Your Federal Quarterly Tax Payments are due April 15th Get Help Now >>

Draft concept note 26 July 2005 by wbg11188


									Project Title         Proposal Development Through a Consultative Workshop on
                      "Learning to Evaluate Capacity Development for CBNRM”

Implementing          International Potato Center – Users‟ Perspectives With Agricultural
Organization          Research and Development (CIP-UPWARD)

Project Leader        Dindo Campilan

Implementation Period April – August 2006

Project Summary       A consultative workshop was organized to assess needs, interests,
                      and opportunities for regional collaboration in learning to evaluate
                      capacity development in community-based natural resource
                      management (ECD-CBNRM). Workshop participants consisted of
                      22 representatives from 11 organizations in 5 countries (i.e. China,
                      Mongolia, Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam). The three-day
                      activity included sessions for experience sharing, small-group and
                      plenary discussions, and planning exercises. Workshop outputs
                      included: 1) synthesis of needs and opportunities for ECD-
                      CBNRM, 2) a draft learning agenda for regional collaboration, 3)
                      action plan for proposal development by prospective partner
                                 Table of Contents

  Section                                   Title                        Page
I            Background on CBNRM capacity development                      1
II           Workshop purpose and objectives                               1
III          Workshop design and implementation                            1
IV           Participants                                                  2
V            Experiences, needs and opportunities for ECD-CBNRM            3
VI           Proposed regional collaborative project                       4
VII          Prospective partners for collaborative project                5
VIII         Workshop evaluation and synthesis                             7
Appendix A   Workshop schedule                                            11
Appendix B   Contact addresses of workshop participants.                  13
Appendix C   ECD-CBNRM initiatives, needs and opportunities of            15
             participating organizations.
Appendix D   Profiles of case evaluations: key guide questions and M&E    20
Appendix E   Workshop photodocumentation                                  24
                 I.      Background on CBNRM Capacity Development

Community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) refers to a wide range of
approaches for participatory action research in managing natural resources. In Southeast
Asia, there have been several efforts in capacity development (CD) to support CBNRM
practice by research and development organizations. Among the key capacity development
strategies that have been used are: 1) networking/ partnership building, 2) curriculum
development, and 3) training/information support services.

An emerging challenge is to document how these capacity development initiatives are
contributing to CBNRM performance of research and development organizations. In the
region, there are some on-going efforts to document the process and results of these kinds of
capacity development efforts, ranging from monitoring of outputs to assessing long-term
outcomes in terms of strengthening organizational capacities. However, cross-learning and
sharing among organizations involved in CBNRM capacity development have remained
limited. A collaborative regional “platform” or “forum” could facilitate joint learning and
more effective assessment approaches.

Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) efforts allow for integration of “good practices” in
CBNRM capacity development. An evaluative learning framework would help enhance the
existing pool of knowledge by offering valuable lessons and insights on effective strategies
and success factors in capacity development; it also offers a critical outlook on issues in
scaling up, sustainability and institutionalization.

                        II.     Workshop Purpose and Objectives

A key starting point for regional collaboration is a consultative workshop to assess needs,
interests, and opportunities for collaborative learning on evaluating capacity development in
(ECD-CBNRM). The key workshop objectives were:

   1. To assess needs, interests, and opportunities for regional collaboration in learning to
      evaluate CBNRM capacity development.
   2. To identify Southeast Asian organizations as potential partners, while seeking their
      commitment to participate in a collaborative evaluation process.
   3. To develop a proposal for a Southeast Asian project on evaluating CBNRM
      organizational capacity development based on key issues identified during the

                      III.    Workshop Design and Implementation

The consultative workshop was a three-day activity consisting of the following sessions: a)
sharing of experiences in ECD-CBNRM, b) discussion on needs, interests, and opportunities
for regional collaboration including identification of prospective partners, and c) planning
exercises toward developing a project proposal (Appendix A).
The workshop was organized into a series of presentations, discussions and small-group
exercises based on the following general structure:

         Agenda/Guide Questions                                       Activities
Day 1    Needs, opportunities and issues in ECD-CBNRM: What           Presentation and sharing of
         is the emerging learning agenda for ECD-CBNRM                evaluation agenda/questions by
         among partner organizations?                                 partner organizations
Day 2    Evaluation frameworks and methodologies in ECD-              Sharing of experiences with
         CBNRM: What are some of the good practices in                evaluation frameworks and
         evaluation, and how could these be adapted/                  methodologies
         enhanced/refined through joint learning?
Day 3    Collaborative project to support ECD-CBNRM efforts:          Discussion on ideas for a
         What is the added value of a collaborative project, and      collaborative project to support
         how could this facilitate joint learning and sharing among   partner organizations‟ ECD-
         partner organizations?                                       CBNRM efforts

The target outputs were: 1) synthesis of experiences, needs and opportunities for ECD-
CBNRM in Southeast Asia, 2) outline of ideas for a proposal on a regional collaborative
project, and 3) list of prospective project partners with informal commitment to participate.

Each participating organization provided initial inputs to the workshop by sharing their ECD-
CBNRM experiences through poster and 15-minute oral presentation. The poster presented
a “case evaluation” of ECD-CBNRM done by the organization and its partners. It focused on
a specific experience in conducting an evaluation for an identified CBNRM capacity
development effort.

Meanwhile, the oral presentation provided a general overview of the organization‟s learning
agenda for participating in an ECD-CBNRM initiative. The presentations addressed the
following guide questions:

    1.  What CBNRM-related capacities does the organization seek to develop for itself and
       its partners?
    2. How has the organization (and partners) worked to develop/strengthen these
       CBNRM capacities?
    3. Why is the organization interested in learning to evaluate CBNRM capacity
    4. What challenges and issues in ECD-CBNRM does the organization foresee?

                                       IV.     Participants

The workshop had 22 participants representing 11 organizations from 5 countries – China,
Mongolia, Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam. These included team members of prospective
evaluation teams, resource persons and facilitators (Appendix B).

