participatory approaches address capacity gaps redd lesson vietnam 2016 10 en
Working paper
Utilizing participatory approaches to efectively address
capacity gaps in REDD+: Lessons from Viet Nam
Overview
Due to the technical complexity of REDD+ and a dominant use of conventional approach of
training and awareness raising, innovative approaches for training and awareness raising are
needed to ensure that stakeholders, particularly the grassroots stakeholders, are prepared and
enabled to play an efective role in REDD+ implementation.
RECOFTC’s approaches to awareness raising and training are based on participatory principles,
recognizing that adults learn and respond best when actively involved in the learning. Participatory
training allows two way commnunications between trainer and trainee, giving an opportunity to
trainee to share their experience, and thus enriching the learning process.
To achieve the desired outcomes of training and awreness raising, particularly for a complex
issue such as REDD+, it is recommended that participatory approaches be mainstreamed in
government and non-governmental training and awareness raising activities.
Introduction
The overall objectives of the Vietnamese National REDD+ Action Program (NRAP) for the period 2011-2020 are to
reduce deforestation and forest degradation, promote sustainable management of forest resources, and conserve
and enhance forest carbon stocks. The initial period of the program (2011-2015) was intended for REDD+ readiness.
One of the speciic objectives was to raise awareness of relevant stakeholders in the pilot provinces. To help Viet
Nam achieve this objective, development partners have been working in various parts of the country for the last
few years. Although signiicant eforts have been made to enhance awareness and understanding of REDD+ among
concerned stakeholders at all levels, the efectiveness of these activities is low. This brief intends to highlight the
importance of participatory approaches for policy-makers and implementers working in the area of REDD+. It argues
that the methods employed have greatly inluenced the efectiveness of the training and awareness raising and that
participatory approaches should be used to ensure that capacity gaps are efectively addressed.
Why Viet Nam is not REDD+ ready yet:
a commonly known but insuiciently
discussed reason
“Is Viet Nam REDD+ ready yet?” Among other reasons, this question
necessarily implies that training and awareness raising in REDD+
undertaken in Viet Nam (within the scope of the UN-REDD Programme)
have not been efective. In fact, with a few exceptions, there is a
feeling that overall training and awareness raising of the UN-REDD
Programme could have contributed signiicantly more to achieving
the objective of making Viet Nam ready for REDD+. Key issues in
various steps of REDD+ training and awareness raising activities are
briely discussed in Box 1.
This is not a unique case. In the assessment of training on legal rights
to local communities under the Participatory Governance Assessment
(PGA), it was found out that “A training often has 50-70 persons or
even more. Training materials and handouts were the government’s
legal documents which were read out loud to the audience. Trainers
sometimes used visual aids such as photos to illustrate the training
content. After lecturing, some minutes were spent for people to
raise any questions before the trainer moved to another topic. At
the end of each training 30 minutes were spent for questions and
answers.“ The examples above illustrate a common issue with training
and awareness raising in the forestry sector in Viet Nam –the use of
conventional lecture-like approach in training and awareness raising.
A typical training using a conventional lecture places the trainer (also
known as teacher) in the center (see Box 2). The trainer is believed to
be knowledgeable of the training topic and designs the whole training
(based on own assumption about what trainees need to learn). Theory
is the focus. The trainer transfers his or her knowledge to the trainees;
and the trainees passively listen to the lecture and have little or no
chance to relect and share their ideas and experiences.
Box 1: Key issues in training and
awareness raising in REDD+
Initiation: Trainings and awareness
raising happened more on an ad-hoc
basis than as the result of systematic
planning (for example, not using a
capacity development needs assessment
to identify the capacity gaps).
Development: Eforts have been made
to contextualize and adapt the trainings
and awareness raising to the local
context, but there is a clear need for
these to be better targeted to the local
needs.
Delivery: Often there were too many
participants in one training event
(between 30 and 60 people). There
was too much lecturing and too little
time for practice, discussion and ield
observation. Although various visual
aids (lip charts, posters, computer
presentations) were developed, there
is room for improvement in unpacking
the concepts for diferent levels using
simple and accessible tools.
