Building Local Democracy Through Natural Resource Interventions -- An Environmentalist's Responsibility

APPROACH

Through 17 institutional choice case studies funded by PROFOR, the World Resources Institute (WRI) explored the democratizing effects of ‘decentralization’ reforms and projects in forestry in Benin, Botswana, Brazil, China, India, Nicaragua, Malawi, Mali, Mozambique, Russia, Senegal, South Africa, and Zambia.

MAIN FINDINGS

The findings concluded that institutional choice shapes local democracy—hence, it could be a local democracy tool. Choices of local partners would influence the formation and consolidation of local democracy by affecting representation, citizenship, and the public domain. Natural resource, including forestry, and management interventions could be structured to build the many facets of local democracy. To support local democracy while conducting local-level environmental interventions, the research recommends the following actions:

• Choose democracy: Choose to place public decisions with decision makers who are accountable and responsive to the local citizens. Where democratic local government does not exist, work to establish and enable local democracy.
• Build the public domain: Work to create a set of public powers directly or indirectly under the jurisdiction of elected local authorities. These powers make elected authorities worth engaging by enabling them to be responsive to local needs and aspirations. They constitute what we call ‘the public domain’, e.g. the space of public interaction that constitutes the space of democracy.
• Build citizenship: Support the right and provide the means for local people to influence the authorities that govern them—channels of communication and recourse. Inform citizens of the powers and obligations their representatives have and of the means available to citizens for holding their leaders accountable.
• Promote equity: Systematically partner with local organizations representing all classes—with an emphasis on organizations of the poor. Level the playing field through policies that affirmatively favor the poor, women and marginalized groups.
• Enable local representatives to exercise their rights as public decision makers: Create safe means for representative local authorities to sanction and demand resources from and take recourse against line ministries and other intervening agencies so they are able to exercise their role as local representatives.
• Help local governments to engage in collective bargaining for laws that favor the populations they govern: Enable local governments to bargain collectively with central government to ensure they are granted the rights they need to manage their forest and to insure that the rights they have been granted in law are transferred to them in practice. Facilitate representation of rural needs and aspirations in national legislatures. 
• Harness elite capture: Elite capture is pervasive if not inevitable. Enable the people to capture the elite who capture power. Assure that elites who rule are systematically held accountable to the majority and to the poor, and marginal populations through all of the above means. This is democracy.

Building Local Democracy Through Natural Resource Interventions -- An Environmentalist's Responsibility

APPROACH

Through 17 institutional choice case studies funded by PROFOR, the World Resources Institute (WRI) explored the democratizing effects of ‘decentralization’ reforms and projects in forestry in Benin, Botswana, Brazil, China, India, Nicaragua, Malawi, Mali, Mozambique, Russia, Senegal, South Africa, and Zambia.

MAIN FINDINGS

The findings concluded that institutional choice shapes local democracy—hence, it could be a local democracy tool. Choices of local partners would influence the formation and consolidation of local democracy by affecting representation, citizenship, and the public domain. Natural resource, including forestry, and management interventions could be structured to build the many facets of local democracy. To support local democracy while conducting local-level environmental interventions, the research recommends the following actions:

• Choose democracy: Choose to place public decisions with decision makers who are accountable and responsive to the local citizens. Where democratic local government does not exist, work to establish and enable local democracy.
• Build the public domain: Work to create a set of public powers directly or indirectly under the jurisdiction of elected local authorities. These powers make elected authorities worth engaging by enabling them to be responsive to local needs and aspirations. They constitute what we call ‘the public domain’, e.g. the space of public interaction that constitutes the space of democracy.
• Build citizenship: Support the right and provide the means for local people to influence the authorities that govern them—channels of communication and recourse. Inform citizens of the powers and obligations their representatives have and of the means available to citizens for holding their leaders accountable.
• Promote equity: Systematically partner with local organizations representing all classes—with an emphasis on organizations of the poor. Level the playing field through policies that affirmatively favor the poor, women and marginalized groups.
• Enable local representatives to exercise their rights as public decision makers: Create safe means for representative local authorities to sanction and demand resources from and take recourse against line ministries and other intervening agencies so they are able to exercise their role as local representatives.
• Help local governments to engage in collective bargaining for laws that favor the populations they govern: Enable local governments to bargain collectively with central government to ensure they are granted the rights they need to manage their forest and to insure that the rights they have been granted in law are transferred to them in practice. Facilitate representation of rural needs and aspirations in national legislatures. 
• Harness elite capture: Elite capture is pervasive if not inevitable. Enable the people to capture the elite who capture power. Assure that elites who rule are systematically held accountable to the majority and to the poor, and marginal populations through all of the above means. This is democracy.

