9. Regional Network Assessment of Civil Society.pdf

June 2023

This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by Tetra Tech.

REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF

FOREST AND BIODIVERSITY CIVIL

SOCIETY NETWORKS IN CENTRAL

AFRICA

PHOTO CREDIT: MOLLY BERGEN, WCS, WWF, WRI

This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development by Tetra Tech, through USAID Contract No. 72060520C00001, USAID Forest and Biodiversity Support Activity. This report was produced by consultant Guy Patrice Dkamela with revisions from the Forest and Biodiversity Support Activity team.

This report was prepared by:

Tetra Tech 159 Bank Street, Suite 300 Burlington, Vermont 05401 USA Telephone: (802) 495-0282 Fax: (802) 658-4247 Email: international.development@tetratech.com

Tetra Tech Contact:

Vanessa Filippini, Chief of Party Email: vanessa.filippini@tetratech.com

Lauren Williams, Project Manager Email: lauren.williams1@tetratech.com mailto:vanessa.filippini@tetratech.com mailto:lauren.williams1@tetratech.com

REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FOREST

AND BIODIVERSITY CIVIL SOCIETY

NETWORKS IN CENTRAL AFRICA

June 2023

DISCLAIMER

The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government.

REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FOREST AND BIODIVERSITY CIVIL SOCIETY NETWORKS IN CENTRAL AFRICA 4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS 4

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7

1.0 ACTIVITY OVERVIEW 1

1.1 Activity description 1

2.0 INTRODUCTION 2

2.1 Rationale 2

2.2 Methods 3

3.0 OVERVIEW OF CIVIL SOCIETY NETWORKS IN CENTRAL AFRICA 6

3.1 Overview of Regional Network Identification 6

3.2 Network creation Timeline 6

3.3 Interventions and Thematic Focus 7

3.4 discussion 8

4.0 CASE STUDIES 10

4.1 Eco Activists for Governance and Law Enforcement (EAGLE) 10

4.2 RÉseau pour la Conservation et la Réhabilitation des Ecosystèmes Forestiers (RÉseau

CREF) 16

4.3 Coalition des Femmes Leaders pour l’Environnement et le DÉveloppement Durable

(CFLEDD) 23

4.4 Dynamique des Groupes des Peuples Autochtones (DGPA) 27

5.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 32

5.1 Discussion 32

5.2 Recommendations 36

ANNEX I. SUMMARY OF INTERVIEWS AND MEETINGS 39

REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FOREST AND BIODIVERSITY CIVIL SOCIETY NETWORKS IN CENTRAL AFRICA 5

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AAP Action et Aide pour la Paix

ACEFA Association Congolaise des Exploitants Forestiers Artisanaux

CAMV Centre d'Accompagnement des Autochtones Pygmées et Minoritaires Vulnérables

CARPE Central Africa Regional Program for the Environment

CBFP Congo Basin Forest Partnership

CCT Conseil de Concertation Territorial

CCU Central Coordination Unit

CEFDHAC Conférence sur les Ecosystèmes de Forêts Denses et Humides d'Afrique Centrale

CFCL Concession Forestière des Communautés Locales

CFLEDD Coalition des femmes leaders pour l'environnement et le développement durable

CLA Collaborating, Learning and Adapting

COMIFAC Central African Forest Commission

CONAREF Commission Nationale de la Réforme Foncière

CREF Réseau pour la Conservation et la Réhabilitation des Ecosystèmes Forestiers

CSO Civil society organization

DGPA Dynamique des Groupes des Peuples Autochtones

DRC Democratic Republic of Congo

DYFED Dynamique des Femmes Engagées pour un Environnement sain et Durable

EAGLE Eco-Activists for Governance and Law Enforcement

FABS Forest and Biodiversity Support Activity

FECOFFA Fédération Congolaise des Femmes et Filles Autochtones

FLEGT VPA EU Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade Voluntary Partnership Agreements

FOCODER Forêt Communautaire pour le Développement Rural

FODI Forêt pour le Développement Intégral

FOPRADI Foyer pour la Promotion Paysanne et la Redynamisation des Actions pour le Développement Intégral

FPIC Free Prior Informed Consent

GA General Assembly

GERNES Gestion des Ressources Naturelles et Environnement Sain

GTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit

REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FOREST AND BIODIVERSITY CIVIL SOCIETY NETWORKS IN CENTRAL AFRICA 6

ICCN Institut Congolais pour la Conservation de la Nature

IR Intermediate Result

IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature

LAGA Last Great Apes organization

NGO Non-governmental organization

PIDP Programme Intégré pour le Développement du Peuple Pygmée

PREPPYG Association paysanne pour la réhabilitation et la protection des peuples autochtones pygmées

RECOFTC Regional Community Forestry Training Center for Asia and the Pacific

REDD+ Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation

REID Réseau d'Initiatives Locales pour un Développement Durable Réseau

REPALEF Réseau des Populations Autochtones et Locales pour la Gestion Durable des Ecosystèmes Forestiers en RDC

