48980 Environment Notes Strategic Environmental Assessment FORESTRY Number Guidance Note on Mainstreaming -- Environment in 01 Forest Sector Reform Diji Chandrasekharan Behr and Fernando Loayza 1 Introduction March 2009 Task managers and sector specialists face the chal- lenge of incorporating complex environmental and social considerations into forest sector reforms. Strategic environmental assessment (SEA) is one useful tool for achieving this objective. This note provides some general guidance on applying SEA to forest sector reform, drawing on the experience and lessons learned from an SEA undertaken to anderS assess environmental and social priorities associ- lasK ated with the Kenya Forests Act 2005 and the systems to manage these priorities. This SEA also Authors proposes policy adjustments and specific actions Diji Chandrasekharan Behr, Natural Resources Economist, Agri- to improve existing environmental and social culture and Rural Development Department, and Fernando management systems to enhance the positive and Loayza, Sr. SEA Specialist, Environment Department, both of the minimize the negative environmental and social World Bank. impacts of the Forests Act (see Box 1). Reviewers An SEA utilizes both analytical and participatory This note was reviewed by Peter Jipp, Senior Natural Resource approaches to integrate environmental consider- Management Specialist, Rural Development, Natural Resources and Environment Unit, East Asia and Pacific Region (EASRE), and ations into policies, plans, and programs and eval- Ulrich Schmitt, Natural Resource Economist, Rural Development, uate their inter linkages with economic and social Natural Resources and Environment Unit, East Asia and Pacific considerations (OECD 2006.) The Environment Region (EASRE), all of the World Bank. Department of the World Bank is piloting an Additional Contributors SEA approach--the institutions-centered SEA Kulsum Ahmed, Lead Environmental Specialist, Environment approach--that applies institutional and political Department; Dora Nsuwa Cudjoe, Young Professional, Environ- economy analysis to help design and evaluate pro- ment Department, all of the World Bank. posed public policies and sector-level structural reforms. The Kenya Forests Act SEA was the first Strategic Environmental Assessment FORESTRY Number Box 1. The SEA of the Kenya Forests Act 2005 -- For many years, forest legislation and practice in Kenya has been criticized for failing to protect the country's native forests 01 or ensure sustainable use of plantations and other forest and woodland areas. Most forest communities have felt disadvan- taged and excluded from forest management, and Kenya has had a history of poor management and abuse of authority by national government and private concessionaires. The Forests Act approved by parliament and endorsed by the president in 2005 contains many innovative provisions to correct previous shortcomings, including strong emphasis on working in partnership, engaging local communities, and promoting private investment. Along with the establishment of a semi- 2 autonomous Kenya Forest Service (KFS), this new legislation opened up a major opportunity to address the inequalities of the past and to improve the quality and sustainability of Kenya's forests, trees, and woodland. The role of the SEA was to prioritize areas in which the reform process should concentrate its activities in order to achieve real and lasting social and environmental, as well as economic, benefits. The SEA was developed to reflect the local context and dynamic in the forest sector, identifying mechanisms to address strategic environmental and social issues during implementation of the Kenya Forests Act 2005. The main elements of the SEA included: · Arapidassessmentofthepoliticaleconomy,includingareviewofexistingpublications,toestablishthecontextwithin which the Act would be implemented · National-level situation assessment reports to provide a baseline description of the governance, institutional, econom- ic, financial, social, and environmental factors that needed to be taken into account in implementing the Forests Act · Strong emphasis on the engagement of stakeholder groups to help identify priority areas of concern and key posi- tive and negative inter-sectoral environmental and social impacts. The opinions of all key stakeholders were sought through open dialogue and prioritization exercises in workshops and one-on-one consultations · Acasestudyandothersite-specificinformationto:(i)validatefindingsfromthenationalassessment,(ii)identifypoten- tial winners and losers arising from implementation of the new Act, and (iii) assess the extent to which the benefits of good forest management were likely to be shared throughout society · Development of a policy action matrix both to present the SEA recommendations and to facilitate accountability and transparency in implementing the Forests Act. The SEA highlights three areas for priority action: (i) strategic management and planning of the KFS, (ii) enabling com- munity participation and benefit sharing, and (iii) a public and private investment framework to enable sustainable forest management (SFM). Source: World Bank 2007. pilot; others have been implemented in other sectors approaches are also appropriate for providing input and regions. into policy formulation. When an SEA's focus is on The SEA of the Kenya Forests Act was undertaken af- implementation, as in this example, the scope of the ter the policy had been enacted in an effort to generate analytical work and consultations are framed by the consensus around implementation priorities among a key elements of the already adopted policy. broad and diverse group of stakeholders and to ensure Preliminary lessons and results from the Kenya ex- their support for, and active involvement in, imple- ample described in this note will be supplemented by mentation of the Act. But the SEA framework and the other completed and ongoing pilots. It is expected Strategic Environmental Assessment FORESTRY Number that application of SEA in other settings will generate grazers, encroachers) heard along with the voices of additional lessons to enrich and refine our understand- more powerful stakeholders is needed to engender ing of how to apply SEA in the forest sector. atherefore process that reflects public well being and reform -- Key considerations for SEA in environmental and social priorities. 