Documento(s) 13 de 24

Abstract

This chapter highlights two lessons from a multidisciplinary research team's experience in adopting a CBNRM approach in Guizhou province, China. The first lesson is that a CBNRM approach needs to be adapted to Chinese practice when attempting to work with multiple-level local government agencies, which are organized in a top-down structure. The second lesson is that one of the innovative and powerful elements of the CBNRM approach is the creation of a platform allowing villagers to voice their ideas, needs and interests, and to provide input to government-led programmes. An effective scaling-up strategy requires a diversity of action-oriented initiatives to allow government staff to become familiar with the strengths, challenges and advantages of CBNRM, experiment with the approach and adopt it in policies, programmes and projects.

Introduction

A research team at the Guizhou Academy of Agricultural Sciences (GAAS) has worked for nine years implementing CBNRM in Guizhou province, China. This experience proves how CBNRM can be used collaboratively with the government of China to improve the livelihoods of large numbers of rural people.

During the initial years, this project addressed NRM issues at the local level. Using participatory appraisal and action research tools, the team described and analysed both household and community-based management practices; evaluated the impact of economic, socio-cultural and agro-ecological factors on the natural resource base in the villages; and identified constraints and opportunities for technical, organizational and policy interventions aimed at improving livelihoods and the sustainable management of land, water and trees.

During the first six years from 1995 to 2001, the research involved only six villages. Therefore, the positive impacts on livelihoods and NRM in rural communities were largely overlooked by various levels of government. Like many other projects which have worked well with local communities, the grassroots successes and approaches were not integrated with local government processes, programmes and projects.

It should be noted that in China, 'local' encompasses several levels. The smallest unit of local organization is the village. Although a 'natural village' is a long-standing separate settlement, it is not a unit of government. The administrative village (commune) is an official unit defined for administrative purposes, frequently including several natural villages. Communes typically have leadership and committee structures that attend to community issues and interact with senior government agencies, but they have little administrative autonomy. Above the commune is the township, which is the lowest level of formal public administration. The level above townships is the county, which in many respects is the most powerful unit of local government. This has been a key unit of public administration through centuries of imperial history. In China, a county may include rural and urban settlements, and have a population of well over 1 million. Above the county is the prefecture, followed by the province. In this study, we refer mainly to the village, township and county levels of local government.

By 2001, trying to scale up the CBNRM approach in Guizhou province became the research team's logical next step (Sun, 2001). What has the GAAS team achieved so far? How have their accomplishments been realized? What elements of the CBNRM approach have contributed to success? What have been the challenges? What experiences and lessons have emerged from the project? In this case, we focus on these questions by describing and reflecting on the scaling-up action research that we have carried out since the end of 2001. However, before doing so, we will introduce the research site and summarize research carried out before that date.

The setting

The work started in Kaizuo township, located in the north of Changshun county, 60 km from Guiyang, the capital of Guizhou province. Guizhou, which is located in the southwest of China, is a karst (porous limestone) mountainous province and one of the poorest provinces in China. About half of its population belongs to ethnic minority groups. These groups mostly inhabit the mountainous rural areas where they manage complex production systems consisting of irrigated and rain-fed rice fields, less productive uplands and grasslands, forested areas and so-called wastelands.

In the period during the 1950s called the 'Great Leap Forward,' much of China, including Guizhou, was deforested to fuel local steel-production ovens. Most of the wastelands now found near villages were once forested. Regenerating them has been a slow, difficult process. Apart from these unproductive wastelands, villagers are facing serious problems such as degraded forests, overgrazed common grasslands and water resources that have been affected by barren hillsides. Chronically low crop yields are the result. Introduction of improvements such as crop diversification has proved to be complicated.

Figure 9.1 Map of China Guizhou and research site

Like farmers in other rural areas in Guizhou, those in Kaizuo make their living from fragile natural resources. Most farm lands are rain-fed and the few irrigation systems that work are small-scale, serving up to 10 households at most. Some of these systems fell into disuse after the commune production system collapsed, and they have progressively deteriorated since then (see Box 9.1 for a brief description of the changes following the demise of the commune system). Nobody took responsibility for the irrigation systems and no rules of use were defined. Although Kaizuo has seven pumping stations for irrigation, according to the township leaders only two are properly functioning.

