TNRC Practice Note Building Transparency and Accountability in Natural Resource Management (NRM): The Role of Social Accountability and Civic Participation in Addressing Corruption in the NRM Sector

Context and governance challenges

In Uganda, forest cover declined from 24 percent in 1990 to nine percent in 2015, primarily due to poor governance of the forestry sector (Ministry of Water and Environment 2016). The 2001 Forest Policy in Uganda included legislative frameworks to govern the NRM sector and provide for regulated access to forest resources. However, despite attempts by the government to sustainably manage forest resources, corrupt practices continued to deny marginalized groups’ access to forest resources and efforts to end corruption failed (Anti-corruption Coalition in Uganda, 2016).

Challenges included the impunity of powerful and politically connected perpetrators of forest crime due to corruption amongst some duty-bearers; a breakdown in community feedback mechanisms on NRM misuse; and where there was reporting, an unmatched response by National Forestry Authority officers at the district and sub-county level. This resulted in illegal possession of land titles in central forest reserves, movement of forest produce without permits, sale of timber for less than market-value, and illicit use of forest land for agriculture.

This lack of meaningful forest governance and secure livelihoods drove forest and natural resource degradation and prevented poverty reduction. In response, CARE Uganda and partners initiated the Forest Resource Sector Transparency (FOREST) Program (2013-2017) in biodiversity hotspots in Uganda’s Albertine Rift Valley, which is surrounded by poor communities whose livelihoods depend on natural resources.

Program approach

The FOREST project supported poor and natural resource dependent citizens to participate in forest governance, to monitor the implementation of forest policies and laws, and to advocate for fairer and more appropriate forest laws and policies at local and national levels. FOREST worked with dozens of local partners in three main lines of action: 1) building citizens’ capacity to use information and communications technology (ICT) for oversight; 2) using media to amplify citizens’ voices; and 3) improving civil society organizations’ (CSO) and networks' capacity to advocate for better forest laws in Uganda, via multi-stakeholder dialogues.

Impact on forest governance

The impact of the FOREST Program in Uganda was significant. Overall, the project reduced the illegal extraction of protected forests by over 60 percent (from 90 percent in 2014 to 29 percent in 2017). It also reduced the number of illegal farms by 10 percent (from 14 percent to four percent) and resulted in a complete end to livestock grazing (from three to zero percent) in Central Forest Reserves (Janoch 2018). Furthermore, 4,338 individuals benefited from access to forest land for tree planting, 40 percent of whom were women.

Efforts to strengthen community-based monitoring systems increased their number from 112 in 2013 to 778 in 2017. Community members’ awareness and knowledge of forest policies and laws also increased, from 35 percent to 93 percent. Partly as a result, over 1,000 ordinary citizens reported cases of irregular, corrupt, or illegal practices during the project period. The number of NRM issues raised increased from three at the district level and zero at national level in 2013, to 186 at the district level and 133 at the national level in 2017 (Balelwa 2018). Through all reporting channels, overall citizen monitoring contributed to the resolution of an estimated 625 reported cases by the NFA, indicating a resolution rate of 86 percent (Everse 2018).

The project dramatically increased media coverage on natural resource misuse from only 24 articles from nine journalists in 2013, to 329 newspaper articles, 322 radio debates, 147 Public Service Advertisements, 43 interviews, and 104 features as of 2017. Due in part to that media coverage, the government canceled 154 illegal land titles. Finally, the multi-stakeholder dialogues contributed to improved coordination and enhanced discussions between the Ministry of Water and Environment and the Ministry of Lands on the issuing of land titles in Central Forest Reserves (Everse 2018). They also contributed to the National Forestry Authorities (NFA) signing agreements with forest management groups, for those groups to be able to access forest resources legally.

What worked?