CHALLENGE
In the last decade two programs helped make forest policy processes more inclusive.

• The National Forest Program Facility (NFP), hosted by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, worked for 10 years in 80 partner countries. It aimed to foster country leadership and strengthen the participation of stakeholders in developing and implementing national forest programs. About 75% of the 900 grants it delivered went to civil society organizations; the remainder supported central forestry agencies.
• The Growing Forest Partnerships (GFP), financed by the World Bank, worked for three years in five of those partner countries. It helped create a strong network of local forest stakeholders and linked these networks with three global alliances of forest right holders. Those countries also benefited from improved collaboration between the various partners implementing these programs: FAO, International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) and the World Bank.

Although these programs ended in 2012, there is an ongoing need for strong and equitable organizations and networks. Such organizations can help smallholders, women groups, communities and Indigenous Peoples make their voices heard in policy making processes at local, regional, national and global levels on forest and farm related issues, and more readily access financing and investments for forest and farm development.

The Forest and Farm Facility was launched in September 2012 to take this work forward. The Facility is expected to support national and sub-national governments to establish multi-sectoral platforms (through dialogues, information and capacity building) to better-coordinate the various ministries, private sector and civil society stakeholders involved in, or affected by, policies and activities related to forest and farm management like food security, SFM, climate change, bio energy and water. The Facility will also help organize and strengthen communities and small producers at the local level.

APPROACH
The objectives of the Facility are to promote equitable governance mechanisms; improve coordination among multiple funding streams; enhance skills and access to market opportunities; and contribute to creating public awareness.

While core funding has been mobilized for the Facility’s startup phase, these resources are quite limited and provide few opportunities for partners who have had long engagement through the GFP to continue collaborating. The objective of this activity is to facilitate coordination among the main organizations that will be involved with activities associated with the Forest and Farm Facility and to provide a mechanism to finance incremental and follow on activities which improve collaboration. Coordination among the key organizations (Facility, IIED, and IUCN) will be instrumental to effectively and efficiently implement activities identified by the Facility.

RESULTS
Since December 2012, IIED and IUCN have been working closely with members of the Facility management team on a range of issues, from scoping and launch visits in six pilot countries, to setting up the M&E strategy in each country and for the Facility more broadly.

The six initial pilot countries are as follows :

• Latin America: Guatemala and Nicaragua
• Africa: Gambia and Liberia
• Asia: Myanmar and Nepal

This activity is ongoing. Findings will be shared on this page when they become available. Follow us on twitter or join our mailing list for regular updates.

CHALLENGE
In the last decade two programs helped make forest policy processes more inclusive.

• The National Forest Program Facility (NFP), hosted by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, worked for 10 years in 80 partner countries. It aimed to foster country leadership and strengthen the participation of stakeholders in developing and implementing national forest programs. About 75% of the 900 grants it delivered went to civil society organizations; the remainder supported central forestry agencies.
• The Growing Forest Partnerships (GFP), financed by the World Bank, worked for three years in five of those partner countries. It helped create a strong network of local forest stakeholders and linked these networks with three global alliances of forest right holders. Those countries also benefited from improved collaboration between the various partners implementing these programs: FAO, International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) and the World Bank.

