Participatory Monitoring in Forest Communities to Improve Governance, Accountability and Women’s Participation

  • Kristen EvansEmail author
  • Selmira Flores
  • Anne M. Larson
Original Research


We explore how participatory monitoring can help communities and community partners define local governance, identify governance issues and problems, and improve women’s participation, based on action research from 2011 to 2015 to improve women’s participation in decision-making in indigenous communities in Nicaragua. The findings are based on experiences in developing a participatory monitoring governance tool and the lessons learned, observations about the process and results from the monitoring. We found that participatory monitoring of governance provides a mechanism to identify obstacles to community governance by creating a space for community members to evaluate local governance, identify issues and present solutions. It also created tensions with leaders who were concerned that monitoring would focus unwelcome attention on their activities. While we have yet to see if the tool actually improves women’s participation and governance—a longer-term impact—participants said that the process helped them define good governance and explore improving participation and accountability.


Gender Indigenous Latin America Nicaragua Local monitoring Participation Participatory methods 



We express our deepest thanks to the members of the five communities that participated in this action research project. Furthermore, we thank Alejandro Pikitle and Roberto Marchena.


This study was funded by the Austrian Development Agency Grant Number CIFOR (2012/02).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Agarwal B (2001) Participatory exclusions, community forestry, and gender: an analysis for South Asia and a conceptual framework. World Dev 29:1623–1648. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agarwal B (2009) Gender and forest conservation: the impact of women’s participation in community forest governance. Ecol Econ 68:2785–2799. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Agrawal A, Chhatre A (2006) Explaining success on the commons: community forest governance in the Indian Himalaya. World Dev 34:149–166. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Andrianandrasana HT, Randriamahefasoa J, Durbin J et al (2005) Participatory ecological monitoring of the Alaotra wetlands in Madagascar. Biodivers Conserv 14:2757–2774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arnstein SR (1969) A ladder of citizen participation. J Am Inst Plan 35:216–224. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Asamblea Nacional (2003) Ley de Participación Ciudadana. Normas jurídicas de Nicaragua, ManaguaGoogle Scholar
  7. Bartletti JPS, Larson AM, Amico AL et al (2018) Does the monitoring of local governance improve transparency? Lessons from three approaches in subnational jurisdictions. Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), BogorGoogle Scholar
  8. Bekhouche Y, Haumann R, Tyson LD, Zahidi S (2014) The global gender gap report. World Economic Forum, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  9. Blair H (2000) Participation and accountability at the periphery: democratic local governance in six countries. World Dev 28:21–39. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bloom E, Sunseri A, Leonard A (2007) Measuring and strengthening local governance capacity: the local governance barometer. USAID, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  11. CARE Malawi (2013) The Community Score Card (CSC): a generic guide for implementing CARE’s CSC process to improve quality of services. Cooperative for Assistance and Relief Everywhere, Inc., GenevaGoogle Scholar
  12. Chao S (2012) FOREST PEOPLES: numbers across the world. Forest Peoples Programme, Moreton-in-MarshGoogle Scholar
  13. Colfer CJP (2005) The complex forest: communities, uncertainty, and adaptive collaborative management. RFF/CIFOR, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  14. Colfer CJP (2013) The gender box: a framework for analysing gender roles in forest management. Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), BogorGoogle Scholar
  15. CONADETI (2014) Informe Ejecutivo de la CONADETI y las CIDTs al 31 de Marzo del Año 2014. National Demarcation and Titling Commission, BilwiGoogle Scholar
