1

A Methodological Framework for addressing Gender Dimensions

in Inclusive Natural Resource Governance

Jordan Treakle

With the supervision of:

Ilaria Sisto
Gender and Development Officer (ESP)

and
Paolo Groppo
Territorial Development Officer (NRL)

August 2014
 2

Acronyms

CFS Committee on World Food Security

ESP Social Protection Division of the FAOs Economic and Social Protection
Department

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

FFS Farmer Field Schools

ICARRD International Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development

IDP Internally Displaced Person

IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development

ILC International Land Coalition

IYFF 2014 International Year of Family Farming

JFFLS Junior Farmer Field and Life Schools

MDGs Millennium Development Goals

NGO Non-governmental organization

NRL Land and Water Division of the FAOs Natural Resources and Environment
Department

SDGs Sustainable Development Goals

VGGTs The Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land,

Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security
 3

Content:

Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 4
Objective ................................................................................................................................ 4
Governance Explanation ............................................................................................................ 6
Governance Functions ............................................................................................................ 6
Agricultural stakeholders and gender issues in governance mechanisms .............................. 6
Range of Governance Approaches ......................................................................................... 7
Governance tools for inclusive natural resource management ............................................... 8
Governance in the global development agenda.......................................................................... 9
International Natural Resource Governance and Gender Tools........................................... 10
Natural Resource Governance in FAOs Strategic Objectives ............................................ 12
Natural Resource Governance Framework .............................................................................. 12
Principles .............................................................................................................................. 15
1. Analysis Component .................................................................................................... 16
1.1 Natural resource Analysis ...................................................................................... 16
1.2 Intermediary Stakeholders Analysis....................................................................... 17
1.3 Institutional Capacity Analysis .............................................................................. 19
1.4 Natural Resource Governance Analysis ................................................................. 20
2. Capacity Development Component ............................................................................. 21
2.1 Capacity development of stakeholder groups ........................................................ 22
2.2 Institutional capacity development for creating an enabling environment ............ 23
3. Participatory Multi-stakeholder Governance Development Component ..................... 25
3.1 Target Stakeholder Groups..................................................................................... 26
3.2 Participatory Multi-stakeholder Platforms ............................................................. 26
3.3 Gender Sensitivity .................................................................................................. 28
3.4 Governance Impact Assessments ........................................................................... 28
3.5 Policy Revisions ..................................................................................................... 28
4. Inclusive Governance Implementation Component ..................................................... 29
4.1 Communication strategy for public education of governance policy .................... 30
4.2 Institutional alignment............................................................................................ 30
4.3 Government technical support and enforcement .................................................... 31
4.4 Collaboration and partnership with civil society and the private sector ................ 31
5. Equitable and effective Conflict Resolution Component ............................................. 33
6. Monitoring and Evaluation Component ....................................................................... 35
Role of FAO in facilitating participatory natural resource governance ................................... 36
 4

Introduction
The concept of governance of natural resources has emerged as a defining issue in 21st
century agricultural policy development. In the context of globalization, climate change, and
continuous population growth increasingly straining agricultural systems and rural
communities, effective governance is seen as an important element for sustainable ecosystems
and livelihoods.

While notoriously difficult to define, governance can be considered broadly as the ways in-
which interests, stakeholders, and institutions interact and are managed in pursuing common
good for society. Governance therefore includes the instruments and processes ranging from
short-term operational activities to long-term policy development and planning, and from
conventional forms of administration to modern forms of participative decision-making.

National or sub-national government institutions are generally the primary governance

apparatus, although customary, informal, and other non-state institutions also play a critical
role in developing, implementing, and enforcing governance. Additionally, efforts to
decentralize governance mechanisms increasingly lead to non-government stakeholders
playing important roles particularly at the local level.

Despite the breadth of this governance concept, recent governance approaches have
increasingly adopted people-centered and rights-based core principles, with the concept of
equity becoming a foundation of good governance.1 This comes in response to many countries
continuing to lack adequate governance mechanisms to manage their natural resources,
particularly in-terms of promoting equity and gender equality in this resource management.
This common challenge, and the social conflict and environmental degradation that results for
the lack of effective governance, emphasizes the need for governance mechanisms to
recognize and reduce power asymmetries among stakeholders. Only through promoting
rights-base approaches to good governance in this way will societies be able to more
effectively and equitably govern resources.

The move toward placing the rights of agricultural stakeholders at the center of natural
resource governance offers a strategic entry-point for FAOs work on gender issues and
womens empowerment, which has become a critical cross-cutting theme in FAOs food
security agenda. In making gender equality a central part of natural resource governance, the
FAOs Land and Water Division and the Social Protection Division are promoting a
collaborative and inclusive approach to recognizing and supporting the rights of marginalized
stakeholders and improving the sustainable management of natural resources.

Objective
Given the growing importance of natural resource governance within the international
agricultural development agenda, and more specifically within FAOs new Strategic
Framework, this paper proposes an inclusive and gender-sensitive Methodological
Framework for developing, implementing, and monitoring natural resource governance at the
national and sub-national levels. Following a brief explanation of governance and the
relevance of this topic within the international agenda, this paper will focus on six

1
The other Principles of Good Governance promoted by UNDP can be found here:
http://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/library/Poverty%20Reduction/Inclusive%20development/Towards%20
Human%20Resilience/Towards_SustainingMDGProgress_Ch8.pdf
 5

participatory and gender-sensitive governance steps for developing and implementing

effective governance, targeting intermediate level stakeholders and institutions within
countries. These methodological steps can be summarized as:

1. Resource, stakeholder and institutional analysis

2. Stakeholder and institutional capacity development
3. Participatory and gender-sensitive approaches to multi-stakeholder natural
resource policy development
4. Participatory and gender-sensitive approaches to governance implementation
5. Equitable and effective natural resource governance conflict resolution
6. Monitoring and evaluation of the impact of natural resource governance

The main objective of this methodological framework is to develop a resource for improving
the feasibility, effectiveness, and sustainability of natural resource governance. In pursuing
this objective this paper provides policy-makers, FAO staff, and agricultural stakeholders a
gender-sensitive process for analysing territories, engaging stakeholders, and equitably
developing and implementing governance mechanisms.
 6

Governance Explanation
Governance Functions
Addressing the complexity of challenges facing rural stakeholders requires a diversity of
tools, approaches, and policies which fall under the governance concept. Likewise it is critical
that governance mechanisms be appropriate and accountable to the unique social,
environmental, economic conditions at the local level in order to maximize the effectiveness
and positive impacts of the governance approach. With this goal, there are five core functions
that effective governance must work to promote2:

A) A feeding function that ensures the access, quality, quantity, and the variety of food
products for achieving food security and nutrition. The concept of food sovereignty3 is
highly relevant to this governance function as a rights-based philosophy that goes beyond
the food security definition to recognize the social, economic and cultural dimensions of
agricultural systems and food production and consumption.

B) An economic function that promotes fair and equitable compensation for producers
and agricultural4 workers (including those involved in market chains and trade), supports
decent employment opportunities (particularly for rural women and vulnerable groups),
enables economic sectors to grow sustainably and diversify, and strengthens social and
economic safety-nets for agricultural stakeholders at local and national levels.

C) An ecological function dedicated to protecting and renewing natural resources5 and

ecosystems. In particular this function should support the sustainable management and use
of resources, including both plant and animal genetic resources, in order to conserve
biodiversity while helping agricultural systems adapt to the challenges posed by climate
change.

D) A social function protecting the rights (both formal and customary), dignity, and well-
being of rural men, women, children and agricultural communities in general. In particular,
supporting gender equality, rural womens empowerment, and the capacity of marginalized
groups by recognizing and eliminating discrimination and asymmetries of power should be
priorities.

E) A cultural function for protecting, enhancing, and passing on the knowledge,

traditions, and practices of farming and managing natural spaces, as well as the cultures
that go along with them, with particular emphasis on indigenous tribal groups, local, and
vulnerable communities.

Agricultural stakeholders and gender issues in governance mechanisms

In considering these core functions, it is critical that developing and implementing governance
not be solely a top-down, centralized process. Rather the perspectives, interests, and rights of

2
Based in-part on FAO 2006. States and Civil Society: access to land, rural development and capacity building
for new forms of governance. ICARRD Issue Paper 2; FAO 2011. Good Food Security Governance: The
Crucial Premise to the Twin-Track Approach.
3
Declaration of Nyeleni 2007; International Planning Committee for Food Sovereignty; La Via Campesina
2013. The Jakarta Call.
4
Including the forestry and fishery sectors
5
Including land, water, forests, and biodiversity
 7

local stakeholders must be equitably incorporated into the process in order to make the
governance mechanism effective and accountable at the local level. This process is detailed in
the Governance Framework Components below, but it should be noted that in developing
natural resource policy, the role of small-scale and family producers (and in particular women
and poor producers) should be a central focus.6 Small-scale and family producers are the
back-bone of most agricultural economies but they are also most vulnerable to poor or
ineffective governance polices. Therefore these stakeholders should have a priority role in
shaping governance mechanisms that will impact their livelihoods.

In addition, the role and rights of women have significant impacts on sustainable natural
resource management, poverty, and food security. Thus promoting gender equality should be
fundamental to all natural resource governance approaches although the specific tools to reach
this goal differ depending on the country context. Although more time-intensive and requiring
more analysis, consultation, and capacity development among stakeholders in different
resource sectors, pro-small-scale and gender-sensitive governance mechanisms can lead to a
clearer, more holistic and more effective natural resource governance.

