Global Partnership on Forest Landscape Restoration
Towards a global learning network of sites(Bali, May 2009)
Global Partnership on Forest Landscape Restoration
Started around 2005
n International organisations: IUCN, WWF, PROFOR, UNFF, UNEP-WCMC, IUFRO, ITTO, ICRAF, CIFOR, FAO, CBD, CARE, ARC
n UK Forestry Commission, US Forest Servicen Growing number of governmentsn Growing number of individuals
Aim:n Effectively restore the world’s degraded forest
landscapes n Establish and improve relationships among
resource managers, policy makers, environmentalists, researchers and other groups involved in forest landscape restoration
n Encourage the development and use of innovative FLR approaches and methodologies
Global Partnership on Forest Landscape Restoration
Major achievements:
n International advocacy
n Putting forest landscape restoration in the picture
n Mobilise global interest and financial means
Global Partnership on Forest Landscape Restoration
Yet to be done:
n Link more with site level
n Putting “theory” into “practice”
n Getting local actors involved
n Launch process of collective learning
n Translate lessons learned to policy level
Global Partnership on Forest Landscape Restoration
GPFLR Learning Network
GPFLR
Gradually building the learning network:
n January-March 2009: Scoping phase
n April-September 2009: Development phase
n September 2009 onward: Operational phase
GPFLR Learning Network
Scoping report (March 2009)
Scoping phase
n Needs and expectations of GPFLR partners
n Needs and expectations of learning sites
n Identification of learning objectives
n Identification of learning strategy
n Identification of opportunities and risks
Positive:
n Linking practitioners, policy makers and academia
n Up-scaling of site experience
n International exposure of site managers
n Fosters creativity and critical thinking
n Dialogue - action oriented - institutional change
Scoping phase: overall opinion
Scoping phase: objectives
n “Reforest the world”
n Feed policy makers with evidence-based advice
n Further develop FLR concept through shared learning and practice
n Enhance local FLR efforts
Scoping phase: a “cloud” of objectives
Learning
site Learning
site
Learning
siteactoractor
actoractor
Inter-site learning Innovative
policy advice
Forest Landscape Restoration
Site-based learning
Scoping phase: Knowledge for action
n Pure action networks: lobby & advocacy
n Pure knowledge networks: exchange knowledge without using that knowledge to take action (academic networks)
n Knowledge for action: exchange of knowledge to help practitioners do their work more effectively
(Source: Brown & Salafsky, 2004, quoted by Conje, 2005)
Scoping phase: good practices network
n Information Exchange Network: provision of information, one-way traffic, info from providers to users
n Research network: formal learning framework, pre-defined research questions, data collection
n “Good Practices” Network: (in) formal learning framework, continuous change, learning by doing, two-way traffic
(Source: Brown & Salafsky, 2004, quoted by Conje, 2005)
Good practice network
n No practice is best, many practices are good
n Good practice = Innovativen Good practice = Effectiven Sustainablen Good practice = Replicable (?)
Only if shared and contextualised
Good practice network
We also learn from:
n Bad practicen Problems encounteredn Failuresn Difficulties
Only if openly presented and shared
Scoping phase: users, producers and connectors
actor
partnerpartner
partner
Network facilitator
Universities
ITTO
CIFOR
IUFRO
Policy
maker Policy
maker media
media
actor
GPFLR
publiccompany
company
actor actor
actor
actor
Learning site 2
Learning site 3
Learning site 1
GPFLR coordinator
producer
user
connector
Scoping phase: nested networks
Learning process at site level (intra-site)
Learning process at global level (inter-site)
§ Strengthening local FLR initiatives
§ Enhancing local multi-stakeholder dialogue
§ Enhancing local networks
§ Connecting networks (“nested” networks)
Scoping phase: nested networks
Scoping phase: facilitation
Facilitation of the learning process:
n Both at central, and at decentralised leveln Responsibility of network membersn Local ownership
n Reflective learning
n Issue-driven and output oriented
n Blended learning
n Horizontal and vertical linkages
n Output orientation and action learning
n Capacity development
n North-south and South-south exchange
n Monitoring: learning-by-doing
Scoping phase: learning strategy
n Reflective learning
n Issue-driven and output oriented
n Blended learning
n Horizontal and vertical linkages
n Output orientation and action learning
n Capacity development
n North-south and South-south exchange
n Monitoring: learning-by-doing
Scoping phase: learning strategy
Experience
ReviewAdapt and implement
Conceptualisation
Kolb’s Learning
Cycle
Learning strategy: Reflective learning
After: Kolb’s learning cycle
Plan
Act
Monitor
Evaluate
Plan
Act
Monitor
Evaluate
After: Kolb’s learning cycle
Learning strategy: Reflective learning
n Reflective learning
n Issue-driven and output oriented
n Blended learning
n Horizontal and vertical linkages
n Output orientation and action learning
n Capacity development
n North-south and South-south exchange
n Monitoring: learning-by-doing
Scoping phase: learning strategy
Learning strategy: issue focused
1. Site level restoration techniques 2. Analysing landscape dynamics (biophysical, socio-economic, institutional)3. Analysing stakeholders (needs, claims, motivations at various scales)4. Mechanisms of stakeholder involvement (multi-stakeholder dialogue)5. Competing and conflicting claims (drivers and influencing factors)6. Negotiation and conflict resolution7. Wider policy environment8. Governance and multi-scale governance (transboundary issues)9. Defining broader landscape objectives10. Defining specific restoration objectives11. Monitoring & evaluation12. Financing FLR
Where to start?