Organization                                                            Name
1. IIRR, Philippines                                                    Emily Monville-Oro

2. Vietnam Uplands Forum, Vietnam                                   Le Van An
3. Ministry for Nature and Environment, Mongolia                    HijabaYkhanbai
4. FCR Network, China                                               Xu Xiuli
5. China Agricultural University, China                             Mao Miankui
6. Jilin Agricultural University, China                             Lu Min
7. Northwest Agro-forestry Science & Technology University, China   Gao Pengcheng
8. RECOFTC, Thailand                                                Noelle O‟Brien
9. CBCRM Resource Center, Philippines                               Elmer Ferrer
                                                                    Leonore de la Cruz
10. UPLB, Philippines                                               Ma. Stella Tirol
                                                                    Ma. Celeste Cadiz
11. UPWARD, Philippines                                             Lorna Sister
                                                                    Carlos Basilio
12. Resource Persons                                                Nora Quebral (UPLB)
                                                                    Gelia Castillo (UPWARD)
                                                                    Julian Gonsalves (UPWARD)
13. Lead Facilitators                                               Ronnie Vernooy (IDRC)
                                                                    Dindo Campilan (UPWARD)
14. Secretariat                                                     Mayette Nadal (UPWARD)
                                                                    Judith Luis (UPWARD)
                                                                    Jaime Gallentes (UPWARD)

The succeeding sections present the key outputs of the workshop.

              V.        Experiences, Needs and Opportunities for ECD-CBNRM

Participating organizations presented experiences, current efforts and challenges faced in
ECD-CBNRM (Appendix C). Drawing on experiences of 11 organizations in Northeast and
Southeast Asia, the workshop identified the following key issues as agenda for joint learning:

    Conceptual issues
    1. Evaluation as institutional learning: beyond audit and performance review
    2. Understanding the nature of CBNRM capacities: emergent and predictive types
    3. Attributing improved performance to capacity development: causalities and
    4. Complexity of capacity development: processes, actors and outcomes

    Methodological issues
    5. Measuring “capacity”: from the abstract to the operational
    6. Ethics of evaluation: sensitivity of information and access to data sources
    7. Rigors of evaluation: (inter)subjectivity and objectivity
    8. Complementary methods: quantitative and qualitative

   Issues in managing and using evaluation
   9. Institutional contexts of capacity development: dynamics of organizations and
   10. Using evaluation: building on evaluation to enhance capacity development
   11. Engaging multi-level stakeholders in evaluation
   12. Costs and risks in evaluating capacity development

The key discussion points, following the presentations, are as follows (summarized by Dr.
Nora Quebral, resource person):

   1. The conceptual foundations implied by the terms “participatory”, “stakeholder”,
      “program ownership”, “collaboration”, “cooperation” need to be better understood.
   2. CBNRM is as a cluster of concepts. There needs to be greater clarity on the notions of
      “community-based” and “natural resources”.
   3. ECD-CBNRM relies on partner organizations‟ willingness to share new ideas and
      other resources, readiness to learn from others, flexibility of outlook that allows for
      change, and crossing or lowering of territorial fences and boundaries for mutual
   4. 2. CBNRM capacities that need to be developed will vary depending on the agenda of
      stakeholders, and the levels of program interventions/objectives. Ultimately, the
      community is the crucial level and stakeholder in CBNRM.
   5. Formative or process evaluation monitors what is happening in the program, clarifies
      corrective measures, feeds into ongoing program process. This needs to be a key
      component of ECD-CBNRM.
   6. ECD-CBNRM needs to address both the effect of the external environment on
      capacity development process, and the effect of capacity development process on
      external environment.

                     VI.    Proposed Regional Collaborative Project

Based on experiences, needs and opportunities shared during the workshop, participants
discussed the strategic contribution of learning to use evaluation in CBNRM capacity
development. Through small-group exercises and plenary discussion: participants formulated
the following key learning questions for a proposal regional collaborative project:

   1. What are different stakeholders learning from their involvement in capacity
      development efforts? Are changing (individual) attitudes, knowledge, and skills
      contributing to improved CBNRM practices? Are changing individual capacities also
      contributing to the strengthening of organizational performance?
   2. Are capacity development efforts contributing to more equal and learning-oriented
      relationships among stakeholders? What difference are these changed relationships
      making for CBNRM practice?
   3. Have capacity development efforts contributed to desired CBNRM outcomes, in terms
      of improved livelihoods, more equal access to natural resources, towards sustainable
      use of natural resources, empowerment, supportive policy changes?

    4. What are the strengths and weaknesses of different capacity development modalities,
       such as, working groups, learning communities, networks, organizational
       partnerships, for CBNRM outcomes? How does wider context (i.e., societal forces)
       influence outcomes, given a particular modality or a combination of modalities?
    5. How to monitor and evaluate CBNRM capacity development efforts? How to consider
       multiple stakeholder perspectives? How useful is self-assessment? How useful is
       PM&E? How useful is a theory of action? What is an adequate time frame? How to
       develop M&E capacities?

An action plan was also drawn up consisting of key steps in proposal development and
project implementation.

Activities/Actions                          Responsible Persons/Orgns      Target Dates
1. Prepare 2-3 page briefs (profiles)       Case study coordinators and    30 Jun 2006
of case evaluation                          teams
2. Collect and distribute documented        Case study coordinators        1 Sep 2006
CD/ECD cases
3. Identify and form learning clusters      Prospective partner            30 Jun 2006
4. Organize the project‟s core and          Lu Min, Cel Cadiz              30 Jul 2006
support team/s                              Emily Oro, Dindo Campilan
5. Prepare a proposal to IDRC               Core team with input partner   15 Aug 2006
6. Learning workshops on                    Learning clusters              Oct-Dec 2006
developing evaluation plans
7. Exchange visits                          Learning clusters              Jan-Apr 2007
8.Electronic forum                          Core team                      Sep 2006- Oct 2007

9. General review/planning                  Partner organizations          Oct 2007
10. Participation in external learning      Partner organizations          Oct-Dec 2007
events (e.g. conferences)

                                     VII.     Prospective Partners

During and immediately after the workshop, participating organizations used the workshop
outputs to re-assess their respective learning agendas in ECD-CBNRM. They then submitted
a 2-3 page profile of an on-going case evaluation, to formally signify their interest as
prospective partner of the regional collaborative project.

There were a total of 9 prospective partner organizations from northeast and southeast Asia.
Tentatively, these were grouped into three learning clusters: a) CD-CBNRM in academic
setting, b) CD-CBNRM through networking, and c) CD-CBNRM for influencing sectoral
policy and reform.

