Handbook

Principles for Adaptive Lanscape Management

 Principles for Adaptive Landscape Approach 2011

Welcome to the Adaptive Landscape Approach Module

Since the 1980s, it has become clear that the improvement of local livelihoods should be an
integrated part for the protection of biodiversity. However, 'win-win' relationship proved to
be elusive. Compensation mechanisms were inadequate and many initiatives have been
hamstrung by project planning processes that are largely driven by external actors, with little
participation by local stakeholders. Recently, renewed efforts have been made to influence
land use changes in more biodiversity- and socially-friendly ways. Rather than trying to
develop desk-based idealistic land use plans, the emphasis has shifted towards highlighting
tradeoffs as well as possible synergies, negotiating options to minimize conflicts and
reinforce possible synergies and supporting collaborative and adaptive natural resource
management schemes. A landscape approach integrates ecological patterns and processes
with socio-economic and institutional dynamics in defined geographical areas. On the one
hand, it is based on specific ecosystem and land management practices, while on the other,
it is linked to policies at multiple scales which have an impact on the landscape, and includes
social learning processes.

Multiple-use as a base for Landscape Approach.

The landscapes appropriate to consider with this approach are composed of various land
uses and ecosystems. A multiple-use landscape is often a mosaic of land use types, in which
some parts may be formally protected while others are sustainable-use communal areas,
private farmland and/or other types of productive use. The multiplicity of (local and
external) stakeholders and interests implies that societal choices must be negotiated and
that management approaches enhancing synergies must be agreed upon. The juxtaposition
of lands ranging from natural state to various degrees of use intensity implies that ecological
and use interactions need to be understood in order to adapt landscape patterns and
resource use to these wider societal choices. Landscape approaches are becoming
increasingly common because they are a notable improvement on prior approaches to
integration. Landscape approaches are variously conceived, organized and implemented.
Given their relative novelty, the diversity of early experience with landscape approaches is
inevitable. Notably with regard to climate change and mitigation and adaptation, as well as
to water management measures, landscape-scale approaches are promising as more
appropriate assessment and planning processes. Landscapes provide the basis for analyzing
socio-ecological interactions and institutional and governance issues impacting on these
interactions across scales.

Principles as Guiding Tools

The principles presented here can be used to guide reflections related to landscape
restoration, to payments/compensations for environmental services, to interventions aiming
at reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation and for broader landscape-scale
water management needs and appropriate mitigation and adaptation measures to climate
change.
 Principles for Adaptive Landscape Approach 2011

Video

http://www.forestlandscaperestoration.org/learning-resources/cinema/)

Concept of the Adaptive Landscape Approach

• Forests and landscapes have always been shaped and modified by human
intervention. At present, only 20% of the world’s original forest reserves has
remained to be intact, while 80% has suffered from some form of degradation or
deforestation (WRI, 2009). Many of these degraded forest landscapes could
potentially be regained, if not in its natural state, then at least in mosaic landscapes,
maintaining its original functions. This is the reasoning behind forest landscape
restoration, which is presently being promoted by more and more organizations,
governments and civic movements worldwide.
• Since the conservation value of restored forests is generally low, forest restoration is
not high on the conservation agenda. This while in terms of local populations’
livelihoods, the value of (secondary) forest might be equally high, in terms of food,
fuel, income, and socio-cultural values (Chokkalingam et al, 2005).
• Maginnis (2005) emphasizes the process orientation of forest landscape restoration,
having a double focus on both ecological integrity and human wellbeing, two
components that cannot be subject to trade-offs. Functionality of forests is a crucial
element, which has to be approached from a multi-stakeholder perspective.
 Principles for Adaptive Landscape Approach 2011

Participatory valuation creates the scope for multi-stakeholder dialogue, negotiation,

and democratic trade-offs between the different land use options (Kusumanto, 2005).
• This complexity of landscape dynamics demands an adaptive management, sensitive
to social, economic, and environmental variation at landscape level, within a
framework for continuous monitoring and learning (Maginnis et al, 2005).
• The principles presented here can be used to guide reflections related to landscape
restoration, to payments/compensations for environmental services, to interventions
aiming at reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation and for broader
landscape-scale water management needs and appropriate mitigation and
adaptation measures to climate change.
• In managing complex landscapes there are fundamental ecological and socio-
economic elements that must be considered to help foster success. The aim of this
module is to capture these fundamental elements in some guiding principles to
support institutions in their efforts to improve the governance and management of
rural landscapes which may include some natural areas and native forest.
 Principles for Adaptive Landscape Approach 2011