The region's staple foods are rice and corn. Diets are poor and health problems abound. Nowadays, many younger villagers (men in particular) go to the city to work and this is causing a serious labour shortage in the busy season. Villagers normally work together to complete every household's fieldwork in a rotating manner or to engage in other village activities. The formal education level in both villages is low and the dropout rate for children is high, especially for middle-level students. The average land holding per head is 23.7 mu (15 mu equals 1 ha), and as mentioned, land utilization is very low. The arable land resource per head varies from 3.8 mu to 2.6 mu. Water resources are scarce and difficult to access because of the karst topography. The villagers – mostly women – must fetch water from some distance. They must wait for the rains to irrigate their fields naturally. In comparison, artificially irrigated fields, where they exist, bring high yields (Chen et al., 2002; Zhou et al., 1998).

Figure 9.2 The landscape of the project site
Source: Yuan et al., 2004.

Putting CBNRM into practice: insights from the first six years

Getting started

Before 1995, GAAS researchers had done a lot of agricultural research and extension work, but many of their activities proved unsuccessful or unsustainable because they focused on the technology and overlooked the socio-economic aspects of their work. For instance, when they did extension work for hybrid varieties of rapeseed, they did not notice that internal migration was causing a labour shortage. Hence, despite investing serious efforts and resources in the extension work, farmers only adopted and used the new varieties for a short period of time. When the extension work moved to another topic, farmers abandoned the new varieties. In 1995, a multidisciplinary research team at GAAS started a research project to address these problems. The team decided to introduce and practise a CBNRM approach in two villages, Dabuyang and Xiaozhai, in Kaizuo township of Changsuan county. Four other villages were added later when the research team expanded its field-based learning sites.

CBNRM provided an alternative approach to addressing NRM concerns. In particular, a major theme has been supporting both the formal and informal organization of farmers, empowering them by enhancing their capacities and promoting a supportive institutional environment. The GAAS team formulated three main hypotheses to guide the research.

• Local institutions are essential for sustainable NRM.
  
  
• Capacity-building of farmers is the basis for institutional development.
  
  
• A supportive environment for collective action of local communities is key for developing sustainable community-based institutions.

With input from and participation of villagers, the team facilitated the implementation of a number of research interventions and monitored and evaluated their impact.

Local institutional development for sustainable resource management: building on local knowledge and practice

The villages have a tradition of creating local regulations to manage the community, including how to deal with theft, crop destruction and security problems. Yet in discussions with the villagers, the team learned that there were no such regulations concerning NRM. Accordingly, the project researchers facilitated a series of village meetings with a view to filling this gap. Specific persons and groups were designated to enforce the new regulations. Dabuyang formulated water, road, cattle and forest management regulations, whereas Xiaozhai formulated rules governing water and forest management. Regulations were drawn up by the villagers themselves and accepted at village meetings, thereby giving them the force of customary law. As a result, villagers followed the rules as best as they could. Villages also formed resource management groups which monitored the effectiveness of the regulations and were supported by the research team.

Farming technology options were provided and farmers and researchers tested them on fields. For example, farmers tried planting fruit trees and mushrooms and intercropping with crops such as maize and wheat or rapeseed and maize. Cross-farm visits were organized to analyse the experiments and share experiences.

A participatory approach to infrastructure-building at the community level was designed with a particular emphasis on integrating livelihood improvements and innovative management processes. Male and female farmers were involved in the decision-making, design, mobilization of resources (labour, materials and funds), construction, operations and maintenance. For example, in one village, a 200-year-old drinking-water problem was solved by the construction of a village-managed drinking-water system. Government technicians had given up on this problem, declaring that the village did not have enough water resources in the first place; however, the old-timers in the village knew better. Moreover, after the water system was constructed, villagers drew up a set of standards and rules to define the rights and obligations of users. Water meters meant that individuals paid by use and the management group used those revenues for maintenance and other village priorities.

After three years, visible improvements began to be observed in the pilot villages' use and management of their water, arable land, forest and wasteland resources. Significant changes in incomes resulted. However, the more important accomplishment of the project was giving women and men the opportunity to participate actively in managing these resources. This was a vast improvement over the traditional rural development approach. As one villager remarked,

We have not held a community meeting to discuss community affairs in a long time. The government usually makes the decisions for us. Now that we have begun to organize to manage our resources, we are seeing more and more benefits.

With hardly any effort on the part of the researchers or the villagers, some nearby communities started to find out what was happening in Dabuyang and Xiaozhai. On their own initiative, they visited the project sites and, seeing the improvements for themselves, wondered if the same assistance could be given to their communities. Some local government officials also came to observe the progress made in the project sites. This prompted the researchers to think about the possibility of expanding the coverage of their project to other villages.