Range of Governance Approaches

Within the context of the five core functions above and the prioritization of engaging family
producer stakeholders and gender issues, governance spans a continuum across different
administrative, institutional, and political levels, although governance activities tend to be
divided into policy (high level governance) and management (medium to low level
governance). Along this vertical continuum from high-level policy to lower-level
management, there is a broad horizontal spectrum of mechanisms in-which governance can
take form: 7
Establishing overriding principles and objectives;
Maintaining and strengthening institutions and instruments;
Developing policy and regulatory frameworks, plans, norms and regulations;
Engaging with stakeholders and coordinating collective action;
Enforcing decisions and regulations;
Defining the conditions for allocation of power, resources and benefits
between men and women;
Interacting with other governance systems;

6
IFAD 2013. Supporting poor rural peoples empowerment through policy solutions for natural resource
management and agriculture.
7
FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department. What is Governance?
http://www.fao.org/fishery/topic/12271/en
 8

An example of how governance represents a range of overlapping areas from the policy to the
management levels is represented by the figure below:

High Level Policy

Natural
Policy enforcement resource
management
Regulatory
frameworks for Land use zoning
agricultural markets
Natural Resource
Rules for policy Governance
Institutional
development and
services for
implementation Natural
Gender- producers
resource
responsive
tenure
legislation
policies

Management and Use Tools

In addition to describing governance mechanisms on the spectrum of Policy - Management, it

should be recognized that governance tools related to natural resources are generally sector
specific. For example in the land sector, land governance is generally divided into land tenure
and land management. This sector approach to governance will often lead to policies related
to land overlapping or impacting other governance mechanisms, such as policies on forestry
management. This can cause policy incoherence for regulators and institutions as well as
cause confusion or conflict between natural resource users in different sectors. For this reason
this Methodological Framework advocates for integrating different natural resource sectors
into related governance mechanisms to the greatest extent possible.

Governance tools for inclusive natural resource management

Natural resource management refers to the management of natural resources such as land,
water, soil, plants and animals, with a particular focus on how management affects the quality
of life (of men and women) for both present and future generations.8 Integrated and inclusive
approaches to natural resource management attempt to bridge the administrative distinctions
made between different resource sectors (for example managing water resources separately
from land resources), as well as how local stakeholders (in particular women who are often
excluded) are incorporated into management processes. The governance of natural resource
management therefore are the mechanisms, structures, rules etc. that determine priorities for
natural resource management, the management approaches themselves, and the ways in-
which the approaches are developed/implemented at the local level.

8
FAOTERM: http://termportal.fao.org/faoterm/main/start.do?lang=en
 9

Closely related to natural resource management is the concept of tenure, which focuses on
men and womens access to resources.9 Although natural resource tenure and management
conceptually are different, in reality they closely overlap and represent the range of rules that
influence how local stakeholders interact with the surrounding natural environment. This is
particularly true for the water sector, where the tenure relationship between the water user and
how the water resource is used are intricately related (i.e. the tenure relationship has a
significant impact on the resource management decisions of the user). For this reason it is
important to recognize that natural resource governance often incorporate both management
and tenure dimensions, but the purpose of this Methodological Framework focuses only on
resource management side of the governance concept.

Governance in the global development agenda

As part of the transition of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) into the Post-2015
agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), attention has been focused on the
issue of global governance, and in-particular the connections among natural resource
management, land tenure, and gender. Issues of womens empowerment, gender equality, and
access to land are critical to effectively improving social, environmental, and economic
sustainability globally. These connections are largely missing from the MDG indicators but
may have greater prominence in the SDGs. Without examining this issue (since the SDGs
have not been finalized) it should be mentioned that as of May 9th, 2014 SDG Focus Area 5 is
dedicated to Gender Equality and Womens Empowerment with an attainment goal of by
2030 ensure equal access to, and control of, assets and resources, including natural resources
management.10 This inclusion of gender equality and explicit connection with natural
resource management reflects a concerted effort within the international development agenda
to address natural resource governance issues using gender-sensitive approaches.

Focus on natural resource governance is not new to the international agriculture agenda or
FAO. But March 2006 marks an important date when the concept of natural resource
governance gained significant prominence within FAOs agricultural development agenda
when a wide-range of agricultural development stakeholders11 convened at the International
Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ICARRD). The expressed vision of
the conference was to promote rural development policies, including those on agrarian
reforms[that are]focused on the poor and their organizations, socially-driven,
participatory, and respectful of gender equality, in the context of economic, social and
environmentally sound sustainable development.12 During the Conference the delegates
agreed to a set of Principles which included:

Support for a participatory approach based on economic, social and

cultural rights as well as good governance for the equitable
management of land, water, forests and other natural resources
within the context of national legal frameworks focusing on sustainable
development and overcoming inequalities in order to eradicate hunger
and poverty.13

9
FAO Environment and Natural Resources Department: http://www.fao.org/nr/tenure/governance-of-tenure/it/
10
UN Sustainable Development Open Working Group Document
11
Including FAO, civil society, and 91 country representatives
12
ICARRD 2006. Final Declaration.
13
ICARRD 2006. Final Declaration. (emphasis added)
 10

This Principle is particularly important because it clearly connects rights-based participation

with governance mechanisms to promote equitable management of natural resources.

Following the ICARRD conference, the 2007/2008 spike in global food prices challenged the
efforts made to promote equitable natural resource governance systems, although the
importance of this goal was not lost and has continued to be re-emphasized in the agricultural
development agenda. For example, in 2013 agricultural development stakeholders from civil
society, international organizations (including FAO, IFAD, and the World Bank), and 47
country representatives met for the International Land Coalitions (ILC) Global Land Form in
Guatemala with the central theme of Inclusive and Sustainable Territorial Governance. 14 In
acknowledging the critical connections between land governance and territorial rights, the
Forums final Antigua Declaration committed ILC members to:

[W]ork towards strengthening womens land rights and gender justice

in land governance, with the aim of achieving both de jure and de facto
equality between men and women, while recognising the diversity of
women, their tenure rights and ensuring womens equal opportunities
and participation in decision-making at all levels.15

The Antigua Declaration also contains an Annex, named People-centered Land

Governance, containing recommendations on participatory approaches to natural resource
governance.16 Similar to the Principles of the ICARRD conference, the Antigua Declaration
emphasizes participatory decision-making as a core component of effective governance. But
the Declaration differs from ICARRD in its specificity by clearly connecting gender issues
and womens land rights to governance mechanisms. Furthermore, the Declaration frames this
need for gender-sensitive land polices within a territorial dimension while recognizing the
critical governance roles and responsibilities of nation-states.

International Natural Resource Governance and Gender Tools

Although land governance has been emphasized as a critical area of work in the international
agriculture agenda, there are few international binding instruments for natural resource
governance.17 The passage of the Voluntary Guidelines on the Governance of Tenure
(VGGTs) through the Committee on World Food Security (CFS) in 2012 marked an
important event for drawing attention to tenure issues at the international level, particularly
for land. But the VGGTs are a non-binding instrument and do not address the natural resource
management side of the governance discussion. The lack of a holistic and binding
international instrument on natural resource governance with a prominent gender focus draws
attention to the need for tools and methodologies for natural resource governance to be
developed to address natural resource management issues currently not covered by the
VGGTs as well as support the implementation of the VGGTs on the tenure side.

Finally, the lack of binding international governance instruments raises the importance of
national level governance frameworks, binding international instruments that relate to natural
resource governance issues, and soft law tools such as voluntary guidelines related to land
governance.

14
Antigua Declaration: http://www.landcoalition.org/en/news/antigua-declaration-ilc-members
15
Ibd
16
Ibd
17
Marauhn 2011: http://www.ajol.info/index.php/pelj/article/view/68707/56785
 11

Some of the most relevant international frameworks and tools related to natural resource
governance and gender are listed below, and should be adopted at country national level as
part of efforts to promote gender equality and inclusive natural resource governance:

Relevant soft law tools and frameworks

FAO Right to Food Guidelines

http://www.fao.org/docrep/009/y7937e/y7937e00.htm

Voluntary Guidelines on the Governance of Tenure (VGGTs)

http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/i2801e/i2801e.pdf

Voluntary Guidelines on Small-scale Fisheries (in-process of finalization)

Principles for Responsible Agricultural Investment (in process of negotiation)

Relevant International Treaties and Agreements

Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women

Article 7: Support for womens involvement in policy formulation and implementation
Article 14: Specific focus on rural women in agriculture and governance
The International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture
Article 9: Emphasis on the right of farmers to participate in national decision-making processes
related to plant genetic resources for food and agriculture

Convention on Biological Diversity

Preamble: Recognition of the role of women in conserving biological resources and the importance
of their participation in policy-making and implementation

United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification

Article 2: Emphasis on integrated strategies for sustainable management of land and water
resources at the community level
Article 3: Highlighting the importance of community and stakeholder participation in the design
and implementation of natural resource governance mechanisms

Relevant FAO approaches for engaging land governance and gender issues
FAO Integrating Gender Equality into Territorial Issues (IGETI)
http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/me282e/me282e.pdf

Participatory Negotiated Territorial Development (PNTD)

http://www.fao.org/sd/dim_pe2/docs/pe2_050402d1_en.pdf

FAO Socio-Economic and Gender Analysis (SEAGA)

http://www.fao.org/gender/seaga/seaga-home/it/

FAO Policy on Gender Equality

http://www.fao.org/docrep/017/i3205e/i3205e.pdf
 12

Natural Resource Governance in FAOs Strategic Objectives

In addition to FAOs involvement in the ICARRD and the Antigua Declaration commitments,
FAO is also leading the implementation of the 2014 International Year of Family Farming
(IYFF).18 The IYFF offers an opportunity for FAO to bring attention to innovative approaches
to involving family farmers, and in particular small-scale producers, in participatory
governance mechanisms as Increase opportunities for dialogue, participation, and access to
information for smallholders and their associations is a Key Objective while Promotion of
dialogue in policy decision-making processes is one of three Global Lines of Action for the
IYFF. 19

Although gender issues are not mentioned in the IYFF Objectives and Lines of Action, gender
equality and womens empowerment constitute a major cross-cutting theme in FAOs new
Strategic Framework, which began to be implemented in 2014. In particular, Strategic
Objective 2 Make Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries more Productive and Sustainable and
Strategic Objective 3 Reduce Rural Poverty both place emphasis on governance and gender
issues to improve sustainability and the rights of agricultural stakeholders.

