Transformative Learning

This approach is guided by what is called transformative learning. In this approach, learners together build a more integrated or inclusive perspective of the world. Through the learning process, they jointly transform some part of their world view, for example, their understanding of social relations in their own community forest. Manifestations of transformative learning in resource management include, for example, new values or patterns of decision-making that farmers generate and apply outside the immediate arena of the learning intervention. This approach to learning has linkages to the people-centered, emancipatory research approaches, such as participatory action research. This approach to research, ideally, integrates knowledge sharing, systematic inquiry and human interpretations of the world. Moreover, it intentionally and consciously activates the 'praxis' (i.e., practice informed by theory) as a means of (self)-empowerment of marginalized people and improvements in human systems.

Case 1: Collective Watershed Management in Nicaragua

Since 1997, in the central hillsides of Nicaragua, the International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) has been working with a number of organizations (universities, NGOs and government) on the sustainable management of the natural resource base in the Calico river watershed. The "Hillsides" project employs a collaborative participatory research methodology including natural resource mapping, an analysis and monitoring method developed by the team in Nicaragua. The research addresses questions such as: What is happening and according to whom with the natural resource base at the micro-watershed level? What are the main problems, (research) gaps and opportunities related to the use and management of land, water, flora and fauna?

The multi-tool method is based on the hypothesis that the micro-watershed level is a conceptually and practically useful scale at which to work. This was considered to be the case because it represents a space where resource flows and dynamics (e.g., soil erosion, pests, water pollution) interact continuously and visibly with socio-economic relationships, such as land, tree and water tenure and access relationships, with labor-exchange ties and with local rules and arrangements that have been established over decades.

The research team worked with carefully selected small groups of local key informants in each of the 15 micro-watersheds. These informants included farmers, local tÉcnicos from the various NGOs, promotores (from the NGOs and grassroots associations) and assistant mayors better known as alcalditos. As much as possible, the research included diverse local people – i.e., women and men, the politically influential and the marginalized, and both landowners and the landless. Despite these efforts, male informants were ultimately in the majority, as it proved difficult to find women who were able or willing to spend a whole day with the project. As a result, researchers also made efforts to capture a gendered perspective through interviews on other occasions, and the involvement of women from the local farmer research groups (known in Spanish as CIALs).

Case 2: Towards Grassland Co-management in Mongolia

In Mongolia, grasslands and steppes are currently home to over 25 million head of livestock and 192,000 herding families. Nomadic livestock producers are the backbone of the economy. Livestock production accounted for over a third of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2000 and employed almost half of the country's labor force. More than these numbers can indicate, herding is a way of life rooted in the country's long history. However, nomadic herders in most regions are facing very serious grassland degradation problems that have been aggravated by three consecutive extremely severe winters (2001-2003). Addressing these problems not only requires dealing with the biophysical and social dynamics of natural resource management, but also unlearning "Soviet-style rule" and responding to "the economic and political opening up" that the government has been promoting since 1992.

A multi-disciplinary project team, housed in the Ministry of Nature and the Environment, is addressing this challenge through a combination of participatory and multidisciplinary field research in three of the major ecosystems. Methods include participatory rural appraisal, social and gender analysis, and participatory monitoring and evaluation. The team is also directly involved in national policy-making including the drafting of new laws. Two innovative and crucial activities have been the formation of community herder groups supportive of traditional systems and the establishment of pasture co-management teams involving herder or community groups, local government and civil society members. The team's continuous, diversified and multi-level capacity building efforts supportive of a participatory action agenda, are resulting in new thinking and doing, and providing space for active and meaningful roles for herders and government officials alike.

Field research and insights gained from conversations amongst government officials and herders make it clear that pasture degradation is very serious and widespread: local carrying capacities – they differ significantly across mountain ranges and valleys - are exceeded. Most herder groups graze too many animals/animal units per hectare. This problem needs to be seen in context: in Mongolia the pastures are still used in common, there are no fences, and most herders move four times/year. They are also dependant on the government given that the State owns the land. There is only one way out of this problem: collective reflection and action with the involvement of all stakeholders.