  16. Constantino P, Carlos H, Ramalho E et al (2012) Empowering local people through community-based resource monitoring: a comparison of Brazil and Namibia. Ecol Soc 17:22. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cronkleton P, Keating R, Evans K (2006) Helping village level stakeholders monitor forest benefits, negotiated learning: collaborative monitoring in forest resource management. Resources for the Future, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  18. Cundill G, Fabricius C (2010) Monitoring the governance dimension of natural resource co-management. Ecol Soc 15:15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dangol S (2005) Participation and decisionmaking in Nepal. In: Colfer CJP (ed) The equitable forest: diversity, community, and resource management. Resources for the Future/CIFOR, Washington, DC, pp 54–71Google Scholar
  20. Danielsen F, Burgess ND, Balmford A et al (2009) Local participation in natural resource monitoring: a characterization of approaches. Conserv Biol 23:31–42. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. De Sy V, Herold M, Martius C et al (2016) Enhancing transparency in the land-use sector: exploring the role of independent monitoring approaches. Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), BogorGoogle Scholar
  22. Demeo T, Markus A, Bormann B, Leingang J (2015) Tracking progress: the monitoring process used in collaborative forest landscape restoration projects in the Pacific Northwest Region. University of Oregon, OregonGoogle Scholar
  23. Dey DC, Schweitzer CJ (2014) Restoration for the future: endpoints, targets, and indicators of progress and success. J Sustain For 33:S43–S65. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Evans K, Guariguata MR (2008) Participatory monitoring in tropical forest management: a review of tools, concepts and lessons learned. CIFOR, BogorGoogle Scholar
  25. Evans K, Velarde SJ, Prieto RP et al (2006) Field guide to the future: four ways for communities to think ahead. CIFOR, ASB System-Wide Program of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research, ICRAF, Secretariat of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, NairobiGoogle Scholar
  26. Evans K, Larson AM, Mwangi E et al (2014) Field guide to adaptive collaborative management and improving women’s participation. CIFOR, BogorGoogle Scholar
  27. Evans K, Marchena R, Flores S et al (2016) Guía práctica para el monitoreo participativo de gobernanza. Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), BogorGoogle Scholar
  28. Evans K, Flores S, Larson AM et al (2017) Challenges for women’s participation in communal forests: experience from Nicaragua’s indigenous territories. Women’s Stud Int Forum 65:37–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Fals Borda O, Rahman MA (1991) Action and knowledge: breaking the monopoly with participatory action-research. Apex Press, MuscatCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. FAO (2014) Forests and gender equality: participatory forestry. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, RomeGoogle Scholar
  31. FAO (2015) Global forest resources assessment 2015. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, RomeGoogle Scholar
  32. Fernandez-Gimenez ME, Ballard HL, Sturtevant VE (2008) Adaptive management and social learning in collaborative and community-based monitoring: a study of five community-based forestry organizations in the western USA. Ecol Soc 13:4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Flores S, Evans K, Larson AM et al (2016) La participación de mujeres indígenas rurales para fortalecer la gobernanza comunitaria. Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), BogorGoogle Scholar
  34. Guijt I (ed) (2007) Negotiated learning: collaborative monitoring in forest resource management. Resources for the Future, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  35. Haddad S, Narayana D, Mohindra KS (2011) Reducing inequalities in health and access to health care in a rural Indian community: an India–Canada collaborative action research project. BMC Int Health Hum Rights 11:S3. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hartanto H, Lorenzo MC, Valmores C et al (2003) Learning together: responding to change and complexity to improve community forests in the Philippines. CIFOR, BogorGoogle Scholar
  37. Hayes TM (2008) The robustness of indigenous common-property systems to frontier expansion: institutional interplay in the Mosquitia forest corridor. Conserv Soc 6:117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hayes T, Persha L (2010) Nesting local forestry initiatives: revisiting community forest management in a REDD+ world. For Policy Econ 12:545–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. INAFOR (2008) Inventorio Forestal 2007–08. Instituto Nacional Forestal, ManaguaGoogle Scholar
  40. INIDE (2005a) CENSO 2005. Instituto Nacional de Información de Desarrollo, ManaguaGoogle Scholar