Understanding the barriers and opportunities for change through political economy analysis and investing in relationship building

At its onset and throughout the project, program partners conducted political economy analyses (PEAs) to better understand underlying power dynamics and relationships between the key players and institutions of the sector. The PEA helped to identify how corruption was being facilitated in the NRM sector in Uganda, existing policy frameworks that were not properly implemented, gaps in community awareness and feedback mechanisms, and inaction by the NFA that was de-motivating civic monitoring and oversight. The PEA also helped to identify key champions within state institutions and the availability of existing multi-stakeholder platforms and CSO forums. Once these actors’ relevant interests and capacities were understood, the project was then able to invest time to build awareness, trust, and ownership around project goals and ways of working.

Increasing transparency by improving awareness and ICT-enabled community monitoring

FOREST used social media, community meetings and radio programs to improve awareness and educate local officials, private sector actors, and citizens about good forestry governance policy and practice. Topics included forest-related legislation, such as the National Forestry and Tree Planting Act of 2003, as well as information on the role of duty-bearers and resource users to combat corruption. The project also helped establish Community Forest User Groups (CFUGs), which appointed community-based monitors to track and report illegal forest activities via SMS and a toll-free phone line as part of an ICT Reporting Platform. This enabled users to instantly reach critical stakeholders, like law enforcement operatives and personnel in the NFA and Uganda Wildlife Authority, as well as CSO activists (Balelwa 2018).

Increasing the responsiveness of the NFA and Uganda Wildlife Authority through multi-stakeholder dialogue and building trust

The FOREST Program worked to improve transparency and accountability by facilitating access to, and public participation in, multi-stakeholder public accountability forums, set up as safe spaces for dialogue with key government officials.[3] The community-based monitors used these forums to raise forest governance issues at the district and regional level, and the forums provided the space for duty-bearers to respond to the issues raised. For example, the Regional Forestry Governance Forum in Masindi recommended that the Forest Sector Support Department fast track the process of registration and declaration of community and private forests to halt their encroachments and illegal sale. Dialogues about illegal land titling in Central Forest Reserves led to the cancellation of 154 illegal land titles and contributed to improved coordination between ministries on land title issues (Everse 2017).

CSOs also supported meaningful dialogue between marginalized groups and the authorities by building their capacity to engage with officials and report illegal forest activities. The FOREST Program contributed to increased participation of women in these mechanisms, for example. The empowered communities and marginalized groups have continued to share their views with government officials after the program’s closure. 

Building national level accountability through national media campaigns

Using the community-based monitoring data, CSOs amplified community voices on forest governance using advocacy tools such as investigative journalism, critical action research, and social and electronic media campaigns. As a result, the project dramatically increased media coverage on NRM mismanagement issues which contributed to securing commitments from duty bearers to fight corruption. The Ministry of Water and Land, for example, cancelled claims to land that had been irregularly issued in central forest reserves. The National Forest Authorities also became more transparent by making information about issued permits available to the Community Based Monitors and sub-county Chair-people, and invited CSOs to help verify tree harvesting licence applicants. To enable effective advocacy, the FOREST program built good working relationships with the Ministry of Water and Environment and other state actors whereupon they acted as champions to, for example, help mobilize media coverage for activities during the Forest Week.[4]

This social accountability approach therefore helped improve stakeholders’ abilities to report illegal forest activities, and incentivized duty-bearers to respond, as greater transparency made resource misuse more difficult to ignore (Albisu Ardigó 2019). It helped to provide checks and balances against corrupt officials who did not perform their duties, or those who were giving patronage to criminal elements, often because of weak implementation of existing laws (Anti-Corruption Resource Center 2008). Community feedback on forest misuse also helped local officials to identify solutions and informed decisions around illegal use of land and granting of titles. Evidence gathered using the feedback system also formed the basis for engagement between resource users and duty-bearers, and increased collaboration between government departments responsible for field operations (e.g., between District Forest Services and Police). The digitisation of field data increased the scale of evidence and its availability for advocacy, for a wider set of CSOs.