Monitoring: There was no plan for
Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E). M&E
information was collected at the end of
the event, but not done systematically,
so it is diicult to generalize. More
critically, M&E of the learning and the
application after the training/ awareness
raising is generally missing from the
whole process.
Box 2. Key characteristics of the conventional and participatory approaches in training
Conventional lecture-like approach:
Participatory approach:
-
-
The trainer is the center;
The trainer is a teacher;
The trainer is considered knowledgeable;
The trainer is responsible for learning;
The trainer deines training agenda;
Monitoring and evaluation are largely absent;
The trainees are passive:
o The trainer tells, the trainees listen;
o The trainees have little or no chance to
relect and share their ideas and experiences;
o The emphasis is given to theory with little or
no practice.
The trainees are the center;
The trainer is a facilitator;
The trainees are considered knowledgeable;
The trainees are responsible for learning;
Training agenda is designed based on speciic
needs of the trainees;
- Participatory monitoring and evaluation are in place;
- The trainees are active:
o The trainer guides, the trainees take action;
o The trainees are given opportunities to relect
and share their ideas and experiences;
o Experiential learning.
The strength of lecture-based training approach is that it can cover a large number of people and issues in a short time.
The key challenge is that the participants often do not remember much when the training inishes (see Box 3), particularly
when it comes to new and complex issues like REDD+, which undermines the efectiveness of the training.
Box 3. How adults learn
We can remember
90% what we ourselves do and explain. i.e. simulation
game, exercise in class or ield using new insights
or skills and a presentation of results;
70% what we explain ourselves. i.e. participants
asked to present information;
50% what we see and hear. i.e. a lecture with visual aids
and demonstration;
30% what we see i.e. a poster with no explanation or
demonstration without explanation;
20% what we hear. i.e. a lecture with no visuals;
10% what we read i.e. training materials, handouts with
no accompanying explanation (if they can read).
Members of local community in Lam Dong province discussed
during planning meeting for upcoming awareness raising event
Participatory approaches in training and awareness raising - why?
In contrast to trainings using a conventional lecture-like approach, a typical training using a participatory approach
places the trainees in the center. The trainees are believed to be knowledgeable and the trainer plays the role of a
facilitator, helping the trainees relect and share their knowledge and experiences, using various participatory
techniques such as brainstorming, pair work, group work, games and role play according to the training objectives
and the needs of the trainees. The program of a training using participatory approaches is designed based on speciic
needs of the trainees (collected through a capacity development needs assessment) - see Box 2.
Issues related to climate change and REDD+ are highly complex and evolve quickly. Delivery of training and awareness
raising activities for stakeholders using participatory approaches facilitates the highest level of engagement of the
participants in training activities and thus increases their efectiveness.
In addition, participation of concerned stakeholders in REDD+
is required as part of its social safeguards under the Cancun
Agreement, speciically agreement point 2 ‘transparent and
efective national forest governance structures’; point 3 ‘respect
for the knowledge and rights of indigenous peoples and members
of local communities’; and point 4 ‘full and efective participation
of relevant stakeholders’. For this purpose, the use of participatory
approaches in training will build up the capacity needed for people
working on REDD+ to facilitate participatory multi-stakeholder
processes.
In Viet Nam, participatory approaches have been widely used by
RECOFTC – The Center for People and Forests for the training and
awareness raising activities for diferent stakeholders in Bac Kan,
Ha Tinh, Lam Dong and Ca Mau under the Grassroots Capacity
Building for REDD+ in Asia Project. In this project, a Capacity
Building Needs Assessment (CBNA) was undertaken prior to the
delivery of the training program. Subsequently, a training was
organized for a group of key trainers (ToT) from each province on
the participatory approach and various technical issues (relating
to climate change and REDD+). Relection (refresher) trainings
were also organized for these trainers to relect and discuss
their training experiences with each other. Back at home, they
conducted training for their colleagues and local communities,
using a similar approach. Overall, the relection from both ToT
participants and local communities on training efectiveness
was highly positive, conirming that participatory approaches
are efective in training and awareness raising in general and
speciically regarding climate change and REDD+ (see Box 4).
