forestry/foris/webview/forestry2/index.jsp?siteId=1440&langId=1 (National Forest Programmes site on FAO web site www.fao.org, 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

 

RESULTS:

 

Working group 1 : Phase I – Organization of the Process

 

HI/LP

Forest Owners (private-small)

Farmers

Community organizations

Local government

National NGOs

Small scale forest industry

Indigenous People

Forest workers

 

HI/HP

Academic&research

Forest owners (private-large)

National gouvernments/ National Forest autorities

Large forest industry

Legislators

Forest administrations

Forest workers

 

LI/LP

Other users

Academic&research (developping country)

 

LI/HP

Donors

International NGOs (IUCN,WWF)

Other ministries

International Organizations

 

---------------------------------------------------------------

 

WHO

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

Continuity

% of initiatives approved

 

HOW

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

 

Legitimization

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

 

HI/LP

Female/male farmers

Consultants/research

Ministry of planning

Labor force

Local community

Rural poor

Indigenous

Local government

Small forest entreprise

Wildlife

 

HI/HP

Ministry of Finance

Civil society

Private sector –corporate

Ministry of Forestry

Research institutions/universities

Tourism

 

LI/LP

General public

Environmental NGOs

Civil society

 

LI/HP

Private land owners

Ministry of planning = $, €

Donor community

Other ministries

Elected official (national/subnational/regional level)

Regional associations/organizations

Trade partners

 

------------------------------------------

 

Principles

Transparency

Voluntary participation

Equity

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

 

Criteria:

Adequate financial support to enable the process

Political support for participation in NFP exists

Planning of the process prior to launching

Indicators:

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

 

Criteria:

Sufficient understanding among all stakeholders for informed participation

Final objective of process is clear to participants

Indicators:

Positive survey response

Degree of participation in nfp process

 

Feedback

Approaches to ensure, draw and sustain stakeholder participation

Ensure feedback to maintain participation

Give feedback on their participation

Create/ facilitate an environment of trust

Accountability

 

Criteria:

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

Indicator:

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

 

Criteria:

Feedback mechanisms established and sustain participation

Effective communication strategy exists

 

Indicators:

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

 

Criteria

Local recommendations are documented

Realistic and comprehensive information generated in the process

Indicators

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

 

Criteria

Organizational capacity of stakeholders enables efficient participation

Capacity to conduct participatory analysis exists

Indicators

# 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

 

Criteria

Fair representation of stakeholders at national level

Local stakeholders contribute to strategic analysis

 

Indicators

% 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

Incentive

Show them benefits (added value) by participating

Social mobilization (HI/LP)

Empowerment

Explain the importance of their participation (motivation)

Respect

Help increase their self esteem

Give responsibility

The process has to result for all stakeholders/partners

 

Criteria

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

 

HI/LP

Ministry of Environment

Marginalised groups

Local NGOs

Other ministries

Local government

Universities&research

Private sector

Small private industry/entrepreneurs

 

HI/HP

Forestry administration

Ministry of finance

Banking institutions

Donors

Logging companies

Trade-unions

WB-implementation review team

 

LI/LP

Extension services (local)

General public

 

LI/HP

Politicians

Chiefs of villages

Medias

International NGOs

 

----------------------------------------------

 

 

 

Decision-making

(conflict management, consensus building)

Consultations

(communication – feedback)

Information

(presentation,promotion)

           

Stakeholder groups/objective of their participation

 

Approaches to ensure their participation

HI/LP

 

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/

workshop

 

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

HI/HP

 

Transparency in decision making

 

 

Indicators in poverty reduction frameworks

 

Public statements/press quotes

 

Awareness raising &interest formation

 

Evaluation reports, impact assessment

 

 

Study tours

 

 

Surveys/studies

 

Parlimentary retreats

 

Option papers, scenario analysis

 

Hi-ranking (Ministers) Steering Committee

 

Inter-sectoral ministerial task force

 

Writeshops

 

Country specific stekeholders profile

 

Conflict meeting

 

Make participation plan

 

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

LI/LP

 

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

LI/HP

 

Transparency in decision making

 

 

Keep them well informed

 

 

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

 

Awareness raising &interest formation

 

 

Public workshops/

hearings

 

 

Problem-driven approach

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Criteria

 

Commitment

Access to the process

Transparency

 

Level of endorsement of the FPS

 

Awareness

Credibility (legitimacy)

Accountability

Level of realism

Representation

Timebound

Human&financial resources

Capacity building

 

Indicators

 

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