  41. INIDE (2005b) Mapa de Pobreza Extrema Municipal por el Método de Necesidades Básicas Insatisfechas (NBI). Instituto Nacional de Información de Desarrollo, ManaguaGoogle Scholar
  42. Kanowski PJ, McDermott CL, Cashore BW (2011) Implementing REDD+: lessons from analysis of forest governance. Environ Sci Policy 14:111–117. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kusumanto T (2007) Learning to monitor political processes for fairness in Jambi, Indonesia. In: Guijt I (ed) Negotiated learning: collaborative monitoring in forest resource management. Resources for the Future, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  44. Larson AM, Lewis-Mendoza J (2012) Decentralisation and devolution in Nicaragua’s North Atlantic autonomous region: natural resources and indigenous peoples’ rights. Int J Commons 6:179–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Larson AM, Mendoza-Lewis J (2009) Desafíos en la tenencia comunitaria de bosques en la RAAN de Nicaragua. URACCAN, ManaguaGoogle Scholar
  46. Larson AM, Petkova E (2011) An introduction to forest governance, people and REDD+ in Latin America: obstacles and opportunities. Forests 2:86–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Larson AM, Flores S, Evans K (2016) Forest use in Nicaragua: results of a survey on gendered forest use, benefits and participation. Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), BogorGoogle Scholar
  48. Lawrence A, Paudel K, Barnes R, Malla Y (2006) Adaptive value of participatory biodiversity monitoring in community forestry. Environ Conserv 33:325. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Lemos MC, Agrawal A (2006) Environmental governance. Annu Rev Environ Resour 31:297–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Mai YH, Mwangi E, Wan M (2012) Gender analysis in forestry research. CIFOR, BogorGoogle Scholar
  51. Mairena E, Lorio G, Hernández X et al (2012) Gender and forests in Nicaragua’s indigenous territories: from national policy to local practice. Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), BogorGoogle Scholar
  52. Manfre C, Rubin D (2012) Integrating gender into forestry research: a guide for CIFOR scientists and programme administrators. Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), BogorGoogle Scholar
  53. McDougall C, Khadka C, Dangol S (2007) Using monitoring as leverage for equal opportunity in Nepal. In: Guijt I (ed) Negotiated learning: collaborative monitoring in forest resource management. Resources for the Future, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  54. Mutimukuru-Maravanyika T, Matose F (2013) Learning in contested landscapes: applying adaptive collaborative management in forested landscapes in Zimbabwe. In: Ojha HR, Hall A, Sulaiman VR (eds) Adaptive collaborative approaches in natural resource governance: rethinking participation. Earthscan, OxonGoogle Scholar
  55. Mwangi E, Larson AM (2009) Project proposal: gender, tenure and community forests in Uganda and Nicaragua. CIFOR, BogorGoogle Scholar
  56. Ostrom E, Nagendra H (2006) Insights on linking forests, trees, and people from the air, on the ground, and in the laboratory. PNAS 103:19224–19231. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Pagdee A, Kim Y, Daugherty PJ (2006) What makes community forest management successful: a meta-study from community forests throughout the world. Soci Nat Resour 19:33–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Ribot JC (2004) Waiting for democracy: the politics of choice in natural resource decentralization. World Resources Institute, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  59. Rights and Resources Initiative (2014) What future for reform? Progress and slowdown in forest tenure reform since 2002. Rights and Resources Initiative, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  60. Saipothong P, Preechapanya P, Promduang T et al (2006) Community-based watershed monitoring and management in Northern Thailand. Mt Res Dev 26:289–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Stocks A (2005) Too much for too few: problems of indigenous land rights in Latin America. Annu Rev Anthropol 34:85–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. UNDESA (2007) Governance for the millennium development goals: core issues and good practices. Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations Secretariat, ViennaGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Steve Harrison, John Herbohn 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for International Forestry Researchc/o Centro Internacional de la Papa (CIP)La MolinaPeru
  2. 2.Nitlapan, Campus of the Universidad Centroamericana (UCA)ManaguaNicaragua

Personalised recommendations