Review Of The Contributions Of Pim Funded Research On Resource Tenure And Governance To Policy And Program Decision Making

The purpose of this review is to assess the extent to which the research outputs of Flagship 5 of the CGIAR Research Program on Policies, Institutions, and Markets (PIM5) have been used to inform decisions and behaviors of representatives of government organizations, development agencies, researchers, donors, private firms, nongovernment organizations, and other users. The review addresses seven questions: 1. Who uses the outputs of PIM5, including general publications, journal articles, briefs, and other products? 2. Who uses the tools and games created and disseminated by the Flagship researchers? 3. Who attends the outreach events and capacity-building workshops organized by researchers involved in the Flagship? 4. How are the research outputs being used? What policies, programs, and strategies have been informed, and how? 5. For selected cases, what is the research-to-uptake process and how we can learn from it? 6. What are the key cases and impact pathways identified, and what can we learn from them? What are the promising pathways that we should explore further in the final 18 months of the program? 7. What are the gaps and missed opportunities for impact that we should explore in the final months of the program, or that should be considered in the One CGIAR? To address these questions, the review relied on bibliographic references; document download data; personal interviews; focus group discussions; and three different online surveys targeting researchers and their partners, as well as different types of end users. We used both quantitative and qualitative techniques to analyze these data. In this summary, we selectively discuss the review’s most important findings and recommendations.

In 2020, PIM findings contributed to seed policies in Nepal and Uganda, Malawi’s extension strategy and approval of insect-resistant cotton, a nationwide program aimed at improving the effectiveness of public service delivery in Uganda, social protection programs in Egypt, and school gardens for better nutrition in Papua New Guinea. At the global level, PIM research was used to shape strategic decisions of organizations such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, GIZ, the Inter-American Development Bank, the UK Government's Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office, the World Bank and the World Health Organization. PIM tools were incorporated in universities’ curricula in India and South Africa. Examples of PIM innovations scaled up by partners in 2020 are private sector seed marketing in Ethiopia, picture-based insurance in Ethiopia, India and Kenya, and tools for inclusive governance of natural resources in India and Peru.

The evaluative study focuses primarily on PIM’s external partners; this includes partnerships where PIM is engaged by another organization as a service provider and trusted advisor. The objective is to undertake an in-depth analysis of PIM partnerships and to elicit lessons on the key factors contributing to their success in achieving outcomes. The aim is to generate: (1) an inventory of partnerships; (2) an understanding of the motivations for partnership formation, and of the partnership dynamics in promoting innovations and policy change; and (3) an assessment of strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities to foster stronger future partnerships. This evaluative study serves the dual purposes of accountability to CGIAR partners and funders and of learning. The primary intended users are CGIAR researchers and partners. The findings and lessons learned will also provide input into the implementation of new initiatives under One CGIAR.

This Working Paper analyzes the gender dimensions of forest tenure and forest tenure reform in Indonesia. Data were derived from CIFOR's research on forest tenure reform at the national and provincial levels, focusing on the provinces of Lampung and Maluku. Additional data were taken from training workshops on gender and community-based forest tenure reform held at these two sites. The study forms part of CIFOR's Global Comparative Study on Forest Tenure Reform (https://www.cifor.org/gcs-tenure/).

REDD+ must be transformational. REDD+ requires broad institutional and governance reforms, such as tenure, decentralisation, and corruption control. These reforms will enable departures from business as usual, and involve communities and forest users in making and implementing policies that a ect them. Policies must go beyond forestry. REDD+ strategies must include policies outside the forestry sector narrowly de ned, such as agriculture and energy, and better coordinate across sectors to deal with non-forest drivers of deforestation and degradation. Performance-based payments are key, yet limited. Payments based on performance directly incentivise and compensate forest owners and users. But schemes such as payments for environmental services (PES) depend on conditions, such as secure tenure, solid carbon data and transparent governance, that are often lacking and take time to change. This constraint reinforces the need for broad institutional and policy reforms. We must learn from the past. Many approaches to REDD+ now being considered are similar to previous e orts to conserve and better manage forests, often with limited success. Taking on board lessons learned from past experience will improve the prospects of REDD+ e ectiveness. National circumstances and uncertainty must be factored in. Di erent country contexts will create a variety of REDD+ models with di erent institutional and policy mixes. Uncertainties about the shape of the future global REDD+ system, national readiness and political consensus require  exibility and a phased approach to REDD+ implementation.

Key messagesMulti-stakeholder forums (MSFs) are increasingly seen as essential for collaboration -- across different levels of government and among multiple constituencies-- due to the growing urgency to address climate change and transform development trajectories.A review of the scholarly literature reveals that more equitable and resilient MSFs require a shift in emphasis away from how to design projects toward designing engagement in a way that addresses a specific situation or context.Designing for engagement combines top-down with bottom-up approaches, starting with a period of research and meetings at upper levels to understand the potential challenges that local project implementers face within the broader context they are encountering.This process is engaged, committed and adaptive, supporting a spirit of co-learning among all actors, building mutual respect and trust over time.This approach has the best chance of resilience in the face of change or challenge, and of leading to equitable outcomes -- and is not fostered by the increasingly short-term nature of donor funding and the emphasis on simple quantitative impact indicators.