Natural Resource Governance Framework

The following Principals and six Components offer a broad Methodological Framework for
developing and implementing inclusive and gender-sensitive natural resource governance that
addresses power asymmetries among stakeholders. With a focus on engaging stakeholders
and building institutional capacity at the local and intermediate levels within countries, this
framework aims to provide a tool for government policy makers, FAO staff, and civil society
stakeholders to improve natural resource governance. In particular, this framework
emphasizes the importance of taking a participatory, gender-sensitive and inclusive approach
to natural resource governance.

The term territory, as it relates to a holistic concept of the natural resources, people, and
social and environmental processes in a given geographical space, will be used throughout the
document to describe the area relevant to the governance mechanism.20

From the analysis of many international tools, good governance principles, country policies,
and field-level experiences, it is clear that the countrys socio-economic context, legal
framework21, and diversity of stakeholders22 will have a significant impact on how the natural
resource governance process takes place. For example engaging issues such as land rights and
natural resource governance in a post-conflict environment will be quite different than in a
context where a government is trying to encourage agricultural investment. This is also to say
that natural resource governance changes, particularly for land, are highly political and have
significant impacts on the livelihoods of stakeholders. For these reasons governance polices

18
International Year of Family Farming: http://www.fao.org/family-farming-2014/en/
19
International Year of Family Farming Master Plan :
http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/iyff/docs/Final_Master_Plan_IYFF_2014_30-05.pdf
20
For more information on territoriality and agricultural development see: FAO 2005. Participatory Negotiated
Territorial Development.
21
Particularly in regard to how the countrys laws addressing customary rights
22
Representing all of the main socio-economic groups and sectors including the public sector, NGOs, private
sector, civil society, academia, etc.
 13

never start from a clean slate, do not develop in a political vacuum, and almost always
involve some level of social tension in the on-going process of implementation.
Given the diversity of different contexts and political dynamics involved in governance
policy, this Methodological Framework should be used in two ways:

1) The Principles of the Framework should form the basis of governance approaches
(both in the development and implementation) in any context and should be used
for evaluating and monitoring of the governance mechanism.

2) The six core Components of the Framework should be incorporated into all
governance approaches, although the specific timing, tools, and collaborators used
to accomplish these Components will have to be adapted to the local conditions,
constraints, and resources.

Some key challenges and limitations of this Framework are listed in Appendix 1.

Following the overarching Principles section below, the Framework is divided into six core
Components. Each Component has a varying number of steps which provide additional
details on how to effectively accomplish the Framework Component. Finally each Component
ends with a series of Key Questions, which are meant to draw attention to critical issues
relevant to the Framework process, as well as guide the development and implementation of
the governance mechanism according to the Governance Framework Principles.

On the following page a flow chart summarizes the six Components of the Methodological
Framework:
 14

1. Analysis
Phase 2. Capacity Development
Stakeholders: 3. Policy Development
Community
organization
Equitable
4. Policy Implementation
Stakeholders representation
Involvement in multi-
stakeholder platforms
Dialogue and
negotiation Participation Dialogue
Consensus building Communication Institutional
alighment
Inclusive
strategy for
Institutions:
Stakeholder public education Natural
Gender sensitivity Consensus Instiutional Resource
Institutional training collaboration
Capacity
Engaging multi- Technical
support and
and Governance
stakeholder platforms partnships
Participatory policy
Negotiation enforcement with civil
society and
implementation private sector
Technical skills
Natural 5. Conflict Mediation and Resolution
Resources Impact -Throughout the governance process equitable
Assessments conflict mediation and resolution mechanisms must
Environment be available to support stakeholders in addressing
Social disputes.
Economic
Governance
Regulatory
Mechanisms
6. Monitoring and Evaluation
-Participatory and gender-sensitive monitoring and
Policy revisions
evaluation mechanisms are needed throughout the
policy implementation process and over the long-term
to ensure that governance policy is accomplishing its
intended impact.

Accessible,
Equitable and Consensus- Multi-sectoral and Transparent and
Rights-based Inclusive and Process-orientated
Gender-sensitive orientated multi-level Accountable
Participatory

Methodological Framework Principles

 15

In considering the Framework Components above, it is important to recognize that

governance is not a linear process but rather can have multiple entry-points. Therefore this
Methodological Framework can likewise be used to develop governance mechanisms in
different ways beginning at any of the Components 1-6. For example, the governance
development process may begin after increasing conflict mediation (Component 5) efforts fail
due to a poor policy, and stakeholders agree to revise the policy in question (Component 3).
This would then require stakeholders to begin the analysis process (Component 1) to
effectively engage stakeholders, build capacity, and revise the policy. Thus in conclusion, all
steps of the Methodological Framework should be addressed to some degree in the
governance process, although the order of the Components may differ depending on the
country context. But for the purposes of this paper the Framework will be presented in order
of Components 1-6.

Principles
The following Framework Principles build off of common principles of good governance23
and are meant to be used as guiding concepts throughout the process of developing and
implementing governance policies:

Governance Framework Principles

Rights-based: Recognizes the equality and inalienable rights of all stakeholders

under international, national, and local law.

Accessible, Inclusive and Participatory: Promotes equal access to governance

mechanisms, equitable representation and meaningful involvement of stakeholders,
in-particular marginalized groups.

Process-oriented: Increases the effectiveness, feasibility, sustainability, and

legitimacy of governance mechanisms through a process-orientated approach of
engaging stakeholders and institutions for governance design and implementation.

Equitable and Gender-sensitive: Recognizing the heterogeneity of stakeholders,

promotes equity and gender equality among stakeholders and within governance
mechanisms.

Consensus-orientation: Promotes fair dialogue and meaningful negotiation to reach

stakeholder consensus for governance development.

Multi-sectoral and multi-level: Recognizes the interrelatedness of natural resource

sectors and promotes an integrated approach to natural resource governance across
different territorial and administrative levels and scales in the systems of governance.

Transparent and Accountable: Promotes transparency and accountability for all

stakeholders, institutions, and governance mechanisms to improve effectiveness,
access, and legitimacy.

23
UNESCAP. No Date. What is good governance? United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia
and the Pacific.; Institute on Governance: http://iog.ca/about-us/iog-principles-of-good-governance/
 16

1. Analysis Component
The initial Component of the Natural Resource Governance Framework is an Analysis
Component focused on the natural resources, stakeholders, institutions, and governance
mechanisms of the relevant territory. The objective of this Analysis Component is to gather
data and information relevant to the territory to be impacted by the proposed governance
mechanism.

It must be recognized that policy development does not take place in a political vacuum and is
highly influenced by the historical and political context. This information on the natural
resources, stakeholders, relations among stakeholders, institutions, and governance
mechanism is critical to effectively project governance impacts, identify stakeholders to be
engaged, and support institutions for governance implementation.

The complexity of this Analysis Component will depend on the size and scope of the territory.
National or regional contexts may be highly complex with migratory groups, seasonal
changes to resource bases, and weak or uncoordinated institutions. Given this complexity,
participatory and gender-sensitive approaches to gathering information should be used
throughout this Analysis Component. Some data collection methods are found in Appendix 2.

The expected result of this Analysis Component is a series of reports on the natural resource
sector, stakeholders, institutional capacity, and natural resource governance in the relevant
territory to be used in the governance development Components. Information on this Analysis
process is organized into four steps described below.

1.1 Natural resource Analysis

The first step of the Analysis Component examines the natural resources in the given territory.
From an ecosystem approach24 perspective, all natural resources in a given area are
interrelated, and changes to the management and use of one resource will have subsequent
impacts on other natural resource sectors. Drawing on this perspective, the identification of
the natural resources25 relevant to the
proposed governance mechanism should Relevant Tool:
provide an overview of the resource base.
One possible natural resource analysis tool used
This information will be necessary for by FAOs Land and Water Division for
policy-makers and stakeholders to know evaluating natural resources, natural resource
how changes in natural resource degradation and conservation, and sustainable
governance will impact the environment land management knowledge is the WOCAT
and in-turn the people living there. This methodologya. This tool has been used in a
information therefore is also very relevant number of countries through the Kagera
for the Environmental Impact Assessments Transboundary Agro-ecosystem Management
(see section 3.4) as well as determining Programme for the Kagera River Basin.b
how changes in natural resource
a
governance will impact local stakeholders. https://www.wocat.net/en/methods.html
b
Results from this resource analysis process http://www.fao.org/nr/kagera/en/
should then be mapped and be made
available to the public.

24
See FAOs related work on Ecosystem approaches: http://www.fao.org/biodiversity/cross-sectoral-
issues/ecosystem-approach/it/
25
Including biological and genetic diversity
 17

1.2 Intermediary Stakeholders Analysis

The second step of the Analysis Component focuses on identifying, analyzing, and mapping
the stakeholders in the relevant territory.26 Changes to natural resource governance, in
particular tenure and access rights, will have significant, as well as gender-specific, impacts
on these stakeholders, especially at the local and intermediate levels. Therefore identification
of stakeholders who will be affected by governance changes is critical to ensure their
equitable and inclusive participation in the governance mechanism design and
implementation.

A stakeholder here is defined as any group related to the territory whose livelihood will be
immediately impacted by a change in the governance of the resource in question. As
mentioned previously, small-scale and family producers whose lives are directly dependent on
the relevant natural resource should be priority stakeholders in the governance process.