01 forest sector reform Among the social concerns that may emerge from such consultations are inclusiveness of the process An SEA contributes to policy and sector reform and capacity of the various stakeholders to participate; mainly by: rights and welfare of ethnic minorities, indigenous 3 · Identifying environmental and social priorities people, and poor communities; respect and recogni- that should be included in planning and policy tion of customary tenure; and access rights and benefit processes sharing. Environmental concerns may include efficient · Assessing gaps in the institutional, policy, and allocation of forest resources; loss or damage to func- legal frameworks to address these priorities tional forest, critical habitats, and wildlife corridors; · Engaging decision makers to ensure a common and impact on botanical non-timber forest products understanding and broad support for implemen- and wildlife. tation To obtain representative consultations and stakeholder · Formulating policy and institutional adjustments participation, a good understanding of the political needed to close policy and legal gaps and address economy is necessary to ensure that all the relevant institutional weaknesses as part of sector reform. people and groups are involved. In the forest sector, as Each of these stages is discussed below and illustrated in other sectors, access to land and the allocation of with examples from the SEA for the Kenya Forests public investment and the distributional consequences Act 2005. of subsidies and revenues often result in inequities. A political economy analysis assesses the impacts on, and Identifying environmental and social priorities the influence of, the various stakeholders in relation to the policy design and implementation.The assessment Identification of environmental and social priorities is helps identify how and which groups are marginalized, critical to influencing sector reform, which is so com- as well as how to balance the difference in political in- plex that only key issues or priorities can justifiably be fluence and economic clout of the various stakeholders included. To be effective, the assessment has to be stra- to ensure that their concerns are discussed and inte- tegic and focused only on issues that transcend specific grated in identifying priorities. activities and are central for environmental, social, and economic sustainability of forest development. A forest SEA process must encompass a broad range of stakeholders: traditionally excluded groups such as Determining priorities first requires analytical work the extreme poor, ethnic groups, and women; forestry to identify specific technical environmental and social companies; nongovernmental organizations; com- issues that impact forests. It also requires consultation munity groups; research organizations; donors; and with, and participation of, stakeholders to elicit and various national government agencies. Effectively share information that may not be captured through engaging these diverse stakeholders warrants the use data, widely documented, or readily examined in of a combination of tools (some of which are described analytical studies (for example, cost of degradation). in Box 2), including: Making the voice of traditionally sidelined stakehold- · Workshops (national, regional, and local) ers (for example, forest-dependent women, pitsawers, · Formal public meetings Strategic Environmental Assessment FORESTRY Number Box 2. Public Participation Mechanisms in SEA -- SEA uses several mechanisms to ensure public participation in the assessment process. 01 Workshops can bring together a large number of people and provide the SEA task team with insights on different stake- holder groups' reactions, perspectives, and knowledge while also providing this information to other stakeholder groups. Often unresolved issues can be further addressed in this forum, and unexpected alliances can be formed. For a workshop to effectively meet its objective, it needs to be well structured, well facilitated, and focused. A shortcoming of workshops 4 is that they can marginalize groups that do not have a dominant voice. Unless they take place at a convenient location and time, vulnerable and marginalized groups may not participate. Workshops can be an effective mechanism to engage stakeholders when used in combination with other tools; in isolation, they provide only a limited platform for effective engagement of stakeholders. A combination of presentations, exercises, working group sessions, and plenary discussions are usually needed to effectively gather participants'views, perceptions, priorities, and knowledge. Informal meetings in villages or on site are helpful for reaching stakeholder groups that reside in remote areas of the country, have limited time to participate in workshops, or prefer to discuss their opinions and share their knowledge in a familiar setting. Because