This document discusses innovation platforms (IPs) as institutions for integrated natural resource management (INRM) at the landscape level. It uses the case study of the Kapchorwa District Landcare Chapter (KADLACC) in Uganda. KADLACC is an IP established through the AGILE concept to address challenges like declining vegetation/soil fertility and conflicts through collective action. It facilitates integrated development planning and farmer learning. Major interventions include strengthening local government involvement in NRM planning and developing market linkages. Key results include increased tree planting, community bylaws for watershed management, and income generation. Outcomes are reduced grazing/landslides, increased production/income, and strengthened community cohesion, gender balancing and youth engagement

1. Are Innovation Platforms possible Institutions
for Integrated Natural Resource Management
Practices at Landscape Level?
Verrah Otiende, Joseph Tanui, Rick
Kamugisha, Mieke Bourne, Jeremias Mowo

2. What is an Innovation platform (IP)

A broader environment for learning and change

Various actors from different backgrounds: farmers,
traders, food processors, researchers, government
officials, development practitioners, etc.

Collective diagnosis of challenges, identification of
opportunities and plan of achieving mutual goals

3. Innovation platforms (IPs)

Referred to in various names including multi-stakeholder
arrangements, innovation networks, coalitions or publicprivate partnerships

Work at a single level or across several levels: value chain
or economic sector

Considered as channels for catalyzing collective action to
enhance sustainable smallholder livelihoods and rural
development

IPs contribution to innovation processes through a case
study of Kapchorwa District Landcare Chapter
(KADLACC) in eastern Uganda

4. The AGILE concept

The African Grassroots Innovation for Livelihood and
Environment (AGILE) concept spearheaded the
establishment of KADLACC as an IP

Evolved through insights from work carried out at
community and district levels that focused on:
 Community assets
 Institutional dynamics
 Livelihood and environmental conservation

5. The AGILE concept

Hinged on four pillars of learning:





Exploration of livelihood opportunities
Farmer institutional development
Linking conservation to development
Lesson learning framework at various levels
Geared towards influencing community, research
and development institutions towards a holistic
sustainable INRM based on the 6 principles of
Landcare

6. 6 Principles of Landcare

Integrated
Sustainable
Natural
Resource
Management practices addressing primary causes
of natural resource decline

Community based and led natural resource
management within a participatory framework

The development of sustainable livelihoods for
individuals, groups and communities utilizing
empowerment strategies

7. 6 Principles of Landcare

Government, community and individual capacity
building through targeted training, education and
support mechanisms

The development of active and true partnerships
between governments, Landcare groups and
communities, non-government organizations

The blending together of appropriate upper level
policy processes with bottom up feedback
mechanisms

8. Case description

Kapchorwa District Land Care Chapter (KADLACC) is
an innovation
platform of
22 grassroots
organizations

Targets the marginalized poor communities and
vulnerable groups in the degraded densely populated
watersheds with low productivity.

Facilitates collective action for integrated natural
resources management and community formulated
INRM by-laws

9. KADLACC structure

10. Why KADLACC?

The case of KADLACC provides an indication of an IP
achieving tangible INRM outcomes

Study focused on seven farmer groups purposively
selected:
 Involved from inception of the platform
 Have evolved over the period of the IP
 Sufficiently advanced thus adequate depth of
experience to elucidate the innovation process

11. Why KADLACC
Key Challenges
• Declining vegetation cover
• Declining soil fertility
• Erosion and landslides
• Conflict in Forest areas
• Gender inequality
• Weak farmer institutions and
structures

12. Major interventions through the IP

Integrated development and NRM planning from
village to sub-county levels

Linking of farmer learning cycles to trained
facilitators

Appreciative inquiry into the process of building
local level assets and the spirit of volunteerism

Defined process of linking livelihood goals to
conservation objectives advocated for by the
community

13. Major interventions through the IP

Strengthened role of local government structures in
integrated NRM planning; involvement of community
members in policy reform

Strategies under development for enhancing linkages
to markets in the context of environmental
conservation

Maintained agility and ability to identify new
opportunities

Ensuring ownership by the local community

14. Key results
Significant increase in the number of trees
planted between 2003 and 2011

15. Key results
Development and implementation of community
bylaws to support watershed management

16. Key results
Increased enterprise opportunities from land
investments; income generation and asset accumulation

18. Outcomes at Household level:
• Reduced free range grazing
• Increased livestock production
• Increased agroforestry tree cover
• Reduced landsides frequency
• Increased food production
• Increased income opportunities

19. The REAL Outcomes:
• Community cohesion and unity – evidenced
by the networking, knowledge sharing,
relationships & trust
• Gender balancing – workloads and decision
making
• Youth engagement
• Local by laws formation and implementation

20. Conclusion
Innovation Platforms are useful in engaging actors
at grassroots levels into integrated initiatives that
yield better returns in NRM

21. THANK YOU