Principle 1: Continual Learning and Adaptive Management

A sound understanding of the social dynamics of the landscape and the ecological
interactions of the multiple resources it contains is a necessary basis for negotiating,
implementing and monitoring landscape management. But learning about these landscape
dynamics is not a one-time requirement. Activities have to be adapted both to evolving or
new negotiated objectives as well as to render the achievement of existing objectives
more efficiently. The generation, sharing and management of information on landscape
processes, changes and potentials are essential for a landscape approach.

Trends in understanding Landscape Dynamics

Understanding of landscape dynamics in space and time (e.g. time series) is developed
gradually, with an initial situation assessment which can vary in intensity depending on
resources available, and which would usefully include information about the status and
trends of biodiversity, livelihoods, markets and governance systems. Different groups of
stakeholders will be more concerned in specific components of the landscape, thus overall,
there will be a good understanding of such spatial and temporal dynamics, as well as causal
relationships of these dynamics. As the stakeholders are confronted with each other's,
respective knowledge and understandings/ perceptions, as well as the information on
externally induced influences will make that both local and external stakeholders
increasingly acquire the level of understanding required for soundly founded scenario
projections, negotiation and monitoring of introduced changes.

Knowledge sharing system?

To ensure adaptive and knowledge management, a knowledge sharing system must be
developed that is rooted both in local and in scientific methods of inquiry. Practitioners
should prepare to be flexible and adapt to changing circumstances within their landscapes.
This requires an understanding of the drivers of change and allowing for the unexpected
nature of managing complex and ever-changing landscapes.

Guidelines

Guideline 1

Step 1: Develop a broad baseline assessment of the landscape, launch adaptive

management and knowledge sharing

1. Gather existing information that includes spatial and non-spatial information

on markets, livelihoods, natural resource management and conservation;
identify information gaps and establish a transparent mechanism of
information gathering.
2. Identify internal and external drivers of change (according to the type of such
drivers- policy, markets…) for social, environmental and economic/market
dimensions, as well as trends in change and their causes.
 Principles for Adaptive Landscape Approach 2011

3. Evaluate historical patterns and expected trends in land use change, including
deforestation, forest regeneration, agricultural intensification, and land
degradation.
4. Assess market opportunities and constraints for the human population within
and outside the landscape, quantify the potential impact of the market on the
landscape and initiate reflection on effective market development.
5. Identify the underlying causes of possible market dysfunctions and
constraints, and focus on understanding the rules that govern the market
systems.
6. Assess the role of socio-economic flows in and out of the landscape, including
immigration, emigration, remittances, and off-farm employment
opportunities. For economic poles of attraction see also guideline 3.1.
7. Highlight past shocks and adaptive mechanisms at both the household and
landscape scale putting them into perspectives with global trends/issues that
are concurrently taking place.
8. Understand the spatial interactions between ecological, socioeconomic and
political factors, when possible based on topographic maps, remote sensed
images and digital elevation models
 Avoid being trapped into “technocratic” GIS processes: spatial
planning should be a product of participatory processes and should
not be essential to precede or constrain the exploration of landscape
scenarios
9. Identify cultural landscapes, rare ecosystems, as well as key and charismatic
species and understand conservation objectives and needs both within and
outside of existing or potential nature reserves.
10. Consider global agricultural and tenure trends and highlight for external
opportunities and threats, especially with regard to resource extraction
concessions and cash crop expansion.
11. Develop future scenarios based on past trends and on a range of potential
interventions.
 The use of scenario assessment and other decision support tools is a
critical element if one wants to manage landscapes as systems. The
complexity of interactions and dynamics often exceeds the ability of
stakeholders and managers to understand them without modelling or
decision support tools
12. Establish knowledge networks to promote a continuous flow of horizontal and
vertical information sharing and joint learning.
13. Document, analyse and communicate about practical experiences to feed the
policy dialogue with concrete ‘ground truthing’ – often obtained in the form
of the implementation of programs/projects (i.e. learning by doing).