RFN Rainforest Foundation Norway

USAID United States Agency for International Development

WCS Wildlife Conservation Society

WWF World Wide Fund for Nature

REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FOREST AND BIODIVERSITY CIVIL SOCIETY NETWORKS IN CENTRAL AFRICA 7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Over the past two decades, development of civil society networks in Central Africa emerged to support collective action on a range of natural resource management issues. Many of these networks provide critical activities including support to policy analysis, formulation, and dialogue; technical assistance to under-resourced government agencies; and independent monitoring activities to strengthen accountability for natural resource management decisions. The proliferation of civil society networks working on conservation and natural resource management in Central Africa has created opportunities for increased knowledge exchange, dialogue, skill-sharing, and joint advocacy. These networks also face a host of challenges to maintain cohesion, sustain funding, and achieve impact in a context characterized by weak governance and low government accountability.

METHODS

The consultant implemented the research in two phases. Phase one consisted of a literature review and identification of relevant civil society networks operating in target countries in Central Africa (Cameroon, Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Gabon, and the Republic of the Congo) that are focused on conservation and/or natural resource management. The consultant compiled a database of networks and key characteristics including geography, date of establishment, and thematic focus to identify general trends across the region, and selected a shortlist of four networks for more in-depth case studies, in consultation with the Activity team. The four case studies represent networks operating at different geographic scales working on a range of thematic areas, with two networks that explicitly focus on representation and voice of marginalized groups.

Network Case Studies

Network Thematic focus Intervention type Geography and scale

EAGLE – Eco-Activists for Governance and Law Enforcement

Wildlife law enforcement

Independent monitoring; capacity strengthening

Regional

Réseau CREF – Réseau pour la Conservation et la Réhabilitation des Ecosystèmes Forestiers

Natural resource management

Policy advocacy Provincial (North Kivu, DRC)

CFLEDD – Coalition des femmes leaders pour l'environnement et le développement durable

Women’s empowerment and natural resource management

Policy advocacy National (DRC)

DGPA – Dynamique des Groupes des Peuples Autochtones

Indigenous peoples’ rights and natural resource management

Policy advocacy National (DRC)

1 Ashman, D. with C. Charles, A. Cuenca, C. Luca, B. Singer, and M. Schmith. 2005. Supporting Civil Society Networks in International Development Programs, Edition 1. AED Center for Civil Society and Governance.

Civil society networks are “civil society groups, organizations, and sometimes, individuals that come together voluntarily to pursue shared purposes of social development or democratic governance. These purposes may include exchanging resources, addressing common social goals or expressing their identities as community or social group.”1

REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FOREST AND BIODIVERSITY CIVIL SOCIETY NETWORKS IN CENTRAL AFRICA 8

SUMMARY OF NETWORK INVENTORY

Networks in the region have emerged as a response to internal priorities (e.g., achieving greater voice and participation in decision-making) and external drivers including new policy opportunities. The expansion of networks as an effective strategy for collective action to improve resource governance has led to new interactions and dialogue between state actors and civil society across the Central African region and documented improvements in policy and its implementation, as shown in the case studies in the following section. Through a desk review, the research identified 76 civil society networks and characterized them according to scale, timeline, and key thematic areas and types of intervention.

● Nearly one-third of the networks identified had an explicit regional focus spanning at least two countries in Central Africa, but many of these are dependent on project cycles, or are no longer active. Regional networks organized around general advocacy goals struggle to achieve stable funding and long-term sustainability. National and sub-national networks based in Cameroon and the Democratic Republic of the Congo comprised 60 percent of the networks identified, with a more limited number found in Central African Republic, Gabon, and the Republic of the Congo.

Sub-national networks operating in difficult contexts or rural areas are less likely to have an online presence and therefore may be underrepresented in these results.

● Many of the 76 platforms identified for this study were created in the early 2000s, as new initiatives such as the EU’s Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade Voluntary Partnership Agreement process, and dialogue on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) were instrumental to the creation of policy dialogue and provided more opportunities for civil society to engage in forest policy discussions.2

● Two-thirds (46) of the identified networks focused on general advocacy as a primary objective.

Of these, 30 percent focused on rights of Indigenous Peoples and 10 percent focused on women’s empowerment. Thirteen percent of the identified networks organize around a specific technical niche, which presents opportunities for training and exchange, with another 11 percent focused on research and knowledge sharing. About 7 percent of networks identified are multi-stakeholder networks created to inform a specific policy process (e.g., FLEGT VPA platforms), and 9 percent focus on community-based natural resource management.

PRESENTATION OF CASE STUDIES

Case studies of four active civil society networks in Cameroon and DRC provide a detailed analysis of the governance structures, impacts, lessons learned, and challenges. The case studies draw from document review and stakeholder interviews to share network members’ own perceptions of strengths, weaknesses, and challenges. This approach supports understanding of the current interests, priorities and challenges of these institutions, as well as how these organizations adapt to meet new challenges and opportunities and the types of support that could help them better deliver on their missions. The table below presents an overview of impacts, best practices, and challenges identified by the case studies.