Cluster               Common Features of CD                               Case Evaluations/
1. CD-CBNRM in        Integrating CBNRM learning content in formal        CAU - China
academic setting         instructional programs                           HUAF - Vietnam
                      Building capacity of future generation of CBNRM     JAU - China
                         researchers and practitioners
                      Addressing institutional challenges of
                         mainstreaming CBNRM in an academic setting
2. CD-CBNRM           Facilitating partnership-based learning through a   ALLinCBNRM/UPLB –
through                  regional/national network                           Southeast Asia
networking            Strengthening capacity of existing CBNRM            CBCRM- Asia
                         researchers and practitioners                    FCRN - China
                      Integrating multiple CD strategies and methods      UPWARD - Asia
3. CD-CBNRM           Engaging multiple stakeholders in a specific        IIRR - Asia
for influencing          development sector                               MNE-Mongolia
sectoral policy and   Strengthening capacity through multi-level
reform                   approach within a macro-institutional
                      Targeting policy change as key CD outcome

Meanwhile during the workshop planning exercises, Dr. Gonsalves (resource person)
provided guidelines and suggestions for a regional collaboration on ECD-CBNRM:

    1. CBNRM is usually about access to natural resources, people‟s livelihoods and
       empowerment. While technical issues are involved, social and institutional issues are
       equally important. Multiple disciplines are involved.
    2. CBNRM is supposedly different from NRM because of its special emphasis on
       grassroots/community level interventions. Often CBNRM involves landscapes rather
       than individual farm. These characteristics must not be forgotten as they imply the
       need for a more targeted approach to capacity development.
    3. CBNRM implies that participatory methods will be featured more prominently - more
       iterative methods, bigger role for internal actors. The partnership element in CBNRM
       also requires participatory methods.
    4. The link of practice with policy is often emphasized. However it is not a uni-
       directional (bottom to top) effort of influencing policy with the results from the field.
       Movement is required from both ends. NGOS, local governments, universities are
       intermediaries in this process.
    5. Nothing is as important as to influence policy makers as an on-the- ground
       demonstration of a (CBNRM) concept. Backed up with data to substantiate claims,
       these are valuable mechanisms to influence policy makers. Strong community level
       capacities are not (alone) adequate to bring about the desired impact.
    6. Universities, NGOs and local governments are really indeed best described as support
       organizations that provide the enabling environment, and provide support functions.
       These intermediaries require a differentiated approach from that for local
    7. Empowerment is a key determinant for success of a CBNRM action effort. This is
       difficult to measure but could include capacities to negotiate and resolve conflicts.

       Similarly strong, resilient, functioning local level organizations are important
       elements for success. Assessing local organizational capacities is important.
   8. Learning communities are emphasized in CBNRM. Many of the methods are
       informal (e.g. cross visits, PM&E, mentoring, farmer to farmer, community to
       community). However, understanding how learning takes place is important.
   9. Evaluation is research and in a CBNRM context it involves work done at different
       levels: network, intermediary/support organization level and community level.
   10. Partnerships are featured in CBNRM because of the multi-stakeholder and multiple
       disciplines involved. However it is important to recognize that partnerships are not
       limited to external or support organizations but local organizations as well. Assessing
       the partnership process itself is as important as assessing the impact of the
   11. Partnerships are about collaborative engagements in CBNRM and should not be used
       synonymously as networking. Partnerships imply that partners are jointly engaged in
       the design implementation and monitoring of the effort. Networks however can serve
       as very effective for enhancing capacities of individual members. They can provide
       opportunities for synthesis and can in themselves serve as mechanisms for sharing
       results of CBNRM.
   12. In CBNRM direct attribution of impact to specific interventions may not be justified
       – impact in CBNRM is often the result of incremental effects of past/current
       interventions. What is important is to assess if there has been impact to determine
       how relevant (contributory) the interventions are.
   13. Capacity development is often included as key objective in many CBNRM projects.
       However for people at the community level, there might be a need to look at more
       tangible objectives (e.g. livelihood or environment enhancement).
   14. Information generated from evaluation is important in mainstreaming efforts.
       However, in CBNRM there are risks in extrapolating experiences from small-scale
       interventions to macro-level.
   15. Transaction costs are often considered to be reasonably high in partnerships. However
       we can consider these costs (negotiations, consultations) as capacity development.

                        VIII. Workshop Evaluation and Synthesis

The workshop ended with a session on synthesis and evaluation. An exercise was carried out
for participants to share their key learning outcomes and suggestions for improving the

What have you learned from the workshop?             How could the workshop be improved?
  Inspiration to undertake evaluation                More time to present CD evaluation
  Evaluating CD for CBNRM involves assessing          studies done already
   individual capacity, organizational development    Start AM session at 9am instead of 8am
   and impact at the community                        More time for poster viewing
  Evaluation is in itself CD of all stakeholders     More field practitioners
  Some methods for ECD                               More games
  Different approaches for ECD                       Elevator, please
  How little was done in this area before            Too noisy at night

What have you learned from the workshop?           How could the workshop be improved?
  Developing partnerships is important in ECD-     Internet access, please
   CBNRM                                            A little bit of trouble in language
  Experiments (experience?) sharing of others
  The way to organize workshop contents
  Inductive workshop process
  Understand more about CBNRM/FCRN
  More clear about the framework of
  Capacity development for CBNRM leads to
   access to natural resources, sustainable
   livelihood, empowerment, improvement NRM
  Bringing many diverse perspectives closer to
   each other
  Partnership experiences/insights

A summary of the workshop process and outputs was presented by Dr. Gelia Castillo,
resource person, through the following key reflections on the activity:

   1. Carrying out or linking with field-based projects is an absolute must in PR&D or
      CBNRM. It is not only a mechanism for ground-truthing but a place for being human
      and finding humanity in others. This is also where capacity development meets the
      need for development outcomes in CBNRM. Field exposure reinforces one‟s
      commitment to this challenging task while obtaining first-hand lessons from life.
   2. In this workshop and elsewhere, much is said about process. The statement often
      made about this is that “process is as important as product but process does not
      substitute for product.”
   3. The conceptual/theoretical literature on PR&D CBNRM evaluation is too pedantic for
      me. Without references to actual cases to illustrate the illustrious concepts, I feel
      terribly lost. For example, theory of action floored me completely until somewhere,
      somehow, I heard that it means sequence of steps which will happen in the project.
      There was also a paragraph which said “We begin with the proposition that people
      hold theories of action about how to produce consequences they intend”.
   4. The literature on evaluation is too neat, stepwise and orderly. They tend to be
      counsels of perfection. When accompanied by field-level experiences/examples,
      perfections can become more human and messy but more true-to-life.
   5. From the presentations, capacity development is intended mostly for intermediaries in
      order to bridge the gap between research in higher education and rural development
      as in the FCRN. This gap cannot be bridged and the theory of action cannot become
      reality unless capacity development connects with CBNRM on-the-ground. We need
      to learn more about how to do this effectively and efficiently and I might add,
      ethically. The community must benefit in some way in the short term while this
      connecting is being done. Otherwise, they will feel “used” especially if the activities
      are mainly “extractive” to generate information to produce a research report for the
   6. Sustainability was mentioned often in the presentations. What do we mean by
      sustainability? Are we referring to sustainability of the natural resource? of capacity

