Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Securing Tenure Rights for Forest-Dependent Communities: A global comparative study of design and implementation of tenure reform

Presented by Anne M. Larson and Iliana Monterroso at the IFAD-CGIAR Partnership Webinar Series #3 on 9 March 2021

This presentation shared three innovative approaches implemented by the Global Comparative Study on Forest Tenure Reforms GCS-Tenure project highlight lessons learned, good practices and challenges for engagement.

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Securing Tenure Rights for Forest-Dependent Communities: A global comparative study of design and implementation of tenure reform

  1. 1. Anne M. Larson, EGT Team Leader, CIFOR-ICRAF Iliana Monterroso, Scientist, Co-coordinator of gender and social inclusion research, CIFOR-ICRAF IFAD-CGIAR Partnership Webinar Series #3 9 March 2021 Securing Tenure Rights for Forest-Dependent Communities: A global comparative study of design and implementation of tenure reform
  2. 2. What is a “forest tenure reform”? • A change in the set of rights and responsibilities to use, manage or control forest or forest land • For which right holder: (our specific interest) Communities, indigenous people, smallholders
  3. 3. Forest Tenure Reforms Source: RRI, 2018:18 Mostforestlands are owned and administeredby the state • Latin America - 48% • Africa 92% • Asia 65%
  4. 4. Forest tenure reforms: Global change in forest land tenure 2650.1 49.8 333.2 369.9 2405.6 96.3 415.2 379.4 0.0 500.0 1000.0 1500.0 2000.0 2500.0 3000.0 Administered by Government Designated for IPs and other Communities Owned by IPs and other Communities Owned by Individuals and Firms Million hectares 2002 2013 Increase of at least 128.5 Mha Between 2002 and 2013 In lands Designated and Owned by IPs and Other Communities Source: Rights and Resources Initiative, 2016
  5. 5. Forest tenure reforms: Regional differences
  6. 6. Devolution of forest rights across developing regions Source: Based on Lawry and McLain, 2012:56. Devolution of Forest Rights and SustainableForest Management. Volume1.
  7. 7. Research countries
  8. 8. Research questions ▪ Establish how forest tenure reforms emerge: opportunities, and options for formal approaches to securing customary rights. ▪ Identify factors that enable or constrain reform implementation. ▪ Identify impacts of tenure reform on rights, livelihoods and security of women, poor men and ethnic minorities to forests and trees. ▪ How reform implementation can be strengthened /improved.
  9. 9. •Prospectiveparticipatory Analysis •Focus GroupDiscussions; •Key informant interviews; •Intrahousehold surveys •Key informant interviews; •Survey toAgent’s of Implementation •Legal and Institutional Analysis; • Historical Analysis Reform Implementation Granting Outcomes Mobilization & Conflict A framework to analyze tenure reform processes (1) Methods
  10. 10. LEGAL REFORM • Historical Analysis: Social actors (Supporting / Opposing) • Legal Analysis: Regulatory Framework REFORM IMPLEMENTATION •Analysis of government institutions in charge of reform implementation (Surveys and Interviews) •Institutional framework •Procedures and requirements (Legal Steps) GRANTING • # of titles, # hectares formalized, permits, authorizations, contracts completed and registered • Scenarios of tenure security at the regional level • South-South Exchanges IMPACT/OUTCOMES • Analysis at the village/Household level •Land/Forest tenure conditions •Tenure security •External threats •Forest conditions REFORM PROCESS A framework to analyze tenure reform processes (2) Issues
  11. 11. Consultative & partnering—diverse actors with multiple roles and interests Three interactive pillars: • Research: comparative; diagnostic; good practice principles; indicators for monitoring tenure security; tools/strategies for integrating multiple interests • Multistakeholder engagement: joint problem solving; scenarios development; experience sharing • Knowledge sharing and capacity enhancement: workshops; needs assessments; tools (e.g. conflict resolution; gender integration); tenure literacy Approach
  12. 12. Project Partners and Funders Indonesia • University of Pattimura • University of Lampung • Ministry of Forestry Uganda • Makerere University • Associationof Uganda ProfessionalWomenin Agriculture and Environment AUPWAE • Forestry SectorSupportDepartment,Ministryof Environmentand Water Peru • Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina • Ministry ofAgriculture,Rural Cadastre Office;National ForestService
