Handout Stakeholder Inventory and Analysis

Henk de Zeeuw, ETC Urban Agriculture/RUAF (2007)

Why stakeholder inventory and analysis?

Stakeholder inventory and analysis is useful since it helps:

- To identify which stakeholders are actually involved in urban agriculture and to
assess their mandates, opinions, interests, available resources and potential
contributions to an Multi-stakeholder Policy formulation and Action Planning (MPAP)
process,
- To identify and motivate organisations that are interested to work together in the
start up and implementation of an MPAP process on urban agriculture,
- To identify organisations that are relevant for solving the problems encountered by
urban farmers and/or realising the existing development potentials in urban agriculture,
identify their mandate and the human, financial and other resources they have available
and motivate them to take an active part in the MPAP process (Multi stakeholder Forum,
working groups, implementation of projects),
- To analyse the relations between the various stakeholders, including
cooperation and conflicts, as to provide a basis for identification of effective
strategies to improve networking, communications, coordination and cooperation
between the various participants in the MPAP process.

A crucial aspect to consider is the wide range of stakeholders encountered in urban settings.
Urban and Peri-urban Agriculture (UPA) is taking place in a multi-sectoral environment and it
is easy to miss some key stakeholders in a participatory process. Effort has to be put into
identifying these different stakeholder groups and motivating them to participate.

The type of stakeholders involved and their level of participation in the planning process will
vary depending on local circumstances. In any case, early co-operation between all
participants in planning and implementing actions and decisions for urban agriculture, can
smooth many obstacles from the path of the planning and implementation process (H.de
Zeeuw and W. Teubner, 2001).

Types of stakeholders in urban agriculture

One can distinguish between :

1. direct stakeholders: 1.various types of actual urban farmers / groups / organisations;
2. categories of the population with a strong interest in urban agriculture due to poverty,
food insecurity, lack of income, disabilities, etc, 3. those interested to invest in urban
agriculture as an economic enterprise.
2. indirect stakeholders; organizations that play (or should play) a role in the
development urban agriculture: Councillors, Municipal departments, local offices of
governmental organisations, ONG’s, universities/research institutes, extension
organisations, credit institutes, parastatals (e.g. marketing board or water authority),
private enterprises (e.g. inputs supply, super markets, agro-processing industry),
community based organisations, etc.

The number and types of stakeholders differs from city to city. That is why we cannot
provide a comprehensive list but just give some general ideas about potential stakeholders
to be considered and their possible role in the planning process:
Important types of stakeholders normally are:

a. Elected councillors
The initial idea to put urban agriculture on the political agenda may come from officers of the
local authority, from the elected councillors or from urban farmers and other citizens groups,
environmental organisations, etc. Wherever the initial impulse comes from, the interest of
the elected council should be engaged and a resolution made to support the work with the
resources of the administration. Urban and Peri-Urban agriculture (UPA) planning activities
undertaken without the council involvement may achieve little in the long term. Therefore, it
might be appropriate to involve councillors in the discussions all along the planning process,
in order to acknowledge their opinion and suggestions, provide feedback in council meetings,
overcome possible resistance and eventually gain support from the council.

b. Local authorities
Departments of the local Municipality are already engaged in areas of service provision and
regulation, such as urban planning, water treatment, waste collection, which have direct
interactions with urban agriculture. The participation of the local authority in the planning
process regarding UPA is a crucial factor and if representatives of the Local Authority
participate in the MPAP process, this importantly facilitates the involvement of other actors
and the coordination of the planning process and its link to the formal decision making and
legislation. During meetings, they will also provide expertise and advice to the stakeholders,
regarding municipal policies, projects and areas of service provision.

c. Associations, Networks, and other forms of organization of urban Farmers and Gardeners
The involvement of the urban farmers and gardeners will be particularly important since
their viewpoints, and needs should be taken in the planning and decision making process.
One has to ensure to differentiate between different types of farmers, especially between
a. Small scale or Larger scale farmers and gardeners
b. Commercial or (mainly) Subsistence Farmers and Gardeners
c. Horticulture, Livestock, Aquaculture, Forestry, …
Although these groups might have certain interests in common, they might strongly differ in
other interests and needs and might require quire different kinds of support. Hence, we
should ensure that all of these stakeholder categories are recognized and get involved in the
MPAP process. Especially the participation of the small scale and informal urban farmers is
often problematic since they are less organised and easily overlooked or left out. Therefore,
the identification of their representatives needs special attention (and will be an important
component of participatory farming system analysis).