    development or of the evaluation capacity? or of the network? Why would we want
    to sustain a network if its existence does not contribute to the achievement of
    CBNRM objectives? Is it possible to have a situation where capacity development
    succeeded but the CBNRM project failed?
7. Our experience not only in NRM but in health tells us that it is easier to develop
    capacity than to utilize and maintain it. It is also easier to network internationally and
    regionally than to network within institutions and between institutions within the
    country. The most cynical comment about networks says: “Networks work only
    when there is money.”
8. CBNRM cannot be done by a single institution, no matter how brilliant or how richly
    endowed it might be. Partnerships are almost always required for people to actually
    benefit from research products and the research process. The frequent complaint is
    the high transaction costs because of the time involved in building relationships of
    trust, common purpose, mutual benefit, sharing and exchange. But there are no
    partnerships without relationships. As Lee Ezell said: “After all is said and done,
    relationships are truly the only things that really matter.”
9. We must invest the time to do this and time in this case is not a transaction cost; it is
    an investment. Partnership between unequals is quite common but if a concept of
    equivalence and complementarity in what is brought to the partnerships is considered,
    do we achieve more equal relationships?
10. I spent a month and a half synthesizing substantive and methodological lessons from
    16 field projects of UPWARD‟s PR&D capacity development program for South
    Asia. These lessons would be valuable for ECD-CBNRM because they provide
    empirical insights on what capacities need to be developed for PR&D and for
    CBNRM. Capacity development cannot be left in the abstract.
11. Regional collaboration would add to the richness and diversity of ideas, approaches,
    experiences, and lessons in success and failure in CBNRM. There will be a wealth of
    options to learn from. Getting to the ground and making a difference among people
    whose welfare CBNRM espouses is an achievement to share. Coming together
    makes this achievement more urgent.
12. CBNRM, even in the best of circumstances, is not easy. Social, cultural and
    intellectual support from each other will contribute to a sense of belonging, a
    consciousness of kind, a solidarity with like-minded professionals.
13. Wittingly or unwittingly, coming together of CBNRM practitioners will result in
    other-directed socialization which enlarges the universe of perspectives in CBNRM
    practice. This has the net effect of breaking down ethnocentric tendencies and
    encouraging consideration of alternative approaches. CBNRM should be beyond
    language, religion, ethnicity and politics.
14. For a proposed ECD-CBNRM project, three major issues need to be addressed:
    (a)      How to work with biophysical scientists; to engage them in the CBNRM
             approach is a capacity which needs to be developed among social science
             practitioners in CBNRM.
     (b)     We are still struggling with the problem of how to translate concepts into
             actual operations so we can derive doable empirical indicators which will
             enable us to do evaluation of capacity development or of CBNRM
             development outcomes.

   (c)      How do we move from learning to doing – from social learning/knowledge
            production to applying knowledge? How do we make a difference not only in
            our own capacities and in intermediary organizations but in the welfare of
            people for whom CBNRM was invented?
15. We must not forget that poverty is a problem to which we want to contribute
    solutions, not a justification for what we want to do for our own ends.

Appendix 1. Workshop schedule

Date/Time    Activity                                                        Facilitators/
                                                                             Resource Persons
Wed, 7 June
0815-0830 Registration                                                       Lorna Sister
0830-0930 Opening Program
            Welcome                                                          Ronnie Vernooy
            Introduction of participants and workshop overview               Dindo Campilan
            Participants‟ expectations from workshop                         Carlos Basilio
0930-1020   SESSION 1 – Participants’ Sharing of ECD-CBNRM                   Cel Cadiz
            Experiences and Expectations
            Farmer-Centered Research Network (FCRN) China                    Xu Xiuli/
                                                                             Gao Pengcheng
                Community-based Coastal Resource Management (CBCRM)          Elmer Ferrer/
                Resource Center                                              Leonore dela Cruz
1020-1040    Group Pictorial and Break
1040-1200    Continuation of Session 1                                       Noelle O’Brien
               Vietnam Uplands Forum (VUF)                                   Le Van An
               Users‟ Perspectives With Agricultural Research and            Dindo Campilan
               Development (UPWARD)
               University of the Philippines Los Baños – College of          Estella Tirol/Cel
               Development Communication (UPLB-CDC)                          Cadiz
1200-1330    Break
1300-1330    Viewing of Posters
1330-1500    Continuation of Session 1                                       Carlos Basilio
               China Agricultural University (CAU)-Jilin Agricultural        Mao Miankui/
               University (JAU)                                              Lu Min
               International Institute of Rural Reconstruction (IIRR)        Emily Monville-Oro
               Regional Community Forestry Training Center (RECOFTC)         Noelle O’Brien
               Ministry for Nature and Environment-Mongolia                  Hijaba Ykhanbai
1500-1520    Break
1520-1720    SESSION 2 - Discussion-Synthesis of Presentations: Emerging     Dindo Campilan
             Agenda for Evaluating CBNRM Capacity Development
                Introductory comments: What key needs and opportunities      Nora Quebral
                for evaluating CBNRM capacity development were
                expressed by partner organizations?
1800-2000    Welcome Dinner

Thu, 8 June
0815-0915 SESSION 3 - Discussion on Evaluation Frameworks and                Emily Monville-Oro
              Synthesis from Day 1 inputs: What evaluation frameworks        Dindo Campilan
              and objectives were shared by potential partners? What could
              be learned to further enhance evaluation efforts?
0915-1015 SESSION 4 - Discussion on Evaluation Methodologies                 Le Van An

Date/Time     Activity                                                         Facilitators/
                                                                               Resource Persons
                Synthesis from Day 1 inputs: What evaluation methodologies    Ronnie Vernooy
                were shared by partner organizations? What could be learned
                to further enhance evaluation efforts?
1015-1035     Break
1035-1200     SESSION 5 - Small-Group Discussion on Learning Good             Facilitators
              Practices in ECD-CBNRM: Experiences and Gaps
1200-1330     Break
1330-1530       Presentation and general discussion                           Carlos Basilio