Implementation challenges

One major challenge during implementation included the breakdown of the usefulness of the ICT platform. While it did elicit citizen feedback in useful ways, it also became used for issues not necessarily beneficial to forest governance. During the May 2016 elections, the Uganda Communications Commission also banned short code SMS communication, which impacted reporting of illegal activities. After the election period, a toll-free phone line replaced the SMS reporting system, and the data was then collected and responses made at the national, rather than the district, level. This change, and the SMS ban during the election, reduced the volume of resource crime cases reported by community-based monitors. This reflects some of the potential challenges of more visible, ‘confrontational’ open government techniques – which can be co-opted by certain interests and challenge others.

Shifting responsibility to the national level also affected government responsiveness at the district level. The NFA increased its responsiveness, recruiting three state prosecutors to facilitate prosecutions and signing a Collaborative Forest Management Agreement with Matiri Resource Users Association to develop benefit sharing guidelines for Central Forest Reserves. The Forest Sector Support Department also embarked on nation-wide consultations for revising forest fees, with support from CARE. However, the shift also resulted in a perceived reduction in district official responsiveness. This suggests that the closer the data source (or feedback loop) is to the duty bearer and point of service delivery, the more active the response. It also suggests that coordination between national and district level authorities on information management and sharing should be strengthened. Sustaining national reporting and feedback mechanisms requires government support and ownership.

A second major challenge was assessing the impact of the program on forest crimes. Engaging the judiciary has traditionally been difficult in Uganda, as most magistrates tend not to take forest crimes seriously and in some cases give lenient sentences (Everse 2017). The highest percentage of court cases resolved includes those related to encroachment, charcoal burning, and illegal timber harvesting (at 99, 95 and 59 percent respectively). However, court cases related to land titles, transportation of forest products, and corruption of court, police, and NFA and district forest service staff had the lowest resolution rates (at zero, ten and 50 percent respectively) (Everse 2017). In some cases, the program did successfully work with local magistrates to respond to forest crime, but without any figures on the number of perpetrators caught as a result of increased reporting, it is difficult to assess the impact from a penal or punitive perspective. This reflects the challenge of aligning collaborative, constructive engagement approaches through social accountability with more confrontational, punitive approaches to corruption through legal routes (i.e., the balance of the ‘carrot’ and the ‘stick’). A careful, context-specific balance is therefore required to ensure that different approaches are coordinated and reinforce one another.

Context and governance challenges

In 2015, Nepal had 45 percent forest and other wooded land cover, 24 percent of which were protected areas (Dept. of Forest Research and Survey 2015). Community-based forestry is practiced in 44 percent of Nepal’s forests and is a critical source of livelihoods (Paudyal 2020). However, NRM governance has, in some cases, been hampered by poor practices and abuse of power among CFUGs. Some CFUG Executive Committees, for example, have failed to implement annual operational plans transparently, resulting in land encroachment and illegal logging for the executive members’ own benefit (Gender Resource Development Koteshwor 2021). A lack of transparency and weak accountability among public officials have also been challenges in some places.

Land tenure, in particular, has historically suffered from corruption and a lack of inclusion. A formal mechanism called the Land Related Problem-Solving Commission worked at the district and local levels to distribute land certificates to landless people,[5] but corruption and nepotism meant many deserving people did not receive land certificates. Landless people have also been unrepresented in Land Facilitation Committees, set up by the Ministry of Agriculture, Land Management, and Cooperatives to support agriculture policy, including land tenure. As a result, the landless and other marginalized groups have not received the benefits to which they are entitled. Poor, disadvantaged women and marginalized groups, such as Dalit, Adibasi/Janajati, Madhesi, and Muslims, have often been excluded from NRM decision-making processes and benefit-sharing (Uprety et al. 2012), due to unequal gender power relations and harmful social and cultural barriers in communities.

In response to these challenges, the USAID Hariyo Ban and Promoting Inclusive Governance and Resilience for the Right to Food (SAMARTHYA) programs, using similar approaches implemented in different locations, worked to strengthen the internal governance of NRM groups. In particular, they tried to improve the participation of communities in conservation and climate change adaptation, including poor, vulnerable, and socially excluded (PVSE) groups. Their work also included mainstreaming gender equality and social inclusion provisions into NRM group policies.