Stakeholder analysis can be a challenging and time-intensive process, particularly in contexts

of post-conflict zones, migratory groups, and political environments with significant
asymmetries of power between stakeholders. Marginalized groups such as women, indigenous
peoples, or pastoralists tend to have limited capacity to promote their interests or be more
blatantly limited or excluded from different parts of public life, which can challenge efforts to
identify and eventually engage these stakeholders in a participatory policy process.
Recognizing these challenges, it is important that identification of relevant stakeholders in the
territory take methodological steps in order to27:

Not to focus only on the institutional stakeholders.

Not to focus only on those stakeholders who are physically present in the area.
Not to rely exclusively on information provided by key informants that could
influence the analysis and lead to/accentuate exclusion of certain groups.

The analysis should be done in a participatory way, including governmental and non-
governmental stakeholders from the local to the intermediate level. Field-level surveys and
interviews will play a significant role in this analysis component.28 Possible entry-points for
beginning this research include:

Formal, customary and informal institutions (governmental, educational, religious, etc.)

Agricultural service providers (access to loans, credit, agricultural inputs etc.)
Advocacy organizations (womens associations, environmental groups etc.)
Community and cultural groups
Production/trade/processing organizations, associations, cooperatives, and unions
Farmer Field Schools and Junior Farm, Field, and Life Schools

The analysis of stakeholders must be done through a gender-sensitive approach. Aside from
entire groups (such as religious minorities) being marginalized, weaker stakeholders
(particularly women) within groups can also be excluded. For this reason the power dynamics
internal to these stakeholder groups must also be examined (see Table below). To account for
this gender dynamic, during the stakeholder analysis phase both men and women should be
interviewed in separate focus groups to determine how the stakeholder groups relates to the

26
FAO 2012. FAO Approaches to Capacity Development in Programming: Processes and Tools.
27
FAO 2005. Participatory Negotiated Territorial Development.
28
See excerpts from FAO 2013 Organizational Analysis and Development in Appendix 2 for tools for field-
level stakeholder engagement.
 18

territory, their role(s) and relationship(s) directly in relation to the natural resource in-
question. Additionally, power dynamics within these gender-segregated groups (for example
between income or ethnic groups) and how these dynamics may impact stakeholder responses
must be considered and accounted for.

Possible tools for identifying stakeholders through gender-sensitive approaches include

FAOs Improving Gender Equality in Territorial Issues (IGETI) Guidelines and FAOs
SEAGA Field Handbook.29

Having identified the different stakeholder groups through gender sensitive approaches, the
analysis should then focus on these groups direct interests to the natural resource,
relationships among the different groups, and the stakeholder groups capacities to engage in
the governance process. For example this analysis can be summarized to include (but not be
limited to):
The natural resource interests of each stakeholder group
The relationships and power dynamics within stakeholder groups
The relationships and power dynamics among stakeholder groups
Gender dynamics within stakeholder groups
Capacities of the stakeholder groups

An example of how this analysis information can be displayed in a table is shown below.

Stakeholder Analysis Results Table Example:

Relations with Capacity to
Natural Internal
Internal power other stakeholder advocate for
resource gender
hierarchies groups (conflicts, natural resource
interests dynamics
alliances, etc.) interests
Stakeholder
Group #1
Stakeholder
Group #2
Stakeholder
Group #3

A number of analysis resources such as FAOs SEAGA Intermediate Level Handbook30

and capacity development resources such as FAOs Approaches to Capacity Development in
Programming: Processes and Tools31 have been developed and can be utilized for this
process.

Identification of all stakeholders, their rights, and their interests in the territory, and their later
incorporation in the governance development and implementation process will improve the
likelihood that the governance mechanism will be supported and socially legitimized, which
will be critical for the long-term sustainability of the governance mechanism.

29
FAO 2012. IGETI Guidelines.
30
FAO 2001. SEAGA Intermediate Level Handbook
31
FAO 2012. FAO Approaches to Capacity Development in Programming: Processes and Tools.
 19

1.3 Institutional Capacity Analysis

The third step of the Analysis Component builds off of the preceding Stakeholder Analysis
step and involves analyzing the capacity of the relevant institutions in the territory. A good
governance policy is only relevant and beneficial to society if it can be effectively
implemented, with both gender and equity considerations. Since formal, informal, and
customary institutions will be primarily responsible for implementing governance policy,
determining their capacity to accomplish this implementation is critical. Determining
institutional capacity from the outset (rather than after a governance policy has been created
and is ready for implementation) has two major benefits:

Institutional capacity development and/or resources can be identified as part of the

governance policy development process, and therefore make the finalized policy
more relevant and realistic in-regard to the field-level reality.

Reduces the likelihood that time, resources, and political capital are not wasted on
developing a governance policy that cannot be feasibly implemented due to
institutional capacity constraints.

Special attention should be paid to intermediate level institutions as these entities are more
field-orientated (i.e. they are more aware of the real challenges at the local level) than national
institutions (such as a centralized Ministry of Agriculture) while often can impact a larger
number of people than community-level institutions. Potential intermediate level institutions
include:
provincial government institutions
decentralized extension agencies
district-level research centers
farm and forestry service offices
customary conflict resolution bodies

Although public institutions are primarily responsible for policy implementation, other
institutions, such as academic centers, Farmer Field Schools, and customary institutions32 can
play important roles both in engaging stakeholders and developing and implementing policy.
Therefore all relevant institutions should be analyzed for potential involvement in the
governance process.

Determining the capacity of institutions to implement policy with a gender-sensitive approach

is essential. This entails analyzing the training institutions ability (in-terms of the capacity of
the institutions staff, institutional mandate and governance, and services provided) to address
gender issues, as well as promoting equal representation of men and women personnel in the
relevant institutions. Lack of training or lack of female staff members in prominent decision-
making positions for example could require additional resources to be identified and allocated
in the natural resource governance policy (or budget relevant to the policy).

Using a comprehensive, as well as historical, analysis of institutional capacity is important to:

1) limit corruption and political in-fighting among agencies
2) improve institutional ability and accountability for policy implementation
3) promote the institutionalization of gender equality.

32
For example: customary courts and conflict resolution processes, customary decision-making bodies such as a
group of elders or community committee, customary enforcement of village rules
 20

To accomplish these goals an in-depth understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of

institutions is needed to inform later capacity development efforts.

1.4 Natural Resource Governance Analysis

The final step of the Analysis Component focuses on identification of the main governance
mechanisms33 that will be impacted by the introduction of a new governance policy in the
territory. Introductions of new natural governance mechanisms will impact and interact with
existing governance tools, which can cause both policy incoherence and social conflict among
natural resource stakeholders. Research and analysis thus needs to be conducted to determine
how new governance policies will interact with, fall short of, or overlap with existing
governance mechanisms and in-turn how these dynamics will affect stakeholders. This
process will likely necessitate the support of legal experts to analyze law and policy
interactions across different administrative levels. The results of this natural resource
governance analysis will provide the inputs for the Governance Impact Assessment
Component (see section 3.4).

Particular attention during this Analysis step should be focus on two issues:
The natural resource rights of women in the relevant resource sector(s) in
relation to men and how these rights will be strengthen or weakened through
the introduction of new natural resource governance policies.
The natural resource access rights policies which will have significant impacts
on the livelihoods of local stakeholders (both men and women).

Finally, in analyzing natural resource governance mechanisms it is important to consider the

gender components of these mechanisms in order to help make future governance tools more
gender-responsive. FAOs Gender and Land Rights Database offers one tool for analyzing
these issues at national level.34

33
These could range from conflict resolution mechanisms, subsidy programs, resource registration programs,
policy enforcement mechanisms etc.
34
Gender and Land Rights Database: http://www.fao.org/gender/landrights/home/it/
 21

Key Questions for the Analysis Component:

Are local stakeholders involved in the analysis process in participatory ways?

Are gender-sensitive approaches used to engage local stakeholders in the analysis

process?

Are stakeholders identified and analysed at all levels (community/local, intermediate,

national)?

Are local stakeholders involved in the process of identifying other stakeholders and
social networks?

Are governmental natural resource-related institutions and agencies collaborating in the

analysis process?

Are academic institutions involved in the analysis process for research support?

Are international organizations and agencies involved in the analysis process?

Is a historical context used to analyse natural resource conflicts and stakeholder

relations?

Has a historical analysis of the capacity of the institutions been conducted in order to
accurately identify capacity strengths and weaknesses and limit political/institutional
corruption?

Have institutional personnel from different levels of hierarchy within the institution been
consulted through gender-sensitive means?

Is there collaboration among academia, law associations, and international organization

to conduct research on governance mechanism interaction?

2. Capacity Development Component

The second component of the Natural Resource Governance Framework focuses on Capacity
Development. Capacity Development and empowerment are often used interchangeably with
a number of definitions. For the purposes of this Governance Framework the term Capacity
Development is used, but draws heavily on the work of OECD to mean when people,
individually or collectively, conceive of, define and pursue better lives for themselves
[and]change existing power relations and [to] gain and exert influence over the political,
economic and social processes that determine and, all too often, constrain their livelihood
opportunities.35

Following the identification and analysis of the relevant natural resources, stakeholders and
institutions, the objective of this Component is to support the enhancement of the capacity of
marginalized stakeholders and weaker institutions in order for them to effectively and

35
IFAD 2013. Supporting poor rural peoples empowerment through policy solutions for natural resource
management and agriculture.
 22

equitably participate first in the governance policy development process, and then later in the
implementation process.

All stakeholders in a given territory have both distinct and overlapping interests that will be
impacted by new governance mechanisms. In order for the governance policy development
process to be rights-based and adhere to the Framework Principles, all stakeholders should
have the opportunity to advocate for their interests. This is most relevant to marginalized
groups, such as indigenous peoples, women, small-scale farmers, pastoralists, and IDPs who
may face more discrimination and may have less access and opportunity to develop the skills
necessary to represent their interests in the governance process (particularly the steps of
representation, dialogue and negotiation described below). For this reason, capacity
development for marginalized stakeholders should be prioritized in order to reduce
asymmetries of power between marginalized stakeholders and more powerful actors and give
all involved the skills and training to successfully advocate for their own behalf.