Tools

 Market research and value chain analysis;

 Principles for Adaptive Landscape Approach 2011

 M4P tool (http://www.mmw4p.org/dyn/bds/docs/detail/474/6; http://poverty.ch/;

http://www.sdc-employment-
income.ch/en/Home/Making_Markets_Work_for_the_Poor);
 PRA/PLA including time series;
 Community-engaged, ground based photo-monitoring;
 See also value links as indicated in principle 4.

Examples

Under development

Please send us your example from the field

 Principles for Adaptive Landscape Approach 2011

Principle 2: Common Concern Entry-point Principle

The entry point common concern should be people oriented because perceptions
concerning a number of variables/attributes of a landscape are likely to differ between
different stakeholders. To be a motivating factor, it is important that the choice of the
entry point intervention is perceived by key stakeholders to be promising in terms of
addressing common concerns concretely and in the short term. It can be a tentative or trial
action/activity which is anticipated and that will also provide valuable and pertinent
information to the other principles, and in particular will encourage confidence and
interest in stakeholders to address other related issues of common concern which may be
more sensitive.

Guidelines

Guideline 2

1. Choose an entry point for intervention which is perceived by key stakeholders as

promising in addressing common concerns concretely and in the short term.
2. Anticipate scenario options, and in particular in coordination with principle 1, which
will encourage commitment from key stakeholders to contribute to the evolving
landscape approach according to the other principles.

Tools

About "Entry Points for assessing landscape level measures”, see

http://treadwell.cce.cornell.edu/ecoag1a/?page_id=2

Examples

Under development

Please send us your example from the field

 Principles for Adaptive Landscape Approach 2011

Principle 3: Multiple Scale Principle

Stakeholders must pay close attention to the multiple scales at which ecological dynamics
and socio-economic activity in a landscape originate, evolve and interact. This is essential
for developing sound governance systems and management strategies that
are coordinated across different scales and issues as well as different political and
administrative entities.

Optimising the provision of multiple socio-economic and ecological functions and reconciling
conflicting conservation and development goals often requires interventions across the
diverse components of landscape mosaics. Solutions to many natural resource problems
require units of analysis large enough to encompass multiple land uses and ecological
functions but manageable enough for leaders in the landscape to comprehend and
communicate. A chosen landscape often encompasses several settlements (villages, towns,
locations, etc.) and is influenced by multiple administrative units. Landscapes therefore
often represent a useful mid-level scale between local and higher levels. Paying close
attention to the multiple scales at which ecological dynamics and socio-economic activity in
a landscape originate and evolve is essential to developing sound governance systems and
management strategies for the landscape. These have to be linked to plot or village scale
activities as well as district-national-global policies and an enabling institutional environment
which impact, or may impact on the landscape dynamics.

In addition, economic poles of attraction (push-pull factors) might not overlap fully with the
ideal landscapes boundaries set from an (hopefully) appropriate sociological, ecological or
administrative perspective. Such poles of attraction might indeed be in areas that are not
part of the landscape (e.g. a major export market being out of the landscape but still strongly
influencing it). Therefore, analyses have to be scaled at levels that are beyond the strict
boundaries of the landscape. Finally the definition of boundaries will be the result of the
trade-offs made between the ecological, social and economic perspectives.

Guidelines

Guideline 3

Understand landscapes as varying “social constructions” but recognize and define

boundaries to allow linkages with action and policy dialogue

1. Define the boundaries of the landscape according to predominant features of the

landscape as well as recognizable ecological, economic and/or social issues that are
aimed to be addressed through better governance and management of the
landscape.
o It is important to agree early on a defined geographic area to facilitate
subsequent analyses, negotiations of outcomes and management planning.
Generally, a priority issue leads the delineation: it may be ecological (area
surrounding a nature reserve, watersheds), economic (area influenced by
 Principles for Adaptive Landscape Approach 2011

mining, plantations or hydropower activities and a vast array of business

activities from small scale cottage industries to larger agricultural or industrial
activities), social (ethnic homogeneity) or administrative (indigenous
territories, districts). However, the landscapes should also be defined
according to other overlapping or proximate spatial units, and especially
political and administrative ones, that are relevant for policy-making.
o Consider the effects of landscape management on adjacent areas (e.g.
“leakage”).
2. Link landscape-scale processes to smaller-scale land management practices and
larger-scale policies and drivers of change to understand the interactive effects of
activities and influences at each scale.