Deepening our understanding and expanding our efforts

In 1998, the project expanded to four new villages (Dongkou, Chaoshan, Guntang and Niuanyin), to validate the experiences and lessons gained from the original two project sites (Dabuyang and Xiaozhai villages) and to deepen the team's understanding of the CBNRM approach. The team members felt that they had only begun to understand CBNRM ideas and practices. In the next three years, the team worked on several issues and innovations. At the same time, they continued to monitor health, nutrition and environmental conditions in Dabuyang and Xiaozhai. In the four new villages, participatory analyses of resource management systems, including a study of gender roles, were carried out and constraints and opportunities for interventions were identified. The research team also broadened the involvement of key stakeholders, actively including local and provincial-level administrators and policy-makers.

In the next three years, the team undertook many more activities such as clarifying property rights to forestland, infrastructure development and participatory agricultural technology testing. Just as in the first phase, villagers were involved in all aspects of these projects, including identification of needs, project design, implementation and maintenance. Investments, which were partly supported by the research team, were small compared with most government projects. A significant addition, however, was the use of PM&E. This process helped the villagers to better monitor and maintain the introduced systems because problems or issues that could undermine the project's sustainability could be identified early and addressed while the system was installed or began to operate. It also stimulated a critical reflection on the whole process of participation, including the action research decision-making process (Vernooy, Sun and Xu, 2003).

Villagers reported that one important result of the project and its approach was increased community cohesiveness, which helped villagers identify and solve many other problems. Increased numbers of community groups, especially women's groups, became organized and so women's voices became more prominent. As well, self-learning groups grew in importance. Meetings became more lively community events at which issues could be discussed. This broke with the past, when everyone simply had to listen to government officials deliver instructions, and the villagers rarely met to develop a new activity. Thanks to the innovations introduced by the research project, they have learned the value of discussing their affairs, needs, priorities and problems. Now they identify ways to change things collectively that they themselves consider appropriate. This represents a remarkable change.

During this phase, the team also made modest efforts to involve government agencies in the project. Because it was being implemented within the government's jurisdiction and many of the project's activities were normally done by the government, the team made an effort to let the local authorities know about what they were doing. For instance, they invited township or county officials to village meetings, study tours, training and other activities. Government officials seldom attended these events. Their own internal incentives did not encourage involvement, and they felt no ownership of any of the project activities or even the project itself. Some officials, however, began to recognize the merits of the approach and said they wanted to learn more.

Many visitors from government and NGOs visited the six villages and met leaders and farmer groups to discuss the work and CBNRM approach. They expressed their appreciation of the efforts and could see clear changes. However, few government projects adopted successful elements of the CBNRM approach in their own activities or planning. This contrasted with neighbouring villages that readily adopted or adapted some elements. Despite this government attitude, we continued to explore the possibility of getting government involved as a partner in order to spread the approach and benefits further, as well as to make the government more responsive to rural people. In particular, we thought that the following three principles could be scaled up:

• building and strengthening villagers' knowledge and skills are a sound basis for effective NRM;
  
  
• increasing villagers' participation, especially that of women, in the entire management process (decision-making, design, implementation, maintenance, monitoring and evaluation) is critical;
  
  
• local NRM groups and locally formulated regulations are the key institutions.

Trying to scale up CBNRM experiences and processes

In 2001, the research team realized that the project's initial success would remain small-scale without the greater involvement of the government. But given the complexity of the governmental system, particularly its many levels and multiple institutions, the team had a difficult time deciding how and at what level to deal with this challenge. In China, the government is stratified in five levels: national, provincial, prefecture, county and township. There are many line agencies and so-called special programmes. There is often a lack of coordination or even interaction among all the different government units. Sometimes, serious conflicts exist.

The government system is heavily bureaucratic and decision-making is top-down. There is very little space for villagers to influence policy-making and policy implementation. The government has a preference for large-scale demonstration projects because they are perceived to generate quick economic gains. Environmental considerations remain mostly of secondary priority or are ignored altogether. The diverse ideas, needs and interests of female and male farmers are not taken into consideration in this type of intervention. Although the central government is developing more people-oriented programmes, projects and activities, these do not include monitoring and evaluation guidelines for tracking outcomes. Projects are often evaluated only when constructed or completed and not during their operational life. Local conditions are ignored and failures are common. In addition, the performance evaluation system of government officials in China ensures that they are only accountable to the higher ranks of government. They are not accountable to the people with or for whom they work, such as farmers. Despite official government instructions, when officials visit villages during government-led projects, they barely interact with villagers. Instead, they tend to 'watch the flowers from the horse's back', as the saying goes.

