Community Resource Management at the Arnavons
|
|
Community Resource Management at the Arnavons |
2. Lessons on Participatory Project Management
Building a Framework for Participation
Recognizing Problems and Clarifying Conservation Aims
Using a Participatory Approach with Partners
Guiding and Facilitating the Process
Building Awareness, Understanding, and Capabilities at All Levels
Acting Within A Cultural Context
2. Lessons on Participatory Project Management
From my perspective as the Arvavons Project Coordinator and TNC's Field Representative, there were many days I felt the project was on the verge of chaos and that my job was really one of crisis intervention. But, whenever I reviewed the Project's quarterly progress, I was consistently satisfied with what we had accomplished. We increasingly understood how to use the participatory process to meet the challenges of working together, overcome obstacles, and move the project toward its goals.
A principal element of the Arnavon Project's success to date has been the team's dedication to the intention of creating broad-based participation. Every action has been undertaken with this principle in mind. A strong and consistent effort has been made to avoid the natural human tendency to hold on to power. All partners have been willing to experiment with new ideas in resource management and the participatory process.
Establishing a participatory process may appear as an unwelcome burden to project managers, whose workload and responsibilities seem never-ending. However, when used appropriately, participation is a way to share responsibilities among partners and becomes woven into the project fabric. Although there are no set formulas to achieve project participation, the guidelines that follow offer some insights that can help project managers and coordinators explore the exciting path of community-based conservation.
Building a Framework for Participation
Recognizing Problems and Clarifying Conservation Aims
Typically, most conservation projects begin when an urgent problem is identified and an initial idea of how to handle it is formulated. In the case of the Arnavons, the endangered hawksbill turtle and the sharp decline in its breeding population stimulated efforts to re-establish its protected area status. When embarking on a participatory process, it is necessary that resource owners and users, as well as national and local governments, come to recognize the importance of the situation.
Raising the collective awareness of the problems can be accomplished through discussions, resource surveys, and participatory resource appraisal (PRA) techniques that combine concrete evidence with anecdotal information to substantiate the need for and spark a desire to take action.
At the Arnavons, such participatory activities helped clarify the conservation issues that needed to be addressed. The REA showed the decline in sessile marine invertebrate resources, and the household surveys confirmed the decline across the region. Because of the resources' economic importance, their decline motivated local communities to consider conservation and resource management options.
Recognizing and defining what are the environmental problems varies depending on individuals' and communities' perceptions. To formulate conservation objectives, the perspectives of all the project stakeholders need to be considered, in order to address the area's critical needs and ensure everyone's commitment. At the Arnavons, the initial effort to protect the hawksbill turtle (outside conservation experts' priority) evolved to include developing management strategies for the recovery of marine invertebrates important to the local economy (community priority).
Participatory project management cannot succeed without first gaining the support and approval of government and community leaders. A leader provides the access and freedom to work with grassroots communities, and often becomes a project's strongest advocate. In the case of the Arnavons Project, obtaining the approval of the Commissioner of Lands was key to allowing the communities to participate. The Isabel Provincial Executive empowered the Management Committee under existing legislation. Chief Leslie Miki, a member of the Management Committee, ensured the support of the large and diverse Kia community and became an influential project advocate.
When cultivating the support of leaders, it is important to show respect for their position, being especially sensitive to cultural protocol. In the Solomon Islands, for example, upon entering a village, a visitor is expected to speak first with the chief to explain his purpose and request the chief's permission. When a turtle researcher on his second visit to the Arnavons Project neglected to speak first with the chief, assuming he already had approval to continue his work, the entire community became upset. Governments also have their chains of command and protocol. It is particularly important to keep lines of communication open and leaders informed about project activities to maintain their support throughout the process.
Building trust begins by encouraging people to voice their views and concerns, and then letting them know, through words and actions, that they are being heard and that their ideas are valid. Establishing an open dialogue, both vertically between all project levels and horizontally between communities, opens lines of communication between all stakeholders. At the Arnavons, the household surveys and consultative workshops encouraged community members to express their views about resource use. Presenting the results of the REA validated their perceptions and led to taking actions. The December 1993 stakeholder meeting that followed established a dialogue between all project stakeholders. (This meeting was the first time the three communities had met together to discuss an issue of joint concern.)
Challenges and Solutions The events that unfolded during the Arnavon Project's evolution led the participatory process. The project team's intention of participation allowed us to explore practical ways to incorporate participatory decision-making at each step, and a learning process began for everyone involved.