Tools

 About “Thinking and Working at Landscape Scale”, see the Landscape Measures
Resource Center http://treadwell.cce.cornell.edu/ecoag1a/?p=42
 Tools for participatory mapping:
http://cifor.cgiar.org/conservation/_ref/research/research.3.2.htm
 Tools for identifying a relevant territory from an economic perspective:
o Local Economic Development territorial analysis;
o Ecoloc and identification of the neighbourhood;
o ILO LED manuals (www.ledknowledge.org/);
o Territorial Competitiveness (www.mesopartner.com), etc.
 Tools for analysing the economic potential of products and services produced in the
landscape:
o Value chain analysis (particularly value addition);
o Value links from GTZ (http://www.value-links.de/manual/)
o A resource library on the topic: www.valuechains.org

Examples

Under development

Please send us your example from the field

 Principles for Adaptive Landscape Approach 2011

Principle 4: The Multi-Functionality Principle

To support social and ecological objectives, landscapes must be intentionally managed for
‘multifunctionality’ to generate multiple outputs in a sustainable manner with the least
trade-off costs and where possible maximised synergies.

The land, water and other resources in a landscape may provide a diverse range of
consumable and marketable products that can support local livelihoods and also feed global
markets. Rural landscapes also provide valuable ecosystem services and may be essential for
conserving biodiversity. Multi-functionality can occur in a spatially integrated or segregated
way, the latter can potentially lead to a risk of losing ecological connectivity. Cost-benefit
analysis of the various functions and trade-offs and/or synergies between them, provides
the basis for objectively defining management objectives.

Guidelines

Guideline 4

Describe the landscape functions and values, possible synergies and compensation
requirements

1. Consider, including in economic terms, the entire mosaic and multiple dimensions of
production (agriculture, forestry, fisheries, mining etc.), conservation (e.g.
biodiversity, water, other ecosystem services), and livelihoods (e.g. food security,
nutrition, health, gender, off-farm incomes).
2. Assess productivity within multi-functional farming systems and identify options for
possible improved practices.
3. Identify users and beneficiaries of ecosystem goods and services; understand their
management objectives and their socio-political networks.
4. Recognize trade-offs between the various conservation and development objectives,
and investigate potential synergies.
5. Undertake cost-benefit analyses of the various options to guide the development of
management objectives.
6. Assess appropriate compensation mechanisms (PES, REDD+) whenever possible,
assess transaction costs and support policy dialogue to equitably compensate the
rendered ecosystem services.

Tools

 Cost-benefit analysis in a restoration example:

http://www.clw.csiro.au/heartlands/publications/general/hl5-01.pdf
 About PES: http://www.cifor.cgiar.org/pes/_ref/home/index.htm
 Mobilizing PES at a landscape scale:
http://www.cgiar.org/pdf/agm07/sf_McNeely_presentation.pdf
 Principles for Adaptive Landscape Approach 2011

Examples

Under development

Please send us your example from the field

 Principles for Adaptive Landscape Approach 2011

Principle 5: The Multi-Stakeholder Principle

Landscape-scale management requires engagement from a representative set of

stakeholders, and negotiation towards a workable level of agreement among them about
goals concerning issues and resources of common concern from the landscape and ways of
reaching those goals. Developing a stakeholder platform requires a patient iterative
process of identifying stakeholders, their interests, building trust, empowering weak
stakeholders and for powerful stakeholders to accept new rights and roles for other
stakeholders.

The concerned stakeholders include primary users of the landscape (farming communities
and the eventual natural resource extracting private sector), secondary beneficiaries, as
well as the institutional and administrative sectors. It is important that improved
landscape governance and management initiatives invest the time and resources needed
to equitably engage the multiple stakeholders in realizing common elements of their
visions for change, and to make special efforts to involve women and other marginalized
groups. A participative process is aimed at helping build and strengthen multi-stakeholder
dialogue, informed negotiation and equitable decision making processes.

