toolkit for the indicators of resilience

Toolkit for the

Indicators of Resilience in Socio-ecological Production Landscapes and Seascapes

RESEARCH PROGRAM ON

Water, Land and Ecosystems

For more information contact the Secretariat of IPSI, UNU-IAS

E-Mail: [email protected]

http://satoyama-initiative.org/

Toolkit for the

Indicators of Resilience in Socio-ecological Production Landscapes and Seascapes

Table of conTenTs

Foreword 5Chapter 1 Introduction 7 1.1Aboutthistoolkit 7

1.2Socio-ecologicalproductionlandscapesandseascapes

(SEPLS) 7

1.3ResilienceinSEPLS–Whatisit? 8

1.4Abouttheindicators 9

1.5Whocanbenefitfromusingtheindicators? 12

Chapter 2: The indicators 17 2.1Whattheindicatorsmeasure 17

2.2Howtousetheindicators 18

2.3Listofindicators 19

Chapter 3 Practical guidance for using the indicators 29 3.1Stage1:Preparation 31

3.2Stage2:Theassessmentworkshop 38

3.3Stage3:Follow-up 45

Chapter 4 Examples from the field 49 4.1Namibia–Anoverviewoftheprocess 49

4.2Fiji–Identificationofconcretecommunityactions 54

4.3Turkey–Developmentofalandscape/seascapestrategy 59

4.4Kenya–Resultsanalysisforresearchers 64

Citation

UNU-IAS,BioversityInternational,IGESandUNDP(2014)Toolkit

for the Indicators of Resilience in Socio-ecological Production

LandscapesandSeascapes(SEPLS).

Acknowledgement

ThistoolkitwasdevelopedaspartofaCollaborativeActivityby

the United Nations University Institute for the Advanced Study

of Sustainability (UNU-IAS), Bioversity International, Institute for

GlobalEnvironmentalStrategies (IGES), and theUnitedNations

Development Programme (UNDP) under the International

PartnershipfortheSatoyamaInitiative(IPSI).Thetoolkitisbased

on theexperiencesof field testingof thefirst setof the indica-

tors conducted by Bioversity International and UNDP. National

Coordinators from the UNDP-implemented Global Environment

FacilitySmallGrantsProgramme(GEF-SGP)inthetwentyUNDP-

COMDEKScountriesprovidedvaluableinputstothedevelopment

ofthefirstsetoftheindicators,andhavebeenplayingapivotal

roleinthetestingoftheindicators,capturingtheperspectivesof

communitiesinthefield.

The toolkit isalsobasedon theuseful inputs fromanumberof

individualswhoparticipated in the followingeventson the indi-

catorsandthetoolkit:UNU-IASSeminarontheindicators(April

2013,Yokohama,Japan),ExpertWorkshoponadrafttoolkitforthe

indicators (July2013,Yokohama,Japan)organizedbyUNU-IAS

and IGES, Seminars on Indicators Research (January 2014,

Rome, Italy) organized by Bioversity International. Participants

in these events include Maurizio Farhan Ferrari (Forest Peoples

Programme), Fumiko Fukuoka (UNDP), Yoko Watanabe (GEF

Secretariat),HongyanGu(ShanghaiAcademyofSocialSciences),

RikiyaKonishi(MinistryoftheEnvironment,Japan),FumikoNakao

(MinistryoftheEnvironment,Japan),DorothyWanjaNyingi(Kenya

WetlandBiodiversityResearchteam,KENWEB),NaohisaOkuda

(Ministry of the Environment, Japan), Krishna Chandra Paudel

(GovernmentofNepal),SuneethaMSubramanian(UNU-IAS),and

AtsuhiroYoshinaka(SCBD).

List of contributors

NadiaBergamini(BioversityInternational)

WilliamDunbar(UNU-IAS)

PabloEyzaguirre(BioversityInternational)

KaoruIchikawa(UNU-IAS)

IkukoMatsumoto(IGES)

DunjaMijatovic(BioversityInternational)

YasuyukiMorimoto(BioversityInternational)

NickRemple(UNDP)

DianaSalvemini(UNDP)

WataruSuzuki(UNU-IAS)

RonnieVernooy(BioversityInternational)

Designandlayout:[email protected]

Cover:AgrobiodiversityConservationAreainBegnas,Nepal.

©BioversityInternational/DunjaMijatovic

ISBN978-92-9255-006-6

Foreword As I have watched the development of the Indicators of Resilience in Socio-ecological Production Landscapes and Seascapes (SEPLS), I have come to believe that these have the potential to be one of the most effective tools for not only measuring, but also raising awareness of the concept of resilience in the field of sustainable development.

Perhaps the most outstanding feature of the set of indicators first developed by Bioversity International and UNU-IAS in 2012 is that they aim not to provide hard, quantifiable numbers to measure resilience – which would be a highly difficult and problematic process – but rather focus on a community’s own perceptions. By encouraging community members themselves to reflect on landscape and seascape resilience and how it can be improved, the indicators potentially give them a greater sense of ownership over management processes, hopefully leading to more lasting sustainability.

Up to now, this has been a good idea in principle, but there has been little practical guidance for how to translate it into actual practice. With the publication of this toolkit, based on actual experience from field-testing the indicators around the world, I am confident that this issue has been addressed. The indicators themselves have been updated to reflect lessons learned, and the guidance provided in the toolkit should allow users everywhere to make effective use of them.

As the concept of resilience steadily moves into the mainstream in the ongoing worldwide discourse on biodiversity and sustainability, I am proud to see that these indicators of resilience are also ready for mainstreaming as an impor-tant tool. I am sure that this toolkit will reward any community in which it is used with a greater appreciation of the resilience of their landscapes and seascapes, and with greater sustainability looking to the future.

ProfessorAlfredOteng-Yeboah

GhanaNationalBiodiversityCommittee

Floating islands on lake Titicaca, Puno, Peru©BioversityInternational/AlfredoCamacho

6 | Toolkit for the Indicators of Resilience in Socio-ecological Production Landscapes and Seascapes (SEPLS) Chapter 1: Introduction | 7

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1 about this toolkit

This toolkit provides practical guidance for makinguseofthe“IndicatorsofResilienceinSocio-ecologicalProduction Landscapes and Seascapes (SEPLS)” inthefield.The indicatorsarea tool for engaging localcommunities in adaptive management of the land-scapesandseascapesinwhichtheylive.Byusingthetested methods presented in this toolkit, communi-ties can increase their capacity to respond to social,economic,andenvironmentalpressuresandshocks,toimprovetheirenvironmentalandeconomicconditions,thus increasingthesocialandecologicalresilienceoftheirlandscapesandseascapes,andultimatelymakeprogress towards realizing a society in harmony withnature.

The approach presented here is centred on holdingparticipatory“assessmentworkshops”.These involvediscussion and a scoring process for the set oftwenty indicators designed to capture communities’perceptionsof factorsaffecting the resilienceof theirlandscapesandseascapes.Theparticipants in these

workshopsaremembersof the localcommunityandstakeholdersinthelocalarea.Theirparticipationallowsthem to evaluate current conditions across the land-scape and identify and reach agreement on priorityactions, contributing to enhanced communicationamongstakeholdersandempowered localcommuni-ties. Workshops may be planned and implementedbypeople fromwithinoroutside thecommunity.Theguidanceprovided in this toolkit isprimarily intendedfororganizersandfacilitatorsofresilienceassessmentworkshops.

The toolkit is divided into four chapters. Chapter 1explains the conceptual background, the purpose,usesandbenefitsof the indicators.Chapter2 intro-duces the twenty indicators themselves. Chapter 3providespracticalguidanceonhow touse the indi-cators inanassessmentworkshopheldbythe localcommunity. This involves steps to be taken before,duringandaftertheworkshopitself,includingfollow-up discussions and repeated workshops, encour-agingacontinuing, long-term,adaptiveapproach tomanagement. Chapter 4 presents examples of pastuseoftheindicatorstohighlightcertainaspectsoftheassessmentprocess.

Tounderstandtherationaleandpurposeoftheindica-tors, the toolkit reviews two basic concepts: “socio-ecological production landscapes and sea-scapes(SEPLS)”and“resilience”.

1.2 socio-ecological production landscapes and seascapes (sePls)

Humanshave influencedmostof theEarth’secosys-temsthroughproductionactivitiessuchasagriculture,forestry, fisheries, herding and livestock production.Whilehumanimpactsareoftenthoughtofasharmfultotheenvironment,manysuchhuman-natureinteractionsareinfactfavourabletoorsynergisticwithbiodiversity

1

Semau island, Indonesia

©COMDEKSIndonesia/CatharinaDwihastarini


conservation. Around the world, local communities’efforts over many years to adapt to the surroundingenvironment and enjoy its bounty for the long termhavecreateduniqueandsustainable landscapesandseascapes that have provided humans with goodssuchasfoodandfuel,andservicessuchaswaterpuri-ficationandrichsoil,whilehostingadiversityofanimalandplantspecies.

These landscapes and seascapes vary widely dueto their unique local climatic, geographic, cultural,and socio-economic conditions. However, they arecommonly characterized as dynamic bio-culturalmosaicsofhabitatsandlandandseauseswheretheinteractionbetween people and the landscape main-tainsorenhancesbiodiversitywhileprovidinghumanswith the goods and services needed for their well-being.Avarietyofdifferentnamesexistfortheseareasacross countries and languages, including dehesa inSpain,ahupua’ainHawaii,andsatoyama inJapan,sotheterm“socio-ecologicalproductionlandscapesandseascapes”(SEPLS)hasbeencoinedtorefertothemcollectively.

SEPLShaveprotectedbiodiversityandprovidedlocalcommunities with ecosystem services around theworld for many years. However, with rapidly-growinghuman demands for food and other goods in recentyears,aswellaschangesinsocio-economicsystemsdue to industrialization, urbanization and globaliza-tion,diverseproductionareashavebeentransformedtowards more uniform systems requiring intensiveuse of external inputs such as chemical fertilizers,pesticides, and herbicides. Over time, this has hadsignificant impacts on the associated biodiversityandecosystemsthatunderpinagriculturalproductionactivities.Theseimpactscanbemeasuredintermsoflossofresilienceandsustainabilityinproductionareastoanextent that threatenshumanwell-being,due tothedegradationofnaturalresourcesandreductionsinecosystemservices.

Dynamic mosaic of habitats and land uses in Gamri Watershed, Bhutan

1.3 Resilience in sePls – What is it?

Localcommunitiesandtheecosystemstheyliveinmayexperience pressures and disturbances of differenttypes and degrees, from extreme weather events tomarket shocks and profound demographic and insti-tutionalchanges.Forests, farmlands, lakesandotherhabitats are affected by fires, storms and droughts,andnearlyalllandscapesandseascapesareaffectedtosomedegreebyhuman-inducedpressuressuchaspollution, soil erosion, deforestation and introductionofinvasivespeciesthatcanleadtoecosystemdegra-dation.Eventssuchaspoliticalunrestandeconomiccrisesimpacthumansocieties,causingchangestotheway ecosystem goods and services are used. Thesedisturbances can directly and indirectly affect thelivelihoodsof localcommunities, forexamplethroughhigherinputprices,reducedproductionandlowercropprices.Inadditiontotheimpactsfromtheseshocksandshort-termdisturbances,ecosystemsareinfluencedbyrelativelygradualbutcontinuouschangesintheclimateandsocio-culturalpracticesandinstitutions.

While some changes may cause critical damage toecosystems and people’s livelihoods, SEPLS vary inthe degree to which their communities can absorb,resist and/or recover from these impacts. The abilityof a SEPLS to absorb or recover – in terms of bothecosystem processes and socio-economic activity– from various pressures and disturbances withoutlastingdamageiswhatisreferredtoasthe“resilience”of the SEPLS. More generally, resilience refers to the“capacityofasystemtodealwithchangeandcontinueto develop; withstanding shocks and disturbancesand using such events to catalyze renewal and inno-vation”1.Maintainingresilience inSEPLS iscrucial forsecuringecosystemservicesandsustainableproduc-tion systems for the long term, both benefiting localcommunities and contributing to global sustainabledevelopmentobjectives.

Strengthening of SEPLS resilience by local communities

The long-term persistence of community-managedSEPLSthatemployappropriatemanagementanduseofnatural resourcesandbiodiversitydefines themasresilient systems. Nevertheless, many communitiesface growing challenges in maintaining these land-scapes and the social and ecological processes thatsustainthem,especiallyinthefaceofrapidandofteninterrelatedchangesinsocio-economicsystems,accel-erated by increasing climate change and ecosystemdegradation.Communities,astheprimarymanagersoftheprocessesandresourcesofSEPLS,mustreinforceexisting management practices and institutions, andinnovateinordertoadapttothesechangesandrestoreor strengthen the social and ecological resilience oftheirlandscapesandseascapes.

ResilienceinSEPLSisaproductofecological,social,culturalandeconomicsystems,dynamically linkedtoeachotherinwaysthatcreatesynergies.Improvementsin ecosystem services, for example, may require theadoptionofnewmethodsofnatural-resourcemanage-ment,ornewtypesofdiversity incrops,animalsandassociated species. It may also require appropriatelocal governance mechanisms, including agreed-onrules on resource access, use and exchange, whichmaybeembeddedinformaland/ornon-formalinstitu-tions.Increasedsustainabilityofagro-ecosystemsmayrequire that access and equity issues be addressed,suchassupportfortheroleofwomenincropselection,productionandmarketing.

Themanagementofinterlockingsocialandecologicalsystemsrequiresthecapacitytoacceptandcopewithcomplexityandcontinuing adaptation.Thiscapacityis associated with rural communities that depend onthewiderangeoffunctions,productsandservicesthattheir landscapes provide. The resilience indicators inthistoolkitaredesignedtocontributetoacommunity’ssense of ownership over the planning, implementa-tion,monitoringandevaluationoftheirproductionandresource-managementpractices.Lessonsandknowl-edgegeneratedby theseactivitiescan thenbeusedtocommunicate localvisionsandstrategies for resil-ient landscapes and productive ecosystems as inputinto higher-level policies and programmes that affectcommunity livelihoodsaswellasfurtherconservationandresource-managementplanning.

1.4 about the indicators

Local communities require a more complete under-standing of the status and changes in conditions intheirlandscapesandseascapesinordertostrengthenresilience. However, resilience can be difficult tomeasure precisely because it is complex and multi-faceted. Instead of attempting to define an overall

1 StockholmResilienceCenter(2014)WhatisResilience?.http://www.stockholmresilience.org

©C

OM

DE

KS

Bhu

tan/

Dor

jiS

inga

y


measureofresilienceforSEPLS,thistoolkitintroducesanapproachformonitoringSEPLSusingasetofindi-catorsdesignedtocapturetheiressentialattributes.

Pastoral landscape in Jequitinhonha Valley, Brazil

TheIndicatorsofResilienceinSEPLSconsistofasetof20indicatorsdesignedtocapturedifferentaspectsofkeysystems–ecological,agricultural,culturalandsocio-economic. They include both qualitative andquantifiable indicators, but measurement is basedon the observations, tallies, perceptions and experi-encesof the localcommunities themselves.Theyareto be used flexibly and can be customized to reflectthe circumstances of each particular landscape orseascapeanditsassociatedcommunities.

ThespatialscaleofSEPLS,inthecontextofusingtheindicators,dependsonhowlocalcommunitymembersthemselves identify the area they depend on for theirsurvivalandlivelihood.Itgenerallyincludesthemosaicofland-usesfromwhichcommunitiesderivethegoodsandservicesonwhichtheydependdirectlyorindirectlyandwhere theyhaveadirect impacton the resourcebaseand regular interactionswith thenaturalbiodiversity.ASEPLSmaybedelineatedbyadministrativeboundaries(e.g., a national park or state borders) or geographicboundaries(e.g.,awatershed),orbyotherfactors.

Theindicatorsaimtoprovidecommunitieswithaframe-work for discussion and analysis of socio-ecologicalprocessesessential forSEPLSresilience.Thisrelatestocriticallivelihoodanddevelopmentobjectivessuchasfoodsecurity,agriculturalsustainability,institutional

Seascape in the Bouma National Heritage Park on Taveuni Island, Fiji

Inland water landscape at Begnas Lake, Nepal

©C

OM

DE

KS

Bra

zil/I

sab

elF

igue

reid

o

©B

iove

rsity

Inte

rnat

iona

l/Dun

jaM

ijato

vic

©B

iove

rsity

Inte

rnat

iona

l/Nad

iaB

erga

min

i

andhumandevelopment,provisionofecosystemserv-icesandconservationofbiodiversity,strengtheningofcommunity- and landscape-level organizations, andlandscape governance for equity and sustainability.Discussionoftheindicatorswithincommunitiesstimu-lates knowledge-sharing and analysis, which are keyfactorsincreatingsocialcapitalforlandscapegovern-ance,planningandmanagement,andfosterscommu-nityownershipof thisprocess.Periodicuseof theseindicators enables evaluation of progress towardsdevelopmentandsustainablemanagementobjectivesandidentificationofpriorityactionsforlocalinnovationandadaptivemanagement.

The indicators can contribute to local communities and other stakeholders in the following areas:

• Understanding sePls resilience

The indicators provide an analytical framework forunderstanding resilience and its status and changesin SEPLS. They are defined and measured in termsthatareeasyforlocalcommunitiestounderstandanduse,andcanbeadaptedforsuccessiveanalyses.By

assessing current conditions and trends in differentaspectsofSEPLS,userscanunderstandresilienceasamultidimensionalobjective.

• supporting development and implementation of resilience-strengthening strategies

The indicators can help to identify and track socialprocesses, institutions, and practices for land-use,conservation,andinnovationthatarepartofaresilientsystem’scapacitytoadaptandchange.Throughreviewand discussion of assessment results, communitiescan learn what areas and factors to focus on, whichmay include components of agricultural biodiversity,foodsecurity,ecosystemservices, livelihood,govern-anceandothers.

