Step 7. Participatory planning, monitoring, evaluation and lesson learning
Purpose: To operationalise a responsive process of planning, monitoring, evaluation and lesson learning within the CFMG and government for Community forestry
Overview of the step
Community forestry will not be sustainable if planning, monitoring and evaluation systems are not operationalised within the CFMG and within the Forestry Department and other supporting institutions such as the Local Authorities. This step lays out the activities required to set up and institutionalise a responsive Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation (PM&E) system and support mentoring of the new CFMG
Summary Process
a) Setting up P,M&E system within the CFMG – community internal planning monitoring and evaluation
b) Assessment, mentoring and learning by the Forest Department in the CF site.
c) Operationalising joint planning, monitoring and evaluation with CFMG, government and traditional authorities.
d) Advocacy – strengthening the voice of CFMGs and influencing national policy processes.
| Activity | Description | |
| a) | Setting up P,M&E system within the CFMG – Community internal planning monitoring and evaluation | Training of the CFMG to conduct internal monitoring and evaluation against the annual workplan, bylaws and constitution etc. both in the forest and in the village, engaging all affected stakeholders on a frequency that is practical for the community. On an annual basis there should be a general assembly with an evaluation of the management plan, constitution, cashbook, lessons learned and management plan, bylaws and constitution can be updated/revised (See Annex 29 for guidance) |
| b) | Assessment, mentoring and learning by the Forestry Department of the community forest management group and CF | Forestry Department conducts spot checks on community forestry activities to ensure they adhere to sustainable forest management principles and the contents of the management plan/bylaws and agreements as well as checks on organizational health and impact of CF on the broader community. This can be done with a three-pronged technique, visiting the forest, reviewing documents in the village (cash book etc.) with CFMG executive and then interviewing the wider community. (See Annex 30 for guidance). a) Assessing resource condition through transect walk in the forest; b) Reviewing the licensing system and documentation from CFMG box of records and receipts as well as benefit sharing according to the constitution; c) Assessing the quality of participation and wider awareness through interview of selected households (non-committee members). These are conducted to strengthen the capacity of the CFMG to manage and function well, more of a constructive assessment and mentoring rather than a regulatory ‘policing’ |
| c) | Joint review and planning at district level including traditional authorities, institutionalising support for CF | Setting up regular multi-stakeholder review meetings where CFMG, government and traditional authorities can meet to review progress, troubleshoot problems and plan support that CFMGs require. These plans must be incorporated into normal government operational plans and budgeted for |
| d) | Advocacy – strengthening the voice of CFMGs and influencing national policy processes | Encourage CFMGs within the same locality to meet and share experiences. Feed lessons from implementation (both from what works and what doesn’t work) to national level decision makers so that appropriate changes can be made in policy instruments or institutional set-ups. When there is enough CFs consider setting up higher level umbrella representation group for CFMGs as has happened in countries like Nepal |
Tip Box
- Let CFMGs define what is important to monitor. Need to monitor what is important for communities (e.g. security of tenure, user rights, income from the forest).
- From top down monitoring and regulation to joint review and learning. There should be a shift towards joint monitoring and learning with monitoring both ways e.g. quality and frequency of support from the FD and Local Authority should also be monitored by communities
- Institutionalising community forestry through innovative ways to share benefits. Identify innovative ways where money generated from community forestry can be used to help support services to CFMGs locally. For example can a benefit share from some CFMGs be paid in ‘fuel’ to the District Forest Officer so that they can come and provide support services?
Key Outputs
- Regular planning, monitoring and review meetings held by the CFMG.
- Constructive reviews/assessments conducted by the Forestry Department in the community and the Community Forest
- Multi-stakeholder review and planning forums set up where support actions are identified and added into operational plans by the Forestry Department and other government partners.
- Lessons learned fed into higher level policy advocacy/policy processes with higher level umbrella CMFG representative group established when enough CFMGs are established.
Relevant Annexes:
Annex 29 For internal community planning, monitoring and evaluation.
Annex 30. Guidance for assessment/review of community applications by the Forestry Department.