Although these programs ended in 2012, there is an ongoing need for strong and equitable organizations and networks. Such organizations can help smallholders, women groups, communities and Indigenous Peoples make their voices heard in policy making processes at local, regional, national and global levels on forest and farm related issues, and more readily access financing and investments for forest and farm development.

The Forest and Farm Facility was launched in September 2012 to take this work forward. The Facility is expected to support national and sub-national governments to establish multi-sectoral platforms (through dialogues, information and capacity building) to better-coordinate the various ministries, private sector and civil society stakeholders involved in, or affected by, policies and activities related to forest and farm management like food security, SFM, climate change, bio energy and water. The Facility will also help organize and strengthen communities and small producers at the local level.

APPROACH
The objectives of the Facility are to promote equitable governance mechanisms; improve coordination among multiple funding streams; enhance skills and access to market opportunities; and contribute to creating public awareness.

While core funding has been mobilized for the Facility’s startup phase, these resources are quite limited and provide few opportunities for partners who have had long engagement through the GFP to continue collaborating. The objective of this activity is to facilitate coordination among the main organizations that will be involved with activities associated with the Forest and Farm Facility and to provide a mechanism to finance incremental and follow on activities which improve collaboration. Coordination among the key organizations (Facility, IIED, and IUCN) will be instrumental to effectively and efficiently implement activities identified by the Facility.

RESULTS
Since December 2012, IIED and IUCN have been working closely with members of the Facility management team on a range of issues, from scoping and launch visits in six pilot countries, to setting up the M&E strategy in each country and for the Facility more broadly.

The six initial pilot countries are as follows :

• Latin America: Guatemala and Nicaragua
• Africa: Gambia and Liberia
• Asia: Myanmar and Nepal

This activity is ongoing. Findings will be shared on this page when they become available. Follow us on twitter or join our mailing list for regular updates.

CHALLENGE
In the last decade two programs helped make forest policy processes more inclusive.

• The National Forest Program Facility (NFP), hosted by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, worked for 10 years in 80 partner countries. It aimed to foster country leadership and strengthen the participation of stakeholders in developing and implementing national forest programs. About 75% of the 900 grants it delivered went to civil society organizations; the remainder supported central forestry agencies.
• The Growing Forest Partnerships (GFP), financed by the World Bank, worked for three years in five of those partner countries. It helped create a strong network of local forest stakeholders and linked these networks with three global alliances of forest right holders. Those countries also benefited from improved collaboration between the various partners implementing these programs: FAO, International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) and the World Bank.

Although these programs ended in 2012, there is an ongoing need for strong and equitable organizations and networks. Such organizations can help smallholders, women groups, communities and Indigenous Peoples make their voices heard in policy making processes at local, regional, national and global levels on forest and farm related issues, and more readily access financing and investments for forest and farm development.

The Forest and Farm Facility was launched in September 2012 to take this work forward. The Facility is expected to support national and sub-national governments to establish multi-sectoral platforms (through dialogues, information and capacity building) to better-coordinate the various ministries, private sector and civil society stakeholders involved in, or affected by, policies and activities related to forest and farm management like food security, SFM, climate change, bio energy and water. The Facility will also help organize and strengthen communities and small producers at the local level.

APPROACH
The objectives of the Facility are to promote equitable governance mechanisms; improve coordination among multiple funding streams; enhance skills and access to market opportunities; and contribute to creating public awareness.

While core funding has been mobilized for the Facility’s startup phase, these resources are quite limited and provide few opportunities for partners who have had long engagement through the GFP to continue collaborating. The objective of this activity is to facilitate coordination among the main organizations that will be involved with activities associated with the Forest and Farm Facility and to provide a mechanism to finance incremental and follow on activities which improve collaboration. Coordination among the key organizations (Facility, IIED, and IUCN) will be instrumental to effectively and efficiently implement activities identified by the Facility.

RESULTS
Since December 2012, IIED and IUCN have been working closely with members of the Facility management team on a range of issues, from scoping and launch visits in six pilot countries, to setting up the M&E strategy in each country and for the Facility more broadly.