d. Micro-enterprises involved in urban agriculture

Next to the intra-urban and peri-urban farmers and gardeners themselves various micro-
enterprises are involved in the production of agricultural inputs (e.g. composting), the
processing of agricultural produce (e.g. cheese making, jams and marmalades, dried fruits
and flowers) and its marketing (e.g. street vending of fresh products or prepared food, sales
in small shops and on local markets, food box schemes, etcetera).

e. Organisations representing or working with disadvantaged groups of the urban population

As already mentioned, urban agriculture plays an important social role: it contributes to
supply healthy food to the urban population and acts as a tool for integration of excluded
populations. Actions to promote urban agriculture in its social role should be discussed with
representatives of the targeted populations (i.e. disabled people, women, HIV-AIDS affected
people, ethnic minorities, migrants).
Social organisations can have various roles in the creation and implementation of the action
plan: they will provide expertise and knowledge regarding projects aimed at hard-to-reach
groups. This will enable to better tailor actions. They will also act as a link between the local
administration and minority groups.

f. Residential Neighbours and Community Based organisations

It is important to involve individuals or groups, whose habitations or activities are located
near sites of urban agriculture and who might be positively or negatively affected by future
projects.
g. Governmental and non-governmental support organisations and universities/ research
centres
Local authority officers and urban farmers/gardeners may lack expertise regarding specific
aspects of, or related to urban agriculture. They might consider getting advice and guidance
from universities, NGO’s and governmental agencies, and involve them in the planning
process. NGO’s and governmental organisations will often help finance and implement
projects, and as such are entitled to take part in the discussions.

h. Representatives of other local governments and other levels of government, regional

bodies if relevant
Urban agriculture issues are not always bound by the same borders as local authority areas.
Therefore, it should be considered at the beginning of the process whether co-operation with
neighbouring local authorities is a sensible way forward. Resources can be shared and
actions increased in effectiveness. Organisation into groups or working through an existing
regional level of local government may be the most effective way to action.

Key questions to identify stakeholders in urban agriculture include:

- Which (formal or informal) organisations are actually representing and/or
supporting urban farmers in one way or other?
- What organisations represent other categories of the population that have a
strong interest in urban agriculture policies and projects?
- What organisations have a specific authority that requires their involvement in
activities focusing at formulation of policies and design / implementation of projects
on urban agriculture?
- What organisations have a mandate, expertise and/or resources that make
them important partners?
- What organisations represent other categories of the population that might be
negatively affected by it (and thus likely to be against new urban agriculture
initiatives)?

Three moments to identify, analyse (and motivate) stakeholders

1. In the preparatory stage:

Why/expected result: Identification of a small number of key institutional stakeholders in urban

agriculture that are interested to start and facilitate an MPAP process in their city and take part in
the MPAP core or facilitating team (responsible for taking the lead in –facilitation of- the MPAP
process); The concrete result should be the signing of collaboration agreements.

In this stage the main focus is on identification of potential partner organisations interested and
willing to take part in the “core or facilitating team” and that are committed to organise and
facilitate the MPAP process in the city concerned. Normally we would like to see involved at least:
a. One or more Municipal Departments,
b. One or more local dynamic NGO’s involved in -or interested in- UPA,
c. One or more research institutes or universities,
d. An urban farmer organisation or network.

What to analyse:
- Which are crucial and dynamic key institutional actors? Who should we work with?
- Their views on urban agriculture (main problems and potentials and what to do about
it),
- Their interest to initiate the MPAP process and participate in the MPAP facilitating
team,
 - The contributions to the MPAP process we may expect of each of these partners
(resource base, expertise, commitments).

How:
- Review of available literature on urban agriculture and internet search to identify
some knowledgeable contacts in this city,
- Interviews with these contacts to identify potential interested/knowledgeable partner
organisations and the right persons to speak with in these organisations; Visits to the
partner organisations (after sharing written information) to present your organisation and
explain MPAP-process and check out their interests; Follow up by mail/telephone and a
meeting with all interested key partners to sign cooperation agreement and identify dates
and participants for a planning workshop.