To design a strategy for scaling up our CBNRM approach, the team reviewed the literature on the topic. We also held a participatory planning workshop with NGO staff, government officials, donors and research team members. Before the workshop, the team carried out an evaluation of its work with villagers inside and outside the research site (Vernooy, Sun and Xu, 2003: 124–47). Six interrelated questions guided the strategy: Why scale up? What should be scaled up? For whom should we scale up: that is, who will actually use our methodologies and approaches at different levels? Who should implement the scaling-up process? When to scale up? How to scale up? The workshop helped the team to reflect on its previous work. Later we also met with other IDRC project teams to see how they were approaching this aspect of their work and compare their procedures with our own ideas and efforts.

Following the workshop, the team experimented with a methodology combining a horizontal and a vertical strategy, as Figure 9.3 demonstrates. From a horizontal viewpoint, the project focused on community-to-community interactions to build a strong social base, for example, through farmer-to-farmer or villager-to-villager extension. The aim was to strengthen the villagers' organizational capacities socially, economically and politically. Vertically, the project aimed to promote government and community cooperation and multistakeholder partnership development. As well, it helped facilitate recognition of community-based institutions for NRM, and to change the government system and operations so that they could become more responsive and dynamic. In fact, the goal was to change the way in which government works with villagers. Our hypothesis was that both strategies are required in the Chinese context.

Meanwhile, the team was encouraged because the government adopted a policy supporting poverty-alleviation planning, an autonomy law and other people-centred guidelines among the participating villages during the research project (Sun, 2001). These are examples of how policy direction from the national and provincial levels helped reinforce the local participatory institutions which the project sought to scale up.

Three types of action research projects were identified as testing grounds for CBNRM-based partnerships with the government. All represented a mix of vertical and horizontal elements. In each case, however, the township officials were key implementers in adopting a CBNRM approach, while the project team acted as facilitators, mentors, coordinators, trainers and researchers. This was a challenge in the Chinese context, as it represented a radical change from past practice, and introduced new roles for both government staff and researchers. At the time, we chose to concentrate on investment types of projects because they are the most common type of service provided by line agencies in agriculture and village development. Three experiments in participatory institutional and organizational development were conducted:

1. Small-grant projects (financially supported by the research team) that were fully managed by the community. This was a wholly horizontal scaling out, because villagers learned from one another about group management and how to implement and monitor this type of project. Villagers set priorities and managed funds (which only covered part of the actual costs) themselves, according to rules and regulations developed in a series of meetings. The township officials agreed to this approach and committed themselves to assisting the villagers in several tasks. Four roads were built to link the villages to their market, one animal bank was established to help poor farmers acquire animals, two water-systems were built and one mushroom production activity was started.
   
   
2. Projects supported by small grants that were provided either by the research team or by the government. This project type combined horizontal and vertical strategies. Township and county officials assisted villagers to implement the various activities. A CBNRM approach was integrated partially, in that some CBNRM elements were employed. Since the project had some counterpart investment, the project team had a say in how the project was run. This type of project included three biogas projects, two water-system projects, one potato and corn experiment, and one animal bank.
   
   
3. Projects supported exclusively by the government, but integrating some elements of CBNRM. This type combined vertical and minor horizontal elements. Township officials collaborated with county officials to assist the villagers to implement activities. A CBNRM approach was employed in a limited manner, such as in the implementation and management process. This type of project included one forest station, one terraced orchard and one water system.

Figure 9.3 Strategy for CBNRM scaling-up processes in Guizhou province
Source: Sun, 2001.

After two years of efforts, the horizontal scaling out proved to be easier than vertical scaling up, with the exception of the institutionalization process within the township system. The scaling up turned out to be more challenging than the team anticipated. The three following examples illustrate the difficulties and limited successes in introducing more community involvement in policy-making and rural development in China. These examples offer an insight into daily action research practices aimed at changing the ways government officials, farmers and researchers think and behave.

Road construction: improving market access and introducing collective management

Huabian is a village with 63 households and 250 people. Compared with other villages, the community spirit there is good. Totally without government support and despite low household incomes, villagers installed a road lighting system several years ago. This is impressive as it is the only village in Kaizuo that has such a system. The Huabian village leader participated in the 'CBNRM scaling up' workshop in March 2002, together with village leaders from the whole area. They debated the development of their villages in a lively manner. The Huabian village head was inspired by the efforts and enthusiasm of some of the other villages to manage their community resources collectively and sustainably. Upon his return to Huabian, he immediately called a villagers' meeting to discuss how they could follow these examples. One week later, the village leader submitted a proposal to the township officials to build an improved road as a means to increase their market access. The villagers soon raised 7,000 yuan (over US$1,200) for the proposed work. Project team members and township officials met several times to discuss the proposal and to define a response. It was decided to offer Huabian 7,000 yuan as counterpart funding. After the busy planting season, the villagers started the road in July and took less than two months to finish 1.26 km of construction. After its completion, villagers formulated clear management regulations and so far, the road has been maintained very well (see Figure 9.4).