• enhancing communication among stakeholders

Because they provide a framework with a commonset of parameters, the indicators can enhance theexchange of experiences and information within andbeyond SEPLS and their communities, for example,

Landscape heterogeneity in the Cuchillas del Toa Biosphere Reserve, Cuba

©F

red

erik

van

Oud

enho

ven


betweenupstreamanddownstreamcommunitiesandamongcommunitiesindifferentgeographicregions.

• empowering communities in decision-making processes and adaptive management

Useoftheindicatorsfacilitatesacontinuousprocessofdiscussionandparticipationwithinlocalcommunities,leadingtoknowledgeofwhatworksandwhatdoesnot.ThiskindofadaptivemanagementmodelpromotesagreatersenseofownershipamongthepeoplelivinginSEPLS,encouraging them tobeactiveat thepolicy-makinglevel.Usingtheindicatorsasaframeworkfordiscussionalsohelpscreateconsensusonwhatneedstobedone tobuildor enhance resilienceacross thelandscapeandguidedecisionsandimplementation.

1.5 Who can benefit from using the indicators?

Whiletheindicatorsareprimarilydesignedtobeusedby local communities, they have the potential to bevaluabletoolsforotherssuchasNGOs,developmentagencies,andpolicy-makers.Theindicatorsmayalsobe helpful for researchers to understand SEPLS andhow communities see their landscape or seascape.The roleof facilitatormaybemore important in situ-ationswhere it isdifficult forcommunities touse theindicatorsontheirown.

The followingaresomepossiblebenefits fordifferentusers.

Local communities: • Increase common understanding of SEPLS (e.g.,

conditionsandthreatstothem)amongandbeyondcommunitymembers

• Identify priority issues and actions for sustainingSEPLSthatbenefitlivelihoodsandwell-being,andtoevaluatepasteffortsthatcommunityhasmade

• Contributetoenhancingtrustandsocialcapital incommunitiesandresolvingconflicts

• Inform policymakers, donors, and relevant stake-holdersonthesituationoftheirSEPLSandneces-saryareasforsupportinamoreefficientmanner

• Exchangeexperienceswithcommunitieswhohavetriedtheindicators

NGOs and development agencies implementing projects in SEPLS:• Enhance understanding of resilience from the

perspectiveoflocalcommunities• Promoteparticipatoryprocesses• Monitorandevaluateprojectinterventionsonresil-

ience and biodiversity conservation and identifyareasforsupport

• Communicate with policymakers and donors onthe situation of the SEPLS they are working withandnecessaryareasforsupportinamoreefficientmanner

Policymakers and project planners:• Better understand local conditions from the

perspectiveoflocalcommunities• Improvecommunicationwithlocalcommunities• Identifyareasthatneedtobeimprovedandreflect

theseinpolicymaking,planning,andotherdecision-makingprocesses

• Increasecoherenceacrossdifferentprojectsitesbyapplyingacommonanalyticalframeworkandtools

Researchers:• Enhance multi-dimensional understanding of local

conditionsfromtheperspectiveoflocalcommunities• Deepen the understanding of resilience by exam-

iningresultsfromdifferentsites• Identifyresearchgaps

IndIcatoR aPPRoachES at dIffEREnt LEvELS

Indicator approaches are used increasingly invarious sectors and contexts. At the global andnational scales they play important roles in moni-toringprogresstowardachievingspecificgoalsandtargets. For example, around 100 indicators havebeen listed1 to monitor the progress of implemen-tationofthe Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-20202 andtheAichi Biodiversity Targets3,adoptedduringtheCBDCOP10inJapanin2010toprovideaframeworkforactionbyallstakeholderstoprotectbiodiversityandenhanceitsbenefitsforpeople.The Millennium Development Goals Indicators4areasetof60indicatorsforthemeasurementofprogresstowardtheMillenniumDevelopmentGoals(MDGs)5,eightinternationaldevelopmenttargetstobemetby2015foraddressingextremepoverty.TheUNagreedattheRio+20Conferencein2012todevelopasetof Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)6 andiscurrentlyworkingtodefinethegoalsandrelevantindicatorstobeadoptedin2015.

National- and global-scale indicators need to bequantitative forcomparisonacrossspaceandtimeand to be able to aggregate data at larger spatialscales. They also must be scientifically valid andobjective, with assessment often conducted byexperts. Unlike these higher-level indicators, theIndicatorsofResilienceinSEPLSintroducedinthistoolkitareforuseatthelocallevel.Theyincludebothqualitativeandquantifiableindicators,butmeasure-mentisbasedontheobservations,perceptionsandexperience of the local communities themselves.These local observations can be complementedby scientific data and information from global andnationalobservationsanddatasetsaswellaspriorstudies.However,externaldatashouldbeabletobe

adoptedintothelocalknowledgebase.Theindica-torsinthistoolkitprovidelocalcommunitieswithaframeworktodiscussbothcurrentconditionsofresil-ienceandpotentialareasforimprovementaspartoftheprocessofadaptivemanagement.Thiscanleadtoquickandproactiveeffortsbylocalcommunitiestostrengthentheresilienceoftheirproductionland-scapesandseascapes.Italsoprovidesaconsistentprocess for monitoring resilience of the landscapeor seascape and the implementation of measuresto address components and factors that lead toreducedresilience.

TheIndicatorsofResilienceinSEPLSpartiallyoverlapandcomplementsomeofthehigher-levelindicators.Moreresilientlandscapesresultingfromtheuseoftheindicators and implementation of actions identifiedfromtheirusewillalsocontributetoglobalandnationaltargets, such as those of the CBD (e.g., the AichiBiodiversityTargetsandNationalBiodiversityStrategicAction Plans), and the FAO International Treaty onPlant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture.

1 UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/XI/3(www.cbd.int/doc/decisions/cop-11/cop-11-dec-03-en.doc)

2 www.cbd.int/sp/3 www.cbd.int/sp/targets/4 mdgs.un.org/unsd/mdg/Host.aspx?Content=Indicators/OfficialList.htm5 www.unmillenniumproject.org/goals/6 sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?menu=1300


BackgRound

The Indicators of Resilience in Socio-ecologicalProduction Landscapes and Seascapes (SEPLS)and this toolkit were developed as a collaborativeactivity under the International Partnership for theSatoyamaInitiative(IPSI).

The Satoyama Initiative is a comprehensive effortto spread awareness that protecting biodiversityentails the protection of both wild and human-influenced natural environments, such as farmlandand secondary forest, which have been managedsustainably over a long time. It is also an effort atthoughtfulactiontowardstheconservationanduseof such human-influenced natural environments.EstablishedthroughajointcollaborationbetweentheMinistryoftheEnvironmentofJapan(MOEJ)andtheUnitedNationsUniversityInstitutefortheAdvancedStudy of Sustainability (UNU-IAS), the SatoyamaInitiativewasrecognizedduringthe10thmeetingof

theConferenceofthePartiestotheConventiononBiologicalDiversity(CBDCOP10)in2010.

Fromitsinception,theSatoyamaInitiativehastakenaglobalperspectiveandsoughttoconsolidateexper-tisefromaroundtheworldregardingthesustainableuseofresourcesinsocio-ecologicalproductionland-scapesandseascapes(SEPLS).Tothispurpose,on19October2010atCBDCOP10, the InternationalPartnership for the Satoyama Initiative (IPSI) wasestablishedtopromotetheactivitiesidentifiedbytheSatoyamaInitiative.Atotalof51organizationsenteredintopartnershipasfoundingmembersofIPSI,andasof2014, theirnumberhadmore than tripled.Asaninternational platform open to organizations dealingwithSEPLS,IPSIhassoughttofostersynergiesintheimplementationof their respectiveactivities, aswellasotheractivitiesplannedundertheinitiative.

To date, over 20 IPSI Collaborative Activities havebeen initiatedunder IPSI, including this toolkitanditsindicators,carriedoutbyBioversityInternational,the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies(IGES),theUnitedNationsDevelopmentProgramme(UNDP)andUNU-IAS.FormoreinformationonIPSI,pleasevisitsatoyama-initiative.org

The Indicators of Resilience in Socio-ecologicalProduction Landscapes and Seascapes (SEPLS)werefirstdevelopedbyBioversityInternationalandUNU-IAS. The set of indicators has been testedin the field by Bioversity International in Bolivia,BurkinaFaso,Cuba,Ethiopia,Fiji,Kenya,Mongolia,Nepal and Uganda, and also in selected areas intwenty countries participating in the CommunityDevelopment and Knowledge Management for theSatoyamaInitiativeProgrammeoftheUnitedNationsDevelopment Programme (UNDP-COMDEKS; seebelow) to form part of a baseline-assessment andcommunity-consultation process to help measureandunderstand the resilienceof target landscapesand seascapes. The field testing involved assess-mentsconductedthroughaparticipatoryandinclu-sivemulti-stakeholderprocess incommunities thatinhabit,useandprotectlandscapesandseascapes.These assessments have been subsequentlycompiledandanalyzedtosupportthedevelopmentofstrategiesbyidentifyingappropriatecommunity-based activities in each SEPLS to strengthen theirresilience.TheindicatorsinChapter2aretherevisedsetofindicatorsbasedontheseexperiences.

The Community Development and KnowledgeManagementfortheSatoyamaInitiative(COMDEKS)ProgrammeisanIPSIcollaborativeactivitybyUNDP,MOEJ,CBDSecretariatandUNU-IASwiththegoal

of promoting sustainable use and management ofnatural resources in SEPLS. Funded through theJapanBiodiversityFundestablishedwithintheCBDSecretariat, the COMDEKS Programme is imple-mented by UNDP, and delivered through the GEFSmallGrantsProgramme,allowingforafast,flexible,and proven mechanism to reach communities andcivilsocietyatthelocallevel.AspartofCOMDEKS,small grants are provided to local communityorganizationswiththeoveralllong-termobjectiveofenhancingresilienceinSEPLSbydevelopingsoundbiodiversitymanagementandsustainablelivelihoodactivitieswithlocalcommunitiestomaintain,rebuild,andrevitalizelandscapesandseascapes.COMDEKSgrant-making is expected to generate key lessonsoncommunity-basedbestpracticestomaintainandrebuildSEPLStowardtherealizationof“societiesinharmonywithnature”,asdefinedinthevisionoftheSatoyamaInitiative.Launchedin2011,theprojectisbeing implemented in twenty countries around theworld–Bhutan,Brazil,Cambodia,Cameroon,CostaRica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Ghana,India, Indonesia, Kyrgyzstan, Malawi, Mongolia,Namibia,Nepal,Niger,SlovakiaandTurkey.FormoreinformationabouttheCOMDEKSProgramme,visit:www.comdeksproject.com.

©L

IBIR

D/S

ajal

Sth

apit


2Chapter 2: The indicators

2.1 What the indicators measure

The indicatorsmeasureelementsofSEPLSresiliencethatare,almostbydefinition,stronglyinterrelated.Thepractices and institutions that they describe can begroupedinfiveareas:

• Landscape/seascape diversity and ecosystemprotection

• Biodiversity(includingagriculturalbiodiversity)• Knowledgeandinnovation• Governanceandsocialequity• Livelihoodsandwell-being

Landscape/seascape diversity and ecosystem protection

Heterogeneous landscapes and seascapes thatresemblenaturalpatternsprovidegreaterbiodiversitybenefits than intensively-managed monocultures ormarine environments where natural ecosystems likemangroves, seagrass beds or coral reefs have been

heavilytransformedbyextractivepractices.ResultingSEPLS are likely to support higher levels of biodi-versity andbemore resilient to external shocks thanmore simplified systems. In the context of climatechange,theprotectionandrestorationofwatersheds,forestsandcostalecosystemsinSEPLShelpregulatehydrologyandmicroclimate,therebyprovidingabufferagainstextremeweatherevents,floodsanddroughts.

Biodiversity (including agricultural biodiversity)

Thehealthofalandscapeorseascapeandtheecosys-temsitsupports isreflectedinpart inthediversityofspecies living in itand their interactions. Italsooftenforms the physical, cultural and spiritual bases ofcommunities’ well-being. Biodiversity contributes tocommunity and landscape/seascape resilience byprovidingecosystemservices,whicharesustainedordegradedbythepracticesandinstitutionsthatregulatethe use of natural resources. Agricultural biodiversityincludesspeciesusedforfood,fodder,fiberandfuel,aswellasthelargenumberofnon-harvestedspeciesinthewiderlandscapethatbenefitcommunitiesthroughthe services they provide, such as pollinators, soilbiotaandregulatorsofpestsanddiseases.Agriculturalbiodiversity provides material for experimentation,innovationandadaptation.Thegeneticdiversityfoundin local crop varieties and animal breeds, expressedin important traits such as drought, cold and salinetoleranceandresistancetopestsanddiseases,helpsthemadapttovarioussoilandclimateconditions.Lossin diversity of these traits decreases options for riskmanagementandadaptation.

knowledge and innovation

Communitiesstrengthentheirownresiliencebyexperi-menting, innovatingand learningwithinandbetween

Participants score their landscape using indicators for resilience during a workshop, Bhutan©COMDEKSBhutan/DorjiSingay

18 | Toolkit for the Indicators of Resilience in Socio-ecological Production Landscapes and Seascapes (SEPLS)18 | Toolkit for the Indicators of Resilience in Socio-ecological Production Landscapes and Seascapes (SEPLS) Chapter 2: The indicators | 19

differentknowledgesystems,culturesandagegroups.Adaptationstrategiesmaybenovelorold,butgener-allybuildonbio-culturalortraditionalknowledge.Thisknowledgeisspecifictothelocationsandculturesofgiven socio-ecological interactions. It is embodied inresource-use customs, agricultural traditions, locallanguages, cultural values and social institutions.Manycommunitiesarelosingtheirknowledgeoflocalresources, biodiversity and the historical events thathave shaped their landscapes and seascapes. Themaintenance of this knowledge increasingly dependsontheabilityofelders,parentsandtheyoungergener-ationsinacommunitytodocumentandshareit.

governance and social equity

Genderinequalities,socialexclusionandmarginaliza-tioncanhindertheabilityofwomen,indigenousgroupsand others to strengthen the resilience of their land-scapes or seascapes. Women, youth and the elderlyholdspecificknowledgeandskillsrelatedtobiodiver-sity.Forindigenouscommunities,resilienceisintrinsi-cally linked with efforts to protect traditional ways ofsubsistenceandculturalheritage.Theabilitytoaccessancestral lands and engage in traditional land useandagriculturalpracticesareimportantconditionsforcommunities to maintain biodiversity and associatedtraditionalknowledge.

Livelihoods and well-being

Theresilienceofaproductionlandscapeorseascapeis also dependent on the availability of efficient andfunctioning infrastructure such as communication,health and education to meet various communityneeds and aspirations. Livelihood improvement canbedirectly linked to theoptionsandopportunitiesofcommunitymemberstoengageinavarietyofsustain-able income-generating activities developed through

peoples’ ingenuity and the biodiversity portfolio theyhaveavailable.

2.2 How to use the indicators

Theindicatorspresentedinthetablebelowhavebeendevelopedtoguidetheassessmentofresilienceduringassessment workshops participated in by communitymembersandothers.Assessmententails assigningascore and trend to each indicator in response to thequestionsinthetable’ssecondcolumn.Ascorecanbeassignedtoallindicatorsusingthe5-pointscalegiveninthetable’sthirdcolumn,andinformationabouttrendscanbecapturedusingthecategoriesshownhere:

Scores trends

(5)Veryhigh↑Upward trend

(4)High

(3)Medium →No change

(2)Low↓Downward trend

(1)Verylow

The other columns in the table are meant to facili-tate understanding of the questions for scoring andto capture additional information during the groupdiscussion. The first column gives an explanation ofthequestion forscoringandsomeexamplesofwhatismeantbysomeoftheterminology.Thelastcolumncontains, where relevant, additional questions whichcanbeaskedafter individual scoringhasbeendoneand the group is engaged in reaching a consensus.Thesequestionsarenotfixedandcanvaryaccordingtothesituationatthediscretionofthefacilitator.

Notescanbefoundinthefirstcolumnofsomeoftheindicators. Theseare intended to facilitate answeringthequestions for scoring. For example,when talkingabout landscape and seascape diversity it may beusefultorefertoaparticipatorymappingexercise,orthe timelineused toexplain theconceptof resilience

mayhelpscoringwhentalkingaboutthecapacityforrecovery and regeneration of the SEPLS. For morespecific advice on how to carry out an assessmentworkshop, see Chapter 3, where the mapping exer-ciseand timeline formpartof the introductionof theworkshop.

2.3 list of indicators

Indicator description Questions for scoring

Scores discussion questions

Landscape/seascape diversity and ecosystem protection

(1) Landscape/seascape diversity

Thelandscapeorseascapeiscomposedofadiversity/mosaicofnaturalecosystems(terrestrialandaquatic)andlanduses.

Examples:Natural ecosystems: mountains,forests,grasslands,wetlands,lakes,rivers,coastallagoons,estuaries,coralreefs,seagrassmeadowsandmangroveforests.

Land uses:homegardens,cultivatedfields,orchards,(seasonal)pastures,haymakinglands,aquaculture,forestryandagro-forestry,irrigationcanals,waterwells.

Note:Landscape/seascapediversityandlandusescanbedemonstratedthroughamappingexercise.

Isthelandscape/seascapecomposedofdiversenaturalecosystems(terrestrialandaquatic)andlanduses?

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Veryhigh(Thereisalargenumberofnaturalecosystemsandlanduses)

High

Medium

Low

Verylow(Thereisonlyoneoraverysmallnumberofnaturalecosystemsandlanduses)

(2) Ecosystem protection

Areaswithinthelandscapeorseascapeareprotectedfortheirecologicaland/orculturalimportance.