Priority setting per learning site
Learning strategy: issue focused
n Reflective learning
n Issue-driven and output oriented
n Blended learning
n Horizontal and vertical linkages
n Output orientation and action learning
n Capacity development
n North-south and South-south exchange
n Monitoring: learning-by-doing
Scoping phase: learning strategy
n Real life encounters
n Web-based tools
“Blended” learning
Learning strategy: blended learning
Learning strategy: blended learning
Web-based learning platform
Topical workshops Training
events
Assessment of global restoration
potential
Economic rationale of FLR
Site meetings
Resources & documents
Research
n Reflective learning
n Issue-driven and output oriented
n Blended learning
n Horizontal and vertical linkages
n Output orientation and action learning
n Capacity development
n North-south and South-south exchange
n Monitoring: learning-by-doing
Scoping phase: learning strategy
Learning strategy: horizontal and vertical linkages
Horizontal learning:
n Learning at sitesn Learning between site
Learning strategy: horizontal and vertical linkages
Vertical learning:
Inter-action between practitioners, policy makers, and researchers
n Reflective learning
n Issue-driven and output oriented
n Blended learning
n Horizontal and vertical linkages
n Output orientation and action learning
n Capacity development
n North-south and South-south exchange
n Monitoring: learning-by-doing
Scoping phase: learning strategy
n Learning activities translated into tangible action
(document, video, policy brief, article, guidelines)
n Action research: strategic alliance with CIFOR (Landscape tools initiative)
n Social software (social bookmarking, audiovisuals, blogs): building social relations
Learning strategy: output oriented action learning
n Reflective learning
n Issue-driven and output oriented
n Blended learning
n Horizontal and vertical linkages
n Output orientation and action learning
n Capacity development
n North-south and South-south exchange
n Monitoring: learning-by-doing
Scoping phase: learning strategy
Active participation requires special skills:
n “Technical” knowledge on FLR
n Process facilitation
n Web-based communication
Learning strategy: Capacity development
n Reflective learning
n Issue-driven and output oriented
n Blended learning
n Horizontal and vertical linkages
n Output orientation and action learning
n Capacity development
n North-south and South-south exchange
n Monitoring: learning-by-doing
Scoping phase: learning strategy
North-South exchange:
Participation of
Northern/Southern,
Eastern/Western,
Temperate/tropical sites
Learning strategy: North-South exchange
n Reflective learning
n Issue-driven and output oriented
n Blended learning
n Horizontal and vertical linkages
n Output orientation and action learning
n Capacity development
n North-south and South-south exchange
n Monitoring: learning-by-doing
Scoping phase: learning strategy
Monitoring of learning networks:
n Multiple objectives and multiple activities
n No linear process
n Outcome unpredictable
n Learning-by-doing
n Site-specific and cross-country action research
n Evaluation end of the first year
Learning strategy: Monitoring & evaluation
Selection of learning sites:
n Limited number of enthusiastic “pilot” sites
n Sites proposed by GPFLR partners
n Livelihoods & landscapes sites
n Auto-selection of sites
Learning sites
Criteria for learning sites:
n (willing to get) involved in FLR activities
n Willing to comply with FLR principles (dual filter, multi-stakeholder involvement)
n Willing to share information and learn
n Availability of capable and enthusiastic personnel
Learning sites
GPFLR learning sites
United States: South Platte
Ghana: Pame Berekum
Netherlands: Veluwe
United Kingdom: Kielder and Trossachs
Brazil:
Acre
China:
Miyun
Thailand
Dong Mae Salong
Great Lakes
SudanUganda:
Mount Elgon
Indonesia
????
Scoping phase: pre-conditions for success
n Long term commitment of GPFLR core group ($$)
n Envisaged results and impact have to be clearly and collectively defined beforehand
n Active participation and contribution of learning sites (local ownership)
n In-built disposition at site level to disclose information, release staff time, allocate resources
Kick-off meetings to get to know each other, define learning sites and contacts, define learning priorities
n May: Indonesian June: Rwanda (Great Lakes)n June/July: Braziln September: England
Four initial meetings
Indonesia workshop
n To get to know each other
n To share our experiences with FLR
n To define the shape of this network
n To define our learning priorities
n To define the way in which we want to learn
n To define learning sites
n To define roles and responsibilities of actors involved
Web-based support
n Generic GPFLR website: http://www.ideastransformlandscapes.org
n FLR Learning platform: http://learning.gpflr.webfactional.com
GPFLR website and learning platform
GPFLR website and learning platform
GPFLR website and learning platform
Web-based learning platform