The example is instructive for several reasons.

• Exchange visits are extremely effective in horizontal scaling-out processes. Villagers normally have poor access to information and opportunities. Widening their horizons and seeing inspiring examples motivate new local initiatives.
  
  
• Village organization and community spirit are crucial while adopting a CBNRM approach. In most places in China, village spirit has been decreasing steadily since the land-reform policy of the late 1970s. How to reverse this trend is now the challenge.
  
  
• Because of village leaders' political and social position, they can play a key role in scaling out.

Extension of biogas production: adapting technologies and learning to negotiate

In early 2002, the project team and township officials of Kaizuo approached Changshun county to try to encourage its officials to integrate a CBNRM approach, or some elements of it, into their projects. The county leaders agreed and committed to experiment with the new approach in five of their projects. One of these involved the dissemination of biogas production technologies with construction subsidies to individual households. The biogas project aimed to reduce indiscriminate collection of firewood, which contributes to forest degradation, by providing local communities with alternative fuel sources. In 2003, 16 households in Chaoshan village were trained in biogas production technologies with support from the Changshun Agricultural Bureau (see below).

In implementing this project, Changshun county followed the provincial regulations which govern such projects. The first rule was that 70 per cent of households in each natural village and 70 per cent of the natural villages in each administrative unit had to be involved, on the assumption that the project would only be technically successful if at least 70 per cent of households used the gas produced. Additionally, each household was required to raise three pigs, in order to generate the amount of manure needed to produce the gas.

For the poor villagers of Chaoshan, these requirements were rather difficult. For one thing, the biogas system was not easy to build (see Figure 9.5). Second, acquiring and raising three pigs was more than most villagers could afford. In general, the central government encourages provincial officials to consider the local situation in implementing project guidelines flexibly. But unfortunately Guizhou officials decided to apply the criteria strictly. They tried to help the project along by building the biogas facilities and supplying pigs to the demonstration farmer sites. However, the county could do this only for the demonstration units. Others were left wondering where they could procure pigs.

The project team proposed a more flexible approach. Team members and township officials negotiated with the county leaders and were allowed some flexibility in doing extension work in Chaoshan. Sixteen households were helped to build a less expensive locally adapted biogas production system that worked very well. Villagers who could not afford to raise three pigs were asked to collect cattle manure instead. As a result, several villagers opted to build the biogas system and regretted not having built one sooner.

Notwithstanding this encouraging development, challenges remain. For instance, the government is primarily concerned with construction and pays little attention to maintenance. The villagers have had a hard time buying supplies to replace broken parts of the biogas facility. The project team and township officials discussed these concerns with the county bureau responsible, which promised to address them, but no response was forthcoming.

This experience made the team realize several points. Government project proposals must be studied very carefully and creativity must be used to find ways to encourage the government to practise or adapt one or more of the core CBNRM elements. Negotiation skills are very important for starting a CBNRM initiative. Government officials continually need to be coached on what they stand to gain from supporting successful projects that work well for farmers. They need to understand what works and what does not work and why. As well, we need to encourage the adoption of a new performance incentive system that recognizes continuing and sustainable success on the ground.

Figure 9.4 Improved roads link villages to markets
Photo: Ou Guowu.

Figure 9.5 Constructing a locally adapted biogas production system
Photo: Yuan Juanwen.

Figure 9.6 Villagers terracing the land to establish an orchard
Photo: Yuan Juanwen.

Establishing a terraced orchard: the pros and cons of partnership building

An orchard project in Kaizuo township delivered by the Changshun County Agricultural Office offers more insights into the challenges of integrating CBNRM into government programming. Approximately 25 ha of terraced orchards were established on wastelands in 2003 (see Figure 9.6).

At the beginning, staff at the Changshun Agricultural Office in Kaizuo township, project team members and three natural villages were supposed to work as partners to implement this project and to involve villagers in decision-making, implementing, management, monitoring and evaluation processes. The team and township officials worked together, holding several villagers' meetings to decide where to locate the orchard, how large it should be, which varieties of fruit to test, when to start planting and other related orchard development activities. Project team members also brought the villagers to visit some successful terraced orchards. At first, everything went smoothly. The villagers finished terracing the land and digging the holes. But at the stage where seedlings had to be purchased, the county officials acted unilaterally, in violation of their agreement. It was known that officials could benefit personally by purchasing seedlings from a particular company at inflated prices. The project team members insisted that the seedlings should be purchased together with village representatives in order to control this, but the government officer responsible said he had already wired the money to the company in accordance with their seedling purchase agreement. The project team was forced to pull out of this activity because they could not ensure reasonable financial oversight.

