Strengthening Civil Society Capacity to Advocate for Mainstreaming Biodiversity

Page 1





© Deb O’Smee, Flickr


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This manual was compiled by Judit Szabo, Dena Cator, Cate Noble, Nikki de Landmeter, Olivia Adhiambo, NoĂŤlle KĂźmpel and Melanie Heath of BirdLife International.

With the generous support of: MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF DENMARK

In partnership with:

Our thanks go to all those who provided comments and case studies, including Charlotte Mathiassen, Thomas Lehmberg, Ishana Tshapa, Dianah Nalwanga, Serah Munguti, Kiragu Mwangi, Hum Gurung, Ken Mwathe, Carolina Hazin, Nick Phillips, Billy Fairburn and Iain Dickson, and the 25 BirdLife Partners who provided invaluable perspectives and insights during associated training workshops in Singapore and Nairobi in October and November 2017 respectively.

CONTENTS List of Abbreviations


List of Case Studies


List of Boxes & Figures


Executive Summary Introduction to Part 2



Part 2

Section 2.1

Advocacy strategies: background 10


Advocacy: why should we advocate, what to advocate for and who to target? 11

What is advocacy? 11

Why advocate? 11

Whom to influence? 12


How to influence policy? 12

Section 2.2

Advocacy strategies: tools and tactics 13


Planning an advocacy strategy 14

Aims 15 Objectives 16 Context 16

Target audience, stakeholders and partners 17


Communicating your message 20

Multi-channel delivery of messages 20

The timing for advocacy 20

Developing a good policy brief 21

Writing an effective e-mail/letter 22


Meeting an important representative 22

Visiting a site 23

Influencing the media 24


Conflict and negotiation in advocacy 26

When do conflicts occur? 26

Approaches to conflict management 26

Negotiation 27 2.2.4

Nemawashi: using personal, informal methods to gain support 28


Data collection and using science and information in policy-making 30

Backing up your advocacy plans with data 30

Using science in advocacy 32


Online toolkits to support policy advocacy 35

IBAT 35 TESSA 35 PRISM 35 2.2.7

Further reading 37

Section 2.3

Advocacy strategies: implementation and evaluation 38


Activity plan 39


Monitoring and evaluation 40

What do we measure? 40


Fundraising for advocacy 40


Further reading 42


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AES – Agri-Environment Schemes

GEF – Global Environment Facility

APAWG – Africa Policy and Advocacy Working Group

GNP – Gross National Product

ASAP – Asian Species Action Partnership

IAS – Invasive Alien Species

ASCET – African Sites Casework on Emerging Threats Taskforce

IBA – Important Bird and Biodiversity Area

AZE – Alliance for Zero Extinction BATNA – Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement CAF – Central Asian Flyway CAP – Council for African Partnership CBD – Convention on Biological Diversity CBRM – Community-based Resource Management

HCV – High Conservation Value

IBAT – Integrated Biodiversity Assessment Tool IGO – Inter-governmental Organisation IPLC – Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities ISA – International Seabed Authority ITTO – International Tropical Timber Organisation IUCN – International Union for the Conservation of Nature

CFM – Community Forest Management

IUCN SSC – Species Survival Commission of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature

CFUG – Community Forest User Group

IWMI – International Water Management Institute

CIA – Cumulative Impact Assessment

KBA – Key Biodiversity Area

CITES – Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora

MDG – Millennium Development Goal

CMS – Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals, commonly abbreviated as the Convention on Migratory Species CSO – Civil Society Organisation DLG – District Local Government EAAF – East Asian-Australasian Flyway EIA – Environmental Impact Assessment FAO – Food and Agricultural Organization FERI – Forest and Ecosystem Restoration Initiative FPIC – Free, Prior and Informed Consent

MEA – Multilateral Environmental Agreement MoC – Memorandum of Cooperation MoU – Memorandum of Understanding MSB – Migratory Soaring Birds NBSAP – National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan

PRISM – Practical Impact Assessment Methods for Small and Medium-sized Conservation Projects impact of projects REDD+ – Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation RLI – Red List Index RSIS – Ramsar Site Information Service SCP – Sustainable Consumption and Production SIA – Strategic Impact Assessment SBI – Subsidiary Body on Implementation SBSSTA – Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice SDG – Sustainable Development Goal SFM – Sustainable Forest Management SOI – Sustainable Ocean Initiative SPA – Special Protection Area TESSA – Toolkit for Ecosystem Service Site-Based Assessment UNCCD – United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification UNDP – United Nations Development Programme UNEP-WCMC – United Nations Environment World Conservation Monitoring Centre