Program approach

USAID’s Hariyo Ban program had three core interwoven components: biodiversity conservation, sustainable landscapes, and climate change adaptation, with livelihoods, governance, and gender equality and social inclusion (GESI) as crosscutting themes. The program partnered with local communities to empower them to steward their forests effectively and worked to strengthen the internal governance of NRM groups to promote sound management of forests and natural resources, following national policies.

The SAMARTHYA project aimed to support local organizations to strengthen the capacity of, and spaces for, poor and marginalized women and men (mainly landless and small holder farmers) to build economically empowered and resilient communities. Through its integrated inclusive governance approach, the program aimed to strengthen institutional governance and the credibility and capacity of resource user groups to participate in decision making forums and engage with government at all levels. Both programs included ensuring representative leadership and participation in promoting equitable benefit sharing.

Impact on resource governance

As a result of USAID’s Hariyo Ban, “[g]overnance for forest management improved through capacity building and promotion of equitable and transparent processes in local community based NRM groups” (Gyawali et al. 2017). The program supported benefit sharing, reduced the risk of resource exploitation, and increased resilience to climate shocks through the development of more than 331 community adaptation plans of action, and 90 local adaptation plans of action, benefitting 288,499 vulnerable people. In doing so, the program improved the biophysical condition of soil, forest, and water resources, and increased access to natural resources for the marginalized communities in protected areas (Gyawali et al. 2017).

USAID’s Hariyo Ban program also mainstreamed participatory governance and GESI approaches into biodiversity conservation and climate change adaptation activities. It strengthened and mobilized 418 Community-Based Anti-Poaching Units with significant participation and leadership from women and marginalized groups (Gender Resource Development Koteshwor 2021). The Ministry of Forests and Environment, the Federation of Community Forest Users Nepal, and Land Rights Forums have also institutionalized GESI guidelines in the governance of CFUGs (Hariyo Ban, 2020). Anecdotally, this increased participation of marginalized groups and also reduced some of the illegal operations of CFUGs Executive Committees members.

Context and governance challenges

Vietnam is a multi-ethnic country, in which more than two-thirds of people from ethnic minority groups depend overwhelmingly on forests for their livelihoods. Most ethnic minority communities also live below the poverty line, and many people participate in the illicit wildlife trade, employing bribery and other illegal methods to by-pass authorities (Giao 2021).

Despite the community significance of these forests, customary land governance practices have been largely misunderstood and overridden by the state (IWGIA 2018). Existing laws did not include clear guidance on communities’ roles or customary land tenure rights (CIRUM and CARE 2017). Ethnic minorities lacked a formal mechanism to participate in and influence policy development. Discriminatory social norms against women and minorities, language barriers, limited capacity and community access to legal documents in their negotiations with local authorities and forest management boards were also very real barriers.

As a result of this discrimination and violation of customary land and forest tenure, communities and forests have been negatively affected in several ways. Private companies with counterfeit permits have been able to access and exploit natural resources and wildlife. Traders in timber and forest products have been able to under-declare the volume or value of goods to avoid restrictions and fees. Due in part to public officials’ perceptions that ethnic minority people lacked the capacity and experience to manage the forests, there was also often a failure to act on forest- and wildlife-related violations (CIRUM and CARE 2017).

Program approach

The aim of the program was to ensure the fundamental right in law of ethnic minority people to manage ancestral forest land. By establishing an enabling policy environment with firmer rules in place, local communities would then be on stronger legal footing when reporting forest violations in their lands and for holding perpetrators to account through future judicial or social accountability approaches.  In 2017, the Vietnamese government invited a local CSO, Culture, Identity and Resources Use Management (CIRUM), to contribute evidence and provide technical assistance to the drafting committee to update the 2004 Law on Forest Protection and Development. The Land Rights Vietnam project then set out to build the capacity of ethnic minority groups and civil society actors to advocate for recognition of ethnic minority rights in the 2017 amendment. They especially focused on communal leaders, women, and young people. The project facilitated CSO and state champion networks to garner support from policymakers for the legal changes necessary to improve forest land governance. To build awareness, trust, and ownership of the process between different actors, the project used a participatory learning and joint planning approach to advocacy.