Note: Protectionmaybeformalorinformalandincludetraditionalformsofprotectionsuchassacredsites.

Examples:Strictnaturereserves,nationalparks,wildernessareas,heritagesites,communityconservedareas,marineprotectedareas,limited-useareas,sacredsites,grazingreserveareas,rulesandregulationstoexcludeoutsidersfromthe(seasonal)useofnaturalresources,etc.

Arethereareasinthelandscapeorseascapewhereecosystemsareprotectedunderformalorinformalformsofprotection?

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Veryhigh(Keyresourcesareundersomeformofprotection)

High

Medium

Low

Verylow(Therearenoareasunderprotection)

Whichecosystemsareprotectedandwhatistheformofprotection?

20 | Toolkit for the Indicators of Resilience in Socio-ecological Production Landscapes and Seascapes (SEPLS) Chapter 2: The indicators | 21



(3) Ecological interactions between different components of the landscape/seascape

Ecologicalinteractionsbetweendifferentcomponentsoflandscapeorseascapearetakenintoconsiderationinnaturalresourcemanagement.

Examples of ecological interactions: Areasslatedforconservationorrestorationbenefitotherareasthroughpollination,pestcontrol,nutrientcyclingandincreaseofanimalpopulation.

Forestsprotectwatersourcesandprovidefodder,medicineandfood.Agriculturalactivitiescanaffectotherpartsofthelandscape.

Marineprotectedareasmayincreasemarinepopulationsalsoinotherinfishingareas(spill-overeffects).

Areecologicalinteractionsbetweendifferentcomponentsofthelandscapeorseascapeconsideredwhilemanagingnaturalresources?

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Veryhigh(Ecologicalinteractionsareconsideredwhilemanagingnaturalresources)

High

Medium

Low

Verylow(Ecologicalinteractionsarenotconsideredwhilemanagingnaturalresources)

(4) Recovery and regeneration of the landscape/seascape

Thelandscapeorseascapehastheabilitytorecoverandregeneratefromenvironmentalshocksandstresses.

Examples of environmental shocks and stresses:Pestanddiseaseoutbreaks;Extremeweathereventssuchasstorms,extremecold,floodinganddroughts;Earthquakesandtsunamis;Forestfires.

Note:Ifatimelineiscreatedduringtheworkshopintroduction,inwhichrecentshocksandstressesarelisted,itcanbeahelpfulreferenceforscoringthisindicator.

Doesthelandscapeorseascapehavetheabilitytorecoverandregenerateafterextremeenvironmentalshocks?

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Veryhigh(Veryhighabilitytorecoverandregenerate)

High

Medium

Low

Verylow(Verylowabilitytorecoverandregenerate)

Whatwasthecommunity’sresponsetorecentshocksandstresses?



Biodiversity (including agricultural biodiversity)

(5) diversity of local food system

Foodsconsumedinthelandscapeorseascapeincludefoodlocallygrown,gatheredfromlocalforestsand/orfishedfromlocalwaters.

Examples:Cereals,vegetables,fruits,nuts,wildplants,mushrooms,berries,livestock,milk,dairyproducts,wildlife/insects,fish,seaweeds,etc.

Doesthecommunityconsumeadiversityoflocally-producedfood?

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Veryhigh(Diversityoflocally-sourcedfoodsisveryhighandthesefoodsarewidelyconsumed)

High

Medium

Low

Verylow(Thereareveryfewornolocally-sourcedfoods)

(6) Maintenance and use of local crop varieties and animal breeds

Householdsand/orcommunitygroupsmaintainadiversityoflocalcropvarietiesandanimalbreeds.

Examples:Seedguardians,expertanimalbreeders,animalbreedinggroups,homegardens,communityseedbanks.

Aredifferentlocalcrops,varietiesandanimalbreedsconservedandusedinthecommunity?

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Veryhigh(Localcropvarietiesandanimalbreedsarewidelyconservedandused)

High

Medium

Low

Verylow(Therearefewornolocalcropvarietiesandanimalbreeds)

Isthequalityofseedsandbreedsmaintained?Doinvasivespeciesreplacelocalonesoristhisnottakingplace?

(7) Sustainable management of common resources

Commonresourcesaremanagedsustainablyinordertoavoidoverexploitationanddepletion.

Examples: Grazingregulations;Fishing quotas;Sustainabletourism;Controlofwildlifepoachingandillegallogging;orharvestingofforestproducts.

Arecommonresourcesmanagedsustainably?

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Veryhigh(Commonresourcesaremanagedsustainably)

High

Medium

Low

Verylow(Commonresourcesareoverexploitedordepleted)

Whatisthestatusofexploitationofcommonresources(forests,fisheries,grasslands)?




knowledge and innovation

(8) Innovation in agriculture and conservation practices

Newpracticesinagriculture,fisheriesandforestryaredeveloped,adoptedandimprovedand/ortraditionalpracticesarerevitalized.

Examples:Adoptionofwaterconservationmeasuressuchasdripirrigationorwaterharvesting;Diversificationoffarmingsystems;Introductionorre-introductionofdrought-orsaline-tolerantcrops;Organicagriculture;Terracing;Reintroductionofnativespecies;Shiftingandrotationofgrasslands;Reforestation;Replantingofcorals,seagrassandmangroves;Fishhouses;Selectivefishinggear.

Doesthecommunitydevelop,improveandadoptnewagricultural,fisheries,forestry,andconservationpracticesand/orrevitalizetraditionalonestoadapttochangingconditions,includingclimatechange?

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Veryhigh(Thecommunityisreceptivetochangeandadjustsitspractices)

High

Medium

Low

Verylow(Thecommunityisnotreceptivetochangeandmakesfewinnovations)

Whichinnovativepracticesareusedinmanagingagriculture,fisheriesandforestry?

(9) traditional knowledge related to biodiversity

Localknowledgeandculturaltraditionsrelatedtobiodiversityaretransmittedfromeldersandparentstoyoungpeopleinthecommunity.

Examples:Songs,dances,rituals,festivals,stories,localterminologyrelatedtolandandbiodiversity;Specificknowledgeaboutfishing,cropplantingandharvesting,andtheprocessingandcookingoffood;Knowledgeincludedinschoolcurricula.

Arelocalknowledgeandculturaltraditionsrelatedtobiodiversitytransmittedfromeldersandparentstoyoungpeopleinthecommunity?

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Veryhigh(Localknowledgeandculturaltraditionsaretransmittedtoyoungpeople)

High

Medium

Low

Verylow(Localknowledgeandculturaltraditionsarelost)



(10) documentation of biodiversity-associated knowledge

Thebiodiversityinthelandscapeorseascape,includingagriculturalbiodiversity,andknowledgeassociatedwithitisdocumented,storedandmadeavailabletocommunitymembers.

Examples: Traditionalknowledgeregisters;Resourceclassificationsystems;Communitybiodiversityregisters;Farmers’fieldschools;Animalbreedinggroups;Pastureco-managementgroups;Seedexchangenetworks(animalandseedfairs);Seasonalcalendars.

Isagriculturalbiodiversity,andassociatedknowledgedocumentedandexchanged?

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Veryhigh(Documentationisrobust)

High

Medium

Low

Verylow(Thereislittleornodocumentationinthecommunity)

(11) Women’s knowledge

Women’sknowledge,experiencesandskillsarerecognizedandrespectedinthecommunity.Womenoftenhavespecificknowledge,experienceandskillsaboutbiodiversity,itsuseandmanagement,whicharedifferentfromthoseofmen.

Examples of women specific knowledge:Know-howabouttheproductionofparticularcrops;Collectionanduseofmedicinalplants;Caringforanimals.

Arewomen’sknowledge,experiencesandskillsrecognizedandrespectedathousehold,communityandlandscapelevels?

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Veryhigh(Women’sknowledge,experiencesandskillsrecognizedandrespectedatalllevels)

High

Medium

Low

Verylow(Women’sknowledge,experiencesandskillsarenotrecognizedandrespected)




governance and social equity

(12) Rights in relation to land/water and other natural resource management

Rightsoverland/waterandothernaturalresourcesareclearlydefinedandrecognizedbyrelevantgroupsandinstitutions,forexamplegovernmentsanddevelopmentagencies.Recognitioncanbeformalizedbypolicy,lawand/orthroughcustomarypractices.

Examples: Land-usegroups;Communityforestrycommittees;Co-managementgroupsorcommunities.

Doesthecommunityhavecustomaryand/orformallyrecognizedrightsoverland,(seasonal)pastures,waterandnaturalresources?

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Veryhigh(Rightsarefullyrecognizedandnotdisputed)

High

Medium

Low

Verylow(Rightsarenotrecognizedandheavilydisputed)

Dotheserightsgivesecurityintermsofaccessanduse?

(13) community-based landscape/seascape governance

Thelandscapeorseascapehascapable,accountableandtransparentlocalinstitutionsinplacefortheeffectivegovernanceofitsresourcesandthelocalbiodiversity.

Examples of institutions:Organizations,rules,policies,regulationsandenforcementaimedatresourcemanagement;Traditionalauthoritiesandcustomaryrules;Co-managementarrangements,forexamplejointforestmanagement,betweenlocalpeopleandgovernment.

Isthereamultistakeholderlandscape/seascapeplatformorinstitutionabletoeffectivelyplanandmanagelandscaperesources?

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Veryhigh(Platformorinstitutioniscapableoftransparent,participatoryandeffectivedecisionmaking)

High

Medium

Low

Verylow(Thereisnomultistakeholderplatformorinstitution)

Doesagreementexistabouttheboundariesofnaturalresourcesintermsofaccessanduse?Isthepolicyandlegalenvironmentsupportiveornot?

(14) Social capital in the form of cooperation across the landscape/seascape

Individualswithinandbetweencommunitiesareconnectedandcoordinatedthroughnetworksthatmanageresourcesandexchangematerials,skillsandknowledge.

Examples:Self-helpgroups;Communityclubsandgroups(women’sandyouthgroups);Intercommunitynetworks;Associationsoffederationswithafocusonnaturalresourcemanagement.

Isthereconnection,coordinationandcooperationwithinandbetweencommunitiesforthemanagementofnaturalresources?

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Veryhigh(Thereisaveryhighlevelofcooperationandcoordinationinnaturalresourcemanagement)

High

Medium

Low

Verylow(Thereislittleornocooperationandcoordinationinnaturalresourcemanagement)

Isthelevelofout-migrationlow?



(15) Social equity (including gender equity)

Rightsandaccesstoresourcesandopportunitiesforeducation,informationanddecision-makingarefairandequitableforallcommunitymembers,includingwomen,athousehold,communityandlandscapelevels.Examples:Uplandandlowlandcommunities;Communitymembersbelongingtodifferentsocialorethnicgroups;Women’svoicesandchoicesaretakenintoconsiderationinhouseholddecision-makingandatcommunitymeetingswheredecisionsaboutcollectiveactionsaremade.

Isaccesstoopportunitiesandresourcesfairandequitableforallcommunitymembers,includingwomen,athousehold,communityandlandscapelevel?

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Veryhigh(Accesstoresourcesandopportunitiesisfairandequitableatalllevels)

High

Medium

Low

Verylow(Accesstoresourcesandopportunitiesisnotfairandequitable)

Isdecision-makingfairandequitableforallcommunitymembers,includingwomen,atalllevels?




Livelihoods and well-being

(16) Socio-economic infrastructure

Socio-economicinfrastructureisadequateforcommunityneeds.

Examples of socio-economic infrastructure:Schools,hospitals,roadsandtransport;Safedrinkingwater;Markets;Electricityandcommunicationinfrastructure.

Isthesocio-economicinfrastructureadequatefortheneedsofthecommunity?

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Veryhigh(Socio-economicinfrastructuremeetsallcommunityneeds)

High

Medium

Low

Verylow(Socio-economicinfrastructuredoesnotmeetcommunityneeds)

(17) human health and environmental conditions

Theoverallstateofhumanhealthinthecommunityissatisfactory,alsoconsideringtheprevailingenvironmentalconditions.

Examples:Absenceorregularoccurrenceofdiseases;Frequencyofdiseaseoutbreaksthataffectalargenumberofpeople;Absence/presenceofenvironmentalstresseslikepollution,lackofcleanwater,exposuretoextremeweatherevents.

Whatisthegeneralhealthsituationoflocalpeoplealsoconsideringtheprevailingenvironmentalconditions?

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Veryhigh(Thehealthsituationandtheenvironmentalconditionsaregood)

High

Medium

Low

Verylow(Thehealthandtheenvironmentalconditionsarebad)

Whatarethemainrisks?Whattypesofmedicineareused?(i.e.traditionalhealingmethods,modernmedicine)

(18) Income diversity

Peopleinthelandscapeorseascapeareinvolvedinavarietyofsustainableincome-generatingactivities.

Note:Diversityineconomicactivitiescanhelphouseholdsincaseofunexpecteddownturns,disasters,changesinenvironmentalconditions,etc.

Arehouseholdsinthecommunityinvolvedinavarietyofsustainable,income-generatingactivities?

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Veryhigh(Householdsareinvolvedinavarietyofsustainable,incomegeneratingactivities)

High

Medium

Low

Verylow(Householdshavenoalternativeeconomicactivities)

Whatactivitiesgenerateincomeinthelandscapeorseascape?



(19) Biodiversity-based livelihoods

Livelihoodimprovementsinthelandscapeorseascapeareconcernedwithinnovativeuseoflocalbiodiversity. Examples: Handicraftsusinglocalmaterials,e.g.woodcarving,basketry,painting,weavingetc.;Eco-tourism;Processingoflocalfoods,bee-keepingetc.

Doesthecommunitydevelopinnovativeuseofthelocalbiodiversityforitslivelihoods?

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Veryhigh(Livelihoodsarebeingimprovedbyinnovativeuseoflocalbiodiversity)

High

Medium

Low

Verylow(Livelihoodimprovementsarenotrelatedtolocalbiodiversity)

(20) Socio-ecological mobility

Householdsandcommunitiesareabletomovearoundtotakeadvantageofshiftsinproductionopportunitiesandavoidlanddegradationandoverexploitation.

Examples of mobility:Shiftingcultivationandcroprotationpractices;Shiftingbetweenagricultureandherding/fishing;Seasonalmigrationofherders;Shiftingfishinggrounds;Maintainingreserveareasforperiodsofhardship.

Arehouseholdsandcommunitiesabletomovearoundbetweendifferentproductionactivitiesandlocationsasnecessary?

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Veryhigh(Therearesufficientopportunitiesformobility)

High

Medium

Low

Verylow(Therearenoopportunitiesformobility)

Arethereagreedrulesandregulationsforeffectivelydoingso?

28 | Toolkit for the Indicators of Resilience in Socio-ecological Production Landscapes and Seascapes (SEPLS)

3Chapter 3 Practical guidance for using the

indicators

The purpose of this chapter is to provide users ofthe indicators with concrete advice on their practicalapplication, including various processes for activelyengaging local communities in planning, preparingandholdingassessmentworkshops,and then imple-mentingactivitiesforrestoringandmaintainingSEPLSafteranassessmentoftheirresilience.

Whileitispossiblefortheindicatorstobeusedinseveraldifferentwaysforvariouspolicy-making,academicorotherpurposes,theyaregenerallyintendedtobeusedinthecontextofacommunity-basedassessmentwork-shopheldwithinthetargetlandscapeorseascape.Theguidanceprovided in this toolkit isprimarily intendedfororganizersandfacilitatorsofresilienceassessmentworkshops.

Different landscapesandseascapesmayhavevastlydifferent geographical scales, governance systems,stakeholders, cultural traditions, and resources, andthusrequiredifferentapproachestoassessmentwork-shopsandfollow-upactivities.Facilitatorsandstake-holdersshouldbeflexibleinidentifyinglocally-adaptedsolutionsaccountingforthespecificcircumstancesof

communities.Forguidance,thistoolkitprovidesexam-ples of the indicators in action, taken from previousfield-testing by Bioversity International and UNDP-COMDEKS,plussomepracticaltipsforpracticesthathavebeenproveneffectiveinthepast.

A resilience assessment generally consists of threemainstages:1)preparation,2)assessmentworkshopand3)follow-up.

The preparation stage consists of planning andorganizingacommunity-based resilienceassessmentworkshop. This may include steps such as clarifyingthe purpose of the assessment, determining theassessmentareaandobtaining informationaboutthelandscape/seascape,residentcommunitiesandstake-holdersaswellaspracticalmatterssuchastranslatingtheindicatorsintothelocallanguage.

Theworkshopitselfiswhentheassessmentofland-scape or seascape resilience by local stakeholdersactuallytakesplace.Aworkshopwillgenerallyconsistof: introductory presentations; scoring based on theindicators; anddiscussion, summary and next steps.This toolkit also provides tips for workshop facilita-tors to explain unfamiliar concepts such as “socio-ecological production landscapes and seascapes”and“resilience”,andencourageactiveandmeaningfulengagementoftheparticipants.

Thefollow-up stagecanvarywidelydependingonthepurposeoftheassessment,butisgenerallyintendedtouseassessmentresultsaspartofanongoing,partici-patory landscape/seascape management and plan-ningprocess.Thistoolkitintroduceswaysofanalyzingassessment data and scores, organizing follow-updiscussionamongstakeholders,andidentifyingpriorityareasandcommunity-basedinterventionstoenhanceresilience.