Additionally, it is important that the capacities of institutions be developed in order for

governance mechanisms to have the desired impacts at the local level. This institutional
capacity development utilizes the information gathered during the Institutional Capacity
Analysis step described above and should focus on addressing the capacity weaknesses
identified.

2.1 Capacity development of stakeholder groups

In many contexts rural agricultural communities (and their individual members) represent one
of the most marginalized stakeholder groups in rural territories due to insecure tenure rights,
little political power, and direct dependence on a shrinking natural resource base for their
livelihoods. Thus rural communities are often most vulnerable to changes to natural resource
governance while having the least capacity to influence the natural resource policy
development process. For this reason capacity development training, in particular negotiation
and leadership skills, that is gender-sensitive, context-relevant, and culturally appropriate is
needed for these groups to engage in the governance development and implementation in
meaningful ways.

In addition to stakeholders at the community level, intermediate groups, such as farmer

organizations, cooperatives, and womens associations are also critical groups whose capacity
should be developed during this step. Intermediate stakeholder groups play different
economic, political, and social roles than community organizations, but also have members
who are usually directly dependent on natural resources and thus are also highly impacted by
natural resource policy decisions. For example intermediate organizations are more likely to
produce for non-local markets, employ collective political action, and have the capacity to
make significant impacts on social hierarchies and gender dynamics within territories. But
intermediate stakeholder groups, like community organizations, also often face
marginalization in-terms of access to government services, unfair competition from foreign
investors, and lack of recognition and protection of their members rights. Thus intermediary
stakeholder groups should be empowered through capacity development to effectively
participate in the governance process and can be valuable partners in providing social
legitimacy to a policy.
 23

Although the capacity development skills needed by stakeholder groups and provided by
facilitators will vary according to the context, important capacity development areas should
include:36
Leadership development for effective community representation in multi-stakeholder
platforms
Internal community organization for equitable, participatory, and gender-sensitive
priority-setting and decision-making
Accountable representation of community interests in multi-stakeholder platforms
Dialogue and negotiation skills
Participation in multi-stakeholder platforms
Building consensus with other actors in multi-stakeholder platforms
Coalition building

In crafting and implementing stakeholder capacity development trainings, it is important to

recognize that communities and intermediate-level groups are not cohesive units, but also
have asymmetries of power and marginalization of stakeholders within these bodies. Women
in particular may not have the same opportunities to voice their interests when communities
or organizations are determining how to represent their interests in multi-stakeholder
platforms. For this reason capacity development of communities, community organizations,
farmer cooperatives etc. for gender equitable participation in multi-stakeholder platforms
should also promote this approach in internal community and group structures.

Relevant Field work:

Important FAO work on stakeholder capacity development in a number of countries is represented

by the Forest and Farm Facility, which supports new initiatives to help countries improve their
governance structures at different levels (local, national and regional) through 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.a
a
FAO Forest and Farm Facility: http://www.fao.org/partnerships/forest-farm-facility/en/

2.2 Institutional capacity development for creating an enabling environment

Institutional capacity development is critical for effective implementation of governance
policies and other mechanisms. Thus the goal of this component is to make governance
mechanisms and the institutions related to them more accessible, participatory, and integrated
to create an enabling institutional environment.

Following the Analysis steps 1.3 and 1.4 (which focus on gathering information on
institutional capacity and governance mechanisms), stakeholders37 should form partnerships
to address (to the greatest extent possible) short-falls in institutions capacity to develop and
implement policy.

36
FAO has developing an extensive number of capacity development materials, which can be found at:
http://www.fao.org/capacitydevelopment/capacity-development-home/en/
37
Including government, international organizations, civil society, donors etc.
 24

Institutional capacity development can take many forms including:

Training in equitable and gender-sensitive participation in multi-stakeholder platforms
Training in inclusive implementation of governance mechanisms
Human and technical resources for agricultural services
Enhancement of technical skills such as collecting sex-disaggregated data

For example, capacity development should support institutions in improving the integration of
institutional technical expertise in different resource sectors (e.g. forestry, water, fisheries)
into the policy development process. This will improve policy feasibility from the outset of
the policy development process rather than causing implementation barriers at after a
governance policy has been created.

Additionally, attention to improving institutions ability to implement policies in a

decentralized and equitable manner is important. Some examples of this kind of capacity
development include:
farmer education and outreach campaigns on governance compliance policies
Ensuring producer access to agricultural services
Improving conflict resolution mechanisms

Finally it is important to recognize that capacity development, particularly for institutions, is a

long-term process. As social, political, economic, and environmental conditions in a territory
change over time, institutions in the area also must adapt. Therefore capacity development for
governance is never a completed but is rather an evolving process.

Key questions for the capacity development component:

Have the capacity development priorities of marginalized stakeholders been adequately
addressed through inclusive and gender-sensitive training?

Do marginalized stakeholders feel more empowered for participation in multi-

stakeholder platforms?

Have the asymmetries of power among the different stakeholder groups been reduced?

Do stakeholder groups feel their internal organization is more effective, equitable, and
gender-sensitive?

Do all members of the stakeholder groups feel prepared to equitably represent and be
represented in multi-stakeholder platforms?

Do institutions staff feel they are better able to engage with other stakeholders (in-terms
of gender-sensitivity training, resource capacity, and political will)?

Do institutional staff feel they are better prepared to implement integrated natural
resource policy (in-terms of technical understanding of natural resource issues, resource
capacity, and political will)?

Have the capacities for collaboration of different institutions been improved?

 25

3. Participatory Multi-stakeholder Governance Development Component

The third component of the Governance Methodological Framework focuses on the policy
development process, and in particular engaging stakeholders (including institutions). The
goal of this Component is to ensure that governance policies are developed through rights-
based approaches that adhere to the Framework Principles. Developing governance
mechanisms through equitable means increases the likelihood that the policy will be socially
sustainable (i.e. feasible and effective) when implemented.

At the core of right-based approaches to governance development is the essential need for all
relevant stakeholder groups to have the opportunity to be represented and advocate for their
interests. To accomplish this, multi-stakeholder platforms are used as mechanisms for
dialogue in-which different conflicting interests over natural resources can be mediated
through fair negotiation (with the support of an impartial moderator) to reach a consensus
decision on natural resource governance. Multi-stakeholder platforms have been used
extensively by FAO and other organizations and governments for reaching policy decisions at
the international to the local level.38

As multi-stakeholder platforms will be used to develop governance policy, the process will be
stakeholder driven. But other factors that will have influence on this policy process include:
Administrative/territorial level (provincial, regional, national etc.)
Natural resource sector(s) being addressed
Existing national legal framework

Although this governance development process is stakeholder driven, the following elements
should be considered by stakeholders, particularly for national governance mechanims:39
A process for identifying and recognizing the rights of stakeholders, particularly of
customary rights holders, through participatory approaches
Specific tools for the enforcement of rights and clear penalties for violations of rights
Clear steps on the roles and responsibilities of institutions
Clear steps on how access rights are inherited or transferred
Explicit standards of non-discrimination and steps to enforce these standards
Concrete steps to ensure gender equity in the governance process and results
Concrete steps to ensure that the governance mechanism is participatory and
decentralized to increase access and effectiveness
Mechanisms for ensuring equal access to information related to the governance policy
and the relevant resource sector(s)
Consideration of minimum standards of fair compensation for the sale of access rights
A long-term plan on how to make the governance process financially sustainable (i.e.
not dependent on non-governmental resources)
Accessible and fair conflict resolution mechanisms
A monitoring and evaluation framework and clear steps on how information generated
from this framework is used in policy revisions
Steps to ensure that the governance policy is in coherence with existing human rights
standards endorsed by the national government40
Tools for limiting corruption of the governance mechanism

38
Some examples of these platforms are listed in Appendix 3.
39
Content adapted from the World Banks Land Governance Assessment Framework
40
In particular international instruments related to the right to self-determination, and for protecting the rights of
minority groups, indigenous peoples, and women.
 26

3.1 Target Stakeholder Groups

As mentioned, all relevant stakeholders should have the opportunity to participate in
governance development that will impact their livelihoods. But in particular, local and
intermediate level stakeholder groups (and in particular small-scale and family producers) are
critical to the dialogue process.

From a right-based approach perspective, involving local stakeholder groups, such as

community organizations, is essential because as stakeholders, these groups have a right to
participate in governance decisions that impact their livelihoods and right to self-
determination. On a more concrete level, involving these stakeholders offers the benefit of
providing a grounded perspective on the realities and challenges facing agricultural
communities at field-level.

In addition to local organizations, intermediate groups are important to the policy formulation
process as intermediaries often have the means to represent and connect with a large network
of stakeholders, which is important for equitable representation in the governance
development process.

The input of institutions (formal, informal, and customary) is also very relevant, as these
bodies are primarily involved in policy implementation and their involvement increases the
likelihood that the governance policy will be feasible at the end of the negotiation process.

Finally is it important that local elites and more powerful stakeholders be brought into the
policy development process. Failure to incorporate these powerful stakeholders can cause
significant problems during the policy implementation process if the powerful stakeholders
have the political or economic means to block or ignore the governance mechanism. Although
these elites may not immediately see the benefit of engaging with weaker stakeholders
through dialogue and consensus, the role of an objective facilitator during the multi-
stakeholder dialogue process (see below) can support this process.