2 RECOFTC. 2021. Defining and assessing the effectiveness of civil society networks working on forest governance issues in Africa and Asia. Bangkok, RECOFTC.

REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FOREST AND BIODIVERSITY CIVIL SOCIETY NETWORKS IN CENTRAL AFRICA 9

Summary of Impacts, Best Practices, and Challenges by Network Case Study

Impacts Best Practices Challenges EAGLE – Eco-Activists for Governance and Law Enforcement

● Raising the profile of wildlife crim e.

With the arrests, prosecutions, imprisonments, and public awareness actions, EAGLE has found that public attitudes and perceptions are changing, including the attitude of civil servants in charge of enforcing the law.

● Gaining recognition and leg itim acy for EAGLE m em bers. With the impact of its work, EAGLE has established working relationships with governments in countries where it operates and has gained legitimacy with governments, NGOs, and other technical partners for the assistance it provides.

● Influence on wildlife policies. Though the core of EAGLE’s work is on wildlife law enforcement, network members have in some instances contributed to broader policy reform. For example, LAGA worked to influence the definition of wildlife crime in Cameroon’s “National Anti-poaching and Wildlife Crime Strategy 2020-2030” by incorporating a broader component on wildlife crime at the national level designed to address systemic challenges. This advocacy helps shift from a focus on small poachers in specific sites to the need to address organized criminal networks.

● EAGLE ’s work com plem ents conservation efforts. By filling an important link between strengthening wildlife crime prevention and traditional biodiversity conservation activities, EAGLE perceives that it has amplified conservation success.

● S etting m easurable standards/indicators to m easure progress. EAGLE has procedures to determine the success or failure of its activities. This approach aligns activities with intended results and enables the network to report on impact in a structured way.

● Ensuring transparency of operations.

Having an effective knowledge management system helps facilitate easy access to the network’s results, which are published on the EAGLE website on a regular basis for all members to access.

● Institutiona liz ing new m em ber capacity building and network exchange. EAGLE has instituted membership assessment to identify the types of support required by the network members and uses a three-stage membership development model that facilitates member exchange by pairing new members with more experienced members to help them develop and implement their Law Enforcement Model.

● Leverag ing connections. Members bring their connections in different countries, which are shared across the network. Sharing connections among member organizations in different countries has been critical in supporting the EAGLE network’s regional efforts to address wildlife trafficking.

● Mainta ining flexibility to integrate new ideas. The network maintains clear, structured systems and processes, while also providing opportunities for new ideas,

● Mainta ining standards and a shared identity as the network grows. The network’s high standards (against corruption, on governance issues, requirements on activities) are keys to its success, but also constitute a challenge with balancing expansion with ensuring that new countries follow the Law Enforcement Model.

● S usta inable funding . Although the network has a model in place to secure funding for and among members, the amount secured often does not cover all the pressing needs of the network. Funding at the network level emphasizes the importance of country-specific fundraising by country coordinators;

however, so far this has not been as effective as fundraising work conducted from headquarters.

● S usta ining leadership developm ent and sta ff m obility. The current situation of the network could be characterized as stable due to the current group of strong leaders in the steering group. However, there is a perception of limited upward mobility for staff within the network.

REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FOREST AND BIODIVERSITY CIVIL SOCIETY NETWORKS IN CENTRAL AFRICA 10 systems, activities, or processes to be integrated into network operations.

Réseau CREF – Réseau pour la Conservation et la Réhabilitation des Ecosystèmes Forestiers

● Contribution to establishing com m unity forestry in DRC and in North Kivu. The network implemented experimental field projects before the national regulation on Concession Forestière des Communautés Locales was adopted in 2014. Réseau CREF’s experience contributed to national discussions on CFCL.

● Advocacy ag a inst S OCO Internationa l on oil exploration in the V irunga Nationa l P ark. DRC authorities signed an agreement with SOCO to allow the company to explore and exploit oil resources from within Virunga National Park. Members of the network participated in a successful advocacy campaign which pushed the company to stop oil exploration in Virunga National Park.

● Réseau CREF is perceived as an essentia l actor on environm enta l m atters in North Kivu. In recognition of the network’s technical capacity, local authorities often consult Réseau CREF on environmental issues. As example, the secretariat was appointed as a member of the provincial steering committee for REDD+ projects.

● Reforestation success in Masisi. Members of the network, such as Réseau d'Initiatives Locales pour un Développement Durable Réseau (REID), with Réseau CREF’s support have been able to reforest a large forest in Masisi following deforestation and forest degradation caused by wood fuel extraction.

