Objectives
The following is a brief recapitulation of objectives, target groups and other important aspects related to the first participatory stakeholder workshop (for more details please see the methodological guidelines for stakeholder workshops DESIRE Manuals and Training Guides, No. 6, October 2007).
In the context of the DESIRE project the stakeholder workshop approach was selected to initiate collaboration of SST with relevant stakeholders in their study sites. Although in some study sites collaboration with stakeholders is not new, in some others there have hardly been previous close contacts with stakeholders, and even less in-depth discussions on land degradation issues and possible solutions among different types of stakeholders.
Overall goal of WP 3.1:
- To identify promising (existing and potential) strategies for land conservation for the selected study sites.
Objectives of the 1st stakeholder workshop:
- To initiate a mutual learning process among local and external participants by sharing experience and jointly reflecting on current and potential problems and solutions regarding land degradation and desertification.
- To create a common understanding of problems, potentials and opportunities by integrating external and internal perceptions and to foster a common understanding of problems and solutions related to land degradation and desertification in the study site.
- To strengthen trust and collaboration among concerned stakeholders.
- To identify existing and new strategies to prevent or mitigate land degradation and desertification.
- To select a set of these identified strategies for further evaluation and documentation with the WOCAT methodology (in WP 3.2).
Target groups of the stakeholder workshop:
- local stakeholders (land users, representatives of local authorities, local NGOs etc.) who live in the specific rural environment (local participants); and
- external stakeholders, i.e. researchers and development professionals (from NGOs, GOs etc.) working in rural environments (external participants), with different degrees of professional expertise on environmental and development issues.
This means, the group is composed of researchers, development professionals and representatives of the local community (land users, local authorities). All members of the group have experience in and knowledge about the specific rural environment.
Study sites were advised (training workshop, workshop guidelines) to consider the following regarding the composition of the group:
- 6 to 10 local stakeholders (land users, local authorities, representatives of local NGOs), and 4 to 6 external stakeholders (researchers, representatives of regional NGOs and GOs), and (1 or) 2 moderators.
- Ensure that the group is heterogeneous with regard to age, gender, ethnicity and activities related to land use. The group should also be interdisciplinary in composition.
The main added value of a mutual learning approach lies in bringing together different stakeholder groups with different knowledge systems and perceptions to listen to each other and learn from each other by sharing one's own knowledge and experience. Making different interests and different types of knowledge transparent and engaging in a dialogue sets a basis for the development of sustainable solutions to complex problems. This means giving space and time to a participatory and integrative, social process of communicating, reflecting and interacting across existing social borders (roles, positions, educational background, age etc.).
The workshop duration was suggested to be at least 3 days to give enough time for the learning process to evolve and for intensive discussion and interaction between different stakeholders. As a solution to the difficulty of development professionals to participate in a several day workshop it was suggested that the 1st and 2nd day focus on local perspectives and the local context with mainly local stakeholders attending the meetings, and that external stakeholders join the group on the 3rd day and bring in their perspectives and experience with an additional focus on the regional level and regional and national framework conditions.
The workshop programme follows a logical and consecutive sequence of specific exercises, each with its own objectives, method, procedure, and expected results.
Table 1: Sequence of exercises
| No | Exercise | Objectives | Methods |
| 1 | Land degradation & land conservation at the study site | Establish personal relation with the topic, presentation of participants and their interest in the topic, create a relaxed working atmosphere | Photo gallery, photo language |
| 2 | Water and biomass cycles - the basis of agricultural production | Understand the water and biomass cycles in the local context; links between the cycles; disturbances, their causes and effects; degradation processes and dynamics (space and time); relevant framework conditions (socio-economic, legal, institutional); identify locally applied solutions to disturbances and land degradation. To raise awareness on the importance of healthy cycles as a basis for agricultural production. | Transect walk to identify local land degradation processes and solutions Visualisation to illustrate cycles with photos from study site; Diagnosis of the cycles |
| 3 | Local indicators | Identify indicators used by local stakeholders to recognize land degradation processes and land conservation respectively. | Plenary discussion with guiding questions |
| 4 | Stakeholders, their motivation for and influence in implementing SLM | Identify stakeholders, their motivation and influence / power concerning the implementation of SLM; identify their relative importance for SLM; identify important stakeholders not yet included in the process; critically reflect on own role | Plenary session: stakeholder analysis |
| 5 + 6 | Recapitulation of intermediate workshop results and presentation to external participants | Recapitulate information and conclusions so far, prepare and brief external participants; presentation of local perspectives, get first reactions from external participants (and hints on divergences between local and external views) | Plenary and group work |
| 7 | Assessment of already applied and potential solutions to identified degradation problems | Identify strategies not yet applied but potentially suitable for the local context by integrating the perspective, knowledge and experience of external stakeholders; assess applied and potential strategies; jointly select strategies with highest potential (for further assessment after workshop) | Assessment (cost, benefit, potential, constraints) made in separate groups (local / external participants) Priorisation, selection |
| 8 | Synthesis - Outline of a strategy for SLM | Create awareness of the need for a comprehensive SLM strategy ; identify and discuss important elements for a draft outline. | Plenary: Mind map, link with results from previous exercises |
| 9 | Workshop evaluation | Participants evaluate the workshop |
Regarding workshop moderation it was suggested that two persons will share the task:
- Person A: is the moderator of the stakeholder workshop and responsible for structuring and guiding the process. He /she must be familiar with moderation techniques and participatory methods.
- Person B: assists the moderator during the stakeholder workshop in documenting the work and results, and in preparing the workshop report.
Person B has expert knowledge on Soil and Water Conservation (SWC) / Sustainable Land Management (SLM), and will later document and evaluate the land conservation strategies (WP 3.2).
The importance of having an external workshop moderator, i.e. a person who has the relevant knowledge of the local context and enough moderation skills and experience with participatory methods, but who is not involved in the DESIRE project as a stakeholder (researcher) with own interests was highlighted. However, in the big majority of study sites study site teams opted for somebody from their own team to moderate the workshop.