3.2 Participatory Multi-stakeholder Platforms

The development of gender-sensitive multi-stakeholder platforms in which stakeholders can
participate in governance development is a critical tool for engaging stakeholders. Multi-
stakeholder platforms offer five keys benefits:41

A) Dialogue and negotiation: Through multi-stakeholder platforms stakeholders are able

to advocate for their interests through peaceful consensus-driven dialogue in a neutral
forum. Critical to this process is the role of an impartial facilitator to coordinate and
moderate the dialogue process to ensure that all stakeholders are respected and given
equitable opportunity to participate. Consensus-driven negotiation also requires that
stakeholders be ideologically flexible and be willing to adapt some of their interests in
order to find a common middle-ground with others. This consensus process has the
benefit of providing an open space in-which to recognize the interests of minorities
whose role may be marginalized in more populist or top-down approaches to decision-
making. Finally the facilitator is also responsible for supporting the negotiation process
by ensuring that overarching goals, such as sustainability, are met by coordinating
inputs and advice from outside experts.
41
Adapted from Wageningen University Knowledge and Co-Creation Portal:
http://www.wageningenportals.nl/msp/topic/rationale-why-do-we-need-msps
 27

B) Learning and idea generation: A second benefit of multi-stakeholder platforms is the

learning and innovation that can come from different groups engaging with each other
(potentially for the first time). Addressing common challenges and seeking mutually
agreeable solutions from different perspectives encourages cultural understanding and
respect among stakeholders. Ideally this process in-turn reduces social conflict and
brings more sustainable and inclusive governance policies.

C) Stakeholder leadership and ownership: In addition to learning and innovation, multi-

stakeholder platforms in-which stakeholders have a meaningful leadership role
encourages local stakeholders to feel invested in the final outcome of the policy
development process, and therefore are more likely to support the rules of the
governance mechanism (such as a regulation). This improves the social legitimacy and
sustainability of the governance mechanisms over the long-term.

D) Overcoming conflicts: Multi-stakeholder platforms provide a social space for overt

and hidden conflicts to be addressed through dialogue rather than violence or
discrimination.

E) Collective action: Finally multi-stakeholder platforms have the benefit of

representing and bringing together a wide range and large number of people and
resources for broad implementation of a governance mechanism.

In addition to multi-stakeholder platforms, a number of other tools and forums are available to
increase public involvement in the policy development process, for example:
Open town hall meetings for the general public to provide input
Online public comment forums
Public input by written comment
Public comment by telecommunication

Related approach: Multi-stakeholder processes in national forest policies:

A bottom-up, participatory, multi-stakeholder process is a powerful way to develop a national

forest policy: it helps to build a sense of joint ownership of the resulting policy and ensure its
relevance in times of political change. While such a process is costly, in the long term a lack of one
may cost even more. Many countries use the multi-stakeholder platforms of their national forest
programmes (NFPs) to help facilitate a participatory process.

Decisions on forests and trees often have wide-ranging effects that go well beyond the forest sector.
Ideally, therefore, stakeholders from a range of sectors are involved in the forest policy development
process. Such broad participation will give the forest policy greater legitimacy in and relevance to
the national development agenda.

Source: FAO 2010. Developing Effective Forest Policy.

http://www.fao.org/docrep/013/am007e/am007e00.pdf
 28

3.3 Gender Sensitivity

In order for the benefits of multi-stakeholder platforms mentioned above to be realized, it is
critical that gender dynamics be recognized and addressed. Failure to effectively engage
women, in addition to marginalized groups, will hinder implementation efforts and risk
exacerbating discrimination and exploitation at the local level.

There are a number of tools and approaches that can be used to promote womens
representation and involvement in the policy making process to prevent discrimination and
retaliation against women, including:
Private gender-segregated consultations
Mandatory quotas for female representation
Anonymous voting

Given the cultural sensitivity of supporting womens equal representation and equitable
involvement in governance mechanisms, it is again critical that an objective and gender-
sensitive facilitator of the governance development process be involved.

3.4 Governance Impact Assessments

Toward the later stages of the stakeholder dialogue and negotiation process, when draft inputs
for policy proposals have been agreed to, national and international experts should be engaged
to conduct a series of participatory impact assessments to determine the social, environmental,
economic, and regulatory effects of the proposed new governance mechanism. The goal of
these assessments is to attempt to predict whether the proposed governance policies will have
the desired impacts prior to implementation.

The different impact assessments can build on and utilize the information collected during the
Analysis Component of this Framework and provide additional information about how
governance proposals will impact the lives of stakeholders, as well as the environment.

A number of Impact Assessment tools from FAO,42 CBD,43 and OECD44 are available to
support the implementation of these different Impact Assessments.

3.5 Policy Revisions

Depending on the dialogue and negotiation process, and the information that is provided to
the stakeholders from the Impact Assessments, policy proposal revisions are likely to take
place. This can be a delicate and time-intensive process moving toward policy finalization. It
is critical that the Methodological Framework Principles be maintained through this step in
order for all stakeholders to continue to feel invested in the process and be willing to support
the finalization and implementation of the policy.

After the governance issues have been negotiated, drafted, and revised by the different actors
through the multi-stakeholder process, it is most likely (depending on the context) that the
policy draft will take the form of a socially legitimized policy draft, with many specific goals
and components. But the policy draft will likely be required to go through the existing
administrative, legal, and institutional challenges to be finalized and become official

42
FAO 2012. Environmental Impact Assessment.
43
CBD Draft Guidelines or Recommendations for the Conduct of Cultural, Environmental, and Social Impact
Assessments
44
OECD resources on Regulatory Impact Analysis
 29

government policy. At this stage of finalization, it is critical that the goals and components
agreed upon by the stakeholders are maintained in the document. If removed, the entire
governance drafting process and potentially the entire related government apparatus will lose
the trust of the stakeholders and its legitimacy, which will likely cause social tensions and
threaten the feasibility of implementation.

Key questions for the Governance Development Component:

Are marginalized stakeholders equitably represented in multi-stakeholder platforms?

Are women equally represented in the multi-stakeholder platforms?

Do all stakeholders feel the dialogue forum is open and non-discriminatory?

Does stakeholder involvement go beyond simple consultation of stakeholder interests to

promoting their active engagement in fair negotiation?

How is the meaningful participation of women ensured?

Are there oversight mechanisms in place to ensure that stakeholder input in incorporated
into the final policy proposal?

Are there effective conflict resolution mechanisms in place?

Are the impact assessments (particularly the social impact assessment) carried out in a
participatory way?

4. Inclusive Governance Implementation Component

The forth Component of the Methodological Framework is the implementation of the
governance policy. This is an important step, as all too often governance polices look
effective on paper but are never implemented. Failure to implement polices not only weakens
the governance of natural resources, it also decreases the social legitimacy of the institutions
that are responsible for policy development and implementation. Thus adequate political,
human, and economic capital must be dedicated to the implementation process.

The relevant resource sector(s) and administrative level (national, regional, local etc.) of the
governance policy will determine which institutions will be primarily responsible for the
policy implementation. But regardless of the context, it is important that policy
implementation takes place in a highly collaborative and transparent way. In particular this
process should focus on four steps:
Communication strategy for public education on the governance policy
Institutional alignment
Government technical support and enforcement
Institutional collaboration and partnership with civil society and the private sector

These steps and strategies will differ significantly depending on the country/governance
context. For example ensuring that the land rights of marginalized stakeholders are respected
by the private sector in an agricultural investment context will be different than in an
emergency or post-conflict context involved rival ethnic groups. For this reason the
 30

implementation process must be flexible and adaptable while maintaining the integrity of the
Framework Principles.

In considering the different approaches to policy implementation, FAOs Forestry department

has developed a number of valuable resources related to policy development and
implementation which have informed the steps below.45

4.1 Communication strategy for public education of governance policy

An important initial step toward policy implementation is conducting an education and
outreach campaign at the local level to ensure that all stakeholders have access to information
on the new governance mechanism. Government institutions (depending on the administrative
level) should be primarily responsible for this information dissemination, but partnerships
with NGOs, international development agencies, the private sector, and donors can support
this effort (see section 4.4 below).

The communication strategy should prioritize outreach to local communities and intermediary
stakeholder groups for wide dissemination as well as marginalized groups who are less likely
to have access to such as information.46

Some possible strategies for disseminating information to rural stakeholders include:

Community events/festivals for awareness-raising
Presentations and workshops with intermediary stakeholder groups
Rural radio programming47

One important potential entry point for farmer education on governance issues is FAOs
Farmer Field School48 and Junior Farmer Field and Life School49 programs. As informal
institutions, Field Schools have the proven capacity to educate producers on technical crop
production issues through decentralized and participatory ways. Through collaboration and
support with government stakeholders, these institutions offer a valuable means for
disseminating governance information to stakeholders at the local level.

4.2 Institutional alignment

Once a new policy has been developed, all institutions related to the natural resource sector
must adjust their internal governance policies in order to comply with the new policy. For
example, a new policy related to womens land inheritance rights may require changes in how
institutions register land ownership and collect land-related data. Furthermore, in this
situation staff of the relevant institutions should have gender-sensitivity training in order to
effectively support women in inheriting and registering their land. This institutional alignment
may also require new administrative policies such as staff hiring, prioritization processes for
budgets, and new research agendas.

Much of the information on how institutions will need to adapt and adjust to new governance
mechanisms should already be collected during the Analysis Component (see sections 1.3 and

45
FAO 2010. Developing Effective Forest Policy.
46
For information on effective strategies and challenges in implementing a communication strategy on
Mozambiques land law see: Quaary and Ramirez 2012. The Limits of Communication.
47
See the FAOs Dimitra project
48
FFS: http://www.fao.org/nr/land/sustainable-land-management/farmer-field-school/en/
49
JFFLS: http://www.fao-ilo.org/?id=20904
 31

1.4) and may have been partially addressed during the Capacity Development Component
(see section 2.2).

4.3 Government technical support and enforcement

As part of Government institutions alignment with the new governance mechanism,
institutions must also adapt their services and enforcement techniques to support the
implementation process. Unlike the institutional alignment process (which focuses on
institutions internal governance and processes), this step focuses on how institutions interact
with stakeholders and the public at large.