forests issues often involve indigenous and marginalized groups, such meetings are important to capture information from this stakeholder group. Focus groups allow in-depth discussions on specific issues with a group of knowledgeable persons wanting to share information. A wide and diverse range of environmental and social issues and policies are linked to the forestry sector, and a focus group allows information put forward to be validated by group members. Unlike workshops that convene multiple stakeholders, stakeholders sharing a common specific interest or role in the sector are invited to focus groups. Thus a shortcoming of the focus group approach stems from the limited exchange among stakeholder groups. It is advisable to conduct focus group meetings with key stakeholder groups in advance of workshops, to tailor the meeting to the audi- ence, and ensure that the objective of the meeting is clear and achievable. Scenarios are a useful tool for addressing cross-sector issues that impact forests. Such issues can often require thinking "out of the box," aligning views and creating a common language among stakeholders, and changing the mental map of key forestry decision makers. Scenarios can be used at two different points in the process--the first is to elicit information on important issues and the second is to identify potential approaches or decisions to address key considerations. The for- mer should occur early in the process as it enables participants to open up and raise important points and questions. The second application of scenarios is best suited toward the end of the process to facilitate identification of actions or policy measures to minimize any social and environmental impacts. · Informal village meetings was used in the Kenya Forest SEA workshops to elicit · Focus groups priorities and validate the recommendations. · Scenarios · Field visits Assessing gaps and addressing priorities · Case studies Once environmental and social priorities have been · One-on-one interviews. identified, the assessment should focus on the sector's The approaches used should stimulate ownership of systems and capacity to address these priorities. Since the SEA process and reform of the sector.They should the reform had to adjust the institutional, policy, and help prioritize environmental and social issues at the regulatory framework, the kernel of the Kenya Forest beginning of the assessment and later prioritize the assessment, for example, was to evaluate the extent to recommendations. Box 3 shows how ranking of issues which the proposed reform helped address institu- tional weaknesses and policy and regulatory gaps for Strategic Environmental Assessment FORESTRY Number Box 3. Ranking Priorities and Recommendations -- The SEA consultation process included a series of three stakeholder workshops. At the first workshop, stakeholders were invited to share their concerns regarding the forest sector reform. Based on this information, an analysis of strengths and 01 weakness of the Forests Act, and the findings of the situation assessments, the SEA team presented a list of 40 questions and invited the participants at a second SEA workshop to break into four groups. Each group prioritized the 40 questions in terms of the ten most important topics that should be addressed in the short term in order to strengthen delivery of the Act's objectives. The four groups presented their respective lists, with several overlapping priorities, which resulted in a total list of 21 key issues. After the workshop, these 21 priorities were clustered into three key priority areas and used to 5 develop the SEA's recommendations and policy interventions. 21 Key Issues Identified through Ranking At the third and final stakeholder workshop, the recommended policy interventions and actions prepared by the SEA team were discussed and validated by the whole group. To prioritize the proposed interventions, the participants were invited to rank each recommendation using a scale from -2 to 2, with -2 indicating they disagreed strongly, -1 indicating they disagreed, 0 indicating they were neutral, 1 indicating they approved, and 2 indicating they strongly approved. Responses to each recommendation were analyzed to identify proposed actions requiring revision. More than 80 percent of the par- ticipants in the final SEA workshop agreed with the SEA proposed actions: · Establishing the KFS · Securing independence of the KFS · Providing adequate funding for the KFS · Securing independence of members of the KFS Board · Preparing forest management plans · Protecting water catchments · Developing partnerships with registered com- munity forestry associations (CFAs) · Achieving ecosystem management · Improving staff morale · Appointing an independent Director of the KFS on merit · Achieving effective community participation · Setting up an effective and fair system of con- · Providing incentives cessions · Safeguarding the interests of customary users · Protecting the user rights of CFAs · Selecting appropriate forest conservancy · Developing the role of NGOs areas · Dealing with charcoal production and trans- · Upgrading management of all forests portation. · Establishing joint management of plantations · Achieving transparency in management agree- ments environmental sustainability of the forest sector and forests), private investors, and local forest users; and formed the basis for negotiating benefit sharing ar- benefit sharing from exploitation of forest resources rangements among key stakeholders. Sector planning were found to be critical areas for environmental capacity; managing competing interests for access to sustainability