NDC – Nationally Determined Commitments

UNFCCC – United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

NGO – Non-governmental Organisation

WI – Wetlands International

NTFP – Non-timber Forest Products

WHI – World Heritage Convention

PFM – Participatory Forest Management

WMBD – World Migratory Bird Day

PPN – People Partner with Nature Programme

WWF – World Wide Fund for Nature WWT – Wildlife and Wetlands Trust



Advocacy for Western Siem Pang in Cambodia 20

Case Study 2.2

Nemawashi during the Ramsar nomination of Kasai Rinkai wetlands in Tokyo Bay 29

Case Study 2.3

Mobilising biodiversity data that are relevant to policy and decision-making in Africa 30

Case Study 2.4

The complex conservation problem of illegal killing of birds 32



Policy advocacy and BirdLife 12

Box 2.2

Defining the problem 14

Box 2.3

Key points for an advocacy process 15

Box 2.4

Problem Tree Analysis of threats and Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas (IBAs) 16

Box 2.5

Who are the key stakeholders – IBAs as an example 17

Box 2.6

Building relationships and trust with stakeholders 18

Box 2.7

Position papers and briefs for conventions 21

Box 2.8

The art and science of Nemawashi 28

Box 2.9

The three pillars of science at BirdLife International 31

Box 2.10

The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 31

Box 2.11 BirdLife’s State of the World’s Birds 31 Box 2.12

Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas (IBAs) and Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) 33

Box 2.13

Ways to identify threats to IBAs 34

Box 2.14

IBAs under threat 34

Box 2.15

Data collection and analysis for policy and legislation 35

Figure 3

Stakeholder influence/ interest matrix with communication strategies 19

Figure 4

Ansoff matrix 41


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Strengthening Civil Society Capacity to Advocate for Mainstreaming Biodiversity: The CAMB project This manual is one of the main outcomes of the Strengthening Civil Society Capacity to Advocate for Mainstreaming Biodiversity (CAMB) project - a joint collaboration between Dansk Ornitologisk Forening – DOF; BirdLife in Denmark) and BirdLife International. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark (Danida) Climate and Environmental Fund provided support to DOF for this work, which involved the BirdLife Global Secretariat, Asia and Africa Regional Secretariats, three key BirdLife Partners (Nature Kenya, NatureUganda and Bird Conservation Nepal) as well as 22 other Partners across Africa and Asia. The aim was to build the capacity of BirdLife Partners in these regions to enhance their engagement in Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) processes as well as advocate for the mainstreaming of biodiversity in various sectors at the national level. ‘Mainstreaming’ of biodiversity means the integration of the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity in cross-sectoral policies, plans and operations such as sustainable development, poverty reduction and climate change adaptation/ mitigation, as well as in sector-specific plans such as for agriculture, fisheries, forestry, mining and energy. One of the key challenges in stopping biodiversity loss is finding ways to combat the issue where it originates, among others, in different economic sectors. It is thus essential to ensure that biodiversity conservation is prioritised by all parts of society, including across government agencies, the private sector and organisations. Biodiversity mainstreaming is an integral component of achieving BirdLife’s mission and vision, the CBD’s Strategic Plan and

the work of the broader conservation community. The CBD is a framework convention, meaning that it establishes guidelines and principles that countries can use to develop their own policies for the mainstreaming of biodiversity conservation. BirdLife International has written this reference and training manual with input from DOF and the three key CAMB BirdLife Partners for the use of the CAMB project partners, as a part of the project’s training package. To enable wider outreach, it will be made available more broadly to the BirdLife Partnership and may be adapted at a later stage to share with other interested organisations and agencies. We therefore welcome feedback on how best to use and potentially revisit it in future. Part 1 of the manual provides a general introduction to the CBD and other international policy processes that focus on and enable the mainstreaming of biodiversity into sectors such as energy, forestry and agriculture. Part 2 is a practical section on how to plan and carry out advocacy for mainstreaming of biodiversity. Both parts of the manual highlight case studies, mostly from the BirdLife Partnership, to illustrate how scientific information and practical experience can form the basis upon which to advocate for improved conservation outcomes through international convention processes. Parts 1 and 2 of the manual are available as separate documents or can be used together.