Kituilandscape,Kenya

©RenFujimura

30 | Toolkit for the Indicators of Resilience in Socio-ecological Production Landscapes and Seascapes (SEPLS) Chapter 3: Practical guidance for using the indicators | 31

3.1 stage 1: Preparation

Setting the stage

Before planning the details of an assessment work-shop,itisadvisabletomakesurethereisaclearunder-standingofanumberofbasicprinciples,suchastheexact purpose of the assessment, the target SEPLS,etc.Allinvolvedpartiesshouldsharethesameunder-standingtoensurethateveryoneisworkingtowardthesamepurposes.

clarifying the purpose of the assessment

It isimportanttomakesurethateveryoneinvolvedintheplanningof theresilienceassessmenthasaclearandconsistentunderstandingofthepurpose(s)oftheassessmentandwhatitisexpectedtoaccomplish.Thepurposeoftheassessmentwillaffecthowitiscarriedout.

Tips:Some examples of purposes of an assessment mayinclude:• Gainingacommonunderstandingofthestateofthe

landscapeorseascape.• Identifyingstrengthsofandthreatstothelandscape

orseascape.• Empoweringlocalcommunitiestostrengthentheir

resilience.• Developing landscape/seascape management

strategies and identifying possible collaborativeactionsinthelandscapeorseascapetostrengthenresilience.

• Enhancing trustandsocialcapital incommunitiesandresolvingconflict.

• Monitoringresilienceofthelandscapeorseascapeanditscommunitiesovertime.

Selection of the assessment area

The target landscape or seascape should be deter-minedbasedon thepurposeof theassessment andthe available resources, and a demonstrated interestandengagementofthecommunitieslivinginthearea.

To help clarify why the landscape or seascape waschosen,itmaybeusefultodevelopanumberofparam-eters,suchasnaturalassets,socio-economicactivities,cultural heritage, threats and opportunities, and thepresenceofparticularspeciesandbiodiversityvalues.

indicators in action SELEctIon of thE aSSESSMEnt

aREa

• For Bioversity International’s study in Bolivia,a local NGO that had worked for over twodecades on the conservation, improvementand marketing of local varieties of roots andtubercropstobenefitsmallfarmersinsixteenvillages facilitated theplanningandpreparingof the resilience assessment. The NGOselected two of the villages to conduct theresilienceassessment.

• For the COMDEKS baseline assessment inNamibia, the target landscape was a newconservancy that had been created as anadministrative unit and was selected by theSGP National Steering Committee based ona number of criteria including its biodiversityvalue,ecosystemsensitivity,tourismpotential,its ranking among the most underdevelopedareas inNamibia, andUNDPpresence in thearea(seeChapter4).

outline of the practical guidance

• clarifying the purpose of the assessment• Selection of the assessment area• obtaining information about the landscape or seascape and its resident communities• Identification of stakeholders for planning• clarifying the SEPLS and its boundary • Identification of workshop participants and facilitators• deciding the style and duration of the workshop• Interpretation and translation of the indicators

Stage 1:Preparation

• Introduction – Self Introductions – Participatory mapping exercise – Discussion of biodiversity – Discussion of resilience – Explanation of the indicators

• Scoring – Individual scoring – Group scoring

• discussion, summary and next steps

Stage 2:Workshop

• analysis of assessment data and scoring• Present analysis of assessment and review summary the assessment • discussion of analysis and identification of key topics to discuss• discussion on potential action lands in the communities • Evaluation of the exercise

Stage 3:follow-up


Stakeholders gather to assess boundaries of the landscape in Daman, Nepal

obtaining information about the landscape or seascape and its resident communities

Obtainingscientificandstatisticalinformationaboutthelandscapeorseascapefacilitatesbetterunderstandingoftheareaandappropriatedesignandpreparationoftheassessment.Thisinformationisalsousefulforassess-mentparticipantsandstakeholderstohaveacommonunderstandingoftheareaandtoutilizetheinformationin the resilience assessment. Information may includelanduses,population,rainfall,livelihoodsandothers,aswellasbiodiversityanditsvalue.

Wherepossible,itisagoodideatoobtaininformationondevelopmentplansandprojectsbeingundertakenin the area, capacities of key stakeholders such asgovernments,NGOsandcommunity-basedorganiza-tions and their presence in the area, and any poten-tial opportunities and synergies available to enhanceresilience.

indicators in action IdEntIfyIng StakEhoLdERS

• During theCOMDEKSassessment inMalawi,the assessment facilitators were supportedby the District Executive Committee (DEC),composed of members from the differentgovernment departments (agriculture, fish-eries,environment,education,planning,etc.).Selected members of the DEC accompaniedtheassessmentcoordinatorsastheymobilizedcommunities through local traditional authori-ties and village heads. The team conducteda participatory appraisal with relevant NGOs,local communities and front-line agriculturaland natural resources extension staff in thearea.

• InNamibia,whereanassessmentwascarriedout for an already-defined conservancy, theNGOcontractedtoruntheassessmentmadeuse of the radio, which is the major meansof wide-scale communication in the area, togatherstakeholdersfromaroundtheconserv-ancy.TheNGOthenconsultedasmanypeopleas possible to gain an understanding of thevariousactorsandinterestsinthelandscape.

Consultation and planning

Consultation with local stakeholders is a useful wayand essential requirement to learn more about theareaandcommunitiestotailortheassessmenttolocalneeds.Somedegreeofconsensusmustbereachedontheassessment’spurpose,definitionofthelandscape/seascapeanditsboundary,participants,facilitators,etc.

indicators in action InfoRMatIon coLLEctIon

• GeographicInformationSystem(GIS)mappingwasused to identify the target landscape forCOMDEKS activities in Cambodia and dividethetargetareaintoanumberofsocio-ecolog-icalareastakingintoaccounttopography,rain-fallpatterns,soiltypes,landuse,forestcoverchangeandstatutorylandtenuresystems.

• In Bhutan, the baseline assessment of thetarget landscape was carried out buildingon an existing Watershed Management Plandeveloped in 2009 by the Royal Governmentof Bhutan, which had been stalled due to alack of financial resources. In this case, theCOMDEKS landscape-wide baseline assess-mentwaspartofanefforttobuildonexistingdevelopmentplanstorebuildandrevitalizetheGamri Watershed based on the data alreadycollectedforthoseplans.

Identification of stakeholders for planning

Key stakeholders in the area should be identi-fied during the planning process for consultation inthe next phase. These should represent all relevantsectors and may include local and national NGOs;indigenous peoples’, women’s, elders’, and youthgroups; officers in forest and agricultural manage-ment;cooperativesandunions;representativesfromlocal farmers, fishermen, hotel owners and tourismoperators;andothers.

Community members are consulted before devising landscape strategy, Cambodia

Tips:Consultation with local stakeholders will facilitatelearningmoreabout:• Community priorities, the current state of the

environment and socio-economic conditions andperceivedthreats.

• Existing and potential projects and plans in thetargetarea.

• Capacities and capability of the various stake-holdersinthearea.

• Opportunitiesforcollaborationwithotheractivities.• Suitable community representatives and other

assessment participants representing differentgroups.

• Theexpected time frame for trends inchangesofthe indicatorsof resilience (forexample,10years,30years,etc.).

Thefollowingpagescoversomeoftheissuesinvolvedintheplanningofanassessmentandconsultationwithlocalstakeholders.

©C

OM

DE

KS

Nep

al/T

opB

ahad

urS

hahi

©C

OM

DE

KS

Cam

bod

ia/N

gin

Nav

irak


clarifying the SEPLS and its boundary

The exact landscape or seascape should be definedbased on a community perspective. The boundariesof the landscape or seascape (watershed, jurisdic-tional boundaries, social definition of the landscapeorseascape,etc.)maybedeterminedthroughconsul-tation with key local stakeholders and/or by usingsketches,maps,GISdataoftheregion,etc.Ingeneral,it ishelpful to takeaflexibleapproachdependingonlocal needs. The SEPLS and its boundary can alsobe discussed at the beginning of the assessmentworkshop.

Identification of resilience assessment workshop participants

Theparticipants in theworkshopwill varydependingon itspurposeand thebackgroundof the landscapeorseascape.Participantsmayincludekeylocalstake-holderswithavarietyofinterestssuchaslocalfarmers,fishermen, government authorities, the private sectorandothers,aswellascross-sectorexpertise if tech-nicalserviceprovidersareincluded.

Attentionshouldbepaid toensuring there is agoodgenderandagebalance.Likewise,itisvitaltoincludeindigenous peoples and minority groups if they arepresent in the landscape or seascape. For a largeor diverse landscape or seascape, it is important toincludestakeholdersfromdifferentcommunitiesinthetargetarea.

In order to identify assessment participants fromdifferent groups, it is useful to visit all communitiesin advance. Communities can suggest key repre-sentativesof thecommunity tobeparticipants in theworkshop.

indicators in action cLaRIfyIng thE LandScaPE

In Cambodia, information from the GeographicInformationSystem (GIS)wasused todivide thetargetSeungSiemReapwatershedareaintothreesub-areas,upstream,midstreamanddownstream.Thewatershedarea ishighlyheterogeneousdueto the wide diversity of biological, geographicaland topographical features located within theregion.Inordertocapturetheheterogeneityofthetarget landscape, and identify potential commu-nity-basedactivities toenhance resilienceof thelandscape,thetargetareawasfurtherdividedintosix socio-ecological zones, taking into accounttopography, rainfall pattern, soil types, land use,forest cover change, and statutory land tenuresystems.

Geographic Information System (GIS) has been used in Cambodia to divide the target watershed area into three sub-areas and six socio-ecological zones based on the heterogeneity of the landscape.

gEndER MaInStREaMIng

Itisessentialthatgenderknowledgeiscapturedanddocumentedtoimprovetheparticipationofwomenin futurecommunityprograms including landscapeorseascaperesilience-strengtheningstrategydevel-opmentandactionplans.

Thenormsandcultureoftheareashouldbeconsid-ered.Toenableeffectiveparticipationofwomen inthe planning process and strategy development,community consultation and the assessment needtobeconductedinthecontextofsocialconventions,organizingseparatemeetingsformenandwomenifappropriate. This approach has been employed atseveralCOMDEKSsitesincludingGilgelGibeIdamcatchmentareainEthiopia.

Where inequalities exist, gender integration in theresilienceassessmentworkshopandstrategydevel-opment should focus on strengthening women’scapacities and leadership abilities, and helpingto advance their involvement in governance anddecision-makingprocesses,asgenderequityhelpsto increase resilience. Ways of doing this includesupportingspecificprojectsmanagedbywomen’sgroups within the landscape, ensuring women’sparticipation in community-based institutions andinvolvingwomeninengagementwithexternalpart-nersandnetworks.Forexample,aftertheassess-ment workshop in the Natewa-Tunuloa Peninsula,aCOMDEKSsite inFiji, a villagechief suggestedthat women should lead the COMDEKS projectrecognizing that, despite their limited access toresources, they can greatly improve livelihoods intheir communities such as by bark cloth produc-tion and weaving to support small scale cottageindustries.

Women are interviewed to gather information on local small scale farming activities, Niger

Women and men are separated into groups to ensure both perspectives are heard, Ethiopia

©C

OM

DE

KS

Cam

bod

ia/S

rey

Mar

ona

©C

OM

DE

KS

Nig

er/B

assi

rou

Dan

Mag

aria

©

CO

MD

EK

SE

thio

pia

/Zel

eke

Tesf

aye


deciding the style and duration of the workshop

A resilienceassessmentworkshopgenerally consistsofthreemainparts:1)anintroduction;2)scoringoftheindicators;and3)discussionoftheresultsandwrap-up.Timeconstraintsmayallowformoreorlesstime,buttestinghasshownthattheintroductionandscoringmaytakeonewholeday(includinglunchandteabreak),withanotherhalfdayfordiscussionandwrap-up.

The design of an assessment workshop should bebased on information obtained in the consultations,fieldvisitsandother informationcollection,andfinal-izedtogetherwithlocalstakeholders.Forthisreason,it is important to have a good understanding of thetargetlandscapeorseascapeandthesocio-economic,cultural,andothercircumstancesofresidentcommu-nitiesduringplanning.Forexample,womenandmentend to have different perceptions because of thedifferent roles they usually have, and come up withdifferentviewsonmanyoftheindicators.Insuchcasesit is recommended to have separate groups for thescoringprocessandthenbringtheresultstogetherinthewholegroupdiscussion.Thesameprocesscanbeconsideredforcommunitymembersofdifferentsocio-economicstatus.

The number, size and duration of assessment work-shops depend on the resources available and thecapacity of the communities. In many cases localcommunitymembers,suchasfarmersandfishermen,will be busy with their work, so it is advisable thatthe assessment workshop be completed within oneor twodays,oradapted to thescheduleof the localstakeholders.

Interpretation and translation of the indicators

Prior to the assessment workshop, it is essential tomakesurethattheresilienceindicatorsareexpressedinlanguagethattheparticipantswillbeabletounder-standeasily.Thismayrequiretranslatingthemintooneormore languages.EvenfornativeEnglishspeakers,itmaybenecessarytoalterthelanguageusedintheindicatorstomakethemmoreeasilyunderstoodinthelocalcontext.

Theindicatorshavebeendevelopedtobeapplicabletodifferenttypesandsizesoflandscapesandseascapes.Therefore, facilitators and participating communitiesmayalsoneedtoadjustthecontentofthe indicatorsdependingonthelocalcircumstances.Dependingonthe context, additional indicators can be integratedwhile indicators that are not deemed relevant maybediscarded.

During a baseline assessment in Niger, stones are used as markers

indicators in action SaMPLE aSSESSMEnt WoRkShoP

tIMEtaBLE

Bioversity International held assessment work-shopsinFiji,withparticipantsfromvillagesintheBoumaNationalHeritageParkonTaveuniIsland.Around 10 villagers from each of two villagesparticipated ina1.5dayworkshop.Since therewerealargenumberofparticipants,theintroduc-tionwasdoneforthewholegroupandthegroupthendividedintotwo,witheachvillagedoingitsownmappingexerciseandscoringoftheindica-tors.Discussionswereheld separately for eachvillagethenextday.

DAY 1: Introduction and scoring 9:30-10:00 Introduction(30min.)10:00-11:00 Participatorymappingexercise(1hour)11:00-12:00 Discussionaboutdiversityand

resilienceinthecommunities(1hour)12:00-12:15 Teabreak(15min.)12:15-14:00 Scoring(Questions1-7)

(1hour45min.)14:00-14:30 Lunchbreak(30min.)14:30-16:30 Scoring(Questions8-20)(2hours)16:30-17:00 Summaryoftheassessmentandnext

steps(30min.)

DAY 2: Discussions 9:30-10:00 Analysisofscoringandreview

summaryoftheassessment(30min.)10:00-11:00 Discussionofanalysisand

identificationofkeytopicstodiscuss (1hour)

11:00-12:00 Discussionofpotentialactionplans inthevillage(1hour)

12:00-12:30 Evaluationoftheexercise(30min.)12:30-13:00 Lunch(30min.)

Identification of facilitators

Facilitatorsarethepeoplewhowillruntheworkshop,andtheirrolemayinvolveorganizing,planning,actingasemcees,following-up,andothertasks.Thefacilita-torsshouldleadthesmoothproceedingofanassess-mentworkshopandstimulateactiveandequalpartici-pationofworkshopparticipants.

It is important tohaveanote-takeramong the facili-tators, who understands local languages to be usedduringtheworkshopanddiscussion.Thenotestakenby this person will be of vital importance during thefollow-upstage.

Ideally, facilitators have a working relationship withcommunitiesinthearea.Iflocalcommunitymembersare actively engaged in SEPLS management, theythemselves can become facilitators. In such cases,theymayrequiresometraininginhowtofacilitate.

Local NGOs and project coordinators who havedeveloped a strong relationship with local communi-ties throughexistingprojectscanbegoodcandidatesto serve as facilitators. Alternatively, facilitators needto develop a relationship with the communities andlearn about the landscape or seascape through avail-able documents and discussion with key communitymembersbeforetheassessmentworkshop.Inthiscase,facilitatorsmayneedtospendsometimeinthecommu-nitiestolearnaboutthembeforehand.

The role of the facilitator during an assessment isvital for explaining the concepts of “socio-ecologicalproduction landscapes and seascapes (SEPLS)” and“resilience”tocommunitiesandworkshopparticipants.Facilitatorsshouldhaveagoodunderstandingoftheseconceptsandbeable to translate the indicators intothe local language if necessary, or reword them withvocabularyunderstoodatthelocallevel.

©C

OM

DE

KS

Nig

er/B

assi

rou

Dan

Mag

aria


Tips:• Prepareenoughcopiesofthetranslatedindicators

foreachoftheparticipantsandfacilitators.• Provide pens or pencils and scratch paper for all

participants.• Ensurethatthereisenoughposter-sizedpaperand

markers,colouredpensformapping,stickers,tape,scissorsand/orwhateverwillbeneededforpromi-nentlydisplayingscoringresults,mapping,etc.

• Preparesuitable refreshmentsandorganizemealsforparticipantsasappropriate.

• Considerhowparticipantsaregoing toget to theassessment,andwhethertransportationshouldbeprovided.

3.2 stage 2: The assessment workshop

Introduction

Anassessmentworkshopwillgenerallybeginwithanintroductorypresentationgivenbythefacilitators.Itisimportantduringtheintroductionthattimebeallowedto answer any questions participants may have.Explainingkeyconceptsandansweringallquestionscanbeexpectedtotakeafewhours.

Participatoryactivitiesmayalsobecarriedoutatthistime,toensurenotonlythatparticipantsfeelcomfort-able interacting with each other, but also that theyhave a common understanding of the landscape orseascapeanditsresources.Seebelowforsomeexam-plesofparticipatoryactivities.

Itisagoodideatocollectparticipantinformationsuchas name, age, gender and village name or organiza-tion,or,alternatively,circulateasheetforparticipantsto provide this information at the beginning of theworkshop.

