 ID: 29312
Added: 2003-05-09 8:15
Modified: 2004-10-21 13:07
Refreshed: 2010-03-14 09:12
|
|
| International Model Forest Network Secretariat (IMFNS): Framework |
Document(s) 32 of 34
| VISION: An expanded global model forest network is gathering support for, creating awareness of, and fostering actions that are consistent with sustainable forest management. In developing, transitioning, and developed countries, local communities, private sector companies, and government officials are partnering together, experimenting with putting the model forest concept into practice, and learning to trust one another. They are redefining their relationships towards each other and towards the natural environment and are influencing national policy debates and policy formulation so that sustainable forests are ensured for future generations. They are expanding their understanding of, and sharing knowledge about, the resource base and recognize the interdependence of forest resource values and forest management practices. They are partnering together to negotiate their different perspectives and come up with local solutions that balance conservation needs and desired socio-economic benefits. Formal and informal decision-making processes involve and benefit all forest users. | | MISSION: In support of this vision and on behalf of its donors, the initiative promotes the model forest concept in order to encourage greater participation in setting up and sustaining new model forests and managing existing ones. Its activities at the local and national levels fall into three distinct but interrelated categories: advocacy, coordination, and support. The initiative provides opportunities for participants to cooperate and gain greater trust in one another by coordinating and fostering the exchange of information and experience within the network; serving as the channel for the introduction of new ideas and technologies; encouraging experimentation and the use of results of scientific research in improving the performance and output of model forests; and, planning and organizing workshops, seminars, and discussions. It helps develop structures for model forest partnerships by providing technical advice and guidance, financial support, and linkages to the Canadian network and other model forest sites. The Secretariat supports the development of the network and champions the concept to international bodies on behalf of its partners. | BOUNDARY PARTNER 1:
Local Communities (NGOs, indigenous groups, churches, community leaders, model forest administration unit)
| OUTCOME CHALLENGE 1: The initiative intends to see local communities who recognize the importance of, and are engaged in, planning resource management activities in partnership with other resource users in their region. They have gained the trust of the other members of the partnership and the recognition of government officials so that they can contribute constructively to debates and decision-making processes. They are able to clearly plan and articulate a vision of their forest management activities and goals that is relative to their context and needs. They call upon external technical support and expertise as appropriate. They act as champions for model forest concepts in their communities and motivate others in the partnership to continue their collaborative work. | BOUNDARY PARTNER 2:
Government Officials and Policy Makers (National Forestry Agency/Department, Regional Administration)
| OUTCOME CHALLENGE 2: The initiative intends to see government officials and policy makers who are committed to the model forest concept and the principles of its partnership. They support the development of local capacity and consult non-traditional groups when planning and making decisions about forest resource management. They are actively involved in the model forest partnership and draw lessons from the experience that are relevant and can be used to inform national policy debates and policy formulation. They champion the model forest concept and seek funding from national and international sources to ensure the continuation and success of the model forest in their country/region. | BOUNDARY PARTNER 3:
Private Sector (Tourism, Fisheries, Non-Timber Forest Products, Logging and Wood Processing Companies) | OUTCOME CHALLENGE 3: The initiative intends to see private sector actors who are active participants in the model forest partnership and no longer view their goals and forest practices in isolation from other resource users. They recognize that the forest has legitimate multiple resource users and negotiate costs and trade-offs with other, sometimes non-traditional, partners. They encourage economic development while employing sustainable forest practices. | BOUNDARY PARTNER 4:
Academic and Research Institutions
| OUTCOME CHALLENGE 4: The initiative intends to see academic and research institutions that are active members of model forest partnerships and openly share data and tools to assist in decision-making, assessing trade-offs, and understanding environmental impacts at the local level. They see the relevance of the concept at a practical level and are committed to the participatory process for finding local solutions to sustainable forest management. | BOUNDARY PARTNER 5:
International Institutions
| OUTCOME CHALLENGE 5: The initiativeintends to see international institutions that are aware of, and acknowledge, the utility of the model forest concept as a development tool. They integrate it in their planning and programming and advocate the concept to other international donors and international forest bodies. They participate in network activities and other international fora and support efforts to bring in partners at the local and international level. |