and social equity. These priority areas forest resources involving the government (gazetted were presented in a policy action matrix (discussed Strategic Environmental Assessment FORESTRY Number below) that further detailed the priority actions, listed Effective approaches for engaging clients in the as- responsible stakeholders, and provided an indicative sessment include: -- timeframe with milestones for implementation. · Share a draft concept note and terms of reference 01 Undertaking institutional and policy assessment of the study and request their input. The concept requires assessing the extent to which laws are harmo- note must clearly articulate how the SEA will con- nized and policies are coordinated across government tribute to the reform process. This helps promote agencies affecting the forest sector. For example, the commitment and engagement in the SEA process 6 main finding of the institutional and policy assessment by the primary clients and other key stakeholders was the need to harmonize laws and coordinate poli- · Request a meeting to discuss their input and key cies to reduce conflict among ministries and among issues such as: stakeholder groups. Another critical factor was the · Status of the policy dialogue government's capacity to financially support the · Mechanisms and timing for including infor- necessary level of coordination. In Kenya, case study mation into the policy dialogue process evidence shed light on the need to simplify respon- · Other relevant activities (prior, ongoing, and sibilities for management of watersheds, forests, and upcoming) with which the SEA should coor- biodiversity. The findings highlighted the importance dinate of the role of the National Environmental Manage- · The role and involvement of the primary client ment Agency and of harmonizing the activities of in the process different ministries and lead agencies. Cooperation · Work with opportunities and/or around con- was found to be weak among government agencies in straints within the forest sector. These could be developing strategic plans that would address some of related to or originated in the economic, social, the priorities. The SEA also highlighted institutional environmental, political, legal, and/or political gaps for resolving competing objectives for land man- economy1 context of the forest sector (see Box 4). aged under different types of legislation (for example, the competing objectives between the Kenya Wildlife Formulating policy and institutional adjustments for sustainability Service and the Kenya Forest Service). The final stage of SEA is the formulation of comple- Engaging decision makers mentary policy and institutional adjustments as part of reform. These adjustments must take into account the Influencing and informing decision makers through results of the rapid assessment of political economy the SEA is challenging and requires development of to ensure that they are not biased or driven by the an explicit plan for consultation and dissemination more powerful and that the risk of reform capture to this group. To integrate SEA findings into deci- is reasonably controlled.2 This may require sharing sion making and policy formulation, it is important to engage the primary clients to whom the SEA will 1 be delivered from inception of the assessment. Early It should be noted that vested interests can, in some cases, engagement of clients can stimulate ownership of the influence what are considered appropriate analytical tools and approaches for, among other things, inventorying study, assist in coordinating the timing of the study forests, determining maximum allowable cut and yields, with the relevant policy dialogue and process, and stakeholder identification, financial analysis of the sector, identify critical points (potential windows of oppor- and so on. The SEA team must be sensitive to such influ- ences and able to justify the use of methods that ensure an tunity) in the policy process for sharing preliminary objective and rigorous analysis of the situation. findings/information from the study and informing 2 Policy or reform capture is said to have occurred when the overall process. Engaging clients early also pro- powerful sub-group influence a policy enactment or a vides initial insight into areas of concern. areform portionately favor them at the expense of the larger group. process such that results from the process dispro- Strategic Environmental Assessment FORESTRY Number widespread implementation of the Kenya Forests Act. Box 4. Framing the SEA Priority areas were broken down into issues identified Work in the Context of by stakeholders together with the necessary actions re- quired to ensure the issue(s) are addressed. Milestones, -- 01 Forest Sector Reform Pri- along with an indicative list of stakeholders to be in- orities volved in the action, were also identified. The use of a transparent consultative process to reach agreement on In the case of Kenya, the SEA made a direct contribu- action points and milestones meant the policy actions tion to the work of the Forest Sector Reform Com- listed in the matrix were identified and prioritized by 7 mittee, which was established by the Government of Kenya under the direction of the Ministry of Environ- abybroad range of forest sector stakeholders. Endorsed all the different groups of stakeholders (including ment and Natural Resources (MENR). This committee Permanent Secretaries representing both the Minis- is comprised of senior representatives from across government, representatives from the forest industry, try of Finance and the Ministry of Environment and nongovernmental organizations, conservationists, for- Natural