ABSTRACT. We survey and evaluate selected participatory tools that have been proven effective in natural resources management and research during our extensive experience with forest communities. We first establish a framework for our analysis by identifying a set of criteria for evaluating each tool. Next we provide a brief description of each tool, followed by an evaluation and comparison of the strengths and weaknesses of all the tools examined and how well they can be adapted to diverse contexts. We also provide suggestions for avoiding common pitfalls. Our findings suggest that most tools are flexible enough to be adapted to a range of applications, and that results are more robust when tools are used in concert. Practitioners should not be disturbed when results are contradictory or unexpected; initial surprises can lead to unexpected discoveries. Given the complexity of natural resources and their management, picking the right tool does not guarantee that the data desired will be produced, but selecting the wrong tool does make success less likely. The tools assessed are Bayesian belief networks and system dynamic modeling tools, discourse-based valuation, the 4Rs framework, participatory mapping, scoring or the Pebble Distribution Method, future scenarios, spidergrams, Venn diagrams, and Who Counts Matrices.

New global initiatives to restore forest landscapes present an unparalleled opportunity to reverse deforestation and forest degradation. Participatory monitoring could play a crucial role in providing accountability, generating local buy in, and catalyzing learning in monitoring systems that need scalability and adaptability to a range of local sites. We synthesized current knowledge from literature searches and interviews to provide lessons for the development of a scalable, multisite participatory monitoring system. Studies show that local people can collect accurate data on forest change, drivers of change, threats to reforestation, and biophysical and socioeconomic impacts that remote sensing cannot. They can do this at one-third the cost of professionals. Successful participatory monitoring systems collect information on a few simple indicators, respond to local priorities, provide appropriate incentives for participation, and catalyze learning and decision making based on frequent analyses and multilevel interactions with other stakeholders. Participatory monitoring could provide a framework for linking global, national, and local needs, aspirations, and capacities for forest restoration.

No abstract

This paper describes a participatory mapping method field tested with agro-extractive settlements in the Bolivian Amazon. A regional transition from customary to formal property rights resulting from sweeping 1996 land tenure reforms has led to confusion and conflicts over resource rights, a problem compounded by recent high market prices for Brazil nuts. In response to community requests to clarify resource rights to Brazil nut trees, CIFOR offered to train community members to map trees, trails and other key features themselves. This experience indicates that local residents can map their resources in an effective and efficient way and in the process gather necessary information to mediate competing claims, demonstrate their legitimate resource claims to external stakeholders and make management decisions. We argue that maps and properties are more likely to be seen as legitimate reflections of de facto rights if local stakeholders are involved as a group from the outset.

No abstract

Forest devolution is meant to provide communities with greater decision-making power over the use and future of tropical forests. However, devolution policies have not always had the intended effect; in some cases they have caused or furthered the disenfranchisement of the poor, the creation of open access conditions, resource conflict and forest degradation. These problems are likely to arise when forest communities are at a disadvantage when interacting with other local players and are unprepared for their new opportunities and responsibilities due to their physical remoteness, cultural isolation, low literacy rates or lack of experience in formal planning and negotiation. This paper discusses how a participatory method to facilitate thinking about the future -called future scenarios -can help change the way forest communities and local governments interact. The paper reviews a growing body of literature on future scenarios and shares first-hand experiences with future scenarios in forest communities in the northern Bolivian Amazon and the central provinces of Vietnam. It finds that under the right conditions, the use of future scenarios allows forest communities to collaborate more effectively with local government, better assume responsibilities when given control over forests under devolution schemes and self-organize to benefit from the opportunities that communal control over forests offers. Future scenarios help communities think about dependency, vulnerabilities and ways to prepare for the future; the methods develop organizational capacity and encourage internal democratic processes and planning. Community leaders become more vocal and assertive in meetings with local government, and marginalized groups within communities, such as women or the poorest segments, make their voices heard. However, the methods are less effective when facilitation skills are not available or where government or other interests are threatened by local constituents. Future scenarios are not without their pitfalls and do not work in all situations, but given the appropriate context they can create "break-through moments" that improve collaboration between communities and local officials.

Monitoring is crucial to meet the goals of the major global forest landscape restoration (FLR) initiatives that are underway. If members of the global FLR community are going to learn from one another, a multi‐scalar, multi‐site monitoring approach is needed to generate information that can provide the basis for social learning and adaptive management, both of which are essential processes for FLR. This requires reframing and expanding the perspective of monitoring so that compliance monitoring is just one component of a multidimensional approach where collaborative monitoring and compliance‐oriented monitoring are complementary. However, FLR planners and implementers often lack experience in applying collaborative approaches in multi‐stakeholder settings, and there are few tools that show how to implement FLR or to engage in collaborative monitoring in FLR. Through a literature review, we identified the factors that contribute to successful collaborative monitoring in FLR and synthesized them into a diagnostic that was vetted by 20 global experts. The result is a checklist of 42 core success factors to be assessed at local, subnational, and national levels at different stages in the planning and implementation of FLR. The tool has practical application by providing guidance on best practices: specifically, how to start collaborative monitoring, and more generally, how to plan, prepare for, and evaluate FLR activities. This diagnostic complements other diagnostics, such as those used to identify FLR sites, as it can identify preexisting strengths and weaknesses in new initiatives, or pinpoint problems with ongoing implementation. The diagnostic explicitly addresses issues of scale, including multiple sites, governance levels, and changes over time.

No abstract