The six initial pilot countries are as follows :

• Latin America: Guatemala and Nicaragua
• Africa: Gambia and Liberia
• Asia: Myanmar and Nepal

This activity is ongoing. Findings will be shared on this page when they become available. Follow us on twitter or join our mailing list for regular updates.

CHALLENGE

Today, Haiti has lost over 98% of its original forest cover. Tree harvesting and the widespread agricultural use of steep slopes have radically transformed the natural landscape in Haitian watersheds. High population growth and current land use practices far exceed the carrying capacity of the land, especially the destructive impact of weeded annual crops on unprotected slopes, and the unsustainable production of charcoal. These trends have reduced productivity, decreased water infiltration and exposed the population to acute erosion upstream and severe flooding downstream. In addition, Haiti has been deeply affected by global climate change, which has caused longer dry seasons, periods of extended drought, erratic seasonal rains, and increased frequency and severity of tropical storms. 

The widespread destruction of permanent ground cover on Haiti’s fragile slopes has trapped rural communities in a vicious cycle of poverty and environmental degradation. Small farmers are well aware of the direct link between deforestation and diminished harvests, but near term survival needs undercut use of longer-term alternatives to annual crops such as corn and beans. With limited capacity and resources, the government is unable to provide alternatives or enforce restrictions on tree cutting or agriculture on steep slopes. These damaging trends have had a direct impact on the daily lives of Haitians in both urban and rural areas, leading to food insecurity, water shortage and increased risk from natural disasters.

Despite a general failure to reverse these trends, there are a number of other natural resource management projects that have provided interesting examples of success that are ripe for replication and scale-up. The Haiti Takes Root (HTR) Initiative, a unique partnership between the Government of Haiti, the Government of France, J/P HRO and the Parker Foundation, is founded on the belief that with a technical approach firmly rooted in these lessons learned, a long-term commitment, and the mobilization of sufficient resources, restoring Haiti’s natural capital is possible.

APPROACH

This PROFOR-funded activity will be an important first step in allowing J/P HRO to design and test a Participatory Watershed Engagement Methodology that will provide a common framework through which J/P HRO and other members of the HTR Initiative launch sustainable and community-oriented watershed restoration programs across the country. Deliverables under this PROFOR-supported study included the following:

• A draft methodology for participatory watershed diagnosis and planning, and a study plan for field testing this proposed approach;
• A final report, a detailed methodology and associated step-by-step guide for participatory watershed management planning, and participatory micro-watershed management plans for two test sites; and,
• A public presentation of study findings and methodology to key stakeholders.

The watershed orientation of this methodology includes a “ridge-to-reef” approach where applicable, and the targeting of high priority micro-watershed sites that show promise of a positive rate of return on land use planning and investments. Secondly, a guiding premise of the methodology is that successful programming of watershed interventions requires meaningful engagement of local populations in the implementation of more sustainable land use practices and more efficient management of water resources.  In Haiti, this includes agricultural strategies that protect the resource base by, for example, emphasizing agroforestry and expanded tree cover on fragile slopes. Accordingly, the critical incentive for more sustainable land use is the tangible economic interests of local people, linking livelihood pursuits with improved protection of the environment.  The challenge is to identify sites that incentivize collaborative efforts focused on high-value natural assets such as springs, ravines, watercourses, wetlands, and irrigable land, as well as coastal resources such as mangroves, fisheries, and coconut groves. 

RESULTS

The study team developed a three phase methodology for participatory watershed management planning including the following: (i) a site selection phase, (ii) a rapid micro-watershed assessment strategy, combining a rapid science-based assessment by experts along with participatory assessment by local stakeholders, and (iii) a final phase to identify priorities for specific micro-watershed interventions, based on stakeholder review and consensus. The final report and methodology for participatory waterdhed planning are available at left.

This activity is ongoing. Findings will be shared on this page when they become available.