Impact on forest governance

Through the project’s work, the Law on Forestry (2017) gave ethnic minorities full legal rights to access and control ancestral and customary forests. The project also directly contributed to securing ownership certificates for 100 Sedang poor families in Tu Mo Rong district, for more than 500 hectares of community forest land. After the community was given official ownership, they became more active in managing and protecting the forest (CARE and CIRUM 2018). In addition, the project contributed to improving the advocacy capacity of the Forest People Land Rights Network (FPLRN) members, including farmers representing ethnic minority groups and local commune and district leaders. Participation and engagement strategies strengthened trust and relationships between CSOs and other actors, including communities and local and central government.

With firmer rules in place and strengthened trust with duty-bearers, local communities will now be on stronger legal footing when reporting forest violations in their lands. This will strengthen their ability to report forest violations in their lands and to hold perpetrators to account through future judicial or social accountability approaches (CLEP and UNDP 2008). Understanding and promoting ethnic minority people’s culture is a fundamental building block that enables a culturally sensitive approach to sustainable forest management. Similarly, incremental changes in legal frameworks can create pathways for a larger change for increased accountability in a complex context (Jackson 2020).

What worked?

Insider advocacy and consensus-building through diverse stakeholder participation

PEA, stakeholder analysis, outcome mapping, and Participatory, Reflection, Learning and Planning (PRLP) helped inform, devise, and adapt community-led forest governance dialogues at the local level (Van Tu and Huong 2018). Policymakers and CSO representatives were taken on study tours to foster awareness and trust through participatory experiential learning. A wide range of stakeholders across ethnic minorities, government, and CSO partners helped build the evidence for informed advocacy. The research methodology also created an opportunity for actors to discuss critical issues faced by ethnic minority communities, which led to the establishment of a stronger network of organizations with increased understanding of those communities’ needs.

This approach contributed to securing support from decision-makers and powerholders for including research findings in the draft amendment. This demonstrates that insider advocacy approaches based on consensus building – rather than confrontation – can yield better outcomes in certain contexts. It also highlights that taking advantage of opportunities and favorable conditions, such as when a government is reviewing or adopting new laws, can be convenient for effective advocacy in contexts with limited civic space.

Addressing social norms and attitudes towards gender and minorities’ cultures

The project used behavior change communication tools and a participatory policy advisory process. CIRUM was central to bridging the knowledge gap between ethnic minority people and the rest of the committee drafting the law by organizing inclusive and constructive dialogue between them. This non-confrontational approach built rapport and trust, and enabled women and men to discuss sensitive land rights issues and develop clear policy proposals (Van Tu and Huong 2018).

Supporting gender equality was also a key aspect of the project. Gender analysis at the start of the project found negative social norms and attitudes of men and local authorities towards women’s participation in the monitoring of forests. The project therefore supported women to gain skills and confidence in public participation and advocacy. As a contributor to the technical drafting committee, CIRUM also worked with CARE to ensure ethnic minority people, especially women leaders, took part in multi-level consultations and directly influenced key forest land management policy discussions.

Implementation challenges

Despite the efforts above, it is unclear whether and how the amended forest law strengthened the rights of ethnic minority women. Gender dimensions of exclusion intersect with and exacerbate exclusion for minority ethnic women. Organizations therefore need to identify and support women change agents from minority ethnic groups so that they can build their agency and voice.

In addition, the degree to which majority ethnic groups were included in project processes is not clear. As these groups may also contribute to the systemic exclusion of ethnic minorities, building their awareness and ownership of the process and its outcomes would have helped effective implementation and sustainability of impact.