Selection of the right core partners is crucial for the success of the whole MPAP process. Such a
decision can best be taken when already more insight in the situation regarding UPA in the city is
obtained (e.g. after review of existing data and the stakeholder analysis). Then we also can decide
whether we will focus the MPAP process on the whole city (if not too big) or on one part of the city
(e.g. one of the Municipalities in a Metropolis), which decision of course influences the selection of
core partners in the MPAP process. However, preferably we involve the core local partners already
in the realisation of the literature review and the stakeholder analysis. Hence we are faced with a
dilemma. For each city, the partner(s) initiating the process will have to decide to what extent it
will already get into the literature review and stakeholder analysis themselves before selecting the
core partners and training/involving them in further implementation of the situation analysis.
2. As part of the situation analysis

Why/expected result:
In this stage the focus is on making a systematic inventory and analysis of all stakeholders that
have something to contribute to the development of Urban Agriculture.

With the stakeholder inventory and analysis we want:

1. An inventory of all stakeholders in UPA in this city,
2. To gain insight in their views on urban agriculture and the role of their organisation might
play in the development of urban agriculture and the human, financial and other resources
available in these organisations of relevance for such development,
3. To motivate the most relevant stakeholders to take part in the MPAP process (especially
the Multi-stakeholder Forum – to formulate the Strategic Agenda on UA) and its working
groups (to operationalise the Strategic Agenda into action projects, new zoning regulations,
laws, and other measures, etcetera)

NOTE In the stakeholder analysis we focus on institutions, organisations and networks only.
Activities at farmers level will be undertaken in the context of the farming system analysis in
selected urban and peri-urban farming areas.

What to analyse:
Through the stakeholder analysis we would like to find out:
a. What is the mandate / mission of this organisation (does it include aspects that
relate to urban agriculture)? What is their main area of operation? Their main target groups?
b. What is their actual involvement in urban agriculture; what are past and ongoing
activities regarding urban agriculture (with what types of urban farmers, where, with what
objectives and results)?
c. Existing formal and informal relations between this organisation and different
types of urban farmers (market chain, cooperation, conflicts) and other supporting
institutions,
d. What are their views on actual situation and positive/negative impacts of
(various types of) UPA?
e. What are their views on the desired development of (various types of) UPA:
main strategies to apply and their own role in and contributions to that process?
f. How do we see their potential or desired role in UPA?
g. What human, financial or other resources they have available that might be of
interest for the development of UPA? In what aspects they might become a constraint or
help in the MPAP process?

How:

a.Preparations
Meetings are organized with all persons that will be involved in this activity in order:
- to familiarize them with stakeholder analysis (why, what, when, how),
- to define the methodology to be applied and instruments to be used,
- to define what products have to be developed as a result of the stakeholder analysis,
- work planning: who will do what when how/means,
- how to coordinate /monitor these activities.
The meeting(s) should result in a methodological document that should describe: main concepts,
methodology, instruments used, operational plan/time schedule/commitments, products to be
produced.
b. Inventory of all relevant stakeholders
By reviewing available information from reliable sources (literature, databases, etcetera) and
“brainstorming” and interviews with key informants, a list of stakeholders is developed. The list of
stakeholders should include at least the following information:
- name organization,
- type of stakeholder,
- contact details (name and function of contact person(s), address, tel, e-mail),
- available sources of information on that organisation (website address, documents).

It is suggested to make two of such lists:

a. at the City level
b. at the intervention level, that is to say: the locations of the main urban farming locations
(identified during secondary data review and land use mapping exercise; another important
component of the situation analysis).

c.Data gathering on identified stakeholders

An interview is held with one or more representatives of each organisation included in the list with
help of an interview guide. The person to be interviewed should be of senior rank in that
organisation and his/her views should represent well the institutional viewpoints.

The collected information is added to the stakeholder table which will result in a short stakeholder
profiles per organization (see below).

Stakeholder Profile Sheet

Profile of Stakeholder ………………….

Prepared by:…………………………
On the basis of:
a. documents:…………………………
b. interview with:…………………….