Below are some of challenges that arose during the course of the Arnavon Project and solutions that were developed to meet them:
Challenge Solution Timber-payment issue Use objective standard (fair-market price) CO benefits during monitoring Use objective standard (accepted formula for determining danger allowance
Negotiated bonus based on fairness to balance disproportionate compensation paid to monitoring team leaders Committee Members taking advantage of position Review of roles and responsibilities
Standards for accountability
Team-building game Committee Members reluctant to take responsibility for decisions Review of roles and responsibilities
Use participatory process to continue to build trust in project partnerships and strengthen confidence in decision-making abilities Insufficient communication between Management Committee and communities Learning facilitation skills
Plan for a project community volunteer to assist Committee members develop a regular process to communicate Committee actions, project activities, and receive community feedback; volunteer will also help COs establish community extension and awareness program Conflicts between communities Emphasize partnership and ability to work together
Focus initially on issues of joint concern and areas in which agreement can be easily reached
Use project goal of establishing sustainable resource use with equitable distribution of benefits as a mechanism for achieving a solution Planning activities without consulting communities or considering their other commitments and demands on their time Radios installed in all project communities with project frequency
Planning dates for upcoming events at Committee meeting and check for conflicts Consultants and researchers going to project area on short notice and not presenting results to community Committee established guidelines and application procedures for outsiders wanting to work in the project area The project management team and coordinators should lead the process of building trust. At the Arnavons, the Management Committee provided a forum for participatory decision-making. Trust grew when the Committee's decisions were implemented as agreed upon through consensus and were not altered by the project team to fit a hidden agenda. At the community level, trust grew when what was promised became a reality (e.g., through consultative meetings, the communities' opinions were confirmed and incorporated into the management plan, their choice of COs was confirmed by the Committee, and the field station was constructed as a concrete sign of the project team's commitment). As a project evolves and partners grow more confident of each other's honesty, integrity, and reliability in carrying out their respective roles, trust broadens.
Project partners learn to trust the project management team and each other, and should expect reciprocation. In the case of the Arnavon Project, defining partners' roles and responsibilities clarified their expectations of one another and formalized this trust. Through building mutual trust, a project can demonstrate the benefits of working together for common goals.
Using a Participatory Approach with Partners
Creating a truly participatory project is a challenge that project management teams must cultivate at each step. Participation is not isolated to a PRA workshop, where information is gathered, taken to an office, and formulated into a project by environmental management professionals. Rather, the PRA represents the beginning of a relationship between project coordinators and stakeholders. Project coordinators guide and facilitate a participatory process with partners, working to build awareness, understanding, and capabilities, while acting within the cultural context of the project area, to achieve agreed upon conservation and development objectives.
Guiding and Facilitating the Process
A project coordinator must approach guiding others in the decision-making process with "a beginner's mind" unattached to his or her personal world view or expert opinions. By letting go of one's natural tendency to want to control events and "do it my way" attitude, the project coordinator is opened to new ways of achieving goals. In this way, the project can be shaped by the decisions of the stakeholders, who will be affected by them.
When the Arnavon Project team wanted to address a particular issue, it prepared background information to present before the Management Committee and always opened discussions with the Committee by asking for the members' ideas and opinions first. The group would then brainstorm solutions and formulate a plan of action. The project team facilitated the process, listened to members' views, paraphrased them, and asked for clarification, if needed. Our ideas were offered as they related to or expanded on the members' thoughts or as another option for consideration.
Project managers of community-based conservation efforts must provide communities access to relevant information needed to make informed choices. Communities are usually grateful for the chance to make their own decisions, which most projects do not offer. It is critically important, that project managers implement the agreed upon decisions even if it is not exactly the way they would do it.
Building Awareness, Understanding, and Capabilities at All Levels
Project coordinators must help build awareness of and knowledge about the effectiveness of the participatory approach at government, ministry, NGO, and community levels. Government officials, especially at the upper levels, often lack familiarity with the participatory approach. Project coordinators must build their understanding of the potential of community participation in successfully implementing national environmental programs, and a knowledge of how to use participatory techniques. Mid-level ministry employees and NGOs need to become aware of and knowledgeable about the participatory approach, as well as strengthened in their capability to manage and implement participatory strategies. At the grassroots level, it is necessary to expand communities' awareness of environmental issues, enhance their traditional knowledge with modern resource-management options, and provide training to build capability for managing their resources.
Participation is a process of giving people back control over their destiny. Through educating communities to think critically about issues and options, they become empowered to make decisions. Making decisions, in turn, carries the responsibility for implementing them; therefore, participation also means developing the skills needed to turn decisions into action.
Arnavon Project Helps Local Leaders Understand Participatory Methods When the Arnavon Project first began, Moses Biliki, Chief Environment and Conservation Officer, was skeptical about using PRA techniques during the household surveys. Once Moses recognized that the surveys produced useful information for shaping the project and stimulating community support, he was willing to use participatory methods during the establishment of the Management Committee. He proudly announced at a community meeting to organize a second conservation area project that the Ministry uses a participatory approach and that the community plays an important role in forming new conservation projects.
Through active participation in the Management Committee, Arthur Nego, Fisheries Officer for Choiseul Province, developed an understanding of the participatory process that motivated him to make independent presentations to his superiors, provincial representatives, and Choiseul communities to build project support. When Arthur returned from the BCN-sponsored monitoring workshop, he was excited about putting his new knowledge to work.
The hands-on training conservation officers received through the biological monitoring program and technical workshops developed both their understanding of environmental issues and practical resource-management skills that they are now successfully applying at the Arnavon Marine Conservation Area.