Resources), the matrix is an important tool for est users, and development partners. It is chaired by stakeholders to monitor progress on implementation the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Environ- and hold government to account and vice versa. ment and Natural Resources (PS MENR) and is regard- ed as the main organ to drive the reform process. The policy action matrix is regarded as a living matrix. It is intended for use by the Forest Reform Secretariat A Forest Reform Secretariat was established in the For- est Department to serve this committee and carry out and subsequently the Kenya Forest Service Board to tasks as requested by the committee. One of the first ensure effective implementation of the new Forests tasks of the secretariat was to develop a roadmap for Act. The same wide group of stakeholders is to be implementation of the new Forests Act with a clear reconvened at appropriate intervals to review progress timeframe and outline for budget resource require- against this living matrix. These meetings will enable ments. The SEA team was mandated by the PS MENR to work with the Forest Reform Secretariat. The Gov- the matrix to be updated and adapted as appropriate ernment of Kenya recognized that these processes and, importantly, progress to be monitored. The policy were complementary and should seek to strengthen action matrix has been made available on the Internet each other. The Ministry of Environment and Natural (the www.policyactionmatrix.org) with a column updating Resources and the Department of Forestry agreed that status of actions. the SEA would be able to further strengthen the road- map and would also help to ensure donor support to the reform process. Conclusion The purpose of this Guidance Note is not to provide recommendations in different fora prior to develop- an exhaustive and comprehensive account of what ing them at the national level. In the Kenya Forest is required for undertaking an SEA for forest sector SEA, special fora were not necessary because of the reform. Rather, its aim is to provide guidance to task favorable context to discuss varying and competing managers, sector specialists, and SEA practitioners on interests of the different stakeholder groups, the broad the critical components for mainstreaming environ- representation of stakeholders in the SEA process, and mental and social issues in forest sector reform. the acknowledged capacity of civil society organiza- tions to represent the interests of key and vulnerable Identifying the environmental and social priorities that stakeholders. need to be included in sector reform is the first stage for the assessment to be strategic. This implies not In Kenya, the SEA findings and recommendations only conducting sound analytical work underpinning were presented as a policy action matrix to support the priorities but also incorporating the priority con- Strategic Environmental Assessment FORESTRY Number SEA participant cerns of stakeholders, particularly weak and vulnerable stakeholders. Incorporating the voices of traditionally -- excluded stakeholders is essential for policy priorities 01 to reflect public preferences. Guided by priorities identified early in the process, the assessment should subsequently focus on the systems within the agencies responsible for address- 8 ing the priorities. It should highlight the way that the proposed reform may enhance, constrain, or impair existing stakeholder capacities (including institutional and government capacities) to address the priorities. This requires examining the benefits and costs of the reform, particularly the risk that the reform process inadvertently transfers tangible and intangible costs of reform onto the environment or onto weaker and more vulnerable groups. Formulation of a policy action matrix completes the process. This matrix should clearly indicate the policy and institutional adjustments required to address the identified priorities in the context of ongoing forest sector reforms.Here,a critical issue is to take advantage of windows of opportunity to influence decision mak- ing. Achieving this objective requires a combination of factors: careful planning; integrating the SEA in the yza reform process from the very beginning; flexibility to oaL seize opportunities; engaging key stakeholders in a policy dialogue; and developing good communication links with those stakeholders who have the capacity nandoerF and willingness to shape forest sector reform. Rajalahti, Rikka, Kees van de Heijden, Willem Janssen, Eija Pehu. 2006. Scenario Planning to Guide Long-Term Investments References inCase Agricultural Science and Technology. Theory and Practice from FRR. 2007. "Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Kenya acussionStudy on India. Agriculture and Rural Development Dis- Paper 29. Washington, DC: World Bank. Forests Act (2005)." Final Draft of Consultants Report submit- ted to World Bank. United Kingdom. World Bank. 2007."Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Kenya Forests Act 2005." Report No. 40659-KE. Agricultural OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Devel- and Rural Development Department. Washington, DC. opment). 2006. Applying Strategic Environmental Assessment: Good Practice Guidance for Development Cooperation. DAC World Bank. 2008. Forests Sourcebook: Practical Guidance for Guidelines and Reference Series. OECD Publishing. Sustaining Forests in Development Cooperation. Agriculture and Rural Development Department. Washington, DC. Environment Department 1818 H Street, NW The World Bank Environment Notes Washington, DC 20433 USA www.worldbank.org/environment