● P ioneering work on securing land for m arg ina lized Indigenous P eoples in the province. Members have supported a process to deliver land certificates for some

● The network’s “ fa ire-fa ire” working approach. The network’s “faire-faire” working approach focuses on implementation by member organizations in the field and not by the secretariat, which makes it possible for Réseau CREF to scale-up and implement activities across the province more efficiently.

● Building institutiona l m em ory supports network resilience. Réseau CREF has built an institutional memory thanks to the stability of network members. Having committed members and staff was critical during the period of instability between 2016-2018 to maintain trust and relationships with donors that enabled the network to rebuild.

● Diversifying funding and revenue stream s. While donor funding remains the most prominent source of revenue for Réseau CREF, the network has made progress in diversifying funding sources via membership fees, and capacity building services offered for non-member entities.

● Rigorous recruitm ent and assessm ent processes. The rigorous membership recruitment process ensures organizations are committed and meet the network’s selection criteria. This approach keeps the size of the network manageable and enables coverage of the province across the network, which is critical given the challenging transport, communications infrastructure, and insecurity in the zone.

● Instituting audits for m em ber organizations. Réseau CREF completes audits on funding, which can help reinforce the network’s credibility.

● S trengthening network leadership and supporting sta ff m obility. Réseau CREF identified a need to strengthen leadership including communication of expectations and management styles. Beyond leadership, a need for more training and internal opportunities is needed to ensure staff are effective in their current role and support professional development opportunities and learning among current staff.

● Weak knowledge m anagem ent. Since its inception, Réseau CREF members have implemented several projects, but their learning, impact and results have not been clearly or regularly captured. Weak knowledge management and learning fails to properly capitalize on their successes and benefit the network.

● Funding m odel. The network has been funded through its secretariat for almost 20 years. The continued dependency on one sole donor is also a challenge and poses risks to network longevity and cohesion.

● Building a com m on network vision. The role of the secretariat in supporting member interventions and fundraising vs. the role of individual organizations that seek direct funding has generated some tension over the vision for the secretariat’s role.

● L im ited reach of advocacy. Although the narrowed geographic scope to focus on North Kivu is central to the network’s purpose, it limits the network’s potential to influence policy dialogue or decision making.

REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FOREST AND BIODIVERSITY CIVIL SOCIETY NETWORKS IN CENTRAL AFRICA 11

Indigenous Peoples in North Kivu, thereby ensuring continued access to their lands.

CFLEDD – Coalition des femmes leaders pour l'environnement et le développement durable

● Capacity developm ent am ong wom en leaders. Many members recognize support of the network in their capacity development:

knowledge of various policy processes, gender, women rights, community rights, financial management, leadership, and project design.

● Contribution to gender-related laws and regulations. CFLEDD contributed to the adoption and/or revision of legislations relevant to women in DRC, including the 2015 Parity Law; revision of the Family Code;

and the Ministry of Environment’s decree on gender.

● Contribution to the visibility of wom en leaders. With the support of Rainforest Foundation Norway (RFN), CFLEDD regularly publishes a newsletter titled “News des Femmes Leaders” that focuses on women-related issues.

● Land secured for wom en in Kasa i. Under a project funded by Synchronicity Earth, CFLEDD secured a land agreement, signed by the customary chiefs, which granted 500 hectares of arable land in Kasai to women.

Women committed to use this land to support sustainable natural resource management.

● P ositioning wom en’s leadership and em powerm ent as a change agent. As a network, CFLEDD brought not only a new narrative on women’s organizational leadership and concrete actions on women’s issues. The primary approach focused on positioning women leaders as agents of change within their organizations to transform the practices while staying connected with other women leaders through the network.

● A leadership program a llows perm anent capacity developm ent. The Forum Masolo Leadership program was designed with the technical support of Well Grounded. It trains women and network members in several key areas such as “co-development” and “leadership” skills.

● Integrating B antu and Indigenous wom en. CFLEDD has both Bantu and Indigenous women within the organization.

Having both groups active within the network provides the opportunity to promote their competence and skills and integrate their participation in the network. Empowerment of Indigenous women is reflected in the organizational structure, with an Indigenous woman being elected as the national coordinator of CFLEDD.

● Adopting the principle of volunteerism as a key criterion for m em bership. All members enrolled in the network bodies must understand that, whether there is funding or not, women leaders are committed to implementing their plans.

● Challenges of em powerm ent m odel.

CFLEDD’s model aimed to build women champions within environmental CSOs, yet some members feel this model has not been sufficiently transformative and the network is now seen as simply as a group of women’s organizations.

● Unclear process of m em ber recruitm ent and m em bership status.

Unclear and slow processes for adding new members or removing inactive members is limiting the network’s effectiveness.

● Weak coordination between nationa l and provincia l units. Information-sharing and fundraising roles between national and provincial coordination units are cited as a persistent challenge. Many members, even at the national level, continue to consider fundraising as the responsibility of the national coordination.

● Integrating Indigenous wom en in a B antu-dom inated environm ent. The communication or interaction with some Bantu women leaders that are perceived as lacking diplomacy and respect for Indigenous women. Differences in communication styles even resulted in a group of Indigenous women leaving CFLEDD to establish a new network of Indigenous women (FECOFFA).