Later on, county officials contracted out the orchard road and pond construction, but the quality of the work was poor. In addition, during the planting season, the company provided a poorly qualified technician to teach the villagers how to plant trees. Government officials did not provide further technical support once the orchard was established. The villagers had no idea of how to do the pruning or how to apply the correct amounts of fertilizer. The officials promised to do something, but no training was offered. County government officials, even when confronted by the imminent failure of their investment in the orchard, and even when responding to specific requests, seemed unable to adopt supportive and participatory extension procedures.

This is a common problem. Government officials pay close attention to establishing orchards because officers in charge can only get successful performance reviews if quantitative targets for areas of orchard established are met. But there is no incentive to provide technical training or to look into questions of orchard maintenance and improvement. As a result, the success rate for these types of projects remains low.

Meanwhile, after visiting other project sites the villagers were inspired to formulate local agreements based on their own customs to manage their orchard. For example, one villager was fined 50 yuan when her cattle went into the orchard, even though the poor state of the seedlings gave others the impression that the orchard was abandoned or had failed.

In the winter of 2003–4, the county government supported a 25-ha terraced orchard in another village. The difference was that this project was implemented by the township officials without direct county involvement. This time, the villagers were more involved in the process. The villagers built the orchard road and pond themselves and also had a say in the purchase of planting materials. So far, this orchard is doing well. The survival rate is higher and the fruit trees are growing well.

The story tells us that:

• government officials' personal interests can strongly influence CBNRM projects;
  
  
• transparency and accountability are very difficult to achieve in the current administrative system; mismanagement of funds is common;
  
  
• partnership building is not easy; power abuse is common and breaking promises is easy for senior officials; there is no monitoring mechanism to prevent this;
  
  
• the lack of practical extension support constrains the effectiveness of scaling up;
  
  
• even though the full and meaningful participation of villagers in government projects has a long way to go, some encouraging signs are appearing; the government has begun to respect villagers' opinions and, in this last orchard case at least, to pay more attention to post-seedling management;
  
  
• villagers' capacity-building efforts are bringing good results;. 'farmer to farmer' extension visits and learning help convince villagers to manage their natural resources.

Progress made so far

Among the research results at the Kaizuo project site there are some successful experiences, but also some challenges. In terms of progress in scaling out, the township government has included scaling out of the CBNRM approach in its 2004 work plan. There are now 29 out of 37 villages in the township involved in testing CBNRM approaches. In these villages, a total of 30 management agreements have been approved and results are promising. Management regulations have proved effective in conserving resources and improving productivity, and have been enforced locally Township officials and villagers are beginning to have more dialogue. Participating township officials are starting to change their attitudes. Officials have also begun to integrate gender perspectives into their daily work. In villagers' committee elections this year, for the first time, township officials required that all four administrative villages should select at least one woman for the village committee, something that has never happened before. Three women were selected in the four villages. This represents a good start to including women in decision-making.

The institutionalization of CBNRM at the township level remains a challenge, although more and more officials are beginning to adopt some aspects of the approach. One township agricultural extension officer said: 'I only used to do what my superiors asked me to do. Now, I begin to hold villagers' meetings to discuss with them and try out some new things.' One of the township leaders said: 'After we adopted the CBNRM approach, many management activities were done by the villagers. The government has been released from some tasks. The villagers now take care of themselves. The villagers benefit more.' (Shi and Shi, 2003)

The villagers are becoming more confident and are approaching local officials more frequently to solicit funds for community development priorities. Such priorities are defined after long discussions. Villagers, particularly the women, are beginning to initiate some activities to strengthen their capacities and improve their lives. The most important change is that more opportunities and options are created for the villagers. As well, they are more assertive in managing their natural resources, claim ownership of the process and carry out or at least attempt sustainable management practices.

In terms of scaling up, despite the frustrations in dealing with individual county-level officials and agencies, the team's efforts to introduce and demonstrate the approach have been successful in capturing official attention and support. In December 2003, the Changshun county government directed the county's Poverty Alleviation Office (an agency with a large discretionary programme budget) to adopt the CBNRM approach in all its poverty alleviation activities. One of the county leaders noted: 'The CBNRM flower is already blooming in Kaizuo and now we hope that it will bear fruit in Changshun.'

