6.2. Integration
6.2.10. Identifying stakeholders
There are many potential stakeholders in community-based co-management.
Stakeholders are individuals, groups or organizations of men and women, old and young, who are in one way or another interested, involved or affected (positively or negatively) by a particular project (Box 6.17). They may be motivated to take action based on their interest or values. Stakeholders may include groups affected by the management decisions, groups concerned about the management decisions, groups dependent upon the resources to be managed, groups with claims over the area or resources, groups with activities that impact on the area or resources and groups with, for example, special seasonal or geographic interests. Stakeholders are important because they can support or not support co-management, which can lead to its success or failure. Stakeholders of coastal resources include fishers, fisher households and fishing communities, but also include seasonal fishers, boat owners, fish traders, government, mangrove cutters, etc. Stakeholder groups can be divided into smaller and smaller sub-groups depending upon the particular purpose of stakeholder analysis. The identification of key stakeholders should be inclusive and detailed. More groups may mean more problems and discussion, but excluding certain groups could lead to problems in the long run. Ultimately, every individual is a stakeholder, but that level of detail is rarely required (IIRR, 1998). A key question to be answered in the co-management programme is:
Box 6.17. Identifying Potential Stakeholders.
● Are there communities, groups or individuals actually or potentially affected by the management decisions?
● Who are the main traditional authorities in the area at stake? Are there government agencies officially responsible for the management of the area? Are there respected institutions, to which people have recourses in connection with a variety of needs and circumstances?
● Who has access to the marine resources at stake? Who is using the resources? In what ways? Has this changed over time?
● Which communities, groups and individuals are most dependent on the resources at stake? Is this a matter of livelihood or economic advantage?
● Who upholds claims, including customary rights and legal jurisdiction over the area?
Are there communities with ancestral and/or other types of acquired rights? Are various government sectors and ministerial departments involved? Are there national and/or international bodies involved because of specific laws or treaties?
● Which communities, groups or individuals are most knowledgeable about, and capable of dealing with, the resources at stake? Who has direct experience in managing them?
● What are the seasonal/geographic variations in resource use patterns and user interest?
● Are there co-management initiatives in the region? If so, to what extent are they succeeding? Who are the main partners?
Source: Borrini-Feyerabend et al. (2000, pp. 22–23).
who are the stakeholders that are entitled to take part in discussions and in management?
Stakeholder analysis is conducted to identify potential partners for co- management (Box 6.18), to explore possible approaches in relating to a particular
Community Entry and Integration 87
Box 6.18. Stakeholder Analysis.
The process of identifying stakeholders and figuring out their respective importance regarding the resource is referred to as a stakeholder analysis.
The stakeholder analysis is best conducted in a participatory way with the core group and/or key informants (knowledgeable or important individuals in the community) from a single stakeholder group or from various stakeholder groups. The participants in the stakeholder analysis exercise need to be documented to objectively analyse the results.
● The resource, activity or project to be analysed is identified based on the PNO assessment (for example, fishing) (see Section 6.2.6). The objective(s) and intended outputs of the stakeholder analysis are identified.
● An understanding of the context of the resource, activity or project and how the overall system operates is undertaken including who are the main decision-makers in the system and interactions and interdependencies, especially ecological and human systems.
● The participants are asked to identify and list all stakeholders associated with the resource, activity or project. Write their names on paper circles. Larger circles are used to identify stakeholders with greater influence or power. (Alternatively, a focal group approach can be used by identifying a stakeholder group which plays a central role in resource use and management. Other stakeholders are then uncovered by identifying individuals, groups and institutions who have important relationships with the focal group with respect to resource management.)
● After an initial set of stakeholders is identified, they need to be verified. The stakeholders are questioned as to whom they perceive the other main stakeholders to be, and what the relations between different stakeholders are.
● Prepare a stakeholder analysis matrix with two columns (positively affected and negatively affected) and two rows (directly affected and indirectly affected). Place the circles in one of the four boxes on the matrix. Draw lines between the stakeholders to indicate the existence of some form of relationship. Use plus and minus symbols to indicate the nature of the relationship. An explicit investigation of the relationship between stakeholders can reveal information about the nature of conflicts and cooperative action, and the reasons and contexts behind them.
● Prepare a stakeholder analysis and coping matrix. This matrix has five columns:
1. Stakeholder group.
2. Describe the potential impact of the proposed action (for example, actions identified in the co-management plan) on the stakeholder group.
3. Describe the potential reaction of the affected group and the implications for the proposed action.
4. Can the proposed action be modified to reduce or mitigate the negative impact? If so, how?
5. Describe the recommended course of action (coping strategy).
person or group who can be supportive or potentially hostile to co-management and to provide insights into the dynamics and relationships of individuals and groups with various interests in a particular resource or project. The stakeholder analysis is usually done by key informants from primary stakeholders. In some cases stakeholders may be easily identified through existing organized groups, while in others they may not be organized to currently engage in co-management (for example, a group of unorganized fishers using the same fishing gear type or fishing in the same area). The identification of not only groups with special interests and concerns but also those possessing specific capacities and knowledge for management can improve the list of key stakeholders.