● L im ited resources of m em bers. Many members do not pay membership fees, and many also lack a dedicated office space. This generates additional expectations for the network secretariat to cover needs including meeting space.

DGPA – Dynamique des Groupes des Peuples Autochtones

REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FOREST AND BIODIVERSITY CIVIL SOCIETY NETWORKS IN CENTRAL AFRICA 12

● Increasing awareness of Indigenous P eoples’ issues. DGPA’s advocacy has contributed to increasing awareness on Indigenous Peoples’ rights within Congolese society.

● Advocacy for the adoption of a nationa l law on the protection and prom otion of the rights of Indigenous P eoples. DGPA implemented a long period of advocacy (2012-2021) that contributed to the recent signing into law of a law on rights of Indigenous Peoples by the President.

● Institutiona l support for Indigenous P eoples issues. DGPA has supported advocacy to strengthen institutional frameworks for Indigenous Peoples rights, including the establishment of a Directorate of Indigenous Peoples within the Vice Prime Minister of the Interior, Security, Decentralization and Customary Affairs, integration of Indigenous Peoples into CONAREF provincial coordination, and in the consultative commissions for the settlement of customary conflicts.

● Advocacy for provincia l regulations.

DGPA advocated for regulations in Mai- Ndombe, Sud-Ubangi, and Equateur. The Mai- Ndombe regulation has been adopted and published in the official gazette. The Governor of Mai-Ndombe has created a provincial agency for the promotion of Indigenous Peoples and has recruited some Indigenous Peoples in the provincial administration.

● Indigenous P eoples Atlas. A first version of Atlas of Indigenous People in DRC was published in 2013, and a second version is being finalized. This important tool presents the location of Indigenous populations and

● Indigenous and non-Indigenous organizations working together. Though Indigenous People are the network’s focus, it includes both Indigenous and non-Indigenous organizations. This approach is appropriate for the context of DRC (and Central Africa) where Indigenous Peoples’ issues cannot be addressed in isolation.

● P articipatory approach is an effective way to work with Indigenous P eoples.

Innovation of DGPA members in the field has contributed to the development of specific approaches and tools which proved to be instrumental for the ownership of messages by Indigenous Peoples themselves. In one instance, participatory video played an important role in facilitating exchanges between two conflicting communities.

● Develop a panoram ic and cross-cutting vision. The advocacy for a national law on Indigenous People was conducted in hand with provincial legislation on the same matter. This was a pragmatic approach in the context of the long process (more than a decade) to adopt the national law and a way to prepare the ground for its implementation in provinces.

● The flexibility of DGP A governance in the context of conflict helps to put in place sa feguards. The current governance of the network, perceived as effective and professional, is the result of conflicts of the past.

● P olicy advocacy vs. poverty a lleviation.

Advocacy on laws and policies is perceived as not enough by the people living in poverty, with differences in vision on the balance between work on advocacy and more direct implementation of poverty alleviation.

● Weak knowledge m anagem ent. Weak knowledge management has not yet created a network culture of learning, and communication on activities often targets donors more than other relevant national stakeholders.

● P articipation and ownership of Indigenous leaders and their organizations is still weak. Only 20 of 45 member organizations are managed by Indigenous Peoples, and there is a need for progress beyond representation to ensure more effective participation of Indigenous leadership.

● Weak coordination between nationa l and provincia l level. Provincial branches are not active and there is limited liaison with the administrative units where Indigenous Peoples are located to share information from the ground on challenges and needs with the national coordination.

● Mem bership process. New members were included without evaluation of their commitment to the network vision, leading to some opportunistic membership. There is an ongoing reflection to better define and enforce the responsibilities of members for the network.

● Conflicting approaches to supporting Indigenous P eoples’ rights. Network members in some cases adopt different methods to addressing Indigenous Peoples rights (sometimes within the same communities) that created conflicts.

REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FOREST AND BIODIVERSITY CIVIL SOCIETY NETWORKS IN CENTRAL AFRICA 13 their history, and would be an asset for land tenure and land use planning reforms.

REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FOREST AND BIODIVERSITY CIVIL SOCIETY NETWORKS IN CENTRAL AFRICA 14

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The case studies examined how four active civil society networks in Central Africa have built their collaborations and confronted challenges as part of their efforts to sustain their networks and achieve greater impact over time. Insights from the four case studies are discussed below, as well as recommendations on ways to strengthen civil society networks to guide network leaders and members, individual civil society organizations, technical partners, and donors funding programs that support natural resource governance or civil society strengthening.

NETWORK STRUCTURE AND GOVERNANCE

● Clear definition of roles and responsibilities. The role of the network’s governing body in relation to member organizations must be clearly defined. It is strategic to ensure that network governance provides supporting functions to its members based on clear terms. For example, Réseau CREF’s model ensures that the network’s secretariat provides training, oversight, and fundraising support to members, but implementation itself is the role of member organizations.

