88 H. Hurni Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 81 2000 83–92
throughout the world and is represented by researchers and scientists, environment and development special-
ists, politicians, and administrators, usually reflects an economic world-view and is characterised by its
scientific approach. It has been called the ‘external perspective’ on natural resources. Tools for assess-
ing SLM will have to include both the internal and the external perspective and find ways to reconcile
differing views.
When adopting the ‘multi-level stakeholder ap- proach to SLM’, the various views and dimensions of
sustainability have to be weighed against each other in a negotiated, i.e. participatory approach which
does not discriminate against, or favour, particular actor categories. For example, scientific information
must be coupled with indigenous knowledge to offer a better basis for decision-making in the negotia-
tion processes. Experience world-wide has already demonstrated the multi-level dimensions which have
to be considered to attain long-lasting solutions. The real power of this element of the approach is that it
does not provide a pre-determined concept, but offers a procedure for a process of working towards devel-
oping a common point of view and defining the next steps to take. The scientific approach which com-
bines the internal and external knowledge systems is ‘transdisciplinary’, and goes beyond traditional
interdisciplinary methodology. Science, technology, and society are the three pillars of this innovative
approach, which is used for problem-solving research and in practical application.
3. Some tools for assessing and improving SLM at the local level
Obtaining locally applicable methodologies is a central concern of local stakeholders, researchers,
and project planners. Aggregation of information at community to regional level will be very useful for
the co-ordination of action and for providing a com- parative analysis of local areas. A specific approach
has been developed for this purpose, which is called ‘sustainable development appraisal’ SDA. SDA is a
methodological tool for the participatory assessment of sustainability from local to regional planning levels
CDE, 2000. SDA is comparatively low-cost and has the potential to achieve participatory land manage-
ment solutions that conform with the SLM concept, because it includes multi-level stakeholders in the ne-
gotiation process, and looks at the sustainability of the different uses of resources in large-scale area units.
SDA is preferably applied in interdisciplinary teams, in collaboration with local and external stake-
holders, using a transdisciplinary approach, i.e. inte- grating both scientific and local knowledge to arrive
at shared views of needs, options, and constraints in order to be able to collaborate in efforts to promote
sustainable development. It includes most participa- tory learning and action methods, particularly in its
local socio-economic and development components Pretty et al., 1995. Results of an SDA will provide
a synthesis of different valuations of sustainability based on visions, as well as expressed needs, nego-
tiated options, and assessed constraints, for agreed action to promote sustainable development. Providing
a balance between needs and possibilities is a crucial issue stressed by many authors Muchena and van der
Bliek, 1997.
The primary objective of an SDA is to provide ba- sic information and data to be used as an input into
a participatory process for negotiations on the action needed to promote sustainable natural resource man-
agement and development. It allows a synthetic view of the different perceptions and visions in so-called
‘development profiles’ at village, community, and regional levels, which can be used by planners, ins-
titutions and decision-makers at all levels of admin- istration. Finally, it will provide baseline data and
information for impact monitoring at a later stage.
The SDA methodology has thus been applied in si- tuations where external support was planned in rural
settings, where problems of natural resource manage- ment were explicitly stated as problems, and where
a spatial approach was chosen. SDA can be used by institutions that play an active role in rural develop-
ment and natural resource management. Execution of an SDA is done by multi-disciplinary teams trained in
participatory learning and action and experienced in baseline studies. SDA results are used by planners and
decision-makers at the policy and administrative lev- els, and provide a means which local stakeholders can
use to assume accountability vis-à-vis higher levels.
The different parts and elements of the SDA ap- proach are described in Table 1. Each element is
linked with a set of methods which is described in
H. Hurni Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 81 2000 83–92 89
Table 1 Major elements and steps in a sustainable development appraisal
a
Sustainable development appraisal SDA: major elements and steps Preparation: background and initial steps
Part I. Participatory assessment and appraisal of current situation Element 1. Characterisation of spatial units
Element 2. Characterisation of actor categories Element 3. Appraisal of interactions
Part II. Participatory assessment and appraisal of dynamics Element 4. Assessment of bio-physical dynamics
Element 5. Assessment of social, economic, and cultural dynamics Element 6. Appraisal of change
Part III. Participatory assessment and appraisal of development Element 7. Assessment of development visions
Element 8. Assessment of needs, options, and constraints Element 9. Appraisal of development options
Part IV. Preparation of development profiles and synthesis Element 10. Compilation of local development profiles LDPs
Element 11. Compilation of a regional development profile RDP Element 12. Synthesis and recommendations for sustainable development
Integration: initiation of multi-stakeholder negotiations
a
Each element is outlined in the text and explained in detail in the methodology CDE, 2000.
detail CDE, 2000. In the first part, the focus is on a participatory assessment of existing conditions in a
defined area, for example the territory of a particular community. Here, it is important to present, in a com-
plementary way, a scientific, interdisciplinary assess- ment of the man–environment system, as well as local
and other knowledge that stakeholders have about the people and resources of the area. The goal of the as-
sessment is to define a common knowledge base which is shared and agreed by all, and serves as a starting
point for development planning. The analytical steps are: the formulation of commonly perceived problems
in the area, and statements of different intentions about how to achieve a common goal. This is followed
by a step-by-step analysis of spatial units delimited according to common criteria such as resource status,
land use types, types of access, etc, and a description of different actor categories such as land users, wealth
categories, ownership categories, or external interest groups who have a claim on certain resources or land
units. A detailed appraisal of interactions between and among all spatial units and actor categories is the
most important step in the assessment stage.