Guidelines

Guideline 5

Build and strengthen multi-stakeholder processes

1. When possible, existing multi-stakeholder platforms should be used.

o The use of existing platforms should help stakeholders focus on coordinated
efforts and not be distracted by too many diverse fora.
2. Make sure you gather a broadly representative set of concerned stakeholders;
particularly involve women at all stages of the planning, management and
monitoring/evaluation processes.
o Give a voice to marginalized groups through empowerment for negotiation
o Bring powerful interests, such as multi-national logging, agribusiness, oil, gas,
or mining companies to the same table with other stakeholders, so that they
cannot by-pass the multi-stakeholder process. This is a slow process of
“facipulation” (subtle combination of honest broker manipulation with
facilitation)
3. Plan a long enough inception phase to build confidence and ownership of the process
among stakeholders, demonstrate that all inputs are valued and will be included.
4. Avoid paternalistic or top-down approaches in which outside organizations devise
plans or investments for local people without substantive local participation and
ownership in the process. Use decision or negotiation support tools to search for
“quick wins” by identifying concerns that are common to most stakeholders and
devising solutions that can provide short-term progress toward addressing these
concerns.
 Principles for Adaptive Landscape Approach 2011

o Use common concerns as a starting point for discussions; once sufficient

mutual trust is established, more disputed issues can be brought up
o At value chain development for instance, a very early step is to get all the
actors from the chain, from the farmers to the retailer, pursuing one same
mission that makes sense to their respective businesses. Depending on the
product, this may require information to be gathered internationally with for
instance consumer interest groups.
5. Consider carefully and discuss early the process of weighting different alternatives
and making decisions.

Tools

 Sobre el involucramiento de los actores:

http://treadwell.cce.cornell.edu/ecoag1a/?p=11

Examples

En desarrollo

Por favor envíenos su ejemplo práctico

 Principles for Adaptive Landscape Approach 2011

Principle 6: The Negotiated and Transparent Change Logic Principle

Negotiated change must be built on an agreed vision through building trust and setting
priorities in a collaborative and transparent manner. Even if the logic of change models
generally requires coping with a certain level of uncertainty, it must be clearly discussed
and described on how changes are expected to take place and what these are likely to be
in order to adapt them if needed. A transparent logic of intervention should include
underlying assumptions and expected pathways from interventions to develop and
negotiate new directions.

Appropriate decision making at landscape scale is best achieved by integrating it into an

impact logic model. Such a model is designed to help stakeholders, managers and decision
makers to explicitly and transparently define how they see themselves collaboratively
achieving their goals and having an impact.

Guidelines

Guideline 6

Develop a shared vision and an explicit idea of how change will be achieved

1. Assist stakeholders to agree on a shared vision.

o Those who are concerned with natural resource management (including
conservation and private sector interests) need to negotiate a common vision
with those who are more interested in forest conversion for developing their
business (the private sector at large, which also encompasses the small scale
farmer).
2. Based on explicit assumptions made about the driving forces of landscape changes,
develop with the stakeholders a common understanding of the main problems and
an impact logic, also called impact pathway, by highlighting the result/causal chains
between several actions. Linkage with monitoring guideline 8.3 is particularly
desirable.
o Try to develop impact logics (or pathways) combining several perspectives:
economic, environmental, etc. for instance through a causal model
o Showing the links between different interventions and their respective
contribution to a desired result will help focusing the monitoring effort on a
few indicators that are really the key nodes in the result chain
3. While the impact pathways have to be clarified, interventions do not have to follow
too rigid pre-defined log-frames: remain flexible by establishing and funding adaptive
management systems that allow resources to be used as needs arise (e.g. for
research, development support and coordination).
o A great deal has still to be achieved with regard to the requested flexibility in
budget lines to remain open for identified needs rather than implementation
of a pre-fixed list of activities, but requests have to be systematically
addressed to funding institutions/donors
 Principles for Adaptive Landscape Approach 2011

4. Select consensual activities as well as conflictive situations, i.e. whatever is of

common concern but conflictive, favour:
o Activities that require regular dialog between stakeholders
o Conservation measures based on collaborative stewardship mechanisms
o Ecosystem-based management regimes that encourage a complete
consideration of attributes and interconnections of each ecosystem
o Partnerships with powerful local stakeholders and the private sector, while
giving voice to marginalized groups
5. Work on ways to develop compensation mechanisms for ecosystem services without
curtailing the decision influencing power of the local stakeholders.
6. Ensure that access to information in the course of initial activities is available, notably
to a set of technical experts to be tapped as needed by landscape based multi-
stakeholder groups.