1530-1550     Break
1550-1700     SESSION 6 – Discussion on the Added Value of a Collaborative    Elmer Ferrer
              Project to Learn ECD-CBNRM
                Introductory comments: Building and managing partnerships     Julian Gonsalves
                for learning ECD-CBNRM
1700-1720     Visit Mountain Road/CIP-UPWARD/PCARRD Complex                   Mayette Nadal
1800-2000     Dinner
Fri, 9 June
0815-1015     SESSION 7 - Small Group Discussion: Regional Collaboration      Facilitators
              in Learning ECD-CBNRM
1015-1035     Break
1035-1200       Presentation and general discussion                           Carlos Basilio
1215-1330     Break
1330-1530     Workshop Synthesis                                              Lorna Sister
                Workshop reflections: what we have learned, what we still     Gelia Castillo
                need to learn
                Synthesis of workshop outputs                                 Dindo Campilan
                Next steps in planning the collaborative project              Ronnie Vernooy
                Workshop evaluation                                           Xu Xiuli
                Feedback from participants                                    Participants
1530-1730     Tour: Los Banos Science Community                               Mayette Nadal
1730-1830     Closing Dinner
1830-2000     Guided Shopping                                                 UPWARD Staff

Appendix B. Contact addresses of workshop participants.

     Name              Organization                          Address                     Telephone #            Fax #            Email address
Basilio, Carlos    CIP-UPWARD                PCARRD Complex, Los Baños, Laguna,       (63-49) 536-8185    (63-49) 536-1662

Cadiz, Maria       UPLB                      College of Development Communication,    (63-49) 536-2511    (63-49) 536-3356
Celeste                                      College, Laguna 4031, Philippines        loc. 220

Campilan,          CIP-UPWARD                PCARRD Complex, Los Baños, Laguna,       (63-49) 536-8185    (63-49) 536-1662
Dindo                                        Philippines

Castillo, Gelia    CIP-UPWARD                PCARRD Complex, Los Baños, Laguna,       (63-49) 536-8185    (63-49) 536-1662

Dela Cruz,         CBCRM Resource            13 A Maaralin Street, Central District   (63-2) 920-3368     (63-2) 920-3368    tatadelacruz@cbcrmlea
Leonore            Center                    Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines                                     

Ferrer, Elmer      CBCRM Resource            13 A Maaralin Street, Central District   (63-2) 920-3368     (63-2) 920-3368    emferrer@cbcrmlearnin
                   Center                    Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines                                     

Gallentes, Jaime   CIP-UPWARD                PCARRD Complex, Los Baños, Laguna,       (63-49) 536-8185    (63-49) 536-1662

Gao, Pengcheng     Northwest Agro-           Yangling, Shaanxi, 712100, P.R. China    (86-29) 87081200    (86-29) 87080050   Pengcheng1969@tom.c
                   forestry Science and                                                                                      om
                   Technology University

Gonsalves,         CIP-UPWARD                c/o Toledo Apartments, Maitim II,        (63-46) 413-2806;                      juliangonsalves@yahoo
Julian                                       Tagaytay City                            09198372189 (m)                        .com

Hijaba,            Ministry for Nature and   Baga Toiruu-44, Ulaanbaatar-11, MNE      (976-11) 329619     (976-11) 329619    Ykhanbai@magicnet.m
Ykhanbai           the Environment,                                                                                          n

Le Van, An         Hue University of         102 Phung Hung St., Hue, Vietnam         (84-54) 525049      (84-54) 524923     Levanan-
                   Agriculture and
     Name               Organization                      Address                     Telephone #            Fax #              Email address

Lu, Min             Ji Lin Agricultural   College of Agronomy, 2888# Xincheng       (86-431) 4515062   (86-431) 4515062;
                    University            Street, Changchun City, Jilin Province,                                 
                                          P.R. China                                                              

Luis, Judith        CIP-UPWARD            PCARRD Complex, Los Baños, Laguna,        (63-49) 536-8185   (63-49) 536-1662

Mao, Miankui        China Agricultural    No. 2 Yuanmingyuan West Road              (86-10) 62731316   (86-10) 62731027
                    University            Haidian district, Beijing
                                          China 100094

O‟Brien, Noelle     RECOFTC               P.O. Box 1111, Kasetsart University,      (66-2) 9405700     (66-2) 561-4880
                                          Phahonyothin Road, Bangkok 10903,         ext. 1212;
                                          Thailand                                  6668323048 (m)

Oro, Emilita        IIRR                  Y.C. James Yen Center, Biga, Silang,      (63-46) 4142417-   (63-2) 886-4385 to   Emily.monville@iirr.or
                                          Cavite, Philippines                       19                 87                   g

Quebral, Nora       UPLB                  College of Development Communication,     (63-49) 536-2511   (63-49) 536-3356     nora_quebral@yahoo.c
                                          College, Laguna 4031, Philippines                                                 om

Sister, Lorna       UPWARD                PCARRD Complex, Los Baños, Laguna         (63-49) 536-8185   (63-49) 536-1662

Tirol, Ma. Stella   UPLB                  College of Development Communication,     (63-49) 536-2511   (63-49) 536-3356
                                          College, Laguna 4031, Philippines

Vernooy,            IDRC                  250 Albert Street, Ottawa, ON, Canada     (1-613) 2366163    (1-613) 563-0815
Ronnie                                    K1P 6M1                                   ext. 2229

Xu, Xiuli           China Agricultural    No. 2 Yuanmingyuan West Road,             (86-10) 62731317   (86-10) 62731027
                    University            Haidian district, Beijing, China 100094

Appendix C. ECD-CBNRM initiatives, needs and opportunities of participating organizations.

