View sectionsExpand all Collapse all
1. General information
1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Approach
Key resource person(s)
Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (DEZA / COSUDE / DDC / SDC) - Switzerland
Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)FAO Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO Food and Agriculture Organization) - Italy
1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT
The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:
2. Description of the SLM Approach
2.1 Short description of the Approach
Participatory Negotiated Territorial Development (PNTD) is a rural development approach developed by FAO.
2.2 Detailed description of the Approach
Detailed description of the Approach:
Aims / objectives: It offers a structure to build consensus among individual communities and development partners on natural resources/territorial management and development issues. PNTD facilitates consensus based planning within a team that represents different actors at different levels, including sector offices / technical services (agriculture, environment, etc.) and NGOs (involved in community-based rural development) at district/ department/ municipality level; and traditional authorities, user groups and associations at community/ village level.
Methods: During the diagnostic phase of the PNTD process, local territorial issues are analysed based on the viewpoints of the different actors and on a historical analysis. This step contributes to a coherent, shared understanding of the territorial system, thus providing the basis for collective agreements on development. These are referred to as Social Territorial Agreements. They are based on negotiation within the PNTD team. Main activities of PNTD include: (1) Facilitation of the planning process; (2) Provision of technical expertise; (3) Linkages to relevant institutions; (4) Technical advisory to assess viability and costs of joint development proposals; (5) Reporting back to communities and provision with final plans and resource maps; (6) Signing of ‘Social Territorial Agreements’ and endorsement by local government; (7) Establishment of a joint monitoring and evaluation system; and (8) Follow-up meetings between government institutions and NGOs.
Other important information: Independent external support by territorial facilitators is essential to assist in various aspects of the process. A PNTD approach was piloted within a project in the Onchocerciasis (riverblindess) Freed Zone along the Burkina Faso-Ghana border. This newly opened zone lacked a well defined, accepted management structure to support the development process, while cross-border aspects further complicated development, requiring cooperation among the communities and development partners from both countries. The PNTD team was supported by facilitators from the Netherlands Development Organisation (SNV). The team’s capacity to carry out inclusive planning processes has improved significantly, in terms of proposal development, negotiation and consensus building, and in placing the findings of the diagnostic phase in the larger geographical context. Joint development plans were elaborated and agreed upon from the perspective of the communities. FAO has been supporting the exercise through technical backstopping.
2.3 Photos of the Approach
2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Approach has been applied
2.7 Type of Approach
- project/ programme based
2.8 Main aims/ objectives of the Approach
The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities (a road to link two communities directly)
Testing a PNTD approach for local (transboundary) territorial planning; Refining the methodological process; Preparing a joint development plan for the two areas in Ghana and Burkina Faso
The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Limited commitment from central governments; Cross-border planning proved to be considerably more expensive than regular planning activities
3. Participation and roles of stakeholders involved
3.1 Stakeholders involved in the Approach and their roles
- local land users/ local communities
- national government (planners, decision-makers)
- international organization
3.2 Involvement of local land users/ local communities in the different phases of the Approach
|Involvement of local land users/ local communities||Specify who was involved and describe activities|
4. Technical support, capacity building, and knowledge management
4.1 Capacity building/ training
Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?
Specify who was trained:
- land users
- field staff/ advisers
Form of training:
Training focused on: (1) the PNTD process and its application in the context of cross-border natural resource management; (2) PRA tools relevant to the diagnostic phase; (3) participatory resource mapping (a tool to support the negotiation on development proposals)
4.2 Advisory service
Do land users have access to an advisory service?
This approach focuses on establishing and maintaining social dialogue within the territory and restructuring and/or strengthening territorial institutions.
5. Financing and external material support
5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users
Did land users receive financial/ material support for implementing the Technology/ Technologies?
5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)
If labour by land users was a substantial input, was it:
No subsidies were given. Labour was not rewarded and inputs were not financed by the project.
Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?
6. Impact analysis and concluding statements
6.1 Impacts of the Approach
Did the Approach help land users to implement and maintain SLM Technologies?
- Yes, little
- Yes, moderately
- Yes, greatly
improved soil conservation and livestock rearing
Did other land users / projects adopt the Approach?
- Yes, little
- Yes, moderately
- Yes, greatly
Invoked a high level of interest within the targeted communities; increased active participation, planning and consensus building capacity at community level
6.2 Main motivation of land users to implement SLM
- prestige, social pressure/ social cohesion
avoiding potential transboundary conflicts
- environmental consciousness
improving natural resources and land management
6.3 Sustainability of Approach activities
Can the land users sustain what has been implemented through the Approach (without external support)?
If yes, describe how:
The PNTD-approach has shown applicability. Yet, there are some aspects which need to be considered: (Local) governments need to take ownership of the cross-border planning and development processes. This could be realized by structuring external support differently: (1) Local government (districts, municipalities) supported by NGO’s are responsible to carry out all activities; (2) External (project) support focuses on overall coordination, the provision of technical advice, the provision of op
6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach
|Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view|
|Provides a suitable framework for cross-border planning in the West African context|
|PNTD process raised the level of participation of local government institutions and NGO’s in a negotiated territorial development process through the PNTD team which comprised technical staff of these organizations.|
|PNTD enabled (and stimulated) the communities on both sides of the border to interact and joint development plans were elaborated and agreed upon from the perspective of the communities.|
|Looking beyond community boundaries, and consensus building between communities and stakeholders were new aspects of planning to the team members|
6.5 Weaknesses/ disadvantages of the Approach and ways of overcoming them
|Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view||How can they be overcome?|
|It took time for team members to grasp the conceptual approach of PNTD. They were used to working within individual communities, and if they were involved in planning then mostly at a diagnostic level.|
|Language problems required almost continuous translation, and thus effectively doubling the time required||recruitment of linguistic mediator(s) need to be considered in the project budget|
7. References and links
7.1 Methods/ sources of information
- field visits, field surveys
- interviews with land users
7.2 References to available publications
Title, author, year, ISBN:
FAO. 2005. An approach to rural development: Participatory and Negotiated Territorial Development (PNTD). Rural Development Division, FAO. OFZ Project (Socio Economic Development Programme for the Transborder Onchocerciasis Freed Zone of Burkina Faso and Ghana)
Title, author, year, ISBN:
SNV Burkina Faso - SNV Ghana. 2007. X-border Participatory, Negotiated, Territorial Development (PNTD) – pilot phase report.