Elements Profile
Institutional mandate
and current policies
Available resources
(financial, human, in-
kind)
Expertise

Main target groups

Main areas of
intervention
Main relations with other
stakeholders; networks
they participate in
Information they have on
UPA and related fields
Perceptions/views on key
problems and potentials
of UPA, solutions,
intervention strategies
Ongoing and planned
projects re. UPA
…..
…..
Observations re.
eventual participation in
Core MPAP facilitating
team
Observations re.
participation in Multi-
stakeholder Forum
Other observations

d. Analysis of the collected information

Once all organizations in the list have been identified and visited, the collected data is analyzed by
asking: what do we learn from the collected information regarding:
a. The congruency/discrepancy in the views that these organizations have on the main
problems (different types of) urban agriculture and the strategies suggested to solve these
problems,
b. The congruency/discrepancy in the views that these organisations have on the potentials /
future development of (different types of ) urban agriculture and the strategies suggested to
develop these potentials.
c. The existing relations between the various stakeholders -to that effect one may prepare per
type of urban farmers a Venn diagram (a stakeholder inter-relations map) indicating which
actors do interact with them and the kind and intensity this interaction,
d. The views these organisations have on their own role in the above, and the contributions
they might make to future projects, programme and policies on UPA,
e. Our own assessment of their potential role/contributions: expertise, resources, power,
legitimacy, representation, etcetera,
f. Based on a-e: Which organisations should be included in the MPAP process and in what
ways/roles? What might we expect from each of them? Which ones have to be included for
strategic or practical reasons but need close attention in order to change their views on
urban agriculture?
g. What are the best ways to motivate the various organisations to participate in the MPAP
process?
h. Points of attention (themes / methods) regarding building mutual understanding, networking
and enhancing cooperation and communication among stakeholders.

The results of the analysis will be included in a report on the Stakeholder analysis that will be used
as an input to the development of the Strategic Agenda.

3. After drafting the City Strategic Agenda on Urban Agriculture

Why/expected result
In this stage the key problems and priority intervention strategies for development of UPA have
been identified. So now it becomes possible to analyse for each main problem and strategy
whether all relevant stakeholders are on board or whether additional organisations have to be
invited to take part in the operationalisation and implementation of that specific strategy. It might
be that the present stakeholders involved in the MPAP process do not have all the required
expertise or mandate or social basis to come to adequate project design and implementation.

We thus seek to identify what additional actors are required to take part in the working groups and
projects, with views on their mandate, expertise and skills, resources (direct or indirect), influence
and power. The result should be that the working groups include all relevant stakeholders to design
and to implement, in a participatory manner, adequate solutions to the problems identified or
actions to further explore the existing potentials.

What to analyse:
- What kind of expertise or resources or power we need in order to solve the problems
or realise the potential identified in the Strategic Agenda?
- Where can we find that expertise, or resources or power if not yet present among the
participating organisations?

How:
- Analysis of the Strategic Agenda; listing of expertise and resources needed,
- Comparison with Stakeholder profiles; identification of gaps,
- Internet search; consultations of thematic experts (by telephone/e-mail),
- Visits to potential complementary partner organisations to inform and motivate them
to participate.

Motivating stakeholders in urban agriculture to actively participate in the MPAP

process

In order to get their active participation in the MPAP process an organisation needs:
a. to be aware of UPA and its potentials and problems,
b. to be willing to participate in its development (which mainly depends on the question how
UPA may contribute to the main interests of the actor involved),
c. to be able to contribute (which mainly depends on the organisation’s mandate and
available human and financial resources).
All three conditions have to be fulfilled to certain degree in order to get the organisation actively
involved.

Main obstacles for active involvement at organisation and personal level:

a. ignorance / lack of knowledge

- information is not available/not accessible, or only at one level in the organisation (technical level
or decision making level),
- the available information is not relevant to the user, is not what he/she needs to get interested
and take a decision,
- the available information is not presented in a way that is attractive to the user (wrong channel,
wrong packaging, offered at wrong moments by the wrong persons to the wrong persons).

b. unwilling / lack of interest

- the person/organisation is not well informed on potentials of UA for pursuing his/her interests,
- they have other priorities.

c. unable / lack of resources

- the person/organisation does not have the mandate to work with poor urban farmers (is urban or
agriculture or poor included in the mandate?),
- lack of required expertise/skills,
- lack of required equipment and economic means,
- the person/organisation does not have the right relations/power .