CBNRM-related capacities the     How the orgn has worked       Why learn to evaluate CD for        Challenges and issues in ECD-
orgn seeks to develop for itself to develop/ strengthen        CBNRM?                              CBNRM foreseen
and its partners                 these CBNRM capacities
1. Farmer-Centered Research Network (FCRN) - China
Farmer-centered research (FRC)   Small grant projects,          Provide lessons and                Not all capacities are measurable –
capacities of individuals        workshops, information          recommendations for more            operational indicators for “abstract”
And organizations                sharing, training, cross-       reflective devt strategies          CD
                                 visits, and general            Contribute to policy reforms       How to identify CD induced only by
                                 networking                      for mainstreaming                   FCRN?
                                                                 participatory approaches in        Organizational transition
                                                                 China‟s AR system
                                                                Assess contribution to
                                                                 strengthened FCR capacities of
                                                                 researchers, organizations and
                                                                Develop capacity for
2. CBCRM Resource Center - Asia
 Strategic perspective: why        Training and mentoring,       Demonstrate                     Framework issues
  problems exist, examine           research, organizational       merits/contributions to           Capture complexity of CD, but
  underlying theory, and look for   devt support, library,         development                        overcome limitations of conventional
  ways to address                   documentation,                Improve practice                   methodologies
 Technical capacity for CBNRM -    publications                  Learn from our experience         Dimensions and levels of change in
  to manage change                                                 and those of others                CD
 Ability to learn                                                Understand how learning           Negotiation/dialogue among
 Organizational capacity: to be                                   happens§Demonstrate                stakeholders
  (identity), to do (perform                                       accountability                  Methodological issues
  functions), to relate (manage                                   Communicate amongst               Inadequate baselines
  external interactions)                                           stakeholders§Celebrate gains      Multiple stakeholders
                                                                   and journeys                      Causality and attribution
                                                                  Manage/respond to the             Evaluation as „events‟ or monitoring
                                                                   growing scarcity/ competition      outcomes?
                                                                   for resources                     „Indicators‟: predictive vs emergent,

CBNRM-related capacities the       How the orgn has worked         Why learn to evaluate CD for         Challenges and issues in ECD-
orgn seeks to develop for itself   to develop/ strengthen          CBNRM?                               CBNRM foreseen
and its partners                   these CBNRM capacities
                                                                                                          tracking moving targets.
                                                                                                          “measuring” CD; mundane +
3. Hue University of Agriculture and Forestry (HUAF) - Vietnam
 Multi-disciplinary/multi-         Setting up multi-               See how much CBNRM                  CBNRM is a new approach in
  background team work              disciplinary teams; training     capacity we have                     Vietnam
 PAR/participatory research        and learning; e-learning;       Learn from others                   Framework for ECD- CBNRM
  methods                           university teaching; on-        Share with others                   Criteria for evaluation:
 Livelihood/multi-dimensional      farm research, workshops,       Develop better CBNRM plan            operationalizing what, who makes,
  approaches                        publications, field study by    Link with other institutions and     how
 Stakeholder analysis and          students                         people                              Use of learning
  involvement in CBNRM
 Local capacity building
 Market and resource access
4. CIP-UPWARD - Asia
Capacities for:                     Collaborative field             CIP research agenda: field-         Indicators of capacity and CD
 Experimenting with                research, training,              tested practices in ECD-PR&D        Shared understanding on key
    technology options              information services,            through networking                   concepts of ECD-PR&D by
 Assessment and diagnosis          mentoring and expertise         Demand from participating            evaluation stakeholders
 Dissemination and scaling up      linkage through an               organizations for evidence of       Competing non-learning perspectives
 Facilitating institutional-social integrated, interactive,         benefits in participating and        on evaluation: as audit, performance
    innovations                     grounded and continuous          contributing to UPWARD               review
towards performance of PR&D         CD strategy                     Donors keen to learn about          ECD-CBNRM may require
with elements of:                                                    network sustainability and           accessing “sensitive” information
- user sensitivity                                                   institutionalization                Organizations as “moving targets” of
- institutional partnerships                                        UPWARD seeks cost-effective          evaluation
- livelihood systems perspective                                     CD strategy
- interdisciplinary mode
- integration of scientific and
    local knowledge
- field-based action
- impact-driven agenda

CBNRM-related capacities the          How the orgn has worked Why learn to evaluate CD for         Challenges and issues in ECD-
orgn seeks to develop for itself      to develop/ strengthen     CBNRM?                            CBNRM foreseen
and its partners                      these CBNRM capacities
5. University of the Philippines Los Banos (UPLB) Isang Bagsak Program - Southeast Asia
Diagnosis                             Team workshops, face-to-    Build knowledge                  Qualitative vs quantitative tools
 developing                          face team discussions, e-   Understand the nuances of        Evidence of impact of CBNRM for
  relationship/understanding of       forum, field application,    capacity building and             policymakers, NRM users and
  local setting                       midterm workshop,            community-based processes        Understand CBNRM dimensions
 Working with community to           evaluation and planning     Teach better                     Isang Bagsak evaluation:
  identify problem                    workshop, writeshop/ peer   Contribute to livelihoods and     “beneficiary” vs “stakeholder”
 Identifying stakeholders            review of articles           wellbeing of communities         Sustainability: economic,
 Identifying community needs,                                    Assess contribution to            institutional, social
  objectives and activities                                        livelihoods improvement
 Identifying communication tools
 Preparing and pre-testing
  communication content and
 Facilitating the building of
 Producing an implementation
 Monitoring, documentation and
 sharing and facilitating the
  utilization of results
6. Jilin Agricultural University (JAU) - China
 Facilitation                        Participatory curriculum    Strengthen the link among        Trying out a “Natural science +
 Conflict management                 development, course          teaching and study and other      social science” mix
 Participatory curriculum devt       delivery through learning    mainstreaming efforts            Capacity accumulation and “growing
 PAR: identifying research           by doing, theory-practice-  accumulate experiences and        up”
  question                            reflection cycle             lessons for PRD course           Scaling up and scaling out
 PM&E                                                             improvement                      CD on PRD action research as an