CHALLENGE

Today, Haiti has lost over 98% of its original forest cover. Tree harvesting and the widespread agricultural use of steep slopes have radically transformed the natural landscape in Haitian watersheds. High population growth and current land use practices far exceed the carrying capacity of the land, especially the destructive impact of weeded annual crops on unprotected slopes, and the unsustainable production of charcoal. These trends have reduced productivity, decreased water infiltration and exposed the population to acute erosion upstream and severe flooding downstream. In addition, Haiti has been deeply affected by global climate change, which has caused longer dry seasons, periods of extended drought, erratic seasonal rains, and increased frequency and severity of tropical storms. 

The widespread destruction of permanent ground cover on Haiti’s fragile slopes has trapped rural communities in a vicious cycle of poverty and environmental degradation. Small farmers are well aware of the direct link between deforestation and diminished harvests, but near term survival needs undercut use of longer-term alternatives to annual crops such as corn and beans. With limited capacity and resources, the government is unable to provide alternatives or enforce restrictions on tree cutting or agriculture on steep slopes. These damaging trends have had a direct impact on the daily lives of Haitians in both urban and rural areas, leading to food insecurity, water shortage and increased risk from natural disasters.

Despite a general failure to reverse these trends, there are a number of other natural resource management projects that have provided interesting examples of success that are ripe for replication and scale-up. The Haiti Takes Root (HTR) Initiative, a unique partnership between the Government of Haiti, the Government of France, J/P HRO and the Parker Foundation, is founded on the belief that with a technical approach firmly rooted in these lessons learned, a long-term commitment, and the mobilization of sufficient resources, restoring Haiti’s natural capital is possible.

APPROACH

This PROFOR-funded activity will be an important first step in allowing J/P HRO to design and test a Participatory Watershed Engagement Methodology that will provide a common framework through which J/P HRO and other members of the HTR Initiative launch sustainable and community-oriented watershed restoration programs across the country. Deliverables under this PROFOR-supported study included the following:

• A draft methodology for participatory watershed diagnosis and planning, and a study plan for field testing this proposed approach;
• A final report, a detailed methodology and associated step-by-step guide for participatory watershed management planning, and participatory micro-watershed management plans for two test sites; and,
• A public presentation of study findings and methodology to key stakeholders.

The watershed orientation of this methodology includes a “ridge-to-reef” approach where applicable, and the targeting of high priority micro-watershed sites that show promise of a positive rate of return on land use planning and investments. Secondly, a guiding premise of the methodology is that successful programming of watershed interventions requires meaningful engagement of local populations in the implementation of more sustainable land use practices and more efficient management of water resources.  In Haiti, this includes agricultural strategies that protect the resource base by, for example, emphasizing agroforestry and expanded tree cover on fragile slopes. Accordingly, the critical incentive for more sustainable land use is the tangible economic interests of local people, linking livelihood pursuits with improved protection of the environment.  The challenge is to identify sites that incentivize collaborative efforts focused on high-value natural assets such as springs, ravines, watercourses, wetlands, and irrigable land, as well as coastal resources such as mangroves, fisheries, and coconut groves. 

RESULTS

The study team developed a three phase methodology for participatory watershed management planning including the following: (i) a site selection phase, (ii) a rapid micro-watershed assessment strategy, combining a rapid science-based assessment by experts along with participatory assessment by local stakeholders, and (iii) a final phase to identify priorities for specific micro-watershed interventions, based on stakeholder review and consensus. The final report and methodology for participatory waterdhed planning are available at left.

This activity is ongoing. Findings will be shared on this page when they become available.

CHALLENGE
The World Bank Group has been successful in reporting on the business and investment climate in developing countries through its Doing Business rankings which look at regulatory systems at the country and sub-national level. PROFOR and other partners have also devoted time and energy in trying to mobilize greater participation of businesses in meeting forest sector economic, social and environmental goals. A conducive investment and business climate would seem to be an essential element in this effort and would help increase the forest sector's contribution to "green growth".

However the regulatory requirements faced by large multinational and small local businesses vary widely; implementation of regulation is often inadequate; and investments in the forest sector may be driven by other factors such as adequate information on the resource base (inventories, land use maps, etc) and whether that resource is accessible (infrastructure, land rights, etc).