CREF members specifically cited this model as well-adapted to the difficult security context of North Kivu, creating added value through increasing network reach, and encouraging active network participation by members. EAGLE network follows a similar model, which ensures that there is a clear mutual benefit that maintains independence of structures while ensuring that members benefit from the services of the network.

● Deliberative approach to network sca le and structure. Networks such as EAGLE have carefully managed their expansion to align with their organizational principles and standards.

Likewise, Reseau CREF made a conscious decision not to expand to other provinces despite stated interest. These decisions are closely aligned with the overall mission and strategies of the networks and have enabled them to keep the number of members manageable. National networks such as DGPA and CFLEDD cited challenges with maintaining structures at different administrative levels of the country (national, provincial, local) and facilitating interactions between these levels – these include communication, misaligned expectations of roles for national and provincial representation, and a strong reliance on the national coordination for funding support.

● Clearly defined and enforced m em bership criteria . Each network establishes membership criteria to varying degrees of rigor and application, often linked to the overall network purpose. EAGLE’s law enforcement focus facilitates a more structured membership model as the convening principle of the network is focused on a core set of tasks (e.g., investigations and monitoring of wildlife crime law enforcement) for which clear operating standards can be set. Similarly, Reseau CREF adopted criteria on how new members will add value to the network, including related to geographic spread and thematic focus, and to keep the number of members limited. Both networks also have a robust process for evaluating member participation and performance which are perceived as core strengths by members.

CFLEDD’s focus on voluntary participation is aligned with its model, which focuses on creating champions within a larger number of organizations as a means of strengthening women’s voice in natural resource management decisions at scale, although members cited challenges with ensuring that network members remain active.

● Leadership developm ent and transition planning . The four networks in the case studies all identified long-term leadership development and continuity as a priority. Network members recognized the critical importance of building institutional memory and leadership within their networks, citing specific examples of network staffing changes and shifts which created tensions and challenges for overall network functioning. While some of the network governance structures provide training to member organizations, such as CFLEDD’s Forum Masolo, most of

REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FOREST AND BIODIVERSITY CIVIL SOCIETY NETWORKS IN CENTRAL AFRICA 15 the networks did not describe formalized approaches to mentoring and identifying new leadership.

IMPACT

● S trateg ic vision. Consistent, long-term vision and shared objectives are critical to achieving impact. DGPA cites the example of its work over more than a decade to advocate for the passing of a national law on Indigenous Peoples, which was recently signed into law by the Government of the DRC. Several networks cited the challenge of establishing a common vision for the network while balancing the different approaches and expectations of its member organizations. In some instances, network members indicated that the vision and objectives of the network are neither clear to all members nor owned by all members, citing disconnects between network governing bodies and their member organizations and reinforcing the importance of transparency in network communications.

● S tandards and procedures. Networks focused on a common geography or intervention typically indicated a more standardized approach to operations than those focused on general advocacy or representation. EAGLE cited the critical importance of maintaining standards and procedures, as well as the tension between expanding its work and ensuring that new members uphold these standards. In the case of DGPA, they noted that maintaining common approaches across network members was not always feasible, and cited examples of conflicting ideologies on how to best address the rights of Indigenous Peoples, and in achieving a balance of work on policy advocacy and grassroots action on poverty alleviation. DGPA and Réseau CREF noted the importance of using the network approach to achieve complementarity among network members specialized in different thematic areas or geographies.

RESOURCE AVAILABILITY

● Centralized network funding and fundra ising . Each case study organization indicated that network governance structures had a key role in fundraising, but with varying degrees of dependence on member organizations. For example, Réseau CREF’s model centralizes a significant amount of fundraising at the secretariat level, but with a process for distribution of funds to facilitate implementation of activities by members. EAGLE, on the other hand, emphasizes fundraising at both the network and country coordination level; the intent is to empower national affiliates to fundraise independently, while the network at times can provide resources to cover shortfalls or respond to opportunities. CFLEDD and DGPA, the two largest networks interviewed, cited challenges of overreliance and outsize expectations of the role of the coordinating body in providing funding to its members. These examples reinforce the importance of network structure, governance, and bylaws in clarifying the benefits and services provided by network membership to avoid creation of additional layers of bureaucracy and ensure that the benefits of network membership go beyond funding.

● P roject-focused funding . The case study networks operate based on donor funding through short and medium-term projects, although there are some instances of innovation to generate new revenue streams such as Reseau CREF’s investment in its space to hold workshops and trainings. As a result, there is less investment in strengthening systems and processes including knowledge management, communications, leadership, and member capacity development. As is also the case for direct support to civil society organizations, many donors or technical partners providing grant funding emphasize labor and activity costs, with only limited funds allocated to administrative or overhead costs that can support overall system strengthening.