Box 4: A relection on participatory
approach in training
The Grassroots Capacity Building for REDD+
in Asia Project employed participatory
approaches in conducting training on basic
concepts of climate change and REDD+ for
various stakeholders at grassroots level.
Ms. Tran Thi Thuy Duong is a young
oicial from Vu Quang National Park. She
participated in a training organized by
the project in October 2014. She found it
really interesting, not only the contents
but also the method used in the training.
The information and knowledge that she
learned in the training was very relevant
and she had adapted such information
in her own training, leading her to
integrate the information she learned
and utilize the new training method in
her own trainings. By adding more group
activities, she successfully encouraged the
participation of her trainees and helped
them understand the training content
more easily. Interestingly, trainees from the
other course were really interested in her
course and even asked her to deliver the
training for them.
The example mentioned above (Box 4) is just one among various participants of trainings undertaken by RECOFTC
in Viet Nam. The result of a training impact monitoring conducted by RECOFTC in September 2015 indicates a large
number of training participants have been able to use the new knowledge and skills in their daily work and life
(see Box 5).
Box 5. Monitoring and evaluation to conirm the efectiveness of participatory approach
A post-training evaluation was conducted by RECOFTC in September 2015 for trainings undertaken between
October 2013 and September 2014, covering 43 randomly selected participants from eight events. The
evaluation results show that 42/43 (98%) of the interviewees reported having used the knowledge and skills
learnt from the trainings in various ways, including delivering of trainings and facilitating workshops, project/
program planning and policy advocacy activities.
The results indicated that the trainings conducted by RECOFTC in Viet Nam have brought about efects on
participants from diferent levels (from community members to senior government staf ). Such efects have
helped them make changes in their daily work and life.
Challenges for application of a participatory approach
While there is no doubt about the efectiveness of participatory approaches in training and awareness raising,
there are a number of challenges with this approach that need to be considered. Firstly, the participatory aspect
limits the number of participants. To ensure that each participant has suicient time to interact during the training,
the Grassroots Capacity Building for REDD+ in Asia Project usually limits the size of the training to around 20-25
participants. Compared to 50 or more participants in a lecture-like training, this is less ‘productive.’
Secondly, participation takes more time and resources. A participatory training is usually at least twice as long
as a lecture-like training with the same contents and thus requires more resources. Consequently, participatory
training is often considered ‘costly.’
Thirdly, a participatory training requires a trainer (known as facilitator) with good facilitation skills. The CBNA
conducted by Grassroots Capacity Building for REDD+ in Asia Project suggests that such skills are largely missing
among the (potential) service providers. Although the Project has focused on building up facilitation skills among
its local partners, it will take some time for them to master them. It will take much more time to build up such
capacity among all the REDD+ trainers in the whole country.
The way forward
The capacity of relevant stakeholders plays an essential role for a successful implementation of National REDD+
Action Program. Consequently, raising awareness and building necessary capacities is a pre-condition for REDD+
implementation. The discussion in this brief indicates that although signiicant eforts have been made so far, the
efectiveness of training and awareness raising (in REDD+) has been low, largely due to the use of a conventional
lecture-like approach. To make the country ready for REDD+, the capacity for REDD+ implementation at all
levels, especially at the sub-national and community levels must be further developed. It is recommended that
participatory approaches for REDD+ capacity development be used to maximize the efectiveness of capacity
development activities.
To materialize this recommendation and to address the challenges with the use of participatory approaches, the
following is suggested:
Develop capacity to deliver participatory training: this must be given priority to ensure that participatory
approach is used in training and awareness raising. It should start with training of trainers (TOT) on
participatory approaches for a key group of trainers from selected provinces (e.g. key REDD+ provinces).
After that these TOT participants will conduct participatory training for others. This will gradually build up the
capacity to deliver participatory training for REDD+ trainers in the future.
Monitor the efectiveness of training: The advantage of a participatory training and awareness raising over
a convention lecture-like training approach can be proven by monitoring the efectiveness of the training
during and after the completion of training program. For this purpose, M&E will need to be conducted at
diferent stages and long after completion of training and awareness raising events. M&E of the training and
awareness raising need to be conducted at the beginning, during the sessions, at the end of training program
and after 6-12 months of its completion to measure the learning from the training and its application by
trainees, and impacts on the ground.