Two important services of government natural resource institutions are advisory/education

services and financial incentive services. Advisory services involve public access to technical
knowledge as well as targeted education programming conducted by institutions such as
Agricultural Extension Services. Changes in governance mechanisms require that both
education materials be updated as well as procedures for disseminating this information be
changed (for example to be more gender-sensitive).

Financial incentive services, such as Payment for Ecosystem Services, offer benefits to
stakeholders who adhere to a certain governance mechanism, such as conserving biodiversity.
Depending on the governance mechanism, the monetary benefits, required stakeholder action,
or territory eligible for benefits may change, thus requiring adaptation of the relevant
institutions services. Other common financial-related services for agricultural stakeholders
include:
Access to credit
Production loans
Micro-grants and micro-credit
Crop insurance

In addition to changing services to adhere to new governance mechanisms, institutions must

also adapt and develop governance enforcement techniques such as fines, taxes, and other
penalties for non-compliance with governance policies. Again, information on these changes
must be widely distributed through the communication strategy so that stakeholders have
access to this information.

4.4 Collaboration and partnership with civil society and the private sector
Although government institutions are primarily responsible for governance implementation,
building partnerships with civil society stakeholders and the private sector can support wider
dissemination of governance information and services, greater accountability, and increased
implementation efficiency. Different collaborative efforts may include:

Sub-contracting NGOs or farmer organizations for education and outreach

activities related to the communication strategy mentioned in section 4.1
Training civil society organizations on new services offered by institutions for
broader access to services50
Decentralization of government institutions implementation responsibilities
and budget to informal institutions to promote more participatory governance
mechanisms

50
For information on FAOs work with paralegal training in Mozambique on land issues see: the Social
Protection Division, Land and Water Divisions draft policy brief: Gender and natural resources governance in
Mozambique - Paralegal programme: a powerful tool of justice.
 32

As mentioned previously, this process of collaborating with non-state stakeholders not only
devolves responsibility, which in-turn reduces implementation burdens on state institutions,
but can also strengthen the commitment of stakeholders to respect and adhere to the
governance mechanism. This goal is particularly important in rural areas where
implementation and oversight efforts can be challenged by the amount of geographical space
and lack of state resources.

Like many of the steps in this Relevant field program:

Governance Framework, this process of
building partnerships with non-state One relevant example of government collaboration
stakeholders for more effective with both civil society and the private sector on
implementation can overlap with other water resource management issues is the case of the
Governance Framework Components ITAIPU Dam on the border of Brazil and Paraguay.
already mentioned. For example, the In response to the complexity of managing a
process of state institutions engaging transboundry water source, as well as meeting the
with civil society for policy needs and rights of community water users in the
implementation will actually likely
area, the Brazilian and Paraguayan governments
begin during the Capacity Development
have effectively created a public-private partnership
Component (see step 2.1) and continue
company that uses participatory management
through the Monitoring and Evaluation
Component (see step 6.1 below). techniques to involve local stakeholders in water
management decisions.a
For more relevant information on ahttp://www.cultivandoaguaboa.com.br/sites/default/files/
FAOs work in implementing iniciativa/CAB_english.pdf
governance mechanisms through
supporting rural institutions and farming organizations see FAOs publication Good
Practices in Building Innovative Rural Institutions.51

51
FAO 2012. Good Practices in Building Innovative Rural Institutions.
 33

Key questions for the Governance Implementation Component:

Have all target stakeholders, in particular women and marginalized groups, been
informed of the new governance mechanism?

Have relevant institutions adapted their internal policies to be in-line with the new
governance mechanism?

Have all relevant institutions adapted their education materials, services, and
enforcement mechanisms to be in coherence with the new governance mechanism?

Are civil society and the private sector involved in the implementation process?

Are civil society and private sector stakeholders who are involved in the implementation
process given appropriate financial and technical support?

Are equitable and gender sensitive conflict resolution mechanisms in place to support the
implementation process?

5. Equitable and effective Conflict Resolution Component

The fifth step of the Governance Framework focuses on equitable and effective conflict
resolution mechanisms, which should be mainstreamed throughout all of the Frameworks
Components (i.e. from the Analysis Component to the Monitoring and Evaluation
Component). Conflict resolution mechanisms play a critical role for:
Preventing social conflict
Addressing abuse of stakeholder rights
Addressing gender discrimination
Empowering marginalized stakeholders to advocate for their interests

The first goal of any Conflict Resolution mechanism is to prevent competing interests and
disputes among stakeholders from building into physical violence. The more nuanced and
indirect goal of this mechanism is to prevent discrimination and empower marginalized
stakeholders to feel they have the institutionalized means to advocate for their interests
without retaliation. Dialogue and negotiation are central to this process, but other government
responsibilities such as enforcing penalties when conflict resolution agreements and
governance mechanisms are not respected are also highly relevant.

A conflict resolution mechanism is a kind of institutionalized (whether formal, informal)

governance in itself, but in many contexts there are specific conflict resolution mechanisms
for specific resource sectors. Furthermore, conflict resolution is particularly critical in rights-
based governance approaches involving many stakeholders.52

There are a number of different approaches53 to conflict management have been used by FAO
in different contexts, for example:54

52
As mentioned, the goal of multi-stakeholder negotiated approaches to governance is to resolve disputes from
the beginning of the governance process, rather than trying address more pronounced conflict resulting from a
top-down governance model where fewer stakeholders interests are incorporated.
53
See FAO 2006. Land Tenure Alternative Conflict Management.
54
FAO 2000. Conflict and Natural Resource Management.
 34

Conflict Mediation - Using a third party to facilitate the negotiation process.

(A mediator lacks the authority to impose a solution).
Conflict Negotiation - Following a voluntary process in which parties reach
agreement through consensus.
Conflict Arbitration - Submitting a conflict to a mutually agreeable third party,
who renders a decision.

Regardless of the specific conflict resolution mechanism used, it is most important that the
Governance Framework Principles be maintained. In particular, conflict resolution
mechanisms must be:
a) Accessible to all stakeholders: In addition to ensuring that these mechanisms are
not geographically concentrated (which would cause significant burden to
producers who cannot leave their farms/fisheries/forests for long periods of time),
if administrative costs apply, these costs must be equitable, based on income level,
to not prevent participation.

b) Gender-sensitive: Steps must be taken to ensure that women are both equally
represented in facilitation/decision-making roles within the conflict resolution
mechanisms, as well as have equal access to the mechanism as a plaintiff.

c) Equitable: It is essential that conflict resolution mechanisms be impartial and

agreed upon by all parties involved in the dispute being resolved. Additionally, the
actor(s) in this facilitator role must have some historical awareness of the power-
asymmetries among stakeholders who may require access to the mechanism.55
Failure to ensure that the conflict resolution mechanism is objective (and in-turn
respected by stakeholders) will have immediate negative impacts on all stages of
the governance process.

In contexts where international interests (such as transnational companies), national

governments, and/or high social tensions, FAO can play an important role in
mediating/facilitating negotiations around natural resource issues to prevent or resolve
conflict (see Role of FAO in facilitating participatory natural resource governance below for
more information).

Key questions for the Conflict Resolution Component:

Are conflict resolution mechanisms geographically decentralized to increase the access,
particularly of marginalized producers?

Are women equally represented in facilitator roles in conflict resolution mechanisms?

What steps are taken to prevent discrimination against women?

What procedure steps are taken by conflict resolution mechanisms to prevent

discrimination against marginalized stakeholders?

What procedure steps are taken to prevent corruption?

55
In addition it is important that the conflict mechanism facilitator be culturally sensitive to the territory
 35

6. Monitoring and Evaluation Component

The sixth and final Component of the Governance Framework is dedicated to monitoring and
evaluation. Throughout the governance Components, but in particular during the
implementation process, monitoring and evaluation steps must be taken to ensure that the
Governance Framework Principles are being respected, the governance policy is implemented
as agreed upon by the stakeholders, and the governance policy is achieving the desired social,
economic, and environmental goals.

Developing a set of qualitative and quantitative indicators to be used by stakeholders for

monitoring and evaluating can be an important tool. Some FAO resources related to
monitoring rights-based approaches to food security require that indicators be:56
Defined explicitly and precisely.
Based on a structured and acceptable data collection, processing and dissemination
methodology.
Available on a regular basis.
Relevant and effective in measuring what they are supposed to measure.
Simple, timely and few in number.
Reliable.
Transparent with a verifiable methodology.
Adhere to international human rights standards and accepted statistical criteria.
Possible to disaggregate on the basis of vulnerable or marginalized population groups
at the local level, and on the basis of illegal grounds of discrimination.

Indicators for inclusive natural resource governance will be context specific (i.e. dependent on
the natural resource sector addressed by the governance mechanism, as well as the
administrative level at which it is applied). But 7 core areas that should be examined by a
monitoring framework in any resource sector include:
Whether the governance mechanism is successful in preventing an increase in social
conflict over natural resources.

Whether the governance mechanism is successful in protecting the natural resource

rights of all agricultural stakeholders equally under the countrys legal framework.

Whether the governance mechanism is successful in improving environmental

sustainability.

Whether the governance mechanism is successful in improving government

effectiveness in its land administration.

Whether the governance mechanism is gender sensitive and improves the natural
resource rights of women within the context of the countrys legal framework.

Whether the governance mechanism is participatory, inclusive, and non-

discriminatory.

Whether the governance mechanism is transparent and information on its function is

accessible by the public.

56
FAO Right to Food unit. Procedures for monitoring the right to food.
 36

It is important to note that any indicator should not be reductionist in-terms of evaluating the
complex impacts of governance mechanisms on the livelihoods of stakeholders. As mentioned
previously, the goal of this approach to natural resource governance is to be more integrated
and holistic in-terms of the social, economic, and environmental impacts of governance
policies across different resource sectors. Given this complexity, it is important that
monitoring indicators not be too limited in scope, or risk not capturing the full range of
impacts of a policy.