The project team is trying out a series of experiments in collective action. Among these are:

 The formation of genuine bag or sub-district level herder (interest) "community groups," based on kinships or neighborhood relations as the basic units of social organization. Currently, more than 15 community or herder groups exist in the project study area, with about 13 to 32 herding families in each group, and new groups are also being formed. Herders living in the same area (watershed, mountain) join one community. Each is considered relatively homogeneous, economically (they live and herd together in one camp), socially (they are neighboring households), or ecologically (they herd in the same watershed or mountain valley).

 The formation of sum or district level co-management teams, involving the sum governor, bag governors and other community leaders. These teams discuss and define roles and responsibilities of both the herders and the various government bodies, as stakeholders or co-management parties. Once consensus is reached, so-called Co-management Agreements are written up and signed by all parties. These Agreements include guidelines for herding movements, monitoring mechanisms, and ways to settle disputes or conflicts.

 Women are forming groups to find alternatives responding to some of their interests, particularly, to increase incomes.

The team, together with herders, are also carrying out other experiments. Small community funds are made available to support these experiments. These include:

 Animal breeding to improve resilience, and productivity.

 Joint hay making, pasture improvement, and pasture rotation practices.

 Introducing new economic opportunities such as value-adding to raw materials (e.g., felt and wool), and vegetable growing (e.g., potatoes).

All these experiments provide the opportunity to defining locally appropriate, new common rules and regulations. Encouragingly, more and more herders are showing interest to join these groups or to form new groups. However, legal issues remain an issue. The team is now considering to further strengthening this work, expanding the number of herder co-management groups and ensuring good participatory monitoring of the efforts. This will require training local facilitators/researchers who could respond to the growing interest of herders to connect with the process. Considering equity, the team aims to pay more attention and dedicate resources to women and women's groups, and to their involvement in the project and process of change at large.

Case 3: IDRC's CBNRM Program Initiative

The International Development Research Center's CBNRM program initiative (http://www.idrc.ca/cbnrm) has been operational since 1997. The program supports a variety of projects and research organizations (including NGOs, universities, and government agencies) in Asia. Given that Asia is a very large and heterogeneous region, the program focuses its resources on the poorest countries, and on some of the poorer regions of the larger countries (i.e., the Philippines, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Southwest China). Considerable efforts go into strengthening institutional capabilities and academic skills in the social sciences given the dearth of expertise in this field. Research efforts examine how biophysical and social forces interact, how productivity enhancements can be achieved without resource degradation, and how local management and organizational capacities to manage resources sustainably and equitably can be strengthened. CBNRM projects consider such issues, research questions and actions as:

 The nature and dynamics of indigenous or local environmental knowledge generation, experimentation processes and strategies for livelihood security: How to analyze and assess such processes? How to account for gender and social differentiation? How to build on local people's experimentation and adaptation efforts? How to gain (more) recognition for these efforts? How to provide incentives for local innovation?

 Social heterogeneity, stakeholder analysis and conflicts: How to analyze the realities of social heterogeneity which often exist at local levels? How effective are stakeholder-based approaches? How to better understand and deal with conflicts? How to foster participatory processes for a better understanding of diverging viewpoints and interests? How to strengthen collective action (e.g., co-management)?

 Governance, policy-making and the roles of government: How to analyze, inform, support and experiment with new policy making processes? How to more meaningfully and effectively link citizens to policymakers? How to contribute to a dialogue about the legitimate and supportive roles for governments in resource governance and management? What policies lead to efficient, equitable, and sustainable natural resources systems? What policies are supportive of the livelihoods of the rural poor?

 Micro-macro interactions and interdependencies: How to properly analyze, reshape and monitor the interactions between the micro and macro levels?

 Culture, perceptions, meanings and institutions: How do values, norms, rules and regulations impact on resource access, use and management? How do struggles over meaning take place?