Make participatory approach mandatory in trainings: Because of the challenges mentioned above,
REDD+ trainers are less likely to adopt a participatory approach in their training unless it is mandatory. To
make this happen, the National REDD+ Action Program (NRAP) and Provincial REDD+ Action Plans (PRAP)
should make it legally required that a participatory approach is used. This can be done in the next revision of
NRAP, which will be undertaken in second half of 2016 and in the development of PRAP.
Box 6: Grassroots Capacity Building for REDD+ in Asia Project
The Grassroots Capacity Building for REDD+ in Asia Project has been implemented in ive countries including
Indonesia, Lao PDR and Nepal since 2009, Viet Nam since 2010 and Myanmar since 2013. The project has
promoted the efective engagement of diverse grassroots stakeholders in the climate change and REDD+
dialogues in Asia-Paciic region by providing knowledge and developing the skills of several grassroots
stakeholders through a variety of capacity development programs.
In Viet Nam, the project implemented in August 2010 in four provinces (Bac Kan, Ha Tinh, Lam Dong and
Ca Mau). Until the end of 2016, a number of activities to build capacity and raise awareness of grassroots
forest stakeholders including local government oicials and local people were organized in a participatory
approach. Through these events participants were provided with better understanding of climate change
and REDD+ to be ready for its implementation and be in a better position to take advantage of any potential
beneits from REDD+ in the future.
References
Braakman, L. & Edwards, K.,2002. The Art of Building Facilitation Capacities: a training manual, video and self-study CD. Bangkok:
RECOFTC.
Jawaharlal Nehru University, 2002. Participatory Lifelong Learning and Information and Communication Technologies. Available
at http://www.unesco.org/education/aladin/paldin/pdf/course_01.pdf )
Nguyen, T. Q, Bruyn, T. D. and Hang, N. T. T., 2012. Assessing the Efectiveness of Training and Awareness Raising Activities of the
UN-REDD Programme in Viet Nam (2009-2011). Hanoi, June 2012.
Nguyen, T.Q, Nguyen, D.H, Hoang T.H, Phan G.T, Huynh B.T, Ngo D.T, Nguyen D.T, Hoang N.C.H, Than T.T, Tran T.L, Tran T.N,
Pham T.N, Ha A.H, Do T.P, Kristin DeValue, and Tina Sølvberg, 2014. “Participatory Governance Assessment: Taking
Stock of REDD+ Governance in Lam Dong Province, Viet Nam”. UN-REDD Programme, December 2014.
Steward, H. M. and Swan, S., 2013. Final evaluation of the UN-REDD Viet Nam Programme. Hanoi, April 2013.
RECOFTC’s mission is to enhance capacities for stronger rights, improved
governance and fairer beneits for local people in sustainable forested
landscapes in the Asia and the Paciic region.
Copyright © 2016 RECOFTC – The Center for People and Forests
RECOFTC holds a unique and important place in the world of forestry.
It is the only international not-for-proit organization that specializes
in capacity development for community forestry. RECOFTC engages
in strategic networks and efective partnerships with governments,
nongovernmental organizations, civil society, the private sector, local
people and research and educational institutes throughout the AsiaPaciic region and beyond. With over 25 years of international experience
and a dynamic approach to capacity development – involving research
and analysis, demonstration sites and training products – RECOFTC
delivers innovative solutions for people and forests.
RECOFTC – The Center for People and Forests
P.O. Box 1111
Kasetsart Post Oice
Bangkok 10903, Thailand
Tel (66-2) 940-5700
Fax (66-2) 561-4880
info@recoftc.org
www.recoftc.org
For more information about the Grassroots project, have a look at
www.recoftc.org/project/grassroots-capacity-building-redd
RECOFTC – Trung tâm vì Con người và Rừng
Tầng 3, số 2 Trần Huy Liệu
Ba Đình, Hà Nội, Việt Nam
Tel (+84) 4.3726 4745
Fax (+84) 4.3726 4746
Email: vietnam@recoftc.org
http://www.recoftc.org/country/vietnam
Utilizing participatory approaches to efectively address
capacity gaps in REDD+: Lessons from Viet Nam
Overview
Due to the technical complexity of REDD+ and a dominant use of conventional approach of
training and awareness raising, innovative approaches for training and awareness raising are
needed to ensure that stakeholders, particularly the grassroots stakeholders, are prepared and
enabled to play an efective role in REDD+ implementation.