Once key stakeholder groups are identified, it is important to find out their interests and concerns, whether they are organized and capable of participating in management decision-making, and whether they are willing to participate. Those groups that are not organized or prepared to participate will require assistance to do so.
If a variety of stakeholders is identified in the stakeholder analysis, which will probably happen, the question arises as to who should be invited to participate in the co-management programme (Box 6.19). This can create a dilemma. While it is important to have a well-represented co-management programme, it is important to determine if all stakeholder sub-groups are entitled to be involved in the programme. Too many stakeholders can create administrative and resource allocation problems. It is important that the final stakeholders involved in co-management be well-balanced; not too many so as to complicate and slow down the programme and not too few so as to leave out some key stakeholders. As such, the issue of entitlement becomes a central question: ‘Who is entitled to participate in co-management?’ This question needs to be addressed initially by the core group, and later by the co- management body (Box 6.20). It is difficult and is often only accomplished Begin with the stakeholders identified as being directly and negatively affected, then move on to those indirectly and negatively affected, and so forth. Write the information to each question on the column of the matrix.
● After filling in the matrix, have the group discuss issues, problems and opportunities.
Formulate courses of action for addressing various stakeholder interests, especially for those negatively affected.
● Repeat for other resource, activity or project.
This exercise can identify different stakeholders, give ideas on how to relate to particular stakeholders, and provide insights into the dynamics and relationships of different stakeholders. As a follow-up, the interests, characteristics and circumstances of each stakeholder group in relation to the resource can be investigated.
Stakeholder analysis should be done before initiating co-management. It should be repeated at key points in the co-management process to check on possible changes in the number and characteristics of the stakeholders.
Sources: Grimble and Chan (1995), IIRR (1998).
Community Entry and Integration 89
Box 6.19. Identification of Bona Fide Fishers, South Africa.
A significant problem in South Africa is the illegal harvesting of abalone and rock lobster along the southwest coast. A project was initiated in 1999 to bring all the conflicting stakeholders together to identify and implement a coordinated strategy to diminish poaching in the Hangklip-Kleinmond area. It was necessary to identify the ‘real’ fishers for the project. The decision was taken at the outset of the project that the identification of the fishers in the community would take place by the community itself. However, the criteria for making this decision, and for evaluating the decision, were not effectively defined by the project. As a result, conflict emerged as to the credibility and legitimacy of people applying for, and receiving, access to resources.
First, one of the groups of fishers usually did not participate in meetings and workshops. Their commitment to the process and their ability to fish the quota, if allocated to them, was never verified. Second, there were questions raised regarding people potentially benefiting from the process if they had been outside of the fishing industry for many years doing other employment. Finally, some of the leaders themselves had not fished for many years and had also been involved in other professions. This caused concern as to whether they were bona fide fishers, or whether they were businessmen with other priorities and interests. There was never finalization of the criteria to determine who qualified as a ‘fisher’ with the community. Therefore, when rights were allocated after the project was terminated, conflict broke out within the community as fishers argued that some of the quotas did not go to the ‘real’ fishers in the community. The identification of and agreement on criteria regarding who qualifies as a ‘fisher’ needs to be clarified for future resource allocation processes.
Source: Hauck and Hector (2003).
Box 6.20. Examples of Characteristics of Entitlements.
● Existing legal rights to resource, whether customary or modern law;
● Mandate of the state;
● Direct dependency on resource for subsistence and survival;
● Dependency for economic livelihood;
● Historical, cultural and spiritual relationship to the area;
● Continuity of relationship, e.g. residents versus visitors and tourists;
● Unique knowledge about and ability to manage the area;
● Proximity to the area;
● Degree of effort and interest in management;
● Loss and damage as a result of the co-management;
● Number of individuals or groups sharing the same interest or concern.
Source: Borrini-Feyerabend et al. (2000).
through participation from and negotiation with groups and individuals to ensure equitable representation in the co-management programme. All who believe themselves stakeholders should be allowed to argue their case for entitlement. The stakeholders with recognized entitlements may be subdivided between ‘primary’ and ‘secondary’, and accorded with different roles, rights and responsibilities in co-management (Borrini-Feyerabend et al., 2000). For example, full-time fishers may be recognized as primary stakeholders and seasonal fishers may be recognized as secondary stakeholders.
A problem to note on entitlements is that these are often based on legal and state-mandated rules and documents. In some cases, there are community members, the indigenous peoples among them, who cannot argue their rights to the resources within the legal framework. They would have their own traditional system of rights and rules. It is important for the CO and the core group to recognize the varying bases for claiming rights or entitlements to resources. Establishing equitable representation among stakeholders is necessary in a co-management process.