SUMMARIES OF THE POLICY SEA PILOTS
121
A majority of stakeholders interviewed during the evaluation acknowledged individual learning from their participation in the SEA. They also learned about SEA from discussions with a broad range of actors and stakeholders. However, the evaluation showed that the SEA exercise was too limited in time and in the number of participants to initiate broad-based policy learning. The interest expressed by local communities in forest use, and the rapid increase in registration of community forest associations, indicate that new information and knowledge (“policy learning”) was generated on policy change related to forest management. As a result of the SEA, the World Bank’s Natural Resource Management Project, which was developed in parallel, developed a stronger emphasis on governance issues and community engagement in forest management. However, due to lack of financial and human resources set aside for follow-up of the SEA, and due to staff changes within the World Bank and government of Kenya, the Natural Resource Management Project has not met Kenyan stakeholders’ expectations of substantial engagement by the World Bank in forest sector reform. The SEA did influence World Bank activities outside Kenya, including the design of other forest sector–related SEAs and the drafting of guidelines for undertaking strategic environmental and social assessments in relation to the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility. Constraining or Enabling Factors Timing Although evaluation interviewees differed in their opinions about the timing of the SEA, it was clearly conducted when there was a window of opportunity for policy change. However, the SEA would most likely have been more influential if it had been conducted during (instead of after) the process of formulating the Forests Act and if it had provided for clear follow-up support for the implementation of the act. Ownership The SEA was initiated and financed by the World Bank. Although serious attempts were made to link the SEA to the government’s planning process for the implementation of the Forests Act, the ownership of the SEA remained firmly with the World Bank. Many stakeholders consider that the World Bank has not fulfilled the expectations generated by the SEA process. They expected increased World Bank support to the forest sector reform process and greater follow-up to the PAM and recommendations of the SEA. There were also important factors outside the control of the World Bank and the SEA team that decreased the Kenyan government’s ownership of the SEA process. Notably, the dismantling of