Baseline assessment workshop, Ghana

Tips:Theintroductionisagoodopportunitytoexplain:

• The purpose of the assessment and the value ofpeople’sparticipation.Beawarethatinsomeplacesitcanbeverydifficultforcommunitiestoopenupandholddiscussionsfreely.

• Thebasicconceptsof“socio-ecologicalproductionlandscapes and seascapes (SEPLS)” and “resil-ience”. It is important that all participants under-standtheseconcepts.Theuseofsimple,easy-to-understand language is recommended as well asexamplestohelpparticipantsunderstand.Itmaybeusefultousepicturesorphotosofsocio-ecologicalproductionlandscapesorseascapes.

• Other concepts found in the indicators, such as“agriculturalbiodiversity”and“landuses”.Picturesanddiagramsmaybehelpful.

• Theflowof the resilienceassessmentand indica-torsaccordingtotheirspecificthemes.Theseare:Landscape/seascape diversity and ecosystemprotection;Biodiversity(includingagriculturalbiodi-versity); Knowledge and innovation; Governanceandsocialequity;andLivelihoodsandwell-being.

• The workshop schedule, including plans forfollow-up.

Theexactprocedurefortheintroductorysegmentwillvarydepending on time, resources, local context, purposeetc.,andmayincludesomeorallofthefollowing:

Self-introductionsIfparticipantsare frommultiplecommunitieswithinalandscapeorseascape,oriffacilitatorsorotherpartici-pants are from outside the target community, it maybehelpful to haveeachparticipant introducehimselforherselfandexplaintheirinterestintheassessmentworkshop.

Participatory mapping exerciseHavingparticipantsdrawamapoftheir landscapeorseascape including resources, land-uses, landmarksandothers–agriculturallands,watersources,huntingor fishing areas, buildings, etc. – is useful for identi-fying the landscape or seascape and its boundariesand ensuring a common understanding of the targetarea.ParticipatorySEPLSmappingisalsoeffectiveforengagingparticipantsindiscussion.

Discussion of biodiversityDiscuss and list examples of agricultural and aquatic biodiversity such as fruits, vegetables,medicinalplants,trees, livestock,pollinators,fishandcrustaceans,includingtheirlocalnames.Itmayalsobeappropriatetolistvariouskindsofwildlife.

Discuss and list landscape or seascape compo-nentsincludingfields,forestpatches,rivers,pastures,wetlands,watersources,coral reefsetc.Also list thelocalwordsforthesecomponents.

Discussion of resilienceMake a timeline with major events and changes inrelationtotheclimate,environmentandothers,suchasdroughts,floods,storms,earthquakesetc.,onalargesheetofpaper.

Explain resilience, for example, as “recovering afterstress” (seeChapter1:“Resilience inSEPLS–What isit?”),andthenletparticipantsexplainitintheirownwords.

Explain adaptation,forexample,andaskparticipantshowtheycopewithdroughts,floods,typhoons,earth-quakes,forestfire,pest,diseaseandotherdisasters.

Explanation of the indicatorsExplaintheconceptofindicatorsingeneral,aswellastheIndicatorsofResilienceinSEPLSspecifically,theirpurposeandhowusingthemisintendedtobenefitthecommunity.

©C

OM

DE

KS

Gha

na/G

eorg

eO

rtsi

n


indicators in action

PaRtIcIPatoRy MaPPIng ExERcISE

Aparticipatorymappingexercisecanprovideanopportunity for involvement of a greater numberof both men and women from the communityincludingthosetraditionallymarginalized,buildingtrust and strengthening relationships betweenfacilitatorsandcommunitymembers,andestab-lishinga structure inwhichdecision-makingandresponsibilities are shared. The mapping activityinitiates a community involvement forum whichcontinuestobedevelopedthroughregularvillagemeetings. Finally, the maps created serve asreference material for future planning, providingimportantinsightintothespecificsocio-ecologicalcharacteristicsofthearea.

Community members in Fiji engaged in participatory mapping

localcontext.Whenparticipantshavedifficultycompre-hendingaquestion,facilitatorscanassistparticipantsbyexplainingthescoresandtrends.

Individual ScoringThefacilitatorshouldasktheparticipantsthequestionfor each resilience indicator and explain with somelocal contexts and examples. Have each individualparticipantgivehisorherownscoreforeachindicator.

Participants score their landscape using indicators for resilience during a workshop, Bhutan

Group ScoringAfterindividualscoringhasbeencompleted,thegroupshould discuss, for each indicator question, whichscorerepresentstheoverallperceptionsof thewholegroup.Thismaybedonebyhavingindividualpartici-pantsdiscusstheirscoresandtrendsandthereasonsbehind them to arrive at a consensus opinion, oranothermethodsuchastakingasimplemathematicalaverage.Thisstepisimportant:

• Toprovideaspacefordiscussion.• To identify different views within and among

communitymembers.

ScoringTheprocessofhavingtheworkshopparticipantsscoretheir landscapeor seascapeaccording to the twentyindicatorsofresilienceisattheheartoftheassessmentworkshop. The twenty indicators are each accompa-niedbyquestionsforuseinscoring,aswellasnotes,examples and additional discussion questions whereappropriate.

Thephysicalmethodofcollectingscoresmaydependon the local context. When planning the workshop,facilitatorsshoulddecidewhethereachparticipantwillbe given a scorecard, write their scores on a chalk-board,placeanumberofsmallstones intoacup,orsomeothermethod.

Scores:Theindicatorsareintendedtobescoredonafive-pointscale.Ascoreof1meansthelandscapeorseascapeperformsverypoorlyinthatindicatorandascoreof5meansanextremelygoodperformance.(seepage18)

trends: A basic score for each indicator may beenoughinsomecases.Incaseswhereresourcesallow,itmaybedesirable tohaveparticipantsalsoprovidetheirperceptionsoftrends,notesonreasonsfortheirscores,andpotentialproblemsandsolutions.

Trendsaregenerallycapturedusingatimespan(5,10,30yearsetc.)determinedforeachindicator.Itisgener-ally sufficient to evaluate trends using a three-tieredscale (improving; no change; worsening), but a morecomplex five-tiered scale (rapidly improving; slowlyimproving;nochange;slowlyworsening;rapidlywors-ening)hasalsobeenused.

Itisimportanttoaskquestionsontheresilienceindica-torsinawaythatiseasytounderstandforallpartici-pants. It is recommended that facilitators prepare inadvancehowtoposeeachquestiontotheparticipantsusinglocalexamplesandinterpretingquestionsinthe

• To reachacommonunderstanding (ifpossible)ofthe landscape/seascape situation and any threatsandsolutions.

Toreachconsensus,theadditionalquestionsfoundinthefourthcolumnoftheindicatortable(Chapter2)canbeaskedduringthediscussion.

Tips:• Facilitatorsshouldworkatcreatingaparticipatory

and communicative atmosphere to keep partici-pantsinterestedandengagedintheprocess.

• Itisimportanttocapturehowthingshavechangedtemporally and what the drivers associated withthesechangesare.Thiswillhelpthecommunitiesdevelopstrategies to improve their resilienceasafollowupprocesstotheresilienceassessment.

• Materials such as cards, small stones, plastic orpapercapscanminimizethetimetakenforscoring.Providingacupand5smallstones foreach indi-vidual participant, facilitators can ask the partici-pants to put stones for each question in the cupwhileanote-takercapturesindividualscores.

It may be useful to prepare an indicator score sheetliketheoneonthenextpageonaposter-sizedsheetof paper and write each participant’s scores for thewholegrouptosee,inordertofacilitateaparticipatoryprocessinarrivingatgroupscores.

©B

iove

rsity

Inte

rnat

iona

l/Dun

jaM

ijato

vic

©C

OM

DE

KS

Bhu

tan/

Dor

jiS

inga

y


Indicator Question#

name name name name name group consensus

Score Trend Score Trend Score Trend Score Trend Score Trend Score Trend

1234567891011121314151617181920

Table 1. Score sheet for group scores andrecoverfromshocks.Basedontheseunderstand-ings, participants should further explore options forenhancing the resilience of the landscape/seascapeandidentifypossiblenextstepsforthegrouptotake.

Everyoneshouldbeencouragedtospeakfreelyinthediscussion,evenifthereisrepetition,andanote-takershouldrecordthecomments.

Tips:Groupdiscussionisagoodopportunityto:• Identify potential solutions to problems facing the

landscapeorseascape.• Askparticipantswhatstrikesthemmostaboutthe

findings.• Discusshowtoimprovetheresilienceoftheland-

scapeor seascapeand identifypotential commu-nity-basedactivitiestodoso.

Thefollowingaresomeexamplesofpossibleelementsforthediscussion.Facilitatorscanconsiderorganizinganothersessionafewdaysorweeksaftertheassess-ment workshop to further promote discussion andidentifynextsteps.

Discussion of scoring results Aftersummarizing theassessmentscores, facilitatorsmaydisplaydiagramsand the indicatorscoresheetsonawall,andstimulatediscussiononstrengthsandweaknesses in landscape or seascape resilience.Facilitatorsmaygoovereachresilienceindicatorques-tionagain,orcovereachsub-categoryof the indica-tors. Participants should share their thoughts on thescores,theirreasons,andpracticesusedtorespondtoshocksandchanges.

Discussing the results of the indicators scoring exercise in plenary, Khotont district, Mongolia

Tips:The following is one option to process the collectedscoringdata:• Calculateaveragescoresofeachsub-categoryof

theresilienceindicators.• Drawaradardiagramonabigsheetofpapertohelp

participantsvisualizetheresultsduringdiscussion.

Discussion on specific topicsFacilitators can stimulate discussion to identify keytopicsforthecommunity.

Keydiscussiontopicsmayinclude:• Keycommunityconcernsandthreatstolandscape

orseascaperesilience.• Needsforimprovementincurrentpractices.

Scoring data collected at a workshop in Kenya

discussion, summary and next steps

Discussionoftheresultsoftheindicatorscoringisasimportantasthescoringitself.Anactiveandproduc-tivediscussionoftheindicatorscoringcanhelppartici-pantsunderstandhowtoenhancetheresilienceofthelandscapeorseascapeandidentifypotentialcommu-nity-basedactivitiesthatcanimproveresiliencebasedonthesefindings.Theadditionalquestionsfoundintheindicator table (Chapter 2) can be also asked at thisstagetoguidethediscussion.

Facilitatorsshouldguidethediscussion inawaythatencourages participants to share ideas, views, prob-lems, threats, explanations and local solutions suchasknowledgeandpracticesusedtomitigate,manage

©B

iove

rsity

Inte

rnat

iona

l/Yas

ukiM

orim

oto

©B

iove

rsity

Inte

rnat

iona

l/Ron

nie

Vern

ooy


Discussion of potential action plans within communitiesOncekeytopicshavebeenidentified,facilitatorsshouldencourage participants to discuss potential activitiesintheformofactionplansfortheircommunities.It isimportantthatcommunitymembersdeveloptheirownactionplanstoensurecommunityownership.

Example of radar diagram from a workshop in Fiji

Tips:Thefollowingfourelementsarekeypointswhendevel-opingactionplans:• Whatneedstobedone?• Whowilldoit?• Whowillleadit?• Who fromoutside thecommunitycanhelp imple-

mentactivities?

coMMon chaLLEngES In RESILIEncE aSSESSMEnt

Allocating sufficient time for discussionIf facilitators do not take enough time to explainthe purpose of the exercise, focusing, for example,onsimplygettingscores, theremaynotbeenoughdiscussionamongtheparticipants,makingthework-shoplesseffectiveforengaginglocalcommunities.

Managing expectations from communitiesItisimportanttomanageexpectationsfromcommu-nity members related to the resilience assessmentworkshop.Localcommunitiesshouldunderstandthatanassessmentworkshopisonestepinanongoing,participatoryprocesstoimproveresilience.

Encouraging participation of all stakeholders, including womenParticularlyinlarge-scalelandscapesandseascapes,sometimes only representatives of local coopera-tivesandcommunities,mostlymen,maybeinvitedtotheworkshop.Iftimeandconditionsallow,addi-tionalhousevisitstowomenarestronglyadvisedtoovercomegenderbarriers.

Allowing for sufficient follow-up discussionsIn order to involve a larger number of communitymembers, follow-up workshops at the local levelcan be organized to supplement the assessmentworkshop. These can serve to share findings andgenerate discussion in the community concerningthechallengesahead.

Tailoring the language of the indicators It is essential to tailor the language of all contenttomeet thespecificcapacitiesofparticipants.Thelanguageusedintheindicatorsmaybetoocomplexformanypeople tocomprehendeasily.Facilitatorsmayhavetosimplifythetermsandprovideexamplesrelevanttolocalcommunitiestoensureallmembersunderstand the terms and concepts. Interactivemappingexercisesanduseofphotosof the land-scapeorseascapecanproveparticularlysuccessfulin providing a spatial dimension to conservationpriorities and encouraging relevant and practicalsolutionstoSEPLSresilience.

Keyelementsofanactionplanmayinclude:reachinga common understanding of priorities for the land-scapeorseascape;facilitationofcollaborationacrossdifferent sectors; landscape or seascape strategydevelopment;andadaptivemanagementof the land-scapeorseascape.Amulti-objectivestrategy,takingaholisticlandscapeorseascapeapproach,canbemoreeffectivethananarrow,sectoralapproach.

3.3 stage 3: follow-up

In theweeksandmonthsafteranassessmentwork-shop,facilitatorsshouldencouragefollow-updialogueamongworkshopparticipantsandotherstakeholdersin the landscape or seascape in order to reflect onstepsthatcanbetakentoachievegreaterSEPLSresil-ience,andifpossibleorganizefollow-upsessions.

Howthefollow-upiscarriedoutaspartofanongoingprocess depends on the purpose and nature of theworkshop.Forexample,resultsfromaworkshopheldto help identify specific development projects to befundedbyanationalgovernmentoradonormaybeuseddifferently fromthefindingsofaworkshopheldforacademicresearch.Thefollowingaresomeexam-plesofpossiblewaysresultsmaybeused.

Assisting the Mongolian herders of Khotont district to understand the indicators

Evaluation of the workshopIt is often helpful to seek feedback from participantsabouttheassessmentworkshop.Thiscanhelpfacilita-torstomakefutureworkshopsmoreeffectivebasedontheparticularlocalcontext.

©IG

ES

/Iku

koM

atsu

mot

o

©B

iove

rsity

Inte

rnat

iona

l/Ron

nie

Vern

ooy


QuantItatIvE, QuaLItatIvE and coMPaRatIvE anaLySIS to IdEntIfy

coMMunIty nEEdS

Various types of quantitative, qualitative andcomparative analysis can be applied to scoringresults,eachofwhichwillidentifydifferentissuesandneeds.Forexample,pastuseof the indica-torshasshownthatquantitativeanalysisofscorevalues was useful in identifying risk perceptionsshared among the communities in a landscapeorseascape (suchas lossof localcropvarietiesandpoorecosystemmanagement),whilequalita-tiveanalysisusingdiscussionhelpedtofocusontheperceived reasons for these (suchas lackofawareness and ineffective government actions).Comparative analysis between communitieswhere multiple assessments are carried out canprovide hints as to what kinds of interventionsmaybeeffectiveindifferentareas.SeeChapter4,Example4forexamplesofdataanalysis.

further analysis of assessment data and scoring

Scoringdatacollectedataworkshopcanbeusedforvarioustypesofqualitative,quantitativeandcompara-tiveanalysis.Furtheranalysiscanbeusefulforunder-standing trends, identifying more effective follow-upactivitiesandstrategies,andforscientificresearch.

Share the results of the assessment workshop with other stakeholders

Theworkshopresultscanbesharedwithotherstake-holders.Thefacilitatorcanpresentperceivedstrengthsandweaknesses in landscapeor seascape resilienceby displaying the diagrams and the indicator scoresheetsandsharingthediscussionresults.

develop concrete action plans within communities

Strategy or concrete action plans can be furtherconsolidated toplanand implementspecificprojectsoractivitiestoenhanceSEPLSresilience.

Itisalsogoodtoelucidateconcretestepsthatpartici-pantswill take in implementing theactionplans. It isimportanttorememberthatbothshort-termgoalsthatcanbeachievedwithcurrently-availableresourcesandlong-termgoalstodirectthecontinueddevelopmentoftheSEPLSshouldbeconsidered.

indicators in action foLLoW-uP

Inthenorth-westernpartofMakawanpurdistrictinNepal,theresultsofaresilienceassessmentwereeffectivelyusedtodevelopalandscapestrategyforthearea.Theindicatorscoringshowedarelativelypoorperceptionintheareaofecosystemprotec-tion,sothefollowingwereidentifiedasimportantstrategicissuesindevelopinggoalsandobjectives:

• Increasingconnectivity• Addressingmarginalityandinequality• Diversificationoflanduses• Respectingusefultraditionalknowledge

andcomplementingitwithnewinnovations• Synergybuilding• GenderandsocialInclusion• Marketlinkage

Importantly, the assessment also showed whichearlier interventionshadbeenbeneficial in areassuch as agricultural biodiversity, which helpedguidetheabovepriorities.

Repeated resilience assessment for adaptive management

For adaptive landscape/seascape management, theindicatorsmaynotbeonlyusedasaone-timeexer-cise,butinsteadutilizedthroughoutprojects’lifetimes.Landscape or seascape strategies can be adjusteddependingonperiodic resilienceassessmentsoveranumber of years. This requires allowing appropriatetime fordiscussionand interpretingchanges that thedata reveal and adapting strategies accordingly. It isgoodtopayattentiontoanyseasonaldifferencesthatmightaffectresponses,andtrytoperformthescoringexerciseatthesametimeeachyearifappropriate.