Tools

 Participatory Impact Pathway Analysis: http://boru.pbworks.com/

 “Impact logic” is also a tool from the development sector, generated among others
by the donor committee for enterprise development:
o http://www.enterprise-development.org/download.aspx?id=1527
o http://www.enterprise-development.org/download.aspx?id=1494

Examples

Under development

Please send us your example from the field

 Principles for Adaptive Landscape Approach 2011

Principle 7: The Clarification of Rights and Responsibilities Principle

Access and rights to resources of different stakeholders need to be locally clarified,

especially for local and indigenous populations. Realistically, this does not necessarily
involve formal/legal changes of tenure but the development of negotiated working
institutional arrangements. These may be policy experiments which may lead to future
legislative change. In relation to rights, the respective responsibilities of all stakeholders
must be equitably agreed upon.

Establishment of unambiguous rights and responsibilities of stakeholders represent an

objective of a viable landscape management approach. This is particularly important for
local and indigenous populations whose cultures and livelihoods have historically
depended on resources in the landscape

Guidelines

Guideline 7

Support clarification of rights and responsibilities

1. Legitimate management and/or tenure rights of local communities over natural

resources must be considered and when possible preserved and formalised, with a
specific consideration of indigenous people and women. In all cases, community
management has to be considered in a multi-level governance perspective.
o The devolution of rights, tenure, access and management is often desirable,
but landscape approaches imply that there are some instances where
governance is best established at intermediate scales, although still through a
democratic process that recognises tenure and access rights.
o Devolution is only feasible once considerable capacity building has been
injected into the system so that the people can arbitrate what comes first:
conservation or development or a compromise, if reasonably satisfactory in
view of their long term livelihood strategies.
2. Rights are conditional to the respect of related responsibilities and rules. They have
to be specified and potential sanctions should be clarified during the planning
processes.
3. In case unclear tenure rights allow them, look for define pathways to avoid land
conversion schemes (e.g. biofuel plantations) that provide short-term benefits for a
small group of stakeholders, without securing long-term perspectives, benefits, or
compensation for a widely representative group of stakeholders or for specific ethnic
groups which are closely dependent on natural resources which they traditionally
manage sustainably.

Tools

 Readings on REDD and Rights & Tenure:

http://www.forestsclimatechange.org/rightstenure.html
 Principles for Adaptive Landscape Approach 2011

Examples

Under development

Please send us your example from the field

 Principles for Adaptive Landscape Approach 2011

Principle 8: Participatory and User-Friendly Monitoring Principle

Participatory monitoring and evaluation of landscape changes and interventions should be

designed to generate the information which is necessary for stakeholders to
collaboratively assess and adapt their planned interventions to evolving needs, objectives,
opinions and circumstances.

There are numerous challenges to identifying key values or functions of the landscape as a
whole, as well as to measuring and monitoring outcomes of efforts in terms of biodiversity
conservation, livelihood improvements and environmental services which are likely to
concern in varying ways different stakeholders in a landscape. For stakeholders to
collaboratively adapt their interventions and management over time, it is therefore
essential that they can measure, monitor and communicate the nature and extent to
which a landscape is changing over time with respect to the collaboratively agreed
conservation and livelihood outcomes. Participatory and user friendly monitoring is
therefore of fundamental importance to such landscape conservation and development
approaches. One needs to be very clear on objectives yet need to be flexible to cater for
different needs of different stakeholders: i.e. need for standard transferable indicators
(important for scaling up) as well as local stakeholder specific pertinent indicators

Guidelines

Guideline 8

Develop a monitoring system

1. Be rigorous in the description of what is to be monitored in relation to aims (the

degree of achievement of an intervention? Outcomes or changes of behaviour
related to the intervention? More general landscape social-ecological trajectories?).
2. Try to build on existing monitoring systems but develop specific landscape-scale
monitoring systems which are broad enough to encompass several conservation and
livelihood dimensions, including those that are driven by external drivers.
3. Use indicators that are readily understandable by (and perhaps even measurable
through participatory M&E) and relevant to all stakeholders, focus on a small number
of easily measurable indicators of desirable future scenarios for the landscape.
4. Define the right combination of robust standardized and participatorily developed
indicators and be realistic with regard to the common need for local and external
(including financial means and expertise) contribution to a territorial monitoring
system.

