Reforming Forest Governance in Uganda: Utilizing Diagnostics and Indicators
Reforming Forest Governance inUganda: Utilizing Diagnostics and Indicators Nalin Kishor Forests Team, The World Bank (For WRI meeting May 26-27, Washington DC 2011)
Governance Diagnostics Tool• Why a Governance Diagnostics Tool? ▫ The need to move away from ad hoc efforts at improving governance towards a systematic approach.• Desirable Characteristics of a Good Tool ▫ It would focus on reforms with a high chance of success ▫ It would to involve stakeholders from the beginning (because stakeholder knowledge and support are essential to the success of reforms) ▫ It would to point to actionable, practical interventions ▫ It would lend itself to repeated application, to allow tracking of the progress of reform efforts
WHAT, HOW and for WHOM: ThreeQuestions to Guide Tool Development• WHAT governance aspects should be assessed? WHAT, recognizes the complexities of the scope of forest governance and attempts an unbundling of its components and the existing inter-linkages therein.
3 Key Questions to Guide Tool Development• HOW to assess forest governance?• HOW refers to the challenges associated with measuring aspects of the WHAT. These are often highly perception-based concepts. Carefully crafted approaches are necessary to get reliable and useful measures. Typically theses approaches rely on multi-stakeholder processes to gather information.
3 Key Questions to Guide Tool Development• FOR WHOM to assess?The WHOM of forest governance requires an understanding of the balance of power and of political equilibrium in the context of effecting change. Forest governance reforms create “losers” and “gainers”. Would-be reformers must offset the resistance of losers. How to strengthen demand for good governance and get the support of potential gainers behind the reforms, also needs to be better understood.
Bank’s Approach to Developing a GovernanceDiagnostics Tool • WHAT?: “Roots for Good Forest Outcomes – An Analytical Framework for Governance Reforms” • HOW?: Building on this framework, generate a set of questions to guide stakeholder consultations. Evaluation of these questions will: ▫ identify areas of forest governance needing reform ▫ help draft a forest governance reform strategy • For WHOM?: Disseminate and publicly discuss the draft strategy. Build ownership and consensus. Evolve to an “action plan”.
The Five Pillars of Forest Governance• Transparency, Accountability and Public Participation• Reliability of Forest Institutions and Conflict Management• Quality of Forest Administration• Coherence of Forest Legislation and Rule of Law• Economic Efficiency, Equity and Incentives
Questionnaire Development and Sample QuestionsPILLAR 1: Transparency, Accountability, and Public Participation Question:A.1.1 Are inventory data, management plans, laws, and budgets for government-owned forests easily accessible to the public in a user-friendly format?Rationale:This is primarily a measure of how accessible information is to the stakeholders. Access and the free flow of information are prerequisites for ensuring the voice and participation that is necessary for a democratic society. Access to information lies at the core of some of the main principles of democratic governance: participation, transparency and accountability.Possible Responses:• All of the above are accessible in a user-friendly format (language, statistics, maps).• Most of the above are accessible in a user-friendly format.• Only some of the above data are accessible, or they are in a format that is difficult to use.• None of the above are available.
Uganda Pilot• Relevance in terms of the important role of forests in its National Development Plan and (most recently) in terms of developing the R-PP.• How was it done? ▫ Customization of generic questionnaire and preparation of background governance assessment. Circulated to participants ahead of the workshop. ▫ Two day, facilitated, national workshop of multi- stakeholder representatives (June 15 and 16th 2010). ▫ Five breakout groups worked thru the 97 questions. Reported back in plenary and consolidated the full baseline assessment. ▫ Prepared report identifying areas requiring highest priority attention and a draft reform strategy.
Where are we now?• Government has not acted upon the draft strategy emerging from the June 2010 workshop.• National Forestry Authority continues to be plagued by problems and poor credibility.• Parts of the findings have been picked up, e.g., in the country’s R-PP.• Discussions on the need for an independent monitor, but in very early stages.
Next Steps• Additional pilots--Burkina Faso (FIP), Lao PDR (FIP and FCPF) and Russia (Arkhangelsk oblast).• Use the internationally developed 3 pillar governance framework (“Framework for Assessing and Monitoring Forest Governance”), instead of the WB framework.• Compile a field-manual on the basis of experiences gained.