Possible post-assessment follow-up activities

For local communities and NGOs:Propagatingacommonunderstandingofpriorityissuesforthelandscapeorseascape:• Hold discussions on the status of the landscape

orseascapeasperceivedby localstakeholders inordertoreachaclearunderstandingasabasisforprioritiesincollaborativeactions.

• Facilitate communication on goals and expectedoutcomesatthelandscape/seascapelevel.

• Identify priority issues to be addressed bycommunities.

• Identify key threats and intervention strategies tostrengthen community resilience including liveli-hoodimprovement.

Facilitationofcollaborationacrossdifferentsectors:• Identify possible allies for resilience strengthening

activitiesinthelandscapeorseascape.• Strengthen partnership among various actors and

ensuresustainabilityandresilienceofthelandscapeorseascape.

Landscape/seascapestrategydevelopment:• Develop landscape/seascape resilience-strength-

eningstrategiesandactionplans.• Enhance community participation in the decision-

making process on landscape/seascape manage-ment at local and national levels, and promotecommunicationwithpolicy-makers.

• Presentoutcomesoftheworkshoptokeynationalstakeholders, and enhance communication withpolicy-makersinordertofacilitatetheincorporationof local landscape and seascape strategies intoNational Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plansandotherdevelopmentplans.

Adaptivemanagementofthelandscapeorseascape:• Use assessment results as a baseline for further

monitoringchangesinthelandscapeorseascape.• Conduct resilience assessments periodically to

enableadaptivemanagementof the landscapeorseascape.

For policymakers:• Utilize the resilience assessment as a decision

making tool to identify intervention priorities anddevelopstrategiesatthelocalandnationallevel.

• Promote participatory landscape/seascapemanagementamongdifferentstakeholders.

• Identify an integrated approach in the variousprojectplanningandprojectimplementationstagesinlandscapes/seascapes.

48 | Toolkit for the Indicators of Resilience in Socio-ecological Production Landscapes and Seascapes (SEPLS) Chapter 4: Examples from the field | 49

4Chapter 4 examples from the field

4.1 namibia an overview of the process

Background

The following description of a resilience assessmentworkshop prepared and implemented in Namibiadescribeshowresultscollectedanddiscussionstimu-lated from the application of the indicators could beused for the formulation of participatory landscapestrategies.

Priority area and rationale for selectionTheIpumbu-yaShilongoConservancywasselectedbytheSGPNationalSteeringCommiteeasaCOMDEKSpilotlandscapemainlyduetoitsbiodiversity,ongoingpreservationefforts,sensitiveecosystem,andtourismpotential. The Conservancy is located in the Oshanaand Omusati regions of northern Namibia within theCuvelai-Etosha Basin, a trans-boundary wetlandsystemwhichconsistsofhundredsofdrainagechan-nelsthataredrythroughoutmostoftheyear. However,whenflowsdooccur, theycanrangefromverysmall

trickles to large floods of water, making landscapeconditions dependent on seasons and weather vari-ability. Spreading across 154,800 hectares, it is oneof approximately 70 conservancies in the country inwhichcommunitymembersmanageandbenefitfromtheirresourcesjointlyonalocallevel.TheareaisalsosignificantforitsproximitytotheEtoshaNationalPark,a world-renowned wildlife sanctuary that is home toelephantsandotherAfricanwildlife.

Asasemi-aridareachallengedbyissuessuchaswateravailabilityforbothsustainingwildlifegrazingandagri-cultural production, the conservancy is highly vulner-abletotheimpactsofclimatechangeanddespiteitsprotectedstatus,isstillunderdevelopedagriculturally,ecologically,andeconomically.Forthesereasons,forseveral yearsUNDPhasprovided long-termengage-ment and systematic support to this landscape interms of community-based climate change adapta-tion projects. Thus, COMDEKS activities in Namibiaareexpected tobuildon the lessons learnedandonthenetworksofpartnersandstakeholders,aswellasstrengthenedinstitutions,resultingfromthesepreviousefforts.

Preparation

A local NGO was awarded a grant to facilitate aworkshop with members from the local communitytoconductthebaselineassessment.Inordertoraiseawareness and mobilize support among communitymembers, the primary means for mass communica-tion in the region, were used, and preparatory visitswere also made by the facilitators. Potential partici-pantswerealsosoughtoutthroughconsultationswithtraditionalauthoritiesandother responsibleparties intheconservancy.Awide rangeof local stakeholders,including farmers,natural resourcemonitors,govern-ment representatives and community leaders wereinvited to participate in the assessment with an eye©JulieLaurent


Average scores for each category were written onlargepiecesofpaperandputonthewalltofacilitatediscussiononthesecondday.

Participatory mapping exercise. A group of men creating their map during the baseline assessment mapping activity as a basis for assessing resilience

A group of women collaborate for the mapping activity

towards balanced representation of constituents inconducting the workshops. During the preparatoryphasetheindicatorsweretranslatedbythefacilitatorsinto the local language, Oshiwambo, and hand-outswerepreparedwiththeindicatorsinbothEnglishandOshiwambo.

assessment workshops

InMarch2014,theinitialtwo-daystakeholderassess-mentworkshoptoconductabaselineassessmentofthe socio-economic and ecological resilience of thelandscape and to identify key issues was held in ahotelconferenceroominthetownofOshakati.Thirty-eightcommunitymembers, including15womenand23mentookpart inthediscussion,whichwasusedto provide input for the development of the land-scape strategy. One-on-one discussions were alsoheldbetweentheworkshopfacilitatorsandtheotherorganizations working in the landscape such as theNamibia Development Trust, Creative EntrepreneurServices,thelocalNGOOmalunduIimunaKommitiyeElungameno(OIKE), andtheMinistryofEnvironmentandTourism,toincorporatetheirviewpoints,lessonslearned, and best practices from similar projectsfunded previously. A follow-up two day stakeholderworkshop was later organized at the EngombeAgriculturalCentre,where the formulated landscapestrategywaspresentedandendorsedbycommunityrepresentatives.

Mapping exercise, scoring, and discussionDuring the first day of the resilience assessmentworkshop, men and women were divided into twogroupsforaparticipatorymappingexerciseinwhicheach group drew a map of the conservancy and itsresources,andthenwereaskedtowritetheirscoresfor the indicatorsonpaper.Thescores for the resil-ience indicators were collected and entered into aspreadsheetforanalysisafterthefirstday’ssession.

Theseconddayoftheworkshopconsistedofadiscus-sionofthepreviousday’sresults.Anoverallexplana-tionof thesub-categoriesof the resilience indicatorsand their results (on a scale of excellent, good, fair,poor, and very poor) was given by the facilitators.Facilitatorsalsodiscussedthefollowingwithmembersfor each category: 1) what the situation is, 2) whatactivities are being done now, and 3) what activitiesmightbeneededinthefuture.Whiletheconservancywasgenerallygivenhighmarksinsomeareassuchasagriculturalbiodiversity,itwasperceivedtobelackinginecosystemprotection,withpeopletendingtoagreeon the need for more enforcement and compliancewithregulations.Areasforimprovementwerefoundinnearlyallmeasuredcategories.

Explanation and scoring of the target landscape using the SEPLS indicators during the baseline assessment

The different groups represented often had differingopinionsbasedontheirownsituation;forexample, itwasperceivedthatpeoplelivingneartheedgesoftheconservancyhadadifferentperspectiveonthesitua-tion inside theconservancy than those fromnear thecenter, and that women had less interest in the saltpansasanaturalresourcethanmenbecausetradition-allywomenarenotallowedtogointothesaltpanstocollectsalt.

Suggestions for improvements included socio-economicinfrastructure-relatedconcerns,withtheideathatmoreinstitutionalcapacitywasneededtoenforcerules in place, such as a larger budget for naturalresourcemonitors.Workshopmembersalsoindicateda desire to establish a market to sell local productsandtouristlodgestopromoteecotourismofthearea.Other suggestions focused on awareness-raisingabout theneed to improve landscape resiliency,withpeoplecallingformoretraininginsustainableproduc-tiontechniquesandmoreeffort tocreateacultureofmutualcooperation,throughpromotingvisitstootherconservanciesandexchangeofbestpractices.

Oneofthemajorthemesemergingfromthediscussionwastheneedforbettercommunity-basedgovernance,as thecommunity itself isnot responsible formakingthedecisionsneededtopreservetheecosystem.Theparticipantsseemedtoagreethatyoungergenerationsarelessengagedintheconservancyeffortduetohighratesofout-migrationforschoolandthenwork.

Participants engage in discussion

©U

NU

-IA

S/W

illia

mD

unb

ar©

CO

MD

EK

SN

amib

ia/N

ikey

L.G

aseb

©U

NU

-IA

S/W

illia

mD

unb

ar

©U

NU

-IA

S/W

illia

mD

unb

ar


Wrap-upAfterthesediscussions,thefacilitatorswrappeduptheworkshopbyagain stressing that thisworkshopwasmeant as the beginning, not the end, of a process.BeyondtheimmediatedevelopmentofthelandscapestrategyandidentificationofprojectstobecarriedoutdirectlythroughCOMDEKSorotherdonorfunding,theindicators will be used as an adaptive managementtool,withaplantoholdanotherassessmentworkshopwithinthenextfewyearstoidentifytrendsinperceivedresilience and to evaluate the effectiveness of thestrategy.

Follow-upAfter the baseline assessment, a follow-up sessionwasheld topresent the landscapestrategy tostake-holdersforvalidationandendorsement.Inadditiontoconstraintsandchallenges,thestakeholderconsulta-tion process also identified many opportunities forthe landscape such as the potential for tourism andprotectionofbiodiversityduetothelandscape’scloseproximitytotheEtoshaNationalPark.

The types of community projects identified bystakeholder participants that may be supportedby COMDEKS and/or other donor funding in theIpumbu-ya-Shilongo Conservancy include activitiesthatwillimprovefreshwaterretention,forbothhumanconsumption and agricultural use, rehabilitation ofwells, and the development of “conservation tillage”asanagriculturalpractice,whichwouldallowwatertopenetratethesoilandnourishcropsforalongerperiodof time. Other activities may focus on increasing theuseofindigenouscropvarietiesorthecreationofwild-life preservation zones, which would sustain regionalbiodiversitywhilecreatingasourceofrevenueforthelocalcommunitythroughecotourism.

hunting.Thiswould increase tourismrevenue,butcattle-grazingactivities in thisareawouldhave tobemoved to thecentral areaof theconservancy.In cases like this, it is important to make sure allcommunity interests have representation whenformulating a landscape strategy, so that thenegotiated strategy will be as broadly-supportedas possible. Relatively neutral exercises, such asmapping and scoring indicators, can be useful inthisregardbyencouragingcollaborationandagree-mentaboutlandscapeconditionsbeforemovingontocontestedtopicsinvolvingchangesinland-uses.

Lessons learned and challenges identified during the process1 Discussion through interpreters may not flow as

smoothly as, and may take longer than, expected–Discussionduringtheassessmentworkshopwasoftenhamperedby theneed to translatebetweenEnglishandOshiwambo.Inordertosavetimeandcircumventtheneedoftranslatingalltheproceed-ingsbetweenEnglishand the local language,onepossiblesolutionmaybetodivideparticipantsintosmallergroups.

2 The facilitator must ensure ample time for expla-nation of Satoyama and SEPLS resilience and overall sustainability of ecosystem biodiversity and services–Explainingtheseconceptssothatallstakeholdersunderstoodthemtookagreatdealoftime.Effortmustbemadesothatkeyconceptsareunderstoodbythecommunity,toensureaccept-anceandparticipationbycommunitymembers inthe process. Again, it may be more productive tosplitintosmallergroupsforthosewhoneedacloserexplanationintheirlocallanguage.

3 Sufficient time should also be allocated for completion of the mapping activity –Althoughitwas time-intensive, the mapping process provedparticularlysuccessfulinprovidingaspatialdimen-siontoconservationpriorities,allowingforamoreconcrete discussion of landscape issues andencouraging relevant and practical solutions tolandscape resilience. The extra time taken in thiscasewasconsideredworthwhile.

4 The importance of integrating gender perspec-tives, even in a community with relatively high gender equality should be stressed –Duringtheworkshop, there was some resistance to dividescoringgroupsbygender,with theargument thatthereisrelativelyhighgenderparityinthecommu-nity. In some nearby ethnic groups, women are ©

Gre

gory

Nau

d

heldinamuchlowerpositionthanmen,butintheIpumbu-ya-Shilongo Conservancy, while it maynotbeexactlyequal,womenspeaktheiropinionsopenlyinthepresenceofmenandevenholdposi-tions of authority. However, even though there isnot a great disparity between men and women,men and women did highlight different elementsandaspectsatthelandscapelevel,suchasdiffer-ences in attitudes towards salt pans as a naturalresource.Althoughnotalwaysnecessarytodividegroups along gender lines, workshop facilitatorsshould encourage the active participation of allstakeholders, including women and marginalizedcommunities,inthediscussion.

5 Various community interests and incentives can require sensitivity to balance – Amongtheissuesdiscussedduringtheresilienceassessmentwasaproposaltoturnthesouthernpartoftheconserv-ancy into a zone exclusively for sustainable wild-life management, including regulated big-game


4.2 fiji Identification of concrete community actions

LocalcommunitymembersonTaveuniIsland,Fiji,wereabletoidentifypossibleactionstostrengthentheresil-ienceoftheircommunities’landscapesandseascapesthrough assessment workshops held by BioversityInternational(see“IndicatorsinAction:Sampleassess-ment workshop timetable” on page 37 for the work-shops’design).TwoassessmentworkshopswereheldinthevillagesofLavenaandKorovou,withparticipantsfromfourvillagesintheBoumaNationalHeritageParkon Taveuni Island: Korovou, Lanvena, Vidawa andWaitabu. The Bouma National Heritage Park coversabout 15,000 hectares of rainforest including strictconservation areas known as the Nature Reserve(communities cannot take anything from this area),andtheForestReserve(communitiescantakenaturalresourcesfromthisareaonlyfortheirsubsistence).Allfourvillagesarelocatedalongthecoast,andmostofthevillagersareinvolvedinbothagricultureandfishing.Thus, villagers’ awareness of connectivity between

Map of the Bouma National Heritage Park in Taveuni Island

Table 2. Group scoring from Waitabu village, Taveuni Island, Fiji

Questions for scoring common understanding of the group group Score/trend

Landscape/seascape biodiversity and ecosystem protection 3

1 Landscape/seascape diversity

Isthelandscape/seascapecomposedofdiversenaturalecosystems(terrestrialandaquatic)andlanduses?

TheestablishmentofaMarineProtectedAreacoveringpartofthevillagefishinggroundshasproducedsubstantialbenefitstothecommunity.

4á

2 Ecosystem protection

Arethereareasinthelandscapeorseascapewhereecosystemsareprotectedunderformalorinformalformsofprotection?

SeascapeprotectionisdonethroughtheMarineProtectedArea,butnoneofthelandscapeisprotectedbesidestheNatureReserve,whereaccesstonaturalforestisrestrictedinthenorthernpartofthevillage.

2á

3 Ecological interactions between different components of the landscape/seascape

Areecologicalinteractionsbetweendifferentcomponentsofthelandscapeorseascapeconsideredwhilemanagingnaturalresources?

Theimportanceofconnectivityisunderstood,butvillagersarestillpoachingandusingherbicidesandpesticidesinagriculture.

3á

4 Recovery and regeneration of the landscape/seascape

Doesthelandscapeorseascapehavetheabilitytorecoverandregenerateafterextremeenvironmentalshocks?

Afterahurricane,landscapes/seascapeswillrecover.However,itwilltakesometime.Forexample,recoveryofcoconuttrees,taroandcoralreeftake3,2and2yearsrespectively.

3á

Biodiversity (including agricultural biodiversity) 3.6

5 diversity of local food system

Doesthecommunityconsumeadiversityoflocally-producedfood?

Thereisahighdiversityoflocalfoods.However,villagers’dietsandpreferenceshavebeenchangingandvillagershavestartedbuyingfoodinstores,suchascannedfish,flour,noodlesetc.

5â

6 Maintenance and use of local crop varieties and animal breeds

Aredifferentlocalcrops,varietiesandanimalbreedsconservedandusedinthecommunity?

Localvarietiesstillexist,buttheseareslowlybeingreplacedbycommercialones(e.g.taro),andvillagersarenotinterestedinmaintaininglocalvarieties.

3à

7 Sustainable management of common resources

Arecommonresourcesmanagedsustainably? Fishingpracticesareimproving,butarestillnotsustainable.

3á

korovou village

Lanvena village

vidawa village

Waitabu village

differentcomponentsof the landscapeandseascapeis relatively high. The four villages have been alsoinvolved incommunity-basedecotourismsince1990,with funding assistance from the New Zealand AidProgramme.Thus,thecommunitieshavebeenactivelyinvolved innatural resourcemanagement,particularlyrelatedtoecotourism.

Throughdiscussionsofthegroupscoresforeachindi-cator,thevillagerswereabletosharetheirperceptionsofthestatusoftheir landscapesandseascapes,andtoreachcommonunderstandingamongelders,youth,menandwomen.Afterfinishingthegroupscoring,theydiscussedwaystostrengthenlandscapeandseascaperesiliencebasedonthisunderstanding,whichallowedthemtocomeupwithconcreteideasforactionsthatcouldbeimplementedatthevillagelevel.

Forexample,participantsfromWaitabuvillagereachedagreement on the following group scores for eachindicator.1

1 TheresilienceIndicatorsusedintheFijiworkshopwereapreviousversionslightlydifferentfromthesetofindicatorsfoundinthistoolkit.



knowledge and innovation 3.2

8 Innovation in agriculture and conservation practices

Doesthecommunitydevelop,improveandadoptnewagricultural,fisheries,forestryandconservationpracticesand/orrevitalizetraditionalonestoadapttochangingconditions,includingclimatechange?