Tools

 LOAM:
http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/how_we_work/conservation/forests/publication
s/?uNewsID=120980
 Principles for Adaptive Landscape Approach 2011

 Community-engaged, ground based photo-monitoring makes use of visual indicators

for tracking change and engages multiple stakeholders in the process and in the
analysis, as desired. EP and Cornell developed a Users’ guide on this method with/for
Terr Africa at present. For basic principles and approach see Landscape Measures
Resource Center (LMRC).
 PRA monitoring

Examples

Under development

Please send us your example from the field

 Principles for Adaptive Landscape Approach 2011

Principle 9: The Resilience Principle

The resilience of landscapes, i.e. the capacity of their ecological and livelihood systems to
absorb disturbances, must be maintained or improved so that these ecological and social
systems can reorganize while undergoing change, so as to still retain essentially the same
functions, structure, identity and feedbacks.

The resilience of landscapes to environmental, economic, and political changes can be

improved by fostering the adaptive capacity of institutions, by retaining biological diversity
in the landscape and by ensuring investments that are at the same time profitable and
sustainable. The concept of resilience is therefore an important component of good
governance. Socio-economic and ecological landscape-scale interactions and dynamics are
so complex that long-term research is required to discern many of the important changes
taking place and therefore to support stakeholders and institutions to anticipate, adapt
and plan for the future. Such research can often be linked directly to monitoring and
evaluation (see principle 7).

Guidelines

Guideline 9

Manage landscapes for strengthening resilience with and through local institutions

1. Especially for natural areas, but also for eco-agricultural practices, management
regimes close to natural ecological processes should serve as effective models for
interventions
2. Avoid natural habitat fragmentation where appropriate and possible; protect buffer
core protected areas and other natural habitats from encroachment and
infrastructure development
3. Organize regular events to learn from failures and share lessons learned from both
successes and shortfalls
4. Plan continuous training for land use institutions and facilitate research and
development activities
5. Support inter- and transdisciplinary training, the integration of facilitation principles
and elements of support to negotiation
6. Facilitate the preparation of long term development plans in accordance with
conservation objectives and that ensure resilience is safeguarded. Such plans are
then fed into the decision making processes to protect and manage the landscape
o Agricultural intensification programmes should be aligned or calibrated
according to the capacity of the landscape and supervision should be ensured.
7. Resilience can be fostered by specific investments that could be made by the actors
evolving in the landscape: foster investments that build on synergies between a
conservation agenda and a business.
8. Foster the maintenance of multi-stakeholder processes over time: shared
communication and information among these actors will have a major impact on
how the landscape is managed in the long term. For stakeholders to perceive the
 Principles for Adaptive Landscape Approach 2011

need to continue to be involved in these processes requires that they see an

advantage, which can be through improved landscape based livelihoods and /or
through PES.

Tools

View presentations here

http://www.cifor.cgiar.org/Events/ForestDay3/LearningEvents/Landscape+approaches+to+
mitigation+and+adaptation.htm

Examples

Under development

Please send us your example from the field

 Principles for Adaptive Landscape Approach 2011

Principle 10: Strengthened Stakeholder Capability Principle

Sustainable, resilient and multi-functional landscapes require that stakeholders develop

the capability to manage both processes which are increasingly complex and lands which
are often under growing pressure. Constraints lie in increased need for collaboration
between landscape stakeholders over resources of common concern, in changes in policy
framework conditions and in the globalisation of interest from external stakeholders on
some of their landscape’s resources (e.g. REDD and carbon sequestration, water flows).

The complexity of collaborative multi-stakeholder management in sustainable and

resilient multi-functional landscapes is increased by the often fast evolving external
demands on the landscape. It requires competent and effective community leaders and
institutions, as well as skilled multidisciplinary facilitators, scientific specialists, technicians
and as well as public and private sector managers

Guidelines

Guideline 10

Build capacities

1. Build on, and strengthen, existing organizational capacity and culture to enable
negotiation between stakeholders (community leaders, facilitators, local scientists,
managers).
2. Establish a mechanism for capacity development for stakeholders at village and
landscape levels to acquire the appropriate knowledge to participate in landscape
management negotiations.
3. Promote training and evaluation procedures adapted to the skills required for
landscape monitoring approaches.

Tools

See various resources in the Landscape Measures Center and the

http://learningforsustainability.net/ website

Examples

Under development

Please send us your example from the field

Principles for Adaptive Landscape Approach 2011