- Home
- About us
- ILAC Activities
- Resources
- ILAC Publications
- ILAC Briefs
- ILAC Sourcebook
- Part 2 - Tools and approaches
- Chapter 6: Introduction Part 2
- Chapter 7: Innovation histories
- Chapter 9: Culture study as a tool for change
- Chapter 12: Collaborative agreements
- Chapter 13: Facilitation as a foundation skill for ILAC
- Chapter 14: Learning alliances
- Chapter 15: Institutional histories
- Chapter 16: Engaging Scientists through Institutional Histories
- Chapter 18: Horizontal evaluation
- Chapter 19: Appreciative inquiry
- Part 3 - Cases and experiences
- Part 4 - Challenges and strategies
- About the authors
- Glossary
- References
- Part 2 - Tools and approaches
- Presentations by ILAC Team
- Working Papers
- Journal Articles
- Newsletter
- Reports
- ILAC Library
- Tools and methods for M&E
- Appreciative inquiry
- Biophysical measurements
- Case study
- Content analysis
- Contribution analysis
- Cost-Benefit Analysis
- Creative expression
- Diaries, journals and logs
- Dreams realised or visioning
- Expert review
- GIS mapping
- Graphing results
- Group assessment
- Historical trends and timelines
- Horizontal evaluation
- Impact evaluation
- Benefit-cost methods
- Case studies
- Cost-effectiveness analysis
- Counterfactual Impact Evaluation (CIE)
- Difference-in-difference
- Econometric methods
- Ex-post comparison of project beneficiaries with a control group
- Instrumental variables
- Integrated partial indicators
- Mathematical programming
- Modified peer review
- Partial indicators of impact
- Patent analysis
- Pipeline comparison
- Production function approach
- Propensity score matching
- Quasi-experimental design, involving the use of matched control and project groups
- Randomization
- Rapid assessment or review, conducted ex post
- Regression discontinuity design
- Simulation method
- User surveys
- Impact flow diagram
- Innovation histories
- Institutional history
- Institutional linkage diagram
- Interviews
- Learning alliances
- Learning-oriented evaluation
- M&E Frameworks
- M&E wheel (or "spider web")
- Mapping (sketch)
- Matrix scoring
- Most significant change
- Net-Map
- Non-random sampling
- Observation
- Outcome mapping
- Participatory Impact Pathways Analysis
- Participatory methods
- Performance indicators
- Photographs and video
- Problem and objectives trees
- Random sampling
- Ranking and pocket charts
- Rapid appraisal methods
- Relative scales or ladders
- Rich pictures (or mind maps)
- SWOT
- Seasonal calendars
- Semantic differentials
- Social mapping or well-being ranking
- Sociograms
- Stakeholder analysis
- Survey
- Systems (or inputs-outputs) diagram
- Theory-Based Evaluation
- Transects
- Evaluation studies and reports
- Evaluating capacity development
- Partnership
- Seminars
- Video Room
- Links to other sites
- E-learning courses
- ILAC Publications
- Contact
- Blog
Improving Forest Beekeeping through Monitoring in Chimaliro, Malawi
Sun, 08/31/2008 - 12:52 — Cristina Sette
Publication Type:
Book ChapterSource:
Negotiated Learning: Collaborative Monitoring for Forest Resource Management, Resources for the Future/Center for International Forestry Research, Washington, DC, p.105-113 (2007)URL:
http://www.cifor.cgiar.org/livesinforests/publications/pdf_files/Chapter10_Kamoto.pdfKeywords:
forest; social capitalAbstract:
Local forest users represent significant collective human resources, or social capital, in terms of knowledge of their environment, organizing capabilities, understanding of local institutions, and abilities to develop forest management systems that deal effectively with complexity and surprise. Around the globe, however, their social capital has consistently been underappreciated and underutilized. Government forest departments seem stuck in “command-and-control” forest management regimes. Forest policy makers have been slow to respond to changing circumstances, and their institutional mechanisms often interfere with the goal of achieving sustainable forests and communities. As a result, both forest quality and human well-being have suffered. In Malawi, villagers around the Chimaliro Forest Reserve undertook to monitor sections of the reserve in return for certain usufruct rights. The agreement to cooperate in managing the forest has presented challenges to both the national forest agency and the local communities, but through their collaboration, ongoing improvements in resource management are becoming apparent. The effort hints at the potential of local forest users’ social capital.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page