● Dependence on core donors. Support to networks has, in some cases, evolved as a strategy for donors and technical partners to support a broader group of civil society through a single

REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FOREST AND BIODIVERSITY CIVIL SOCIETY NETWORKS IN CENTRAL AFRICA 16 structure. Several of the networks studied in this report received over half of their support from a single funding source, often based on long-term relationships maintained over time. Staff of these networks expressed concerns, including from member organizations, that this overreliance on a limited funding pool has restricted the range and types of activities that are supported by the network and limits the independence of the network. Donor priorities are perceived as driving which member organizations receive more support, which can lead to conflict among members. In addition, CFLEDD cited an example of donor funding disrupting network cohesion when the intent to fund salaries was not well-adapted to its volunteer-based model.

REPRESENTATION AND INCLUSIVENESS

● Understanding progress and im pact of socia l inclusion. Networks such as DGPA and Réseau CREF have developed a gender policy which states principles and mechanisms for gender mainstreaming within the network and among members’ organizations. CFLEDD adopted an innovative model devoted to creating champions via a volunteer network that would in turn push for change within their individual institutions. While there has been an increase in awareness and discourse on women’s participation and representation, there is still limited assessment of the impact of these policies. CFLEDD noted that their approach has met with limitations in terms of the institutional change it envisioned at the outset, with some staff citing a lack of tools to address gender issues effectively in their activities. This underlines a need for appropriate technical support and management tools including gender and social inclusion analysis, monitoring and evaluation, human resources management and training, and communication. In several instances, application of the term “gender” refers primarily to women’s participation and empowerment, rather than exploring the differential roles, responsibilities, and social norms attached to both men and women, as well as the intersection of these issues with other forms of marginalization including for Indigenous Peoples or youth.

● Inclusion of Indigenous P eoples. Three of the four network case studies have clear mechanisms for engaging Indigenous Peoples organizations and leaders. DGPA has a significant number of Indigenous Peoples organizations as members and is committed to increase this number. There are also several examples of Indigenous People’s leadership in network bodies, including in DGPA and CFLEDD. In DGPA, there is a quota for Indigenous Peoples leaders in network bodies including 3/5 members in the board. DGPA has also adopted the use of Free Prior Informed Consent (FPIC) for making decisions among the Indigenous Peoples leaders in the network. While there are stated examples of representation, ensuring real and effective participation and voice in decision-making is still cited as a challenge.

COMMUNICATION AND INFORMATION SHARING

● Knowledge m anagem ent system s. While most of the networks have invested in communications—for example all have active websites—development of robust knowledge management systems is an ongoing challenge. For example, both Reseau CREF and DPGA cited knowledge management as a key area for strengthening; institutional memory is perceived as present within network leadership, but not necessarily codified through systems and processes that can be easily transferred and tell the story of the network. Several leaders also identified the need to strengthen an overall culture of learning – while all groups could point to specific impacts and shared insights on success factors, there is opportunity for more analysis of what factors led to success as well as which approaches have not been effective and should not be replicated as part of network strategy. The research identified a need for more effective learning mechanisms to develop member capacity, create awareness at the level of grassroots’ members

REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FOREST AND BIODIVERSITY CIVIL SOCIETY NETWORKS IN CENTRAL AFRICA 17 and communities. Developing systems to share institutional history and success stories of networks was cited as a strategy to build network resilience that would have improved ability to navigate leadership transitions and other difficult periods.

● Mem ber exchange and best practices. Related to the need for knowledge management systems, proactive sharing of lessons and even facilitation of member exchange between organizations was identified as a best practice. For example, EAGLE network has institutionalized member exchange as well as ensuring that steering group members are available to provide mentorship to country staff. Exchange on methods and practices could also serve as a potential conflict resolution mechanism between organizations with different experiences, with network leadership playing the role of facilitator to encourage members to evaluate their approaches and learn from others.

● Com m unications. Maintaining effective internal communications, particularly for networks with representation across larger geographies, is an ongoing challenge that is critical to building support and buy-in for network vision. Regarding external communications, as noted by DGPA leadership, in some cases networks focus more on targeting donors than in communicating with national stakeholders and constituents. Investing in communications infrastructure and regular practices is a potentially critical role for network governance structures to strengthen cohesion and two-way exchange of information.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the literature review, network inventory, and case studies there are numerous positive examples of civil society groups working collectively for common goals to improve transparency and accountability of decisions over natural resource governance. Yet, many of these groups face critical questions of defining a clear mission, role, and competing for a limited pool of human, financial, and technical resources. The proliferation of networks, frequent overlap in membership between platforms with broad policy advocacy and dialogue objectives, and resource constraints identified by many CSOs and networks within the region suggest programs interested in creating or supporting civil society networks should align support strategies with the needs of target actors, and work closely with civil society networks and member organizations to design locally-led capacity strengthening strategies that strengthen institutional support alongside support to core labor and activity costs. Table 3 synthesizes recommendations for civil society networks and their member organizations, as well as donor and technical partners focused on organizational development and capacity strengthening.