  13. 13. Innovation 1 The Participatory Prospective Analysis (PPA) processes: Co-ellaboration of Tenure Security Scenarios through staekholder engagement
  14. 14. OUR APPROACH TO STUDY TENURE SECURITY: PROSPECTIVE PARTICIPATORY ANALYSIS (PPA) IDENTIFYING FORCES • Id Forces influencing the system • Defining and measuring forces IDENTIFYING POSSIBLE FUTURES • States of driving forces • Identifying possible scenarios DEFINING AN ACTION PLAN • Strategy FORCES DRIVING (IN)SECURITY IN COLLECTIVE LANDS POSSIBLE FUTURES ACTION PLAN
  15. 15. Tenure security is the assurance of conditions that allow communities to live in their land and benefit from it in the long term. Peru DIFFERENT PERCEPTIONS OF WHAT IS TENURE SECURITY: (Examples from Peru and Colombia) Tenure security is the condition that provides legal security and allows for land use and management, through the recognition of autonomy, sustainable natural resource use, organizational strengthening and cultural recognition. Montes de Maria, Colombia
  16. 16. 3. Scenariosaddressing the relationshipbetween the community and the government POSSIBLE FUTURES AND CONTRASTING SCENARIOS OF TENURE SECURITY (PERU) “ideal” “bad” “when NGOs replace the government” “half way” “paternalist government” “the community disappears” 1. Scenarios addressing the state of the forests 2. Scenarios addressing the state of the community
  17. 17. Action Plans: Uganda
  18. 18. Innovation 2 Approaches to address implementation gaps from the perspective of government agents
  19. 19. Stage Number of steps (Law) Number of government agencies involved (Law) Number of steps (Practice) Number of government agencies involved (Practice) Legal recognition 8 4 11 7 Demarcation and Titlinng 11 7 +22 +12 Usufruct contract 1 2 5 5 TOTAL 20 +7 38 +12 Source: Notess et al., 2018; Monterroso y Larson, 2018 3. Institutions and procedures for implementation, mechanisms for coordinating WHY INTERSECTORIAL COORDINATION/COMMUNICATION IS IMPORTANT? • Ensures meeting outcomes (36%), • Allows meeting goals (22%), • Is part of the institutional mandate (19%). Source: Notess et al., 2018; Monterroso y Larson, 2018 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 si no no sabe Is there a formal agreement to coordinate with other government institutions involved in imnplemenntation of reform process? yes no Doesn’tknow
  20. 20. From design to implementation:From the perspective of government agents Source: Myers et al., underreview Rating of effectiveness of coordination among implementing agencies (N=126) Efficacy of reform implementation (N=143)
  21. 21. Innovation 3 South-South Exchanges • Purpose: Sharing experience, lessons learned and synergies acrossstudy countries • Three events: World Forestry Congress(2016); World Bank Land Poverty Conference(2017); Field Visit and Sub-nationalInternationalConferencein Madre de dios, Peru (2018) • Outcomes: Multi-stakeholder policy dialogues; training events; cross-country exchangefield-visits; review of theory of change, involvement of multi-stakeholder projectadvisory committees
  22. 22. IFAD ENGAGEMENT IN GCS-TENURE PROJECT: Challenges and opportunities • IFAD Project Management: Program offices involved Land Tenure vs. Forest/Environment Opportunities to cross learning across IFAD topic desks • IFAD Country context: Example: IFAD country work in Peru focused outside the lowlands-Amazon vs. GCS Tenure project geographic and theme focus Different situation in Uganda and Indonesia Focus of country projects limit the opportunities of engagement, establishment of synergies and cross- learning. • IFAD Mission field visit in Indonesia •Lessons learned •Engagement with country projects at the inception level is important but not enough if the process is not linked around the project design​ (including topics •More opportunities for cross learning and engagement along the implementation of the project
  23. 23. https://www2.cifor.org/gcs-tenure/
  24. 24. Thank you foreststreesagroforestry.org | globallandscapesforum.org | resilient-landscapes.org cifor.org | worldagroforestry.org The Center for International ForestryResearch (CIFOR) and World Agroforestry (ICRAF) envisiona more equitableworld where trees in all landscapes, from drylands to the humid tropics, enhance the environment and well-being for all. CIFOR and ICRAF are CGIAR Research Centers.

×