CBNRM-related capacities the         How the orgn has worked      Why learn to evaluate CD for         Challenges and issues in ECD-
orgn seeks to develop for itself     to develop/ strengthen       CBNRM?                               CBNRM foreseen
and its partners                     these CBNRM capacities
                                                                    Suggestions similar courses         interest for student fellowship
                                                                    Monitor and evaluate change in     Generating support from department
                                                                     participants‟capacity               of teaching and management
                                                                                                        Sustaining partnerships with
                                                                                                        Integrating stakeholders‟
7. China Agricultural University (CAU) - China
 Understanding complexities of      Initiate and support           Monitor and make adjustments       Time and energy required as
  rural realities and challenges     FLRNC/CBNRM,                   Merits and shortcomings of          pioneers
 Apply participatory learning and   mainstreaming CBNRM in          learning/teaching/ supervision/    Opportunities for learning by doing
  action research concepts and       higher education,               facilitation                       Personal and organizational
  methods                            developing good practices,     Make suggestions to partners        resistance to change
 Critical reflections on the        sharing experiences,           Strengthen M&E knowledge           Dealing with/responding to reform
  contributions to local rural       research results and lessons,   and skills                          policies
  development efforts through        supporting CBNRM field
  joint action learning and research practice, identifying and
 Participatory curriculum devt      supporting champions,
 PM&E                               creating an enabling
                                     environment (political
8. International Institute of Rural Reconstruction (IIRR) – Asia Program
 Policy advocacy                    PAR, training on specific      Assess how the organization        Conceptual clarity: ECD-CBNRM
 PAR                                technologies, facilitating      embraces and contributes to        Who will evaluate who?
 Partnership development            multi-stakeholder meetings,     CBNRM learning from                What is the issue (for evaluation)?
 Multi-stakeholder coordination     participatory M&E,              continuous action and              Systematic documentation and
  and facilitation                   mentoring and follow-up on      reflection                          sharing of processes and experiences
 Community-based watershed          partners, networking and       Improve effectiveness and           generated
  management technologies            linkaging, documentation        efficiency in managing             Application (adopting/adapting)
 M&E of CBNRM                       and dissemination of            CBNRM programs: gaps, areas         processes at different levels
                                     experiences, policy review      for improvement
 Integrating gender and
  population issues in CBNRM

CBNRM-related capacities the       How the orgn has worked      Why learn to evaluate CD for       Challenges and issues in ECD-
orgn seeks to develop for itself   to develop/ strengthen       CBNRM?                             CBNRM foreseen
and its partners                   these CBNRM capacities

9. Regional Community Forestry Training Center (RECOFTC) - Asia
 Participatory research tools and Strategic partnerships,     ECD-CBNRM is Center‟s core          Time and resources
  methods                          regional linkaging, moving   business                            Objectivity: who does ECD?
 Facilitation skills              knowledge from regional to  Assess effectiveness at impact      Developing baselines
 Conflict mediation/mediations    national and vice versa      level – livelihoods, sustainable    Attribution claims in an environment
  skills                                                        NRM                                  of many efforts
 Partnership development and                                  Donor requirement                   Linking CD to NRM, livelihoods,
  management                                                   Document value addition from         empowerment
 Organizational development                                    CD for CBNRM                        CD effectiveness in various socio-
  skills for community                                         Update M&E system                    economic and political contexts
  organizations                                                Share ECD methodologies             CD as a long-term process from
 Documentation and analysis                                    with partners                        institutional perspective
 Networking
10. Ministry for Nature and Environment (MNE) - Mongolia
CBNRM for:                         Training, sustainable       PM&E is one of our core             Communities still need support &
 Pasture & natural resources co-  livelihood opportunities (   CBNRM activities CM                  facilitation
  management                       SLO), networking &          Information needed in               Communities look for short term
 Livelihoods improvement;         experience sharing, cross-   expanding from project study         benefits
 Policy/legal changes             visits, publications         sites to the national level,
                                                               Formulization of CD policy for
                                                                CBNRM communities in
                                                                different ecosystems
                                                               Planning of CD activities

Appendix D. Profiles of case evaluations: key guide questions and M&E approaches/methods.
Organization                               Key guide questions                                                M&E approaches/ methods
               1. Have capacity development efforts contributed to increased CBNRM          Monitoring and evaluation of the program will primarily be in
ALL in            attitudes, knowledge and skills of individuals? What differences have     three modes:
CBNRM             these increased capacities made in practice? Are they contributing to      1. Through face-to-face workshops or meetings that are part of
(UPLB)            strengthened organizational capacities?                                       the program cycle;
               2. What have different stakeholders learned from their participation in       2. Through a system of documenting and reporting through
                  capacity development efforts?                                                 electronic communication; and
               3. Are capacity development efforts contributing to more equal                3. Through field visits during backstopping exercises by the
                  relationships among stakeholders? What difference are these changed           program team members.
                  relationships making in practice?
               4. Have capacity development efforts contributed through direct
                  interventions or through intermediary organizations, to CBNRM
                  outcomes in terms of improved livelihoods, more equal access to natural
                  resources, empowerment and policy changes?
               5. What difference does the organizational modality of capacity
                  development delivery make?
               6. How best to monitor and evaluate CBNRM capacity development
               1. CBNRM methodologies? Advantages and disadvantages                         1. PM&E
HUAF           2. Capacity of researchers in applying CBNRM approaches                      2. Stakeholder analysis
               3. The perception and implementation of CBNRM by local people and            3. CD in CBNRM framework and indicators
                   line organizations                                                       4. Conferences/ workshops at different levels
               4. Livelihood of local people in CBNRM approaches
               5. CBNRM curriculum development and learner's capacity in CBNRM
               6. Influences of CBNRM to process of making decision
                What have been the improvements in PR&D capacity of                         1. Meta-level (program) study to consolidate and review
CIP-               individuals/teams/organizations participating in UPWARD?                     findings from its previous/on-going M&E efforts. This will
UPWARD          How has UPWARD contributed to these improvements in PR&D                       involve desk studies and workshops to jointly analyze and
                   capacity?                                                                    discuss findings with Network participants.
                What are the effective strategies, methods and other practices for          2. Additional case studies of specific capacity development
                   PR&D capacity development?                                                   interventions. This will involve facilitating self-assessment
                                                                                                exercises among Network participating organizations.
                                                                                             3. Producing and sharing knowledge products (e.g.
                                                                                                publications) based on results of the M&E efforts. This will
                                                                                                involve writeshops and similar learning exercises.
               Concerning the CBNRM/PRD courses:                                            For the courses:
CAU and JAU    1. There are a series of specific questions: see the course evaluation        1. Prior to the 2005 course in Beijing, two focus group
                  questionnaires for students (COHD and JLAU), and the facilitators/co-         discussions with students were organized. In addition, a