In Part II, a participatory assessment and appraisal is made of the dynamic changes observed over time,
such as degradation processes, land use changes, ownership changes, etc. These play an essential role,
as they are the results of pressure exerted on the human–environment system. The assessment of sta-
tus, and pressure, and responses in the first two parts serves as a basis for negotiations on development
in Part III of the SDA Table 1. Actor categories will develop their own vision of development in a
first step, which will have to be compared with other visions in order to arrive at a shared vision as a
common platform for development. Needs, options, and constraints of each category, or group, of actors
will be expressed in the process of discussions, and again differentiated according to spatial units within
the community or area. The appraisal of the different development options will not necessarily be similar
for all stakeholders involved, but will certainly help to clarify diffuse ideas and potential conflicts at an
early stage. SDA is thus a tool for better land man- agement in a specific case study, and can be applied
in situations where external and scientific groups are invited to assist local groups in developing their areas
in a more sustainable way.
Based on the participatory field work in Parts I–III, main results are presented in Part IV in the form of
90 H. Hurni Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 81 2000 83–92
local development profiles LDPs for each commu- nity area, and a regional development profile RDP
summarising the LDPs. Both are a combinations of text, graphs, figures, and maps in a standardised for-
mat, using geographic information systems GIS for geo-referenced information storage and retrieval. The
outcomes of the SDA will serve as a basis for ini- tiating multi-stakeholder negotiations Hurni, 1998,
which will be instrumental for achieving democrati- cally acceptable solutions and for planning concrete
activities. When such action is implemented with the goal of furthering SLM at the local to regional lev-
els, the SDA can also serve as a baseline for impact monitoring, ex ante and at later stages.
If a multi-component programme is planned as an external input into an area, it is recommendable to in-
clude a number of support services accompanying the programme. Support services that may considerably
enhance the quality of the work are listed under the acronym MERIT in Table 2. Although the different el-
ements of the support services resemble the commonly known ‘monitoring and evaluation’ components, there
are some fundamental differences in MERIT which al- low a more pro-active role to be taken by programme
implementers during the activities.
Table 2 Components of support services of projects and programmes active in SLM
M Monitoring
Baseline surveys will be needed as a starting point for any monitoring, to allow impact assessments at any later stage Herweg et al., 1998. Introducing terrestrial observation systems may be
helpful, starting with the local and regional development profiles of SDA. Remote sensing is a very efficient tool for assessing land use and cover changes. In some instances, environmental
process assessments may be needed if no calibrated models for such processes exist
E Experimentation
Innovative elements of development should not simply be introduced, but tested locally in experimental set-ups allowing replicability of the results obtained, i.e. a scientific approach.
Such innovations can make use of participatory technology development approaches, as well as negotiations on community-based land management options
R Resource assessment
Baseline inventories and natural resource inventories should include assessments of change in order to allow a prediction of future trends, including an evaluation of the socio-economic and
ecological implications of change. Although SLM may be attempted through participatory land use planning and the introduction of new technologies, important negative changes inherent in
the system may put these actions at risk if they are not specifically addressed
I Information
Information will have to be generated and made available to all stakeholders in the process. If information is to be developed into a knowledge database, perhaps with the help of geographical
information systems GIS, it should be prepared in a way that is understandable to all involved. This will greatly ease communication and form the basis of a decision-support system for SLM
T Training
Local-level training of specialists and land users can best be provided in specific participatory training approaches at the local level, i.e. through auto-didactic learning for sustainability ALS,
CDE, 1997. Training should be a mix of formal education, participatory knowledge creation, post-graduate training courses, on-the-job training, workshops, and distance learning courses
For example, monitoring in MERIT is a built-in process which not only looks at the changes induced
by programme inputs, but also, and maybe more im- portantly, at the changes occurring in the area outside
of that where the programme has an impact. Distin- guishing between these two types of change can be
essential in order to understand success and failure in programme activities at a later stage. Moreover,
programmes very often introduce innovative ideas and technologies into an area which have not been
part of the local development mechanisms. Doing this without first experimenting can have disastrous
consequences, as many programmes have discov- ered. Building a component of experimentation into
the support services is therefore mandatory, because innovations can then be tested and scientifically ac-
companied before they are widely applied.
Of central concern to rural development planning is an overall resource assessment natural, human, eco-
nomic according to the sustainability paradigm. This element of the MERIT support services Table 2 will
help to foster understanding of the pressures, states, and societal responses associated with these resources
Pieri et al., 1995, and the potential impacts expected from programme activities. Baseline information and
H. Hurni Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 81 2000 83–92 91
modelling of dynamic changes in the system will help in appraising the situation and in understanding trends
in resource changes. This should be carried out at reg- ular intervals, i.e. once per year in a joint, transdisci-
plinary exercise. Programme planning would then be based on the results of this exercise.
The final two elements of the MERIT support ser- vices are information and training. Monitoring, exper-
imentation, and resource assessment all require solid databases and documentation, which should be made
available to concerned stakeholders at any time. Train- ing, finally, should accompany programme activities
for the development of a better, shared knowledge base to promote sustainable land management in a concrete
context.
4. Conclusions