SAMPLE PROGRESS MARKERS FOR LOCAL COMMUNITIES | OUTCOME CHALLENGE: Who recognize the importance of, and are engaged in, planning resource management activities in partnership with other resource users in their region. They have gained the trust of the other members of the partnership and the recognition of government officials so that they can contribute constructively to debates and decision-making processes. They are able to clearly plan and articulate a vision of their forest management activities and goals that is relative to their context and needs. They call upon external technical support and expertise as appropriate. They act as champions for model forest concepts in their communities and motivate others in the partnership to continue their collaborative work. | | EXPECT TO SEE LOCAL COMMUNITIES: | | 1 | Participating in regular MF partnership meetings | | 2 | Establishing a structure for cooperation in the partnership that ensures all local interests are represented (mechanics of setting up the structure) | | 3 | Acquire new skills for involvement in the MF | | 4 | Contributing human and financial resources necessary to get the MF operational (min.) | | LIKE TO SEE LOCAL COMMUNITIES: | | 5 | Articulating a vision for the MF that is locally relevant | | 6 | Promoting the MF concept, their experiences, and results | | 7 | Expanding the partnership to include all the main actors | | 8 | Calling upon external experts when necessary to meet information or technical needs | | 9 | Requested new opportunities for training and extension | | 10 | Producing and dissemination concrete examples of benefits arising from MF activities | | 11 | Identifying opportunities for collaboration with other institutions and actors | | 12 | Identifying opportunities for and successfully obtaining funding from a range of sources | | Love to See Local Communities: | | 13 | Playing a lead role in resource management with view to long and medium term benefits | | 14 | Sharing lessons learned and experiences with other communities nationally and internationally to encourage other MFs | | 15 | Influencing national policy debates and formulation on resource use and management |
CONTRIBUTIONS MAP
PART I: STRATEGY MAP | CAUSAL | PERSUASIVE | SUPPORTIVE | I-1
- financial contribution to set up MF - researched & gathered data (e.g. dev't guidelines, PR documents, results of MF) - | I-2
- info. sessions on concept - cross country tours (internationally with Canadians and vice versa) - on-site workshops to assist local members develop the partnership & engage various groups in the process (to alleviate misconceptions) | I-3
- experienced MF practioners from Cdn. network to provide guidance, advice etc. - on-going support to local champions (e.g. technical advice, financial support, group building, skills development...) | E-1
- negotiate national level agreements (e.g. Mexico and Russia) - had forest and MF concept included in the Canada-Japan Agreement on Cooperation & Environment | E-2
- conferences - web-site | E-3
- supported development of network - encouraging countries to work together beyond their national involvement with MF - identifying regional players to take the lead in certain regions (e.g. Japan Forestry Agency in Southeast Asia) - trying to help develop national/regional networks in Chile and Russia) |
CONTRIBUTIONS MAP
PART II: 7 ROLES ROLE 1. PROSPECTING FOR NEW IDEAS, OPPORTUNITIES, & RESOURCES EXAMPLES
- exploring new partnership opportunities in developing countries (looking for commitment and leadership e.g. Cuba and Equador) - starting to work with PBDO - INGOs (e.g. Cdn. Forest Association, WWF, CUSO, IUCN) - country level consultation process (e.g. new ideas on application of MF, networking, identify potential resources)
SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: |
ROLE 2. SEEKING FEEDBACK FROM KEY INFORMANTS EXAMPLES
- integrated in consultation process - Armstrong consultancy - informal meetings at workshops - 3 international fora - site visits and telephone contact (staff understands local language therefore able to understand more)
SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: |
ROLE 3. OBTAINING SUPPORT OF YOUR NEXT HIGHEST POWER EXAMPLES
- on going relationships - information to Steering Committee - bilateral discussions - Steering Committee participation in workshops (e.g. Ralph in Argentina, David in Africa, Ketch. in China)
Doing right thing with wrong people? Not enough emphasis on Canadian side?
SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: |
ROLE 4. RE-DESIGNING CURRENT PRODUCTS/SERVICES EXAMPLES
- international meetings and workshops to adapt original MF template - change to network of country initiatives therefore product mix and services became more focussed - clear idea of client needs and wants - more efficient distribution and strategic documentation (e.g. workshop findings, Japanese, IMFNS newsletter) - provide materials in language of users (responded quickly - since Halifax) - used web to give information and answers to FAQ so that people contact us when they are further along in the process
Have fallen short in terms of communications?
SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: |
ROLE 5. CHECKING UP ON THOSE ALREADY SERVED TO ADD VALUE EXAMPLES
- financial & technical audits - on-going monitoring and improvements to project (e.g. 60$ plastic for green house to helped Gasinsky develop a 5$ million CIDA project) - bringing Canadian Forestry Association and CUSO into the process in Chiloe (Kafui) - peer evaluation of network in Mexico to enhance synergies (Kafui)
SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: |
ROLE 6. PREPARING & SHARING YOUR BEST WISDOM WITH THE WORLD EXAMPLES
- using various methods (guidelines, brochures, display/PR - EU/Mexico/Indonesia (Kafui) [very positive] - Canadian Science Writers Association Meeting in Ottawa, brought in representative of McGregor MF and only 4 people attended [negative experience]
Challenge to figure out where is the most efficient and effective entry point
SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: |
ROLE 7. EXPERIMENTING TO REMAIN INNOVATIVE EXAMPLES
- come at MF from different backgrounds - willingness to listen rather than be prescriptive with partners - fewer and fewer opportunities due to time constraints (e.g. in terms of looking for synergies with IDRC PIs...) - MF concept itself is an experiment therefore creativity and flexibility are inherent in it (the process is always evolving)
SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: |
Document(s) 32 of 34
|
|
