Influencing forest policy process: Combining research with activism

Naya Sharma

Hemant Ojha

Key message

Combining research with activism can effectively communicate research findings and influence policy process

Influencing policy requires a versatile role, engaging beyond policy makers to policy actors

Challenging political manoeuvring, interest based negotiation and donor hegemony require new breed of researcher-activists

exciting achievements – but remains in the margin

Approaches to link research with activism

Strategic analysis, monitoring and evidencing

Supporting, empowering citizen networks

Critically interrogate knowledge hegemony

Constant engagement with policy actors

Communicate to policy & epistemic community

Key issues of forest sector in Nepal

• Centralised policy process

• Ongoing state-community contestation

• Continued expansion of PAs

• Climate change, REDD, ChuriaTerai forests,

• Differentiated communities and distributional conflicts

• Forestry aid

The actor landscape in forestry

INGOs

Parliamentary committee

Donors

Ministry, Dept

Research institutions

Private sector

Citizen networks

NGOs

Engagement at different levels

National level Policy forums

Meso-forums

CFUG

Research team

Thematic reviews and analysis,

strategic meetings, policy

discussions, networking,

thematic workshops

Local facilitators

Reflective workshops,

coordinated support to local

groups, feedback to Forest

Department, Ministry

Facilitate local level planning and

implementation, monitoring and

documentation, facilitate external

linkage

Alliance with civic networks/movements

Support in strategic planning

Provide critical input to major

policy issues

But

Low appreciation of

knowledge,

Seek friendly evidence,

Culture of defensive routine

1. Identify policy agenda

Identify and invite participantsIdentify and invite

panelists

Set a round-table date and

venue

Conduct diagnostic study and prepare

presentation

Arrange logistics—recorder, camera, and

projector

Seating of panelists and participants

Make presentation and pose questions

Request the panelists for expert opinions

Conduct moderated discussions amongst participants

Recor

d and

note

the

discu

ssion

s

Draw substantive conclusions

2. Prepare for round-table meeting

3. Host the round-table

meeting

4. Incorporate the conclusions into outputs

Policy Brief Discussion Paper Booklet Synthesis report

5. Disseminate through media (media news, TV shows, and feature articles)

Mode

rate

the

discu

ssion

s

Steps of hosting National Policy

Round Table

Engaging with media

• Use of personal relations

• Interaction with journalist, engage them through critical dialogue

• Give interview, organise media interactions

• Write column, help writers with ideas

• TV programme broadcast, documentary

• Press release

Diverse and customised products

involve policy makers

targeted distribution

feedback and learning

Our engagement in forest policy processes

Policy issues Level ForestAction contribution Achievement

Special forest policy for Terai (April 2000) and wider debate of Teraiforest governance

Policy Action researchesDissertationsBook Journal articles Special issue of Journal on Teraiforest

Cartelize teraiforest governance debate

Community Forestry Guidelines

Guidelines Actively participated in taskforce Analysis and papers focusing pro-poor and inclusive provisions

Pro-poor CF guidelines

Forest Act amendment (different attemptsincluding 2001, 2010)

Act Field study Discussion paper Policy roundtable

Government withdrew amendment bill

GaurisankharConservation Area (2010-2011)

Regulations Field study Policy roundtable

Ensured community rights in Gaurisankhar CAregulations with

CF inventory guidelines(September 2000)

Guidelines Field study and report Review article in JFL

Simplified CF inventory guidelines

Contribute to

major events (CF WS, GACF)

Organise policy

forums

Action research and multi level

engagement

Alliance with citizen

networks

Publications(encourage to read

and write )

Meeting,

reflections with policy

makers

Spectrum of engagement

Contribute to govt. processes

Media engagement

Joint

authorship

M-SH process: a continued challenge

• Question government monopoly

• Lobby for, encourage M-SH process

• Capacitate weak actors, question and contest the hegemonic relations

• Critical input to meetings, w/s

• Challenges: strategic manipulation, representation, accountability, unequal deliberative competency

Forest Act amendment bill: A successful case

Media reports FECOFUN protest

Policy round table Discussion paper

Government proposal

Field research

Amendment bill withdrawn

CSOs planned a

study

Conducted a participatory

study

Report blamed bureaucracy

Shared in a press conference

Was not impressive

FA conducted a study

Used scientific discipline

Prepared a discussion paper

Diverse parties appreciated

Presented in a policy

roundtable

Political vs. Intellectual argument

Challenges

Unmet local expectations

Retaining good people

research –advocacy balance

Limited research

funds

Project liabilities

Social accountability

Evidence vspolitical

manoeuvringKnowledge

monopoly of large institutions