Agroforestrypractices,suchasavoidingclear-cutting,helpresilienceinthefaceofhurricanes.However,thesepracticesarenotenough.

3á

9 traditions and knowledge related to biodiversity

Arelocalknowledgeandculturaltraditionsrelatedtobiodiversitytransmittedfromeldersandparentstoyoungpeopleinthecommunity?

Someknowledgeispasseddownthroughcollectiveworkonfarms.Kavasessions(drinkingkava)amongvillagersareoccasionstoshareknowledge.

3á

10 documentation, access and exchange of agricultural biodiversity

Isagriculturalbiodiversityandassociatedknowledgedocumented,accessedandexchanged?

Agriculturalbiodiversityandknowledgeisaccessedandexchangedamongvillagers,butnodocumentationexists.Documentationisnotpartoftheculture.Documentationintheareahasbeendonebythegovernment,butvillagersdon’talwayshaveaccesstodocuments.

3á

11 Women’s knowledge

Arewomen’sknowledge,experiencesandskillsrecognizedandrespectedathousehold,communityandlandscape/seascapelevel?

Womengaveascoreof4,whilemengaveascoreof5.Understandingbetweenmenandwomenwasdifferent.

4á

governance and social equity 4.2

12 Right in relation to land/water and other natural resource management

Doesthecommunityhavecustomaryand/orformallyrecognizedrightsoverland(seasonal)pastures,waterandnaturalresources?

Villagersfeelthattheyhaveacertainfreedomoverlandandwaterresources,althoughthesysteminplacelimitstheallocationoffarmlandforeachfamily.Thefishinggroundiscommonpropertysharedbytwoothercommunities.

5á

13 community-based governance

Aregovernancemechanismsbylocalcommunitiesandinstitutionseffectiveforsustainablenaturalresourcesandbiodiversitymanagement?

Thereisacommitteethatlooksafternaturalresources.Thecommitteeissupportedbythenationalgovernmentandfisheriesdepartment,whicharepromotingsustainabledevelopment.

4á


14 Social capital in the form of cooperation across the landscape/seascape

Isthereconnection,cooperationandcoordinationwithinandbetweencommunitiesforthemanagementofnaturalresources?

Cohesionwithinthecommunityisgood,butnotbetweencommunities.

4á

15 gender equity

Dowomenhavethesameopportunitiesasmenindecisionmaking,accesstoresources,education,informationandinnovation?

Inequalitiesareonlyseenindecision-makingprocessesinclanmeetings.Women’spositionindecision-makingisweak.

4á

16 Social equity

Isaccesstoresourcesandotheropportunitiesfairandequitableforallcommunitymembers?

Eachclanhasanequalshareofresources.However,amongthethreeclansinthevillage,somehavesmallerpopulationsthanothersandsohavemoreresourcesperperson.

4á

Livelihoods and well-being 4

17 Socio-economic infrastructure

Isthesocio-economicinfrastructureadequatefortheneedsofthecommunity?

Roadsinthevillageareinpoorcondition,whichisoneoftheprioritiesforimprovement.

4á

18 health of people and environmental conditions

Whatisthegeneralhealthsituationoflocalpeopletakingintoconsiderationtheprevailingenvironmentalconditions?

Thevillageiskeptcleanandtidy.Wasteisseparated,andplasticisburned.EveryMonday,thosethataresickaretakentothenurse.Biofiltershavebeeninstalledintwocommunitywatertanksfordrinkingwater.Flushtoiletsareineveryhousehold.

5á

19 Income diversity

Arehouseholdsinthecommunityinvolvedinavarietyofsustainable,income-generatingactivities?

Relianceonagriculture(taroandcassava)istoohigh(60-70%).TourismintheMarineParkandhandicraft(mats,fans,virgincoconutoil)arepotentialothersourcesofincome.

3á

20 opportunities for biodiversity-based livelihoods

Doesthecommunitydevelopinnovativeuseoflocalbiodiversityforitslivelihoods?

TheMarineParkisanattemptnotonlytoimprovetheconservationstatusofthecoralreefandbenefitfromspillovereffectsonsurroundingareas,butalsoasamaintouristattraction.

4á


Afterreviewingthiscommonunderstandingofthestatusofthelandscape/seascape,thegroupselectedprioritydiscussion topics to identify possible actions for thevillage.Thefourdiscussiontopicswereasfollows:1 Reductionofchemicaluseinagriculturalactivities2 Reforestation in areas with heavy clearing for

agroforestry

topic What needs to be done? Who will do it? Who will lead it? External support

1 • Revivetraditionalcollectivework(balebale)inthevillagetoreduceuseofchemicals

villagemen villageheadman,villagechief

TeteTaveuni(localNGOpromotinguseoforganicfertilizers),MinistryofAgriculture(nationalgov’t)

2 • Organizevillagemeetingswherethevillagechiefandelderscantellthecommunityabouttheimportanceofreforestation

villagechief plantationcommitteeofeachvillage

ForestryDepartment(nationalgov’t),becauseithasnativeseeds

3 • Discussrevivaloftraditionalknowledgeincludingfarmingpracticesduringcollectivework

• Moredialoguebetweeneldersandyouthtoshareknowledgewithyoungvillagers,forexampleduringthecollectivework

• Documentationoftraditionalknowledge

• Traditionalfarmingpracticesinclude:

– Farmingdiversity:plantingnotonlytaroandcava,butalsootherproducts

– Plantingtaroevery4months:tarotakes8monthstoharvest.Thus,4monthsafterplanting,villagersplantagainsothattheycanharvesttaroevery4months

– Practiceagroforestrytoprotectmarineresources

youthgroups,elders

villageheadman,villagechief

MinistryofAgriculture(nationalgov’t),MinistryofiTaukei(“indigenous”)Affairs(nationalgov’t)

4 Planttarointheoff-season,sincevillagerscangrowtaroatanytimeonTaveuniIsland,sothatvillagerscansellitintheoff-season(AprilandMay)inamarketwheretarocanbesoldatahigherprice

Findgoodmarketsforlocalhandicrafts(sewing,tapacloth,matsandothers),forexampleinavisitorcentreinthevillageorresorthotelsontheisland

PlantmorePandanustoproducemoremats

villagers,women villageheadman,villagechief

3 Revitalization of traditional knowledge includingfarmingpractices

4 Promotionofmoreincome-generatingactivities

Thevillagersdiscussedeachtopicandcameupwiththefollowingideasforconcreteactionsinthevillage.

4.3 Turkey Development of a landscape/seascape strategy

Background

ThefollowingcasestudyfromCOMDEKSactivitiesinTurkeyhighlightshow the indicatorscanbeused forempoweringlocalcommunitiesinthemanagementoftheir landscapesthroughtheformulationofparticipa-tory landscapeandseascapestrategies.ThroughtheCOMDEKSprogramme,UNDPisencouragingahighlyparticipatory and inclusive approach to formulationof landscapeandseascapestrategies,builtaroundacommunity-drivenvisionforrestoringandmaintainingSEPLSresilience.

After the identification of the target landscape forCOMDEKSactivitiesinTurkey-selectionmadeonthebasisofseveralcriteria, themost importantofwhichwasthedemonstratedinterestandengagementofthecommunitiesthemselves-aresilienceassessmentwasheld in the Datça-Bozburun Peninsula in the Muğlaprovince of Southwest Turkey to assess the currentsituationinthetargetSEPLSandtobetterunderstandlocalcommunities’perceptions.Thisbaselineassess-ment led to the preparation of a COMDEKS CountryProgramme Landscape Strategy, a comprehensivedocument which outlines the landscape profile,expectedgoalsandoutcomes,andkeymeasuresandstrategiesforcommunity-basedactions.

TheDatça-BozburunPeninsulaisrecognizedasaKeyBiodiversity Area (KBA)1 as it represents one of themostpristinelowlandforestandcoastallandscapesinthe Mediterranean. The targeted area spans 247,700hectaresandincludesthepeninsulaanditssurround-ings, with a northward extension covering the richmarinehabitatsofGökovaBay.Itisadiversehillyland-scape with harbours and bays along its coasts. The

steepcliffspreventtheexpansionoftheroadnetworkto some extent and provide patches of habitat forwildlife.

About 90 percent of the Datça-Bozburun Peninsulais protected under natural parks, wildlife reservesand natural and archaeological sites, as well as six“No-TakeZones”(NTZs)andtwoSpecialEnvironmentalProtectionAreas (GökovaSEPAandDatça-BozburunPeninsulaSEPA).However,Datça-Bozburun isat riskof losing its valuableprotectedstatus,which todatehasreducedthreatstothelandscape.

The Datça-Bozburun peninsula is recognized as a Key Biodiversity Area

1 “Keybiodiversityareasareplacesofinternationalimportancefortheconservationofbiodiversitythroughprotectedareasandothergovern-ancemechanisms.Theyareidentifiednationallyusingsimple,standardcriteria,basedontheirimportanceinmaintainingspeciespopulations.”(Source:www.iucn.org)

Table 3. Ideas for actions in Waitabu village, Taveuni Island, Fiji

©C

OM

DE

KS

Tur

key/

Gök

men

Arg

un


Fishing is one of the key livelihood activities in Gokova Bay

Preparation

Information collection and stakeholder identificationThe teamofexperts supporting thebaselineassess-ment prepared information regarding the status ofconservationandlivelihoodactivitiesinthearea,takingintoaccount forexample thecontinuousdecrease inpopulationsofvulnerableMediterraneanspecies.

A literature review, assessment of local capacities,site visits and consultations with local stakeholderswere conducted. Local stakeholders included repre-sentatives of local villages, municipalities and citycouncils;cooperativesandunionsforagriculture,fish-eries, tourism and infrastructure; individual farmers,fishermen, hotel owners, tourism operators, animalkeepersandlocalresidents;localandnationalprotec-tion-oriented NGOs working on nature conservationand agricultural biodiversity; and local academicsresearchingmarineprotection.

One challenge was adapting the terminology to thecommunity’s needs. As the language used in theindicators was difficult for most of the participantsto comprehend, the COMDEKS team translated andsimplifiedtheterminologyandprovidedexamplesrele-vantto localcommunitiestoensurethatallmemberswouldunderstandthetermsandconcepts.


Theassessmentworkshopslasted3-4hours,includingan introductory presentation and exercises to createa more informal, participatory and communicativeatmosphere.Theassessmentof the landscapesitua-tionwasbasedon1)aninteractivemappingexercise,2)scoringoftheresilienceindicators,and3)aproblemtree analysis, which was produced from discussionsduringtheprocess.

Prior to the workshops, participants were asked tomark important assets, values, threats and conflictareasbystickingnotesandphotosontoamapofthelandscape.Thecomposedmapnotonlyprovidedvalu-ableinformationonkeycharacteristicsofthearea,butalso underlined sensitive areas of interest, problems,opportunitiesandthreats.

Afterthemappingexercise,thethreeresilienceassess-mentworkshopswereheld,andlaterkeystakeholderswhodidnotappearatthemeetingswerevisitedindi-vidually. Then, a follow-up session was organized todiscussproblemanalysis.

Based on the interactive mapping exercise and indi-catorassessment,localcommunitiesidentifiedthreatsandproblemsintheareas.Theyfoundthat,asaresultofincreasingdevelopmentpressuressuchasurbaniza-tion,pollutionandhabitatdestructioninterrestrialandmarineecosystems,thedegradationleveloftheland-scape is increasing. Important problems highlighted

ParticipantsThreeworkshopswereheld in thepeninsula inorderto maximize key local stakeholders’ participation. Intotal, more than 70 stakeholder representatives from17targetcommunitieswereinvolvedintheworkshops.

Duetothelargesizeoftheareaandthehighpopulationon the peninsula, only representatives of local coop-erativesandcommunities,mostlymen,wereinvitedtotheseworkshops,althoughiftimeandconditionsallow,additionalhousevisitstowomenarestronglyadvisedtoovercomegenderbarriersinsuchcases.

Local fisherwoman in Datça-Bozburun Peninsula

in the problem tree analysis included a loss of localagriculturalproductssuchasfigandmastic,abandon-mentoftraditionalfishinganddivingpracticesinfavourof conventional products with higher profit margins,destructionofvaluableforestsanddecreasingwildlifepopulation. Literature also shows that populations ofvulnerable Mediterranean species continue to shrinkdespiteprotectionstatus.

Landscape strategy and action plan

The series of consultations undertaken on Datça-Bozburun provided a snapshot of the current situ-ation of the landscape from the perspective of keystakeholders. In addition, a landscape-level perspec-tivewasveryhelpfulforlocalcommunitiestohaveanopportunity to visualize how their actions affect thelandscape, and how those actions link together. Theprocessgenerateda list of values, opportunities andthreats,fromwhichthestrategytoenhancelandscaperesiliencewasdeveloped.

Based on these consultations, stakeholder repre-sentativesdevelopedtheCOMDEKSCountryProgramLandscape Strategy with four desired outcomes: 1)to improve and/or maintain ecosystem services bystrengthening participatory land use planning andmanagementpractices;2)toincreaseresilienceofagri-culturethroughconservationofplantgeneticresourcesandimplementationofagro-ecologicalpracticesusingtraditional knowledge; 3) to improve the livelihoodsof the people through eco-friendly community-basedenterprisesthatreduceimpactsontheecosystemandscenic value of the landscape; and 4) to create and/or strengthen institutional governance mechanismsthrough more inclusive and participatory decision-makingprocessesatthelandscapelevel.

During the consultative process for the developmentoftheLandscapeStrategy,participantsalsoidentified

©C

OM

DE

KS

Tur

key/

Zaf

erK

ızılk

aya

©C

OM

DE

KS

Tur

key/

Zaf

erK

ızılk

aya


the kinds of local interventions needed to achievetheseoutcomesandguidethedesignandselectionofspecificcommunityprojectsfordirectgrantfunding–eitherfromCOMDEKSorotherdonors.Basedonthiscommunity-driven landscape planning process, theSGPNationalSteeringCommittee inTurkey selectednine projects in the Datca-Bozburun Peninsula, allof which are administered by community organiza-tions and are designed to improve the livelihoods oflocal populations while strengthening the resilienceof surrounding ecosystems in the target landscape.For example, the “Transition to Responsible Fishing Practices in Datça Peninsula”and“Ghost Net Hunters”projects aim to protect biodiversity and improveecosystemservicesbycombatingoverfishing,thelackofregulatoryenforcementandillegalharvestingwithinno-fishingzones,while the“Ecosystem Sustainability, Rehabilitation and a Start for Ecotourism at Hacetevi Hill” and “The Conservation, Promotion and Fair Trade of Datça Almonds”projectsareworkingtowardsdevel-opingresilientagriculturalsystems.Alloftheprojectstake a holistic approach to sustainable community-based development and create synergies throughoutthetargetlandscape.

Stakeholder-drivenplanningprocessesand theprac-ticalapplicationoftheindicators,basedoncommunityperspectives,areeffectivetoolsforreachingcommonunderstandingofthreatsandsolutionsandfordefiningstrategies to enhance SEPLS resilience throughcommunity-basedactivities.

TheCOMDEKSTurkeyLandscapeStrategyservesasa collaborative adaptive management tool to protectDatça-BozburunKeyBiodiversityAreawhileimprovingthe livelihoodsof local communities.After theuseoftheResilienceIndicatorsasatoolforcommunitiestoassess their landscape, identify desired ecological,socialandeconomicoutcomes,andplanactivitiestobuildresilience,theCOMDEKSprojectinTurkeysoonbegantheprocessofconductinganex-postbaseline

assessment inorder tomeasure resultsandachieve-mentsatthelandscapelevel,assesschangeinpercep-tions,andadaptplanningforsubsequentmanagementpracticesthatwillreflectlessonslearned.

Divers from the “Ghost Net Hunters” project

Landscape poster with information on landscape elements and COMDEKS funded activities developed during the baseline assessment in Turkey

This poster, titled “Challenges and solutions toenhance the resilience of the Datça-BozburunPeninsula’s socio-economic production landscapeand seascape” was produced through the assess-mentprocess. It isusedasaneducational tool forlocalcommunitiesandforbuildingawarenessamongvisitorstothearea.

The left side of the map simulates the interactivemapping exercise held during the assessment, in

which community members were asked to markimportant assets, including key biodiversity andlocal products, as well as threats and challengessuch as sea pollution, overfishing and ghost nets.The right side outlines the nine community-basedprojectsidentifiedthroughtheresilienceassessmentworkshops,andcurrentlysupportedbyCOMDEKS,which focus on both landscapes and seascapesof the peninsula. Below the annotated map, eightmessages welcome visitors in both Turkish andEnglishandpresentwaystorespectthelandscape’snatural featuresbyavoidingdisturbance to animalhabitats,supportingsustainablefishing,andempow-ering local cooperatives to ensure conservation oftheDatçaalmondandotherlocalproducts.

©C

OM

DE

KS

Tur

key/

Den

izA

carli

©B

ebec

iC.


4.4 Kenya Results analysis for researchers

Background

The following description of workshops preparedand implemented inKenyabyBioversity Internationalserves to highlight how results collected from work-shopsmaybeanalysedbyresearchers tohelpeluci-date the range of perception of risks faced by thecommunity and the existing degree of innovation tocopewithchangesanddevelopmentneeds.Whiletheindicatorsusedinthisstudyareanearlierversionandare slightly different from the latest set of indicators,theoverallprocessshowshowthe indicatorscanbeusefulnotonlyfordevelopingmanagementstrategies,butalsoasaresearchtool.