RECOFTC’s approaches to awareness raising and training are based on participatory principles,
recognizing that adults learn and respond best when actively involved in the learning. Participatory
training allows two way commnunications between trainer and trainee, giving an opportunity to
trainee to share their experience, and thus enriching the learning process.
To achieve the desired outcomes of training and awreness raising, particularly for a complex
issue such as REDD+, it is recommended that participatory approaches be mainstreamed in
government and non-governmental training and awareness raising activities.
Introduction
The overall objectives of the Vietnamese National REDD+ Action Program (NRAP) for the period 2011-2020 are to
reduce deforestation and forest degradation, promote sustainable management of forest resources, and conserve
and enhance forest carbon stocks. The initial period of the program (2011-2015) was intended for REDD+ readiness.
One of the speciic objectives was to raise awareness of relevant stakeholders in the pilot provinces. To help Viet
Nam achieve this objective, development partners have been working in various parts of the country for the last
few years. Although signiicant eforts have been made to enhance awareness and understanding of REDD+ among
concerned stakeholders at all levels, the efectiveness of these activities is low. This brief intends to highlight the
importance of participatory approaches for policy-makers and implementers working in the area of REDD+. It argues
that the methods employed have greatly inluenced the efectiveness of the training and awareness raising and that
participatory approaches should be used to ensure that capacity gaps are efectively addressed.
Why Viet Nam is not REDD+ ready yet:
a commonly known but insuiciently
discussed reason
“Is Viet Nam REDD+ ready yet?” Among other reasons, this question
necessarily implies that training and awareness raising in REDD+
undertaken in Viet Nam (within the scope of the UN-REDD Programme)
have not been efective. In fact, with a few exceptions, there is a
feeling that overall training and awareness raising of the UN-REDD
Programme could have contributed signiicantly more to achieving
the objective of making Viet Nam ready for REDD+. Key issues in
various steps of REDD+ training and awareness raising activities are
briely discussed in Box 1.
This is not a unique case. In the assessment of training on legal rights
to local communities under the Participatory Governance Assessment
(PGA), it was found out that “A training often has 50-70 persons or
even more. Training materials and handouts were the government’s
legal documents which were read out loud to the audience. Trainers
sometimes used visual aids such as photos to illustrate the training
content. After lecturing, some minutes were spent for people to
raise any questions before the trainer moved to another topic. At
the end of each training 30 minutes were spent for questions and
answers.“ The examples above illustrate a common issue with training
and awareness raising in the forestry sector in Viet Nam –the use of
conventional lecture-like approach in training and awareness raising.
A typical training using a conventional lecture places the trainer (also
known as teacher) in the center (see Box 2). The trainer is believed to
be knowledgeable of the training topic and designs the whole training
(based on own assumption about what trainees need to learn). Theory
is the focus. The trainer transfers his or her knowledge to the trainees;
and the trainees passively listen to the lecture and have little or no
chance to relect and share their ideas and experiences.
Box 1: Key issues in training and
awareness raising in REDD+
Initiation: Trainings and awareness
raising happened more on an ad-hoc
basis than as the result of systematic
planning (for example, not using a
capacity development needs assessment
to identify the capacity gaps).
Development: Eforts have been made
to contextualize and adapt the trainings
and awareness raising to the local
context, but there is a clear need for
these to be better targeted to the local
needs.
Delivery: Often there were too many
participants in one training event
(between 30 and 60 people). There
was too much lecturing and too little
time for practice, discussion and ield
observation. Although various visual
aids (lip charts, posters, computer
presentations) were developed, there
is room for improvement in unpacking
the concepts for diferent levels using
simple and accessible tools.