What makes an organisation more committed to actively contribute to the MPAP

process?

a. Link with their institutional policy / interests

An organisation probably will be more interested in UPA if
 - UPA is close to the institutional interests (fits in mandate/mission; fits in institutional
policies,
programmes and budget headings); organisation might be blamed if lack of attention leads
to problems;
interventions in UA generates results that serve also other institutional goals,
- Decision makers are well informed on UPA and its relevance for their main institutional
interests,
- The organisation is less hierarchical, has more democratic attitudes and has gained
(positive) experiences with participatory or multi stakeholder processes,
- The organisation is more innovative and learning oriented organisation. Less “deviations
from normal procedures are negatively rewarded” and less dominant “disciplinary” and
“sectoral” orientation,
- Funding flows for UPA are increasing and accessible for this organisation,
- Attractiveness / clarity of MPAP proposal and “trustworthiness”’ and “leverage power” of the
ones that propose it ; no shorter/cheaper routes to the same results are available.

b. Link with individual interests of people in those organisations

An organisation probably will probably be more interested in UPA if
- There is more staff with positive experiences and relevant expertise on UPA available within
the organisation; one or more strong internal advocates for UA; the higher rank the better,
- Institutional involvement matches with personal interests of the persons involved and
participation in MPAP-process is rewarding (intrinsic values, development of relevant
experience/knowledge/skills, better chances for access to scholarship, certificate, economic
incentives, more fieldwork),
- There is less corruption / more transparency / less resistance to outsiders knowing about
planned activities and their participation in the monitoring of results.

c. Outside pressures
An organisation probably will probably be more interested in UPA if there are outside pressures on
the organisation to give proper attention to UPA
- from persons that can influence the institution directly (agenda, resources, etcetera) like
local and national policy makers, donor organisations, etcetera,
- from clients,
- from media
- etc.
Hence, what strategies to use to enhance stakeholder motivation?

a. In the preparatory stage

- Study the institutional profile of most relevant stakeholders; bring visits to decision
and opinion makers in that organisation making use of well packaged information (UPA
policy briefs and fact sheets, Mayor declarations on UPA) that demonstrates the value of UA
for their institutional interests and the link with their mandate/mission and actual policies
and programmes. Show that comparable organisations elsewhere are also involved in
similar processes. Give adequate follow up to questions raised and observations made.
Make a summary of the main outcomes of these meetings and share that with them,
making promised actions and other commitments of both parties more explicit.
- Involve the ‘opinion makers”’ in that organisation in direct dialogues with farmers
(field visits), sent them examples of successful UA policies and projects resulting from MPAP
processes, involve them in well prepared meetings on MPAP process, supply them with
additional information on urban agriculture (e.g. magazine articles, fact-sheets, videos).
- Identify “like minded” persons in the organisation; suggest them to higher ranking
officials as contact persons / participants in MPAP process.
- In crucial organisations (e.g. Municipality) also a seminar for senior staff and
councillors might be organised (policy awareness seminars).
- Feed well-packaged information also to influential persons outside the organisation
so that they might speak well informed and favourable of UA in meetings.
- Inform leaflets for “clients” of these organisations to inform then on UA so that they
will advocate for more attention for UA in their contacts with the organisation.
- Prepare information package, press bulletins, well-selected pictures and/or copy of
video for journalists of local influential media and invite them for a briefing or seminar on
this subject as well as for a field visit.
- Inform opinion and decision makers of the various stakeholders on the expressed
interests and commitments of other actors in the city. Bring most interested partners
together and make them express their commitments in public.
- Work towards a formal stakeholder agreement between the core partners in the
process.

b. During the situation analysis

- Organise meetings at two levels: Steering committee (superiors; once in a while) and
MPAP Team members (regularly); Ensure that team members can participate in the MPAP
process with formal support of their superiors and with sufficient time and support;
- Keep superiors well informed and feed them with positive news on progress / results
of the work done by their staff and other team members; Discuss eventual problems
encountered at the technical level and include commitments/remedial actions promised in
the minutes. Maintain a good communication relation with their secretary.
- Supply training to the implementers in the form of “planning workshops” rather than
as training (hence applying what was discussed is not a question anymore since the whole
training is oriented towards planning); build in feedback to higher levels and discuss at
decision making level the issues/questions raised at executive level.
- Ensure that team meetings are exciting, inspiring and rewarding (learning a lot; new
ideas emerging).
- Ensure that tasks are well planned and prepared, which makes it more easy/pleasant
to implement.
- Organise a policy awareness seminar.
- Involve them in elaboration of report on the situation analysis.

NB: It is important to develop similar communication strategies for the next phases of the MPAP
process (Development City Strategic Agenda; project planning and implementation).

REFERENCES
- de Zeeuw, H and W. Teubner, 2001. Policy Brief on Urban Agriculture. Chapter 4. Green and
productive cities. ETC/ICLEI, 2001