Different Stakeholders
Any consensus building and planning approach should include both ‘primary
stakeholders’ and ‘secondary stakeholders’ -
Primary stakeholders are those that rely directly on the natural resource base for
their livelihoods – people such as settled villagers, migrant herders or part-time
fishers, for instance. Different ethnic groups may pursue alternative livelihoods
strategies and have differing perspectives and interests. It is also important to
remember the range of interests within such groups. For instance, women are
often involved in specialised activities and have different concerns and
additional knowledge.
Secondary stakeholders are those people or institutions that have a less direct
stake but also have an interest and role to play in management decisions
affecting natural resources and livelihoods. This group includes people like
extension agents and the technical bodies and line departments associated with
agriculture, fisheries and water, for instance. Local and regional government
bodies are also important secondary stakeholders. The UN agencies such as FAO,
UNICEF and UNDP are further examples. Secondary stakeholders are very
important because their support is needed to turn plans into action.
Including this range of stakeholders increases the quality and relevance of local
planning. It helps ensure plans are feasible and well-supported and it increases
the level of understanding and consensus between the stakeholders.
How might PAPD be relevant in the project context?
PAPD has been used in many situations but in all cases there have been several
different interest groups each trying to secure livelihoods. These groups are often
interconnected, relying on each other or being affected by the actions of others.
There are several factors that increase hardship and that can increase competition
between these groups and this can become an obstacle to productive planning and
participation. These factors include climate change, other environmental stress,
social change (displacement etc.) and political insecurity. Access to water such as
irrigated land, pasture or fisheries is often at the centre of these problems. Consensus
building through local planning can help people secure more reliable livelihoods by
first highlighting and then attempting to address these issues.
The same approach will draw in additional supportive stakeholders to represent the
interests of larger numbers of people and to participate in plans that might have
greater potential and geographic coverage. It is possible for a network of participants
to achieve consensus and access support for water management plans within a water
catchment area, for instance (see Adapting the PAPD approach).
4