Monitoring: There was no plan for
Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E). M&E
information was collected at the end of
the event, but not done systematically,
so it is diicult to generalize. More
critically, M&E of the learning and the
application after the training/ awareness
raising is generally missing from the
whole process.
Box 2. Key characteristics of the conventional and participatory approaches in training
Conventional lecture-like approach:
Participatory approach:
-
-
The trainer is the center;
The trainer is a teacher;
The trainer is considered knowledgeable;
The trainer is responsible for learning;
The trainer deines training agenda;
Monitoring and evaluation are largely absent;
The trainees are passive:
o The trainer tells, the trainees listen;
o The trainees have little or no chance to
relect and share their ideas and experiences;
o The emphasis is given to theory with little or
no practice.
The trainees are the center;
The trainer is a facilitator;
The trainees are considered knowledgeable;
The trainees are responsible for learning;
Training agenda is designed based on speciic
needs of the trainees;
- Participatory monitoring and evaluation are in place;
- The trainees are active:
o The trainer guides, the trainees take action;
o The trainees are given opportunities to relect
and share their ideas and experiences;
o Experiential learning.
The strength of lecture-based training approach is that it can cover a large number of people and issues in a short time.
The key challenge is that the participants often do not remember much when the training inishes (see Box 3), particularly
when it comes to new and complex issues like REDD+, which undermines the efectiveness of the training.
Box 3. How adults learn
We can remember
90% what we ourselves do and explain. i.e. simulation
game, exercise in class or ield using new insights
or skills and a presentation of results;
70% what we explain ourselves. i.e. participants
asked to present information;
50% what we see and hear. i.e. a lecture with visual aids
and demonstration;
30% what we see i.e. a poster with no explanation or
demonstration without explanation;
20% what we hear. i.e. a lecture with no visuals;
10% what we read i.e. training materials, handouts with
no accompanying explanation (if they can read).
Members of local community in Lam Dong province discussed
during planning meeting for upcoming awareness raising event
Participatory approaches in training and awareness raising - why?
In contrast to trainings using a conventional lecture-like approach, a typical training using a participatory approach
places the trainees in the center. The trainees are believed to be knowledgeable and the trainer plays the role of a
facilitator, helping the trainees relect and share their knowledge and experiences, using various participatory
techniques such as brainstorming, pair work, group work, games and role play according to the training objectives
and the needs of the trainees. The program of a training using participatory approaches is designed based on speciic
needs of the trainees (collected through a capacity development needs assessment) - see Box 2.
Issues related to climate change and REDD+ are highly complex and evolve quickly. Delivery of training and awareness
raising activities for stakeholders using participatory approaches facilitates the highest level of engagement of the
participants in training activities and thus increases their efectiveness.
In addition, participation of concerned stakeholders in REDD+
is required as part of its social safeguards under the Cancun
Agreement, speciically agreement point 2 ‘transparent and
efective national forest governance structures’; point 3 ‘respect
for the knowledge and rights of indigenous peoples and members
of local communities’; and point 4 ‘full and efective participation
of relevant stakeholders’. For this purpose, the use of participatory
approaches in training will build up the capacity needed for people
working on REDD+ to facilitate participatory multi-stakeholder
processes.
In Viet Nam, participatory approaches have been widely used by
RECOFTC – The Center for People and Forests for the training and
awareness raising activities for diferent stakeholders in Bac Kan,
Ha Tinh, Lam Dong and Ca Mau under the Grassroots Capacity
Building for REDD+ in Asia Project. In this project, a Capacity
Building Needs Assessment (CBNA) was undertaken prior to the
delivery of the training program. Subsequently, a training was
organized for a group of key trainers (ToT) from each province on
the participatory approach and various technical issues (relating
to climate change and REDD+). Relection (refresher) trainings
were also organized for these trainers to relect and discuss
their training experiences with each other. Back at home, they
conducted training for their colleagues and local communities,
using a similar approach. Overall, the relection from both ToT
participants and local communities on training efectiveness
was highly positive, conirming that participatory approaches
are efective in training and awareness raising in general and
speciically regarding climate change and REDD+ (see Box 4).