Summary of Recommendations

Civil Society Networks and Members Donors and Technical Partners Network Governance

● Establish clear criteria and targets for network size

● Establish clear membership criteria and regular review of member performance to encourage network cohesion

● Create clear channels for members to influence decisions on governance and management of networks.

● Adopt and implement clear policies for review and updating of strategy, network organization, membership criteria, and planning processes into network procedures

● Ensure that new programs and initiatives identify and build on existing local civil society networks

● Through existing or future activities, support civil society networks and member organizations in conducting governance self-assessment to identify issues and develop strategies to address them

Impact ● Implement strategic planning and ensure that network objectives are clearly

● Convene “listening sessions” to facilitate opportunities for civil society

REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FOREST AND BIODIVERSITY CIVIL SOCIETY NETWORKS IN CENTRAL AFRICA 18 shared, understood, and communicated across network membership (e.g., through annual/quarterly strategy updates to members)

● Develop measurable standards/indicators and procedures to measure progress that enable mutual learning among members

● Create opportunities for network exchange that facilitate collaboration, for example through exchange programs or skill-sharing to match to needs across network membership networks and their members to communicate on priorities, challenges, and needs to inform design of technical and financial interventions

● In projects that support or partner with civil society networks and member organizations, incorporate indicators and targets that relate to their long-term institutional capacity and sustainability, not just short-term outputs or outcomes within project life cycles

Resource Availability

● Establish strategies to diversify funding, achieve a sustainable funding model, and increase financial autonomy

● Design criteria to assess the capacities of each member of the network on a regular basis

● Institute strong financial controls and transparent financial reporting including sharing financial performance with network members

● Create funding windows to support more flexible institutional funding for civil society organizations

● Review regulations and procedures that limit overhead and administrative costs for small local organizations and networks and identify opportunities to cover costs of internal systems strengthening (e.g., knowledge management, communications, leadership development, and financial management)

Representation and Inclusiveness

● Develop and review implementation of inclusive policies on gender, Indigenous Peoples, and other relevant vulnerable groups, and provide principles and procedures on how the network will proactively address and measure progress on these objectives

● Develop strategies to track outcomes beyond participation and representation metrics to evaluate success of social inclusion strategies

● Integrate gender and social analysis into strategy, program design, and planning including for grants and other support windows

● For technical partners collaborating with civil society organizations, develop simple tools and trainings that develop concepts of representation into actionable strategies

● Provide support for evaluate frameworks to generate an evidence base for understanding how gender and social inclusion interventions influence outcomes for beneficiaries

Communicatio ns and Knowledge Sharing

● Establish long-term monitoring, evaluation, reporting and learning processes that build institutional memory and learning

● Define or clarify network target audiences and adapt messaging to each of these groups

● Establish and evaluate internal communication mechanisms to facilitate regular exchange and ensure equitable access to information on network governance

● Create incentives for knowledge management and lesson-sharing through funding windows and calls for applications

● Strengthen knowledge sharing and coordination between donors and technical partners in relation to civil society network support to avoid duplication of efforts and proliferation of additional networks

REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FOREST AND BIODIVERSITY CIVIL SOCIETY NETWORKS IN CENTRAL AFRICA 1

1.0 ACTIVITY OVERVIEW

1.1 ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION

On August 11, 2020, USAID awarded Tetra Tech USAID’s Forest and Biodiversity Support Activity contract to support the overall development objectives of USAID’s Central Africa Regional Program for the Environment (CARPE). The goal of USAID’s Forest and Biodiversity Support Activity (hereafter referred to as the Activity) is to assist CARPE and other environmental stakeholders in Central Africa to implement strategies and actions that address the large-scale threats to biodiversity conservation and forest management by focusing on three interconnected intermediate results (IRs):

1. Leadership and participation of diverse local organizations and the private sector strengthened

2. Policy, regulatory, and enabling environment improved

3. Innovative and evidence-based approaches adopted and institutionalized within conservation and forest sectors

The Activity applies these IRs to the four overarching thematic areas and strategic approaches of CARPE’s Phase IV vision: (i) Land governance works for forests and biodiversity; (ii) Civil society works for forests and biodiversity; (iii) Law enforcement works for forests and biodiversity; and (iv) Green enterprises and markets work for forests and biodiversity. The Activity engages with a broad network of institutions including civil society, private sector, government, and other conservation and development practitioners across the Congo Basin to build sustainable local institutions. Underpinning these objectives is the activity’s collaborating, learning, and adapting (CLA) approach that will improve knowledge-sharing, communications, and learning across conservation networks in the Congo Basin.

REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FOREST AND BIODIVERSITY CIVIL SOCIETY NETWORKS IN CENTRAL AFRICA 2

2.0 INTRODUCTION

During the past two decades, the proliferation of civil society networks working on conservation and natural resource management in Central Africa has created opportunities for increased knowledge exchange, dialogue, skill-sharing, and joint advocacy.