Forests Sourcebook - HCV Resource Network

Box 4.11
Tools for Integrating Various Viewpoints
The Bank’s project in Natural Resource Management
in Albania used a Participatory Microcatchment (MC)
Planning Approach to collect information and data to
fully understand the physical and socioeconomic conditions
of the MC. This included collection of existing
information (data and maps), data verification and
updating, and supplementation of available information
with further simple surveys. MC plans build on
forest and pasture management plans for communal
forestry and pasture activities and refer to the key
actions they identify (if these plans have already been
prepared).
To integrate various viewpoints in each village, the
project conducted an exercise called Beneficiary-
Centered Problem Census Problem Solving (BCPCPS).
BCPCPS is a nonthreatening, focused discussion that
uses small group dynamics to elicit (i) a complete and
ranked census of the real and perceived problems of
individual households, villages, and the commune as a
whole; and (ii) the commune’s proposed solutions to
these problems. This approach provides a setting in
which all members of the commune can contribute.
No problem is rejected and all solutions are considered.
The final ranking of problems and preferred solutions
is performed by the villagers. The contribution of
the team is limited to facilitating the creation of the
setting in which the BCPCPS approach can be conducted.
The team does not take part in the discussion
nor make promises. Project staff has to ensure that
women and children are not marginalized in the
BCPCPS process.
A “priority list of village problems” is developed by
the team and the problems that are outside the mandate
of the project are eliminated as the list is finalized.
This list is used as the basis of a joint discussion of the
solutions to the problems identified by the villagers.
During this discussion, a suggested “menu of activities”
prepared in advance by the team, is shared with the village
community to contribute to solving the problems
identified. The menu of activities often consists of
rehabilitation activities and income-generation activities
(or income-supporting activities).
Based on discussions, the villagers choose activities
that meet their priorities. Often farmers make additional
demands, particularly for income-generating
activities. However, it was made clear to the villagers
that the resources (money and time) available under
the project were limited and that the project would
support those activities and measures that focus most
of the benefits at the level of the MC, that are cost
effective, and that can be replicated in other parts of
Albania.
Source: Cestti 2005.
a. This menu of activities is a basic tool in the planning process. The team determines on technical, economic, and institutional
grounds which treatments are applicable in a particular MC and prepares the menu. The menu may vary in accordance with
the agroecological and socioeconomic conditions of each village as well as the villagers’ resources and needs. During the life of
the project, it would be revised based on the experience with project implementation.
Develop a work plan reflecting the implementation
schedule. This work plan will provide prioritized action
items with a timeline and a budget to accomplish the work.
It is appropriate to include a description of how stakeholders
will be involved. Most actions will be concentrated
within the macro-zone management plans; however, important
cross-zone issues and current conditions and future
trends are better identified at the landscape scale. All implementation
activities should be linked back to one or more of
the landscape objectives. The schedule should specify what
action items will be accomplished, by whom, and when, and
the associated cost.
Develop a monitoring protocol. This protocol will help
determine if the landscape plan and associated plans under
it are effectively contributing to the achievement of the landscape’s
desired condition and objectives. Monitoring will
provide the feedback loop for evaluating and updating the
plan (see note 4.2, Assessing Outcomes of Landscape Interventions).
Landscape-wide monitoring is typically conducted
to evaluate conditions and trends of specific
resources on the landscape. The monitoring protocol should
indicate the type and frequency of monitoring, as well as
who is responsible for carrying it out and reporting on it.
LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR PRACTITIONERS
This note’s guidance on planning needs to be tailored to
the specific context of the region in question and to the
136 CHAPTER 4: OPTIMIZING FOREST FUNCTIONS IN A LANDSCAPE