Organization                                 Key guide questions                                                    M&E approaches/ methods
                  facilitators self-evaluation forms (COHD and JLAU).                              participatory planning workshop was organized including
               Concerning the Fellowship support programs:                                         students and facilitators/teachers. Reports of these 3 sessions
               2. How does the Fellowship support program contribute to the overall                were prepared.
                  “CBNRM Mainstreaming” initiative?                                             2. Prior to the 2006 courses in both Beijing and Changchun, a
               3. What have students learned from participation in the Fellowship support          local working group was established. The Beijing working
                  program?                                                                         group organized a regional exchange workshop (which took
               4. Have participatory action and learning knowledge and skills for                  place in Beijing in January 2006), which also served as a
                  community based natural resource management been strengthened?                   planning workshop. A workshop report was produced. The
               5. Has students‟ under-standing of the complexity of Chinese rural realities        Changchun working group held a planning workshop
                  and of the rural development challenges being faced by local people              (January 2006). A workshop report was produced.
                  increased?                                                                    3. Each module is monitored by using a PRA tool or PRA tools
               6. Have their research efforts contributed to local rural development efforts       such a score-card or a mood-meter. A “Community-Wall” is
                  undertaken through joint action research and development?                        available during all of the course period.
               7. How effective and efficient is the support provided to students?              4. Students and facilitators are encouraged to write up their
               8. How best can interested students obtain agreement and support from               experiences, and to share these with each other (written
                  their thesis supervisor(s) and university degree committees?                     testimonies).
               9. Have the capacities of the Fellowship management team been                    5. Use of videos (in the class, and in the field), and photos (in
                  strengthened?                                                                    the class and in the field).
                                                                                                6. At the end of the course, we use a questionnaire focusing on
                                                                                                   a) What have you gained from the course? b) What are the
                                                                                                   main merits and shortcomings c) What are your suggestions
                                                                                                   for how to improve it?
                                                                                                7. In the field, each of the field-visit teams chooses the (PRA or
                                                                                                   other) tools they consider appropriate.
                                                                                                8. Roles plays (in the class, and in the field).
                                                                                                9. Videos of the field-visits made by students (with a focus on
                                                                                                   the learning process; instruction: avoid the use of
                                                                                                10. At the end of each course, there is a review meeting with
                                                                                                   students and facilitators (a number of tools are used). In
                                                                                                   2005, following the Beijing course and the review meeting, a
                                                                                                   review workshop was organized (with people not directly
                                                                                                   involved in the course).
                                                                                                11. Progress, trip, and activity reports (Ronnie Vernooy).
                                                                                               For the Fellowship support programs:
                                                                                                1. Through regular peer review by means of the seminar series
                                                                                                   in Beijing, and/or small group meetings in the field (those
                                                                                                   students doing their fieldwork in the same site), or through
                                                                                                   pair wise self-monitoring?: to collect information on the

Organization                               Key guide questions                                                     M&E approaches/ methods
                                                                                                  research progress in terms of answering research questions,
                                                                                                  interactions and relationships with local partners, and coping
                                                                                                  with doing fieldwork.
                                                                                               2. For the management team: through regular self-monitoring
                                                                                                  of the delivery of support, and by asking regular feedback
                                                                                                  from students and supervisors about the quality of the service
               1. What are the results/outcomes from the capacity development efforts?         1. Field visits (direct observation and dialogue)
CBCRM          2. What have the different stakeholders learned from their participation        2. Program staff meetings
                  from the different CD efforts?                                               3. 10.Mid-year and year-end assessments
               3. Are CD efforts contributing to changes in power relationships amongst        4. Performance appraisal systems
                  stakeholders?                                                                5. Photo/video documentation to compare changes over time
               4. Are CD efforts contributing to positive changes in the CBNRM policy          6. External evaluations
               5. Are CD efforts contributing to significant changes in NRM and
                  livelihoods and well-being of the poor?
               6. Given a wide range of CD strategies used and a wide range of target
                  participants (e.g., fishers, policy makers, youth, women, etc.), which are
                  more effective and why?
               7. Does CD have differential impacts on gender, age, ethnicity, education?
               1. What have been the improvements in FCR capacities among individual           1.   Review of secondary data
FCRN China        researchers and research organizations?                                      2.   Focus group discussions
               2. How did the Network contribute to improvements of these FCR                  3.   Individual questionnaires
                  capacities?                                                                  4.   Key informant interview
               3. What have been the improvements in research performance through              5.   Workshops
                  FCR among individual researchers and research organizations?
               4. What have been the development outcomes of applying FCR?
               5. How has FCR been mainstreamed among research organizations in
               1. What are the impacts of CD in different levels? (CBNRM really                1. Interviews with communities and other stake-holders to
MNE-              empowered stakeholders? How?                                                    assess empowerment
SUMCNR         2. What changes (social, economic, environmental, etc.) result from CD?         2. Pre-training assessment
Mongolia          (CM contract empowering communities? How?                                    3. On-going participatory review of training
               3. How were the identified capacity gaps addressed?                             4. Follow up with project team (6 mos., 1 yr, 2 yrs; interviews)
               4. How has the CD program addressed policy makers and policy change?            5. CBNRM capacities to be assessed at multiple levels: policy,
               5. How has the CD input enabled you to work with communities and local             intermediary org, support ag/comm.
                  government? (How is CD linked to learning?                                   6. Multi-level, multi-stakeholder CD – can it fit in one
               6. What do you think worked well? (What will sustain the capacities                evaluation framework?
                  developed?)                                                                  7. Role for peer review, self assessment, internal reviews

Organization                                 Key guide questions                                              M&E approaches/ methods
               7. What do you think did not work well? (What factors intervened in CD       8. Interview policy makers with local government
                  efforts at different levels?                                              9. Interview with project team
               8. How effective were the CD interventions in addressing capacity gaps?      10. Need for diversity of methods for validation, triangulation

               1. Have capacity development efforts contributed to increased knowledge,     1. Participatory Action Research (PAR) – engaging the
IIRR              attitudes and skills in the application of PAR and MSPs to                   stakeholders in a process of action-reflection, action, and be
                  environmental management and social development initiatives within a         able to assess effects of capacity development activities
                  CBNRM context?                                                               based on agreed upon indicators.
               2. To what extent have capacity development efforts contributed, through     2. Case study analysis – document individual case studies
                  direct interventions or through intermediary organizations, to CBNRM         demonstrating how changes in knowledge, skills and
                  outcomes, particularly in terms of increased participation in decision-      attitudes to apply PAR and MSPs occurred and how these
                  making process                                                               link with increased participation in decision making process
               3. What factors influence capacity development for CBNRM?                       related to policy changes
                                                                                            3. Key informant interview – gather information through
                                                                                               interviews with the different stakeholders about their
                                                                                               learning experiences and how these link with increased
                                                                                               participation in decision making process related to policy
                                                                                            4. Policy process review – compare previous and current
                                                                                               decision-making processes, and policies to identify key
                                                                                               changes and how these are linked to the capacity building
                                                                                               initiatives of the project.

Appendix E. Workshop photodocumentation


To top