CBNRM was selected as one of the most significant approaches to government programmes and actions by the Changshun county government. Several county agencies such as the Changshun Planning Bureau and Changshun Science and Technology Bureau are also demonstrating their willingness to try the CBNRM approach in their own programmes. Overall, dialogue between county officials and villagers is increasing. Villages are gaining confidence and assertiveness as they use CBNRM tools to identify their priorities for development, and county officials are increasingly willing to respond to local initiatives. Recently, two villages approached the county government on their own and received support for two village construction projects.

Changes are also happening at the prefecture, province and national level. The prefecture governor asked the project team to provide some lessons and reading materials about CBNRM. Township officials have also advocated adopting the CBNRM approach. The provincial government has gradually recognized CBNRM and provided funds to support the project. The provincial poverty alleviation offices invited the team to do a consultancy and provide training to the officials who are working with the poverty alleviation line agencies. Project-team members have succeeded in getting funds from the Guizhou Department of Science and Technology to scale up the CBNRM approach. The Ministry of Science and Technology from Beijing has visited the project site, has evaluated the work and is planning to support the team in scaling up the CBNRM approach at the national level. Some of the work detailing the approach has been published by the influential national magazine Outlook Weekly.

These outcomes are contributing to improved livelihoods for villagers, to villagers' and particularly women's stronger roles in decision-making about natural resource use and management, and to a gradual shift in the power relationships between villagers and government officials. Through nine years of efforts, the natural resources, living conditions and welfare of villagers have been improved in Kaizuo township. There are now about 9,000 mu of forests that are growing well. Except for sticky rice varieties, 90 per cent of rice crops and more than 60 per cent of maize crops are high-yielding hybrid varieties. Nine new drinking-water systems and four new irrigation-water systems benefit approximately 550 poor households. Another 500 households were helped by the construction of eight new roads, which allowed people access to market and other services. About 1,000 mu of fruit trees and crops (including strawberries) are growing well and realizing good returns. Other alternative, income-generating activities are being pursued, such as mushroom production and virus-free potato cultivation. Four villages representing 230 households are running their own animal bank and thus avoiding high-interest loans and the difficulties associated with accessing micro-credit.

Conclusions and lessons

Through our action research efforts we have found that scaling up CBNRM in China is a difficult endeavour. Government officials lack motivation or incentives to adopt CBNRM even though they recognize its usefulness. There are no CBNRM agencies or policies in the country, although many government agencies have recognized that their programmes are ineffective and are looking for ways to change approaches to planning and service delivery. There is a lot of talk about poverty alleviation, which is a crucial government priority, but precisely how to implement successful programmes remains a big question. Four line ministries and the poverty alleviation office of Changshun County have tried to adopt CBNRM in their projects, and Kaizuo township has been using this approach to administer small local development grants. However, this does not mean CBNRM has been integrated into the government system. The responsible officials did experiment with CBNRM, but only in selected projects and activities while continuing with traditional approaches in the rest of their work.

One of the more obvious reasons why this remains challenging is the prevailing system of performance evaluation for government officials, which still emphasizes quantitative targets. In the recently modified Chinese constitution, the phrase 'people-centred' is included in descriptions of the role of government. Now the central government requires that officials should have the 'right perspective and assessment' of their achievements, in relation to practical and enduring improvements in people's lives. This is encouraging and offers more potential for scaling up a CBNRM approach. But the challenge remains: how to change institutional arrangements, policy-making mechanisms and daily practices of government in order to create space for meaningful community participation in NRM.

Horizontal scaling out is easier than vertical scaling up. Villagers and township officials are more directly exposed to the effective results of CBNRM. Township officials have more frequent face-to-face interactions with villagers than do county officials, and are more accountable to them in many ways. As a result, critical reflections follow more easily. Their work attitudes have started to change and their abilities to use facilitative and participatory methods are improving quickly. Also, their work results are easily recognizable and they get strong support for effective results from villagers. Officials feel a sense of pride when they can successfully tackle these difficult poverty and NRM problems. All of this is creating a more fertile working environment for CBNRM to flourish. But the county officials' stereotypical bureaucratic attitudes and exercise of power remain strong. They fear that adopting the CBNRM approach could bring more risks and threaten their interests.

Cross-village exchange visits are very effective for horizontal scaling out. Villagers readily interact with each other, listening and observing, and trying new things. In particular, women are very active and eager to take on new ideas and put them to work.

Here are some of the things we have learned in rethinking and adapting CBNRM to the Chinese reality.

There is still not much space for the meaningful participation of villagers in government programme delivery. Local men and women can participate in government projects to some extent as long as the interests of government officials are not threatened. Several government officials commented: 'If we give all the decision-making power to the villagers, what are we going to do? We will lose our jobs!'