In addition, it is important that monitoring and evaluation techniques not be top-down

instruments, but rather participatory mechanisms that accessible by all stakeholders impacted
by a governance mechanism. For example, it is important that field-level feedback loops be in
place so that small-scale producers, marginalized stakeholders, and local and informal
institutions can rely information on the effectiveness (or non-effectiveness) of governance
mechanisms at the local level to other stakeholders, national level institutions and decision-
makers, and the broader public.

Key questions for the Monitoring and Evaluation Component:

Are the governance framework Principles being mainstreamed throughout the policy
development and implementation process?

Are there means for local stakeholders to provide feedback to other stakeholders and
national decision-makers on the effectiveness of a governance mechanism?

Is there an oversight mechanism to address governance mechanisms which are not

meeting the stated sustainability and gender equality goals?

Are monitoring and evaluation results made available to the public?

Role of FAO in facilitating participatory natural resource governance

As the concept of natural resource governance gains prominence in FAO and the international
agricultural agenda, it is important that participatory and gender-sensitive approaches to
governance development and implementation be used to protect the rights of agricultural
stakeholders and improve natural resource management.

Drawing on relevant field experience supporting governments on policy matters related to

natural resource governance, FAO can play a critical role of bringing technical expertise and
lessons learned from different regions and translating these experiences across cultural,
political, and economic contexts and hierarchies.

In particular, as mentioned throughout this Governance Framework, the need for an impartial
facilitator throughout the process is fundamental to effectively guiding the governance
development and implementation process. In this position, FAO can play three critical roles:
 37

An advisory role on technical, legal, policy issues related to natural resource

governance that can improve the environmental sustainability, social equity, and
economic feasibility of a governance mechanism

A mediator role as an impartial facilitator of different stakeholders interests during

the governance development process (particularly the steps involving multi-
stakeholder platforms) and to support the equitable implementation of governance
mechanisms

A trainer role to improve the capacity and gender sensitivity of formal and informal
institutions, government representatives, civil society organizations, and communities.

The goal of FAO in these different roles (at different phases of the governance process)
should be to improve governance by bringing different stakeholders and expertise together
through a process of participatory and gender-sensitive dialogue and negotiation. Improving
gender equality is at the core of this process, as gender issues, and in particular the rights of
women, have profound impacts on sustainable use of natural resources, agricultural
productivity, food security, and poverty.

This proposed process of inclusiveness and integration in natural resource governance is not
simple or straightforward, but rather takes significant time and must be adaptable to the
territorial context. Just as overcoming discrimination, introducing new management practices,
and reducing asymmetries of power among stakeholders is a long-term process, the
governance process that seeks to support these objectives must also be a long-term process.
But in investing time and resources for strengthening social cohesion and adapting institutions
to be more open and effective, this Governance Framework process also builds opportunity
for creating a dynamic and adaptable enabling environment within a country for further
improving natural resource governance in the future.
 38

Appendix 1
It is important to recognize that a number of challenges and questions related to natural
resource governance cannot be addressed through this Methodological Framework. In
recognizing these challenges this Framework offers a broad roadmap for improving inclusive
natural resource governance, but will require on-going work, adaptation, collaboration, and
negotiation among all agricultural development stakeholders, from the local to the
international level, in order to be effective. Some specific issues that this Methodological
Framework does not address but should be considered by policy makers and stakeholders
include:
The Methodological Framework offers an approach to forming governance that is a
long-term process (and in fact governance never truly ends as governance is never
static). UN agencies and other advisory services should be prepared and willing to
engage in these governance issues, in partnership with national stakeholders, over the
long-term (although in different roles with different commitments depending on the
period and context).

Evaluation of long-term processes can be difficult to quantify. For example changing

political will, discrete discrimination, and historical tensions among actors as well as
improving education, capacity development, and social cohesion are all goals of the
Framework but are challenging to evaluate. This means that in evaluating
effectiveness of the Framework, a purely result-based or quantitative analysis is
inadequate. This challenge potentially can cause difficulties for engaging potential
donors.

Political will is important to this Methodological Framework process, and in country

contexts of little political accountability the governance process will be hindered.

The capacity of the facilitator entity (whether is it FAO or another organization/team)

will have significant impact on all of the Framework Components, particularly the
governance development process.

The role of donors who support the development and implementation of governance
mechanisms should be considered as these actors can have significant influence (both
positive and negative) as well as their own interests involved in the governance
process.

Limitations on financial resources will also have significant impacts on the

governance process as all Components of the Framework will require funding.
 39

Appendix 2
Depending on the need and context there a number of different data collection methods
available to stakeholders conducting analysis of a territory. Some of these methods are
summarized by FAO and are available in FAOs Capacity Development Portal:57

57
FAOs Capacity Development Portal: http://www.fao.org/capacitydevelopment/capacity-development-
home/en/
 40

Appendix 3
Multi-stakeholder platforms can be a valuable tool for engaging different perspectives,
conflicting interests, and actors with different degrees of political power. Some examples of
multi-stakeholder platforms in different territorial areas and resource sectors include:

International level platform on natural resource governance issues:

http://www.fao.org/cfs/cfs-home/en/

Regional level platform on fisheries issues:

http://www.fao.org/fishery/nems/40534/en

National level platforms on forestry and agriculture issues:

http://www.fao.org/partnerships/forest-farm-facility/country-support/en/
 41

Works Cited

CBD Draft Guidelines or Recommendations for the Conduct of Cultural, Environmental, and
Social Impact Assessments: http://www.cbd.int/doc/meetings/tk/wg8j-02/official/wg8j-02-06-
en.pdf

Declaration of Nyeleni 2007; International Planning Committee for Food Sovereignty; La

Via Campesina 2013. The Jakarta Call.

FAO 2000. Conflict and Natural Resource Management.

FAO 2001. SEAGA Intermediate Level Handbook

FAO 2005. Participatory Negotiated Territorial Development.

FAO 2006. Land Tenure Alternative Conflict Management.

http://www.fao.org/es/esw/lsp/cd/img/docs/landten_confl_en.pdf

FAO 2006. States and Civil Society: access to land, rural development and capacity building
for new forms of governance. ICARRD Issue Paper 2

FAO 2010. Developing Effective Forest Policy.

http://www.fao.org/docrep/013/am007e/am007e00.pdf

FAO 2011. Good Food Security Governance: The Crucial Premise to the Twin-Track
Approach.
http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/righttofood/documents/project_f/fsgovernance/works
hop_report.pdf

FAO 2012. Environmental Impact Assessment.

http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/i2802e/i2802e.pdf

FAO 2012. FAO Approaches to Capacity Development in Programming: Processes and

Tools.

FAO 2012. Good Practices in Building Innovative Rural Institutions.

http://www.fao.org/docrep/015/i2258e/i2258e00.pdf

FAO 2012. Improving Gender Equality in Territorial Issues (IGETI) Guidelines.

http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/me282e/me282e.pdf

FAO Right to Food unit. Procedures for monitoring the right to food.
http://www.fao.org/3/a-i3452e.pdf

ICARRD 2006. Final Declaration.

http://www.agter.org/bdf/_docs/icarrd_final_report_en.pdf

IFAD 2013. Supporting poor rural peoples empowerment through policy solutions for
natural resource management and agriculture.
 42

ILC Antigua Declaration: http://www.landcoalition.org/en/news/antigua-declaration-ilc-

members

Quaary and Ramirez 2012. The Limits of Communication.

http://www.nordicom.gu.se/sites/default/files/kapitel-pdf/362_quarry_ramirez.pdf

UNESCAP. No Date. What is good governance? United Nations Economic and Social
Commission for Asia and the Pacific

UN Sustainable Development Open Working Group Document:

http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/3686WorkingDoc_0205_additionals
upporters.pdf

Websites:

FAO Capacity Development Portal: http://www.fao.org/capacitydevelopment/capacity-

development-home/en/

FAO Dimitra project: http://www.fao.org/dimitra/home/en/

FAO Environment and Natural Resources Department:

http://www.fao.org/nr/tenure/governance-of-tenure/it/

FAO Farmer Field Schools (FFS): http://www.fao.org/nr/land/sustainable-land-

management/farmer-field-school/en/

FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department. What is Governance?

http://www.fao.org/fishery/topic/12271/en

FAO Junior Farmer Field and Life Schools (JFFLS): http://www.fao-ilo.org/?id=20904

FAOTERM: http://termportal.fao.org/faoterm/main/start.do?lang=en

Gender and Land Rights Database: http://www.fao.org/gender/landrights/home/it/

Institute on Governance: http://iog.ca/about-us/iog-principles-of-good-governance/

International Year of Family Farming: http://www.fao.org/family-farming-2014/en/

International Year of Family Farming Master Plan :

http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/iyff/docs/Final_Master_Plan_IYFF_2014_30-
05.pdf

Marauhn 2011. Land Tenure and Good Governance from the Perspective of International
Law. Opening Address at the Colloquium Good Governance in Land Tenure Held at the
Potchefs Room on 22nd and 23rd of April 2010.
http://www.ajol.info/index.php/pelj/article/view/68707/56785
 43

OECD resources on Regulatory Impact Analysis:

http://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-policy/35258511.pdf;
http://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-policy/35258828.pdf;
http://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-policy/35258309.pdf.

Wageningen University Knowledge and Co-Creation Portal:

http://www.wageningenportals.nl/msp/topic/rationale-why-do-we-need-msps

World Banks Land Governance Assessment Framework:

http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTDEC/EXTRESEARCH/EXTPROGRA
MS/EXTARDR/EXTLGA/0,,contentMDK:22793966~pagePK:64168427~piPK:64168435~th
eSitePK:7630425,00.html