Box 4: A relection on participatory
approach in training
The Grassroots Capacity Building for REDD+
in Asia Project employed participatory
approaches in conducting training on basic
concepts of climate change and REDD+ for
various stakeholders at grassroots level.
Ms. Tran Thi Thuy Duong is a young
oicial from Vu Quang National Park. She
participated in a training organized by
the project in October 2014. She found it
really interesting, not only the contents
but also the method used in the training.
The information and knowledge that she
learned in the training was very relevant
and she had adapted such information
in her own training, leading her to
integrate the information she learned
and utilize the new training method in
her own trainings. By adding more group
activities, she successfully encouraged the
participation of her trainees and helped
them understand the training content
more easily. Interestingly, trainees from the
other course were really interested in her
course and even asked her to deliver the
training for them.
The example mentioned above (Box 4) is just one among various participants of trainings undertaken by RECOFTC
in Viet Nam. The result of a training impact monitoring conducted by RECOFTC in September 2015 indicates a large
number of training participants have been able to use the new knowledge and skills in their daily work and life
(see Box 5).
Box 5. Monitoring and evaluation to conirm the efectiveness of participatory approach
A post-training evaluation was conducted by RECOFTC in September 2015 for trainings undertaken between
October 2013 and September 2014, covering 43 randomly selected participants from eight events. The
evaluation results show that 42/43 (98%) of the interviewees reported having used the knowledge and skills
learnt from the trainings in various ways, including delivering of trainings and facilitating workshops, project/
program planning and policy advocacy activities.
The results indicated that the trainings conducted by RECOFTC in Viet Nam have brought about efects on
participants from diferent levels (from community members to senior government staf ). Such efects have
helped them make changes in their daily work and life.
Challenges for application of a participatory approach
While there is no doubt about the efectiveness of participatory approaches in training and awareness raising,
there are a number of challenges with this approach that need to be considered. Firstly, the participatory aspect
limits the number of participants. To ensure that each participant has suicient time to interact during the training,
the Grassroots Capacity Building for REDD+ in Asia Project usually limits the size of the training to around 20-25
participants. Compared to 50 or more participants in a lecture-like training, this is less ‘productive.’
Secondly, participation takes more time and resources. A participatory training is usually at least twice as long
as a lecture-like training with the same contents and thus requires more resources. Consequently, participatory
training is often considered ‘costly.’
Thirdly, a participatory training requires a trainer (known as facilitator) with good facilitation skills. The CBNA
conducted by Grassroots Capacity Building for REDD+ in Asia Project suggests that such skills are largely missing
among the (potential) service providers. Although the Project has focused on building up facilitation skills among
its local partners, it will take some time for them to master them. It will take much more time to build up such
capacity among all the REDD+ trainers in the whole country.
The way forward
The capacity of relevant stakeholders plays an essential role for a successful implementation of National REDD+
Action Program. Consequently, raising awareness and building necessary capacities is a pre-condition for REDD+
implementation. The discussion in this brief indicates that although signiicant eforts have been made so far, the
efectiveness of training and awareness raising (in REDD+) has been low, largely due to the use of a conventional
lecture-like approach. To make the country ready for REDD+, the capacity for REDD+ implementation at all
levels, especially at the sub-national and community levels must be further developed. It is recommended that
participatory approaches for REDD+ capacity development be used to maximize the efectiveness of capacity
development activities.
To materialize this recommendation and to address the challenges with the use of participatory approaches, the
following is suggested:
Develop capacity to deliver participatory training: this must be given priority to ensure that participatory
approach is used in training and awareness raising. It should start with training of trainers (TOT) on
participatory approaches for a key group of trainers from selected provinces (e.g. key REDD+ provinces).
After that these TOT participants will conduct participatory training for others. This will gradually build up the
capacity to deliver participatory training for REDD+ trainers in the future.
Monitor the efectiveness of training: The advantage of a participatory training and awareness raising over
a convention lecture-like training approach can be proven by monitoring the efectiveness of the training
during and after the completion of training program. For this purpose, M&E will need to be conducted at
diferent stages and long after completion of training and awareness raising events. M&E of the training and
awareness raising need to be conducted at the beginning, during the sessions, at the end of training program
and after 6-12 months of its completion to measure the learning from the training and its application by
trainees, and impacts on the ground.