It is vital to improve the organizational skills and confidence of villagers and village leaders. Villagers, in particular women, usually do not have a chance to communicate directly with officials. CBNRM approaches create opportunities for villagers and government officials to collaborate, but local people still lack the confidence to express and defend their ideas. Therefore, leadership training and capacity-building in many different forms are important. The process of engagement in CBNRM itself has many leadership and capacity-building benefits, if properly facilitated.

Integrating the CBNRM approach into the government's daily activities is critical. Although several line ministries of Changshun county have been trying to adopt CBNRM in their projects and the Kaizuo township has been implementing CBNRM in several small-grant projects, it does not mean that CBNRM has been fully integrated into the government system. This stage marks the start of the integration process. How to engage local officials more fully remains a challenge. One township official said: 'I am interested in being involved in CBNRM activities, but there are so many important tasks I must finish otherwise I will have problems in passing the annual evaluation.'

It is important to provide more opportunities for township and county officials to learn participatory approaches in experimental programmes. This research project engaged a small number of officials at both township and county levels in active project management committees. However, we found that aside from the committee members themselves, few officials became involved in the pilot activities. And at the county level, where line agency staff were involved, many officials changed jobs during the course of the pilot and were unable to complete their CBNRM learning. In order to build experience and capacity, we need a commitment from senior leaders to long-term assignments, and to engaging more staff in these participatory pilot efforts. However, because such officials have limited experience with participatory approaches, it is not easy for them to appreciate the importance of supportive project management.

Changing the attitudes of senior officials at the county and township levels is critical to scaling up the CBNRM approach (Yuan et al., 2004). Leaders play a vital role in creating opportunities, in coordination, human-resource inputs and other resource inputs. If staff want to attend scaling-up or learning activities, they must get permission from their superiors, but senior officials are too busy to learn much about these innovations themselves. Supportive senior officials are crucial, but to gain their support, we must convince them that CBNRM offers them more benefits than risks.

Coordination with different line agencies is important. The research team realizes that their coordinating role has become increasingly complex and coordination must be approached more strategically. The team assumed that since senior county officials agreed to support the project, they would also coordinate the project efforts at the line agency level. However, this assumption proved unrealistic. Officials are always busy and frequently unavailable when needed. This issue of line agency coordination needs more analysis and an effective strategy.

Partnership-building needs to be based on a set of negotiable and non-negotiable criteria including both government standards and CBNRM principles. In implementing government projects, officials tend to adhere strictly to government standards and criteria (such as for biogas production systems, reforestation and orchard development, as described), rather than consider other success factors. They do not want to take the risk of being accountable to the villagers or to hand over leadership and decision-making to them. The research team realizes that they need to be better prepared to deal with the politics of government operations and programme delivery. There is a need to compromise, facilitate and negotiate. To accomplish this, we must be clear on each project's negotiable and non-negotiable elements, so as to find space for integrating the CBNRM approach.

Anticipating the different interests of various stakeholders is crucial. The government has a preference for large-scale projects that give officials more attention and recognition. The team needs to raise issues of feasibility and how to measure real success. The technical feasibility of a project might be clear from the government's perspective, but associated social, gender and organizational aspects are often not considered. A clear example is the biogas project. The team is now consulting on how to address difficulties in reaching the required number of household participants and how feasible this might be considering the village reality. As well, we recognize that it is crucial to be flexible when dealing with different village situations.

Strengthening the team's advocacy and other skills is required. Most of the team members are researchers from natural science disciplines who are unaccustomed to public speaking and lack experience in policy advocacy. They have had to develop skills in communications, negotiation and diplomacy. Moreover, they have had to adopt new roles, not only as researchers, but as trainers, negotiators, communicators, advocates, mobilizers and mentors. This requires skills training as well as graduate studies in diverse social and natural sciences.

To conclude, an effective scaling-up strategy requires a diversity of action-oriented initiatives that combine horizontal and vertical elements. In addition, it is crucial that government staff become aware of the strengths, challenges and advantages of CBNRM; and that they are encouraged to experiment with the approach and to adopt it in policies, programmes and projects. This is a time-consuming and extremely challenging process.

Acknowledgements

This chapter is inspired by and builds on Sun (2004). We would like to acknowledge the contributions to the research of Chen Deshou, Zhou Pidong, Ou Guowu, Wei Xiaopin, Vicky Bautista and Norie Garcia, Kaizuo township officials and villagers and Changshun county officials. We also wish to acknowledge the funding support of IDRC and the Ford Foundation.

Documento(s) 13 de 24