Acting Within A Cultural Context
The participatory approach will need to be adapted to particular cultural contexts. Taking time to understand a culture early in the project cycle can help avoid mistakes later on. Project managers need to become aware of how people communicate with each other and outsiders, including how they express respect and disrespect, happiness and anger, and agreement and disagreement, as well as their approaches to handling conflict.
Considerable cultural diversity often exists within a given project area. In the case of the Arnavon Project, Melanesian members of the project team, who were unfamiliar with Micronesian village customs, were initially apprehensive about visiting the Gilbertese on Waghena. After several visits, however, mutual cultural understanding grew, and the team was able to organize project activities within both cultural contexts.
Community-based conservation projects must achieve dual objectives of equal importance: conservation and local control over resource management. Project managers need to remain aware of both objectives and develop a carefully thought out strategy to ensure that both progress at a steady pace, not one at the expense of the other. It may seem easier for the project team to make decisions and take actions to move the project along, especially in the face of organizational pressures to show "progress." But, when the project team controls the process, community partners view the decisions being made and the project as "theirs." On the other hand, when all partners are responsible for making decisions and taking actions, the process is perceived as belonging to all partners, and the project becomes "ours."
Therefore, it is important for the project manager to delegate and share project responsibilities with the other partners (e.g., management team, committee members, and COs) and refrain from taking action independently. Before making a decision or taking an action, project managers should ask the following questions:
- Who should be involved in this decision or activity?
- Who should be responsible for implementation?
- What information or assistance do they need?
- How will the information or assistance be organized?
- What is the best timing for providing it?
Creating a comfortable environment in which each partner's voice can be heard requires:
- Maintaining regular communication,
- Listening to what partners have to say,
- Asking for partners' advice using open-ended questions, and
- Seeking out partners' assistance to get things done.
Keeping lines of communication open and encouraging active involvement sends the message that the project depends on the partners' contributions. Recognizing their role as integral to the project's success increases their commitment and dedication. This is an ongoing process, and project managers must be vigilant that they are continually employing a participatory approach in their work.
Even with careful planning, conflicts inevitably arise. However, recognizing the early signs of discord can prevent most issues from reaching crisis proportions. When conflicts do occur, constructive steps need to be taken quickly to resolve them. Negotiating skills and techniques provide valuable tools needed to do this. Keeping the participatory nature of the project in mind, managers and coordinators should try to engage all sides of the conflict in joint problem-solving. This involves determining the concerns, interests, and needs of all sides and then finding options that mutually satisfy them. To keep the focus on the issues, project partners should be guided to address the problems rather than blame particular individuals assumed responsible for the conflict. Often an objective standard, such as market value or customary norms, can be used to settle disputes because it is easily agreed upon by all sides. In the Arnavon Project, for example, a timber dispute was resolved by using the average market price paid for sawn timber to negotiate a payment acceptable to both sides.
Establishing participation within community-based conservation projects is a long-term process consisting of several distinct phases. The first phase, which prepares stakeholders for involvement in a program of action, includes recognizing environmental problems, cultivating support, and building trust. All too often, this phase is allotted insufficient time because of limited program funding and the rush of donors and implementing organizations to create tangible results. The Arnavon Project was fortunate in having an extended period of time (1989-1993) to work on this phase, which established the foundation upon which later successes were built.
The second phase involves guiding the development of a cohesive management unit with the participation of the various project partners. This is the time to design the project, formulate management strategies, and identify partners' roles. This is process oriented, with much of the focus on discussions, negotiations, planning, and organizing, but tangible activities also need to be included.
The third phase is focused on producing more tangible outcomes, such as biological monitoring, field station construction, conservation area in operation, and enterprise development. The process-oriented second phase needs to be mixed with enough action to maintain enthusiasm and interest, while the product-oriented third phase needs to be balanced by enough process to maintain project clarity and direction.
The participatory process leads stakeholders from dependence on external assistance to self-sufficiency. Project management teams need to assess where along this continuum each partner starts and monitor their progress. At the beginning of a project, stakeholders generally depend on outsiders for technical and managerial support, funding, and guidance. Training and support should be offered at each step to move the partners further along the path to self-sufficiency until they can eventually run the project on their own.
Useful References
Chambers, Robert. 1983. Rural Development: Putting the Last First. Essex, U.K.: Longman.
Fisher, R. and W. Ury. 1981. Getting To Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. New York: Bantam Books.
Ford, Richard, L. Wichart, F. Lelo, E. Odour-Noah, and I. Asamba. 1992. Implementing PRA: A Handbook to Facilitate Participatory Rural Appraisal. Worchester, Massachusetts: Clark University, Program for International Development.
International Institute for Environment and Development. PLA Notes: A Newsletter on Participatory Learning and Action. London: IIED, Sustainable Agriculture Programme.
Ury, William. 1991. Getting Past No: Negotiating Your Way from Confrontation to Cooperation. New York: Bantam Books.
Western, D. and M. Wright, eds. 1994. Natural Connections: Perspectives in Community-based Conservation. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
 |
WHY BIODIVERSITY FIELD STORIES PARTICIPATE RESULTS MARKETSPACE ABOUT THE NETWORK WHAT'S NEW LEARNING MATERIALS SEARCH LINKS SITE MAP HOME |