The field-testing in Kenya involved 5 communi-ties which were selected among partners locatedin different agro-climatic conditions that had beeninvolvedinpreviousBioversityresearchactivitieswithgoodand long-termpartnerships. Inconsiderationofgender andagebalance, agroupof 6-7participantswhoareabletorepresenteachcommunitywereinvitedfortheexercise.Informationwascollectedfromatotalof34individuals(Table4).Thisnumberwasdeterminedforcoordinationpurposestoobtaingoodcommitmentfromtheparticipants.Inaddition,inordertomakelogis-ticalarrangementssmooth(suchasstartingthefocusgroupdiscussionsrightaway),aBioversityrepresenta-tivewenttoallcommunitiesoneweekbeforetoidentifytheparticipantsandmakearrangementsincludingthevenue,food,etc.

The Focus Group Discussion (FDG) consisted oftwo parts: an introduction/brainstorming session,

and indicator question/discussion session. One daywasallotted foreachvillage toconduct itsFGD.Theintroduction/brainstorming session took up the first2 hours, and the indicator session, answering all20 indicator questions and discussion, took about4-5 hours. In each FGD, before starting, simpledemographic information such as full name, ageand gender of the participants was also recorded.

The facilitator first introduced and explained the main objectives of the day

A participatory mapping exercise was organized inthebrainstormingsessiontocreateacommonunder-standing of the scale of the community landscape,landscape contents and ecosystem services. Theresultingcommunitymapservedasafirststeptoiden-tifythescaleofthelandscapeandlocationofthemajorlandscapecharacteristicswithinthecommunity.Aftermapping, the facilitator allowed the participants toengageinadiscussionofmajorcomponentsoftheland-scape,climate-relatedcalamities,ahistoricalcalendarofmajoreventsandcalamities,majorfoodcrops,live-stock,wildfoods,trees,croplands,recentlandscapechangesandaccessandcontroloverresources.Keytechnical terms such as “landscape”, “agricultural

biodiversity”, and “resilience” were also describedin local languages. Information was written on a bigsheetofpaper,whichwashelpfulduringthefollowingscoringof the indicators (Table5aandb).At theendoftheexercise,onerepresentativepresentedthemaptoalltheotherparticipantswhichwereinvitedtoaddwhat was missing on the map. This exercise did notaimtoobtainageographicallycorrectmap,butrathertohelpparticipantscreateafocusfortheirdiscussions.

The facilitator explains the different elements of the landscape

AsectionoftheregionaroundMusevewasdrawnonthemap,includingtwosub-locationsand10villages.

The map created during the participatory mapping exercise

Table 4. Village location and number participating in the Focus Group Discussion

district village Latitude Longitude Elevation (m)

Major Ethnic

community

total paticipants

gender age

M F Average Max Min

Kikuyu Ruku -1,207 36,693 1.978 Kikuyu 6 3 3 48,8 80 29

Mbeere Njarange -0,461 37,814 850 Mbeere 7 3 4 48,7 70 23

Kitui Museve -1,325 38,071 1.283 Kamba 7 3 4 53,4 70 23

Kitui Nzewani -1,386 38,015 1.130 Kamba 7 2 5 43,3 68 22

Machakos Kisaani -1,438 37,438 1.344 Kamba 7 3 4 48,6 74 35

34 14 20 48,6 80 22

©B

iove

rsity

Inte

rnat

iona

l/Yas

ukiM

orim

oto

©B

iove

rsity

Inte

rnat

iona

l/Yas

ukiM

orim

oto

©B

iove

rsity

Inte

rnat

iona

l/Yas

ukiM

orim

oto


Table 5a. Major landscape components and calamities identified in Museve village, Kenya

category description

Majorlandscapesandlandmarks

Hills,ridges,forests,largetreesandrocks,swamps,damsandwaterpointsincludingwells,roads,schools,houses,dispensaries,churches,seasonalriversandstreams,radioandtelephoneboosters,cropfields,grazinglands

Protectedlandscapesandareas

Forests,waterdams,culturalsitesandsacredplaces,schools,markets,churches,dispensaries,roads

Crops Maize,beans,sorghum,cassava,sweetpotatoes,cocoyam(Xanthosomasp.),sugarcane,bananas,kale,blacknightshade(Solanumsp.),carrots,pumpkins,ediblegourds(Lagenaria siceraria),onions,coriander,pigeonpeas,cowpeas,climbingbeans,greengram,bambarabeans,watermelon,fingermillet,pearlmillet,custardapples(Annona reticulata),tomatoes,avocadoes,passionfruit,mangoes,oranges,pawpaw,tangerines,guava

Trees Cupressussp.,Eucalyptus sp,Grevillia robusta,Senna siamea,Vitexpayo,Croton macrostachys(kitundu),Antidesma venosum(kikala),miklanginga

Livestock Cows,goats,sheep,donkeys,chickens

Wildanimals Monkeys,nzonga,squirrels,rabbits/hares,rats,mice,mongoose,impala,snakes

Climate-relatedcalamities

Prolongeddryseason(drought),overgrazing,floods,landerosion,croppestssuchasarmyworms,bushfires,interferenceofpeople,diseases(animalandhuman)

Socialcalamities Poverty,unemployment,malnutritionandhunger,drugabuse,lackofmoralityamongyouth,Indigenoustreescutdownandnotplantedagain

Table 5b. Example translations of landscape terms prepared for the discussion in Kikamba (a local language)

English kikamba

Landscape nzi/nthi,wmbowanthi/nzi(“natureofcountry”)

Resilience kwiyumiisyo,kwingangiiya

Diversity mbulanio,kivathkanyo

The population of this landscape was estimated tobe 6-7,000 people in 750-800 households, with theperceived scale of the landscape varying among thefivecommunitiessurveyed.

Results analysis

After the workshop, researchers carried out furtheranalysisusingthecollectedscores,helpingtoidentifyrisksfacedbythefivecommunities.Localinnovationsand challenges were shown to have implications forpotentialcommunitydevelopment.

Three typesofanalyticalmethodwereutilized:quan-titative, qualitative and comparative. The followingare examples of results found through each of thedifferent methods. Table 6 shows the proportion ofrespondents scoring 1 (explained as “high risk” inthese workshops) to 5 (explained as “good state”)foreachof the20 indicators in thefivecommunities.

Table 6. Percentages of respondents with different scores and trends, mean scores and trends in the five communities, indicating degree and variation of perception scores and trends for the 20 indicators

Score (%) Mean score * trend (%) Mean trend *

Ind

icat

ors

1 2 3 4 5 Ruk

u

Nja

rang

e

Mus

eve

Nze

wan

i

Kis

aani

â æ à ä á Ruk

u

Nja

rang

e

Mus

eve

Nze

wan

i

Kis

aani

1 Heterogeneityandmultifunctionalityinthelandscape

6 21 41 21 12 3.0 a 3.7 a 3.9 a 2.6 a 2.4 a 0 59 12 26 3 2.5 a 2.4 a 2.3 a 4.0 b 2.4 a

2 Areasprotectedfortheirculturalandecologicalimportance

21 59 18 3 0 1.0 a 2.1 b 2.7 b 2.1 b 2.0 b 6 47 24 24 0 3.0 b 1.9 a 2.4 ab 4.0 c 2.0 a

3 Sustainableuseofresources

0 56 38 6 0 3.0 bc 2.0 a 3.1 c 2.4 ab 2.0 a 0 59 9 32 0 2.5 ab 2.0 a 3.1 ab 4.0 c 2.0 a

4 Environmentalsecurityandsafety

0 32 59 9 0 3.3 b 2.1 a 3.0 b 2.7 ab 2.7 ab 0 26 6 68 0 3.5 b 2.0 a 3.6 b 4.0 b 4.0 b

5a Localcrops,varietiesandanimalbreedsusedinacommunity

3 6 76 15 0 2.8 ab 2.6 a 3.3 ab 3.4 b 3.0 ab 0 32 3 65 0 3.0 ab 2.1 a 3.7 b 3.7 b 4.0 b

5b Agriculturalbiodiversitydocumentedandconservedincommunityclassificationsystemsandcommunityseedbanks

62 32 6 0 0 1.0 a 1.0 a 1.4 a 2.3 b 1.4 a 0 0 26 71 3 3.0 a 3.9 b 3.9 b 4.0 b 4.0 b

6 Diversityoflocalfoodsystem

0 50 41 9 0 3.5 b 2.1 a 2.3 a 2.4 a 2.7 ab 3 21 3 74 0 3.7 b 1.9 a 3.9 b 4.0 b 4.0 b

7 Innovationinagriculturalbiodiversitymanagementforimprovedresilienceandsustainability

0 38 47 12 3 4.0 c 2.1 a 2.1 a 3.0 b 2.9 b 0 9 6 76 9 4.0 ab 3.1 a 3.9 ab 4.3 b 4.0 ab

8 Accessandexchangeofagriculturalbiodiversity

0 53 26 18 3 4.2 c 2.1 a 2.0 a 3.0 b 2.4 ab 0 21 6 74 0 3.8 b 2.1 a 4.0 b 3.7 b 4.0 b

9 Transmissionoftraditionalknowledgefromelders,parentsandpeerstotheyoungpeopleinacommunity

3 32 56 9 0 3.3 c 3.1 bc 2.4 ab 2.7 ac 2.0 a 0 38 3 59 0 2.0 a 2.3 a 4.0 b 3.6 b 4.0 b

10 Culturaltraditionsrelatedtobiodiversity

0 26 62 12 0 2.7 a 2.9 a 3.1 a 2.4 a 3.1 a 6 65 6 24 0 2.0 ab 2.4 b 1.7 ab 4.0 b 2.1 ab

11 Numberofgenerationsinteractingwiththelandscape

0 0 38 53 9 4.2 b 3.6 ab 4.1 b 3.3 ab 3.4 ab 0 97 3 0 0 2.0 a 2.1 a 2.0 a 2.0 a 2.0 a


Score (%) Mean score * trend (%) Mean trend *

Ind

icat

ors

1 2 3 4 5 Ruk

u

Nja

rang

e

Mus

eve

Nze

wan

i

Kis

aani

â æ à ä á Ruk

u

Nja

rang

e

Mus

eve

Nze

wan

i

Kis

aani

12 Practicesofdocumentationandexchangeoflocalknowledge

41 21 35 3 0 1.0 a 3.1 b 1.4 a 2.9 b 1.4 a 0 0 21 79 0 3.0 a 4.0 b 3.9 b 4.0 b 4.0 b

13 Useoflocalterminologyorindigenouslanguages

0 3 18 47 32 5.0 d 4.1 bc 4.6 cd 3.6 ab 3.3 ab 0 76 24 0 0 2.7 b 2.0 a 2.4 ab 2.0 a 2.1 ab

14 Women’sknowledgeaboutbiodiversityanditsuse

0 3 59 32 6 3.3 ab 3.3 a 4.1 b 3.4 ab 2.9 a 0 3 3 85 9 4.5 b 3.7 a 3.9 ab 4.0 ab 4.0 ab

15 Localresourcegovernance

38 18 32 12 0 1.0 a 1.0 a 3.6 d 3.0 c 2.1 b 0 0 29 71 0 3.5 b 3.0 a 4.0 c 4.0 c 4.0 c

16 Autonousaccesstoindigenouslandandnaturalreoserces

0 0 0 21 79 5.0 b 5.0 b 5.0 b 5.0 b 4.0 a 0 18 82 0 0 2.0 a 3.0 b 3.0 b 3.0 b 3.0 b

17 Gender 0 9 68 21 3 3.2 a 2.9 a 3.1 a 3.7 a 3.0 a 0 0 24 76 0 3.5 a 4.0 a 3.9 ab 3.7 a 3.7 a

18 Socialinfrastructure 0 32 50 18 0 4.0 c 2.1 a 2.6 ab 2.7 ab 3.0 b 0 3 3 91 3 4.0 a 3.6 a 4.1 a 4.0 a 4.0 a

19 Healthcare 0 24 56 21 0 4.0 c 3.1 b 2.3 a 2.6 ab 3.0 b 0 0 0 100 0 4.0 a 4.0 a 4.0 a 4.0 a 4.0 a

20 Healthrisk 9 56 26 9 0 3.5 b 1.9 a 2.3 a 2.0 a 2.3 a 0 24 6 71 0 3.8 b 2.0 a 4.0 b 3.6 b 4.0 b

Total (%) / Mean * 9 27 41 17 7 3.14 a 2.67 a 2.98 a 2.92 a 2.63 a 1 28 14 55 1 3.14 ab 2.74 a 3.41 b 3.69 b 3.40 ab

Quantitative analysisTheproportionofeachscoregivenbyparticipantswascalculatedforeachindicatortoidentifyspecificareasthecommunityperceivedasmorerisky.

In total, theproportionof respondentsgivingascoreof 3 was the highest at 41%, but 36% of the totalrespondents answered with scores of 1 and 2. Fortrends,thehighestratewasseenas“someincrease”(ä),with55%oftotalrespondents.

Thehighestproportionofrespondentsscored1(“highrisk”)and2(“risky”)for“Agriculturalbiodiversitydocu-mented and conserved in community classificationsystems”(94%),followedby“Areasprotectedfortheirculturalandecologicalimportance”(79%),and“Healthrisk”(65%).Ontheotherhand,thehighestproportionof respondents saw trends of 1 and 2 for “ Numberofgenerations interactingwith the landscape” (97%),followed by “Use of local terminology or indigenouslanguages” (76%), and “Cultural traditions relatedto biodiversity” (71%). This shows that participantsshared a risk perception of losing local crops, varie-ties,classificationknowledgeandculturalsystemsthatmanage the ecosystem and landscape diversity, theyounggenerationtendstodisregardlocalinstitutions,cultural practices, religions and communal property.Comparison of scores (i.e., the proportion of eachscore) among different age, gender, and communitygroupswasusefulforfurtheranalysis.

Qualitative analysis During the assessment, facilitators documentedparticipants’commentsandexplored thedirectionofthe communities’ development. In the discussions, anumberofproblemsfacedbythecommunity,causesof the problems, local solutions, potential interven-tionactivitiesandmajorstakeholder institutionswerecaptured on cards and categorised by root cause,problemsandlocalactions.

Some of the key comments were documented on cards during the assessment and used for the follow-up session in discussions about potential action plans within the communities

Discussionamongcommunitymemberswasafunda-mentalelementofthisstudyandusefultounderstandthe context of actions with high ecological or socialimpact. In the discussions, a number of communityinterventionactivitiesandactionstakenbycommunity-based institutions were described regarding naturalresources, empowerment of the people, creation ofecologicalawarenessandprotectingtheenvironment.Ontheotherhand,thelackofgovernmentactionandpolicyimplementationwasarticulatedasaweakness.Individual communitymembersdidnot feel theyhadthe influence to prevent other community membersfromcuttingtrees,makingcharcoal,convertingtocropfields,harvestingsand,takinganimalstothewateringplaceetc.ContinuarequestafraseconquellasopraeSostituiretuttoquestoparagrafocon:Themaincausesofthiswereseenaspopulation increaseandcolonialinfluence, which have greatly weakened both tradi-tional community punishment and cultural systemsthatpreventedactivitiessuchascuttingtreeswithoutpermission from the community authority. This situ-ation is worsened by the fact that most information

©B

iove

rsity

Inte

rnat

iona

l/Yas

ukiM

orim

oto

70 | Toolkit for the Indicators of Resilience in Socio-ecological Production Landscapes and Seascapes (SEPLS)

relatedtoagriculturalandecosystembiodiversityhasbeenpassedononly throughoral traditionand therehas been a lack of educational materials describinglocalbiodiversityinlocallanguages.

Comparative analysisForacomparativestudy, targetcommunitiesneed tobeidentifiedstrategicallyinconsiderationoftheiragro-climatic,geographical(location,distancetomarketsortowns,altitudeetc.),andsocio-culturalcharacteristics.

In this case, an interesting observation was seen forindicators related todocumentationandexchangeoflocal knowledge, from comparative analysis betweenthe communities. The Kisaani community had betterperceived risk compared to the other communities,whichwasconsideredtobearesultofearliercommu-nity efforts. In Kisaani between 2001 and 2002, withhelp fromBioversity International, agroupofwomenknown as the Kyanika Women’s Group undertook aprojecttosafeguardthediversityofgourdandcowpeavarietiesand localknowledgeabout theirmanyuses.Duringthisproject,theyvisiteddifferentpartsofKenya,collectingmany typesofgourdandcowpeavarietiesand recording people’s knowledge about them. Thefruits, seeds and information were stored and exhib-itedinaspecialbuilding,akindofcommunityresourcecentre,whichactsasasourceofseedsandaneduca-tioncentre.

Comparative analysis in this case helped to showthe real effectiveness of past interventions, and thusprovideevidenceforwhattypesofinterventionsshouldbepursuedinthefuture.

findings of the results analysis

The indicator workshops and results analysis helpedto identify perceived risks and potential develop-ment options for securing ecosystem services and

sustainable production systems through enhancingsocialcohesion,humancapitalandfarmers’knowledgeregardingmanagementoflocally-availableagriculturaldiversity.Thisprocess,includingcontinuedinteraction,can raise self-motivated awareness and local owner-ship in decision-making and creation of action planstoimplementcommunity-basedinterventionsandthusstrengthenresilienceinthelandscape.

Some practical lessons learned from conducting thisstudy:• Agroupof6-7participantswasfoundtobeappro-

priateformanagingandfacilitatingdiscussionsbutinsufficientforstatisticaldataassessmentofscores.In order to understand community perceptionsfromstatisticalanalysis,alargernumberofpartici-pantsfromvarioussocialbackgroundsneedtobeselectedfromabroaderrangeofthepopulation.

• Workingoutpotentialoptionsrequiresalotoftime.The research team and facilitators therefore needtoidentifytheidealnumberofparticipantsforthisexercise.Around15-20activeparticipantsare themaximum number that one facilitator can handle.Iftwopairsoffacilitatorsandnotetakersareavail-able, two separatediscussions can be organized,possiblydividedbygender.

toolkit for the indicators of resilience

Documents