Make participatory approach mandatory in trainings: Because of the challenges mentioned above,
REDD+ trainers are less likely to adopt a participatory approach in their training unless it is mandatory. To
make this happen, the National REDD+ Action Program (NRAP) and Provincial REDD+ Action Plans (PRAP)
should make it legally required that a participatory approach is used. This can be done in the next revision of
NRAP, which will be undertaken in second half of 2016 and in the development of PRAP.
Box 6: Grassroots Capacity Building for REDD+ in Asia Project
The Grassroots Capacity Building for REDD+ in Asia Project has been implemented in ive countries including
Indonesia, Lao PDR and Nepal since 2009, Viet Nam since 2010 and Myanmar since 2013. The project has
promoted the efective engagement of diverse grassroots stakeholders in the climate change and REDD+
dialogues in Asia-Paciic region by providing knowledge and developing the skills of several grassroots
stakeholders through a variety of capacity development programs.
In Viet Nam, the project implemented in August 2010 in four provinces (Bac Kan, Ha Tinh, Lam Dong and
Ca Mau). Until the end of 2016, a number of activities to build capacity and raise awareness of grassroots
forest stakeholders including local government oicials and local people were organized in a participatory
approach. Through these events participants were provided with better understanding of climate change
and REDD+ to be ready for its implementation and be in a better position to take advantage of any potential
beneits from REDD+ in the future.
References
Braakman, L. & Edwards, K.,2002. The Art of Building Facilitation Capacities: a training manual, video and self-study CD. Bangkok:
RECOFTC.
Jawaharlal Nehru University, 2002. Participatory Lifelong Learning and Information and Communication Technologies. Available
at http://www.unesco.org/education/aladin/paldin/pdf/course_01.pdf )
Nguyen, T. Q, Bruyn, T. D. and Hang, N. T. T., 2012. Assessing the Efectiveness of Training and Awareness Raising Activities of the
UN-REDD Programme in Viet Nam (2009-2011). Hanoi, June 2012.
Nguyen, T.Q, Nguyen, D.H, Hoang T.H, Phan G.T, Huynh B.T, Ngo D.T, Nguyen D.T, Hoang N.C.H, Than T.T, Tran T.L, Tran T.N,
Pham T.N, Ha A.H, Do T.P, Kristin DeValue, and Tina Sølvberg, 2014. “Participatory Governance Assessment: Taking
Stock of REDD+ Governance in Lam Dong Province, Viet Nam”. UN-REDD Programme, December 2014.
Steward, H. M. and Swan, S., 2013. Final evaluation of the UN-REDD Viet Nam Programme. Hanoi, April 2013.
RECOFTC’s mission is to enhance capacities for stronger rights, improved
governance and fairer beneits for local people in sustainable forested
landscapes in the Asia and the Paciic region.
Copyright © 2016 RECOFTC – The Center for People and Forests
RECOFTC holds a unique and important place in the world of forestry.
It is the only international not-for-proit organization that specializes
in capacity development for community forestry. RECOFTC engages
in strategic networks and efective partnerships with governments,
nongovernmental organizations, civil society, the private sector, local
people and research and educational institutes throughout the AsiaPaciic region and beyond. With over 25 years of international experience
and a dynamic approach to capacity development – involving research
and analysis, demonstration sites and training products – RECOFTC
delivers innovative solutions for people and forests.
RECOFTC – The Center for People and Forests
P.O. Box 1111
Kasetsart Post Oice
Bangkok 10903, Thailand
Tel (66-2) 940-5700
Fax (66-2) 561-4880
info@recoftc.org
www.recoftc.org
For more information about the Grassroots project, have a look at
www.recoftc.org/project/grassroots-capacity-building-redd
RECOFTC – Trung tâm vì Con người và Rừng
Tầng 3, số 2 Trần Huy Liệu
Ba Đình, Hà Nội, Việt Nam
Tel (+84) 4.3726 4745
Fax (+84) 4.3726 4746
Email: vietnam@recoftc.org
http://www.recoftc.org/country/vietnam