APPROACH
PROFOR created and tested a practical tool (methodology) for systematically assessing how administrative and regulatory requirements impact the business climate for investment in wood products and the forest sector more broadly. To develop the tool, PROFOR established a forest investor typology that reflects the needs of both domestic and international strategic investors and small and medium forest enterprises, and reviewed existing investment climate studies and tools and their applicability for forest sector investors.The applicable tools were then tested in Lao PDR and Tanzania to assess demand for such tool tailored to the forest sector, identify gaps in measuring forest investment climate, and understand the value add of a new instrument.

RESULTS
The publication Business Climate for Forest Investments: A Survey provides an overview of a diversity of tools to assess investment climate, their applicability in the forest sector and main gaps, and offers a menu of options for further development to improve methodologies and investment climate for sustainable forest management and wood processing.

Follow us on twitter or join our mailing list for regular updates.

CHALLENGE
The World Bank Group has been successful in reporting on the business and investment climate in developing countries through its Doing Business rankings which look at regulatory systems at the country and sub-national level. PROFOR and other partners have also devoted time and energy in trying to mobilize greater participation of businesses in meeting forest sector economic, social and environmental goals. A conducive investment and business climate would seem to be an essential element in this effort and would help increase the forest sector's contribution to "green growth".

However the regulatory requirements faced by large multinational and small local businesses vary widely; implementation of regulation is often inadequate; and investments in the forest sector may be driven by other factors such as adequate information on the resource base (inventories, land use maps, etc) and whether that resource is accessible (infrastructure, land rights, etc).

APPROACH
PROFOR created and tested a practical tool (methodology) for systematically assessing how administrative and regulatory requirements impact the business climate for investment in wood products and the forest sector more broadly. To develop the tool, PROFOR established a forest investor typology that reflects the needs of both domestic and international strategic investors and small and medium forest enterprises, and reviewed existing investment climate studies and tools and their applicability for forest sector investors.The applicable tools were then tested in Lao PDR and Tanzania to assess demand for such tool tailored to the forest sector, identify gaps in measuring forest investment climate, and understand the value add of a new instrument.

RESULTS
The publication Business Climate for Forest Investments: A Survey provides an overview of a diversity of tools to assess investment climate, their applicability in the forest sector and main gaps, and offers a menu of options for further development to improve methodologies and investment climate for sustainable forest management and wood processing.

Follow us on twitter or join our mailing list for regular updates.

CHALLENGE
The World Bank Group has been successful in reporting on the business and investment climate in developing countries through its Doing Business rankings which look at regulatory systems at the country and sub-national level. PROFOR and other partners have also devoted time and energy in trying to mobilize greater participation of businesses in meeting forest sector economic, social and environmental goals. A conducive investment and business climate would seem to be an essential element in this effort and would help increase the forest sector's contribution to "green growth".

However the regulatory requirements faced by large multinational and small local businesses vary widely; implementation of regulation is often inadequate; and investments in the forest sector may be driven by other factors such as adequate information on the resource base (inventories, land use maps, etc) and whether that resource is accessible (infrastructure, land rights, etc).

APPROACH
PROFOR created and tested a practical tool (methodology) for systematically assessing how administrative and regulatory requirements impact the business climate for investment in wood products and the forest sector more broadly. To develop the tool, PROFOR established a forest investor typology that reflects the needs of both domestic and international strategic investors and small and medium forest enterprises, and reviewed existing investment climate studies and tools and their applicability for forest sector investors.The applicable tools were then tested in Lao PDR and Tanzania to assess demand for such tool tailored to the forest sector, identify gaps in measuring forest investment climate, and understand the value add of a new instrument.

RESULTS
The publication Business Climate for Forest Investments: A Survey provides an overview of a diversity of tools to assess investment climate, their applicability in the forest sector and main gaps, and offers a menu of options for further development to improve methodologies and investment climate for sustainable forest management and wood processing.

Follow us on twitter or join our mailing list for regular updates.