The manual Part 1 of the manual introduces international policy processes and explains their role in the mainstreaming of biodiversity. It outlines some of the key international conventions or Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) that have been created to facilitate and enhance biodiversity conservation at the global level, and how these MEAs can be used to mainstream biodiversity through both the creation of policies and implementation of activities on the ground that encourage governments, companies and others to conserve biodiversity. As most countries in the world are Party to one or more MEAs, these global agreements facilitate proactive collaboration, provide guidance and incentive for action on mainstreaming biodiversity and serve as a benchmark to measure progress at the national level. The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in particular has an explicit focus on mainstreaming of biodiversity. As a key component of the Strategic Plan on Biodiversity 2011–2020, cross-sectoral and sectorspecific mainstreaming of biodiversity has been high on the agenda for the 13th and 14th CBD Conferences of the Parties (COP13 in Mexico in 2016 and COP14 in Egypt in 2018). Mainstreaming biodiversity will also be key to an effective and transformational post-2020 global biodiversity framework. The CBD requires Parties to have a National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP), which sets out plans to conserve and sustainably use biological diversity at the national level. NBSAPs must guide the planning and activities of all sectors that impact upon biodiversity and thus are a key way to facilitate mainstreaming. Other global conventions that focus on biodiversity conservation are the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar Convention), the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), the World Heritage Convention and the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS). Discussion of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are also included. Part 1 of the manual outlines what these conventions are, how they relate to each other, how they work and

the processes and mechanisms within each that can be used to mainstream biodiversity into various sectors. Part 2 of the manual provides practical guidance on how to advocate for the mainstreaming of biodiversity to support countries’ commitments to the CBD and other MEAs and policy processes. This includes a description of the processes, tools and skills needed to develop and implement advocacy strategies that can be used to promote mainstreaming with governments, businesses and other stakeholders. It is crucial to develop science and evidence-based advocacy strategies that target the appropriate people to take action and address the key issues in a particular country or sector. The process of advocacy planning entails problem-setting, identifying what to advocate for and how as well as whom to work with and whom to target to generate change. It is also important to know which aspects of the policy process to engage with in order to exert the greatest influence and how to fundraise for work on policy change. Monitoring and evaluation are used to track achievements and the success of different actions and approaches.

Additional resources Additional resources and information relating to this project and BirdLife’s wider work on mainstreaming biodiversity can be found on the BirdLife Extranet at: CAMB+Project+-+Create+Strengthening+Civil+Society+Capacity+to+ Advocate+for+Mainstreaming+Biodiversity+Home A series of webinars that accompany this manual have also been produced, which can be found on the BirdLife Extranet at: These include: 1. Reviewing advocacy plans 2. Development of the post-2020 global biodiversity framework 3. Mainstreaming biodiversity in the energy sector 4. Mainstreaming biodiversity in the forestry sector



2 © Alan Harper


INTRODUCTION TO PART 2 In Part 1 of this manual, we introduced key global conventions and international policy processes relevant to biodiversity: the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS), the Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar) and the World Heritage Convention. We discussed their importance for the conservation of global biodiversity and how they can be used to mainstream or integrate biodiversity conservation into national policies and sectors such as energy, forestry and agriculture, crucial for encouraging more sustainable practices in different industries. This section outlines guidance on how BirdLife Partners and other Civil Society Organisations can take information on mainstreaming biodiversity and implement it in policy processes at the national level. The information is based upon experience and successes that BirdLife Partners have had, which is further illustrated through a number of case studies. We will look at the process of advocating for mainstreaming of biodiversity step by step, starting with problem setting, identifying the right people to include in advocacy work, whom to target to generate change, and what methods and tools to use. We will discuss with which policy processes to engage to have the greatest influence and also how to fundraise for policy advocacy. This will help the development of advocacy strategies that target the right people and address the right problems for each organisation and country, including monitoring and evaluating what has been set in motion and achieved. Each BirdLife Partner or organisation can choose how to engage in the most appropriate way, for example national Partners assisting their governments in designing national strategies and policies.


2.1 Section 2.1

© Noëlle Kümpel

Advocacy strategies: background

Section 2.1

Advocacy strategies: background Objectives In this section, we introduce what advocacy is, why it is useful and who to target to achieve policy outcomes. We then explore what advocacy strategies are and what the steps are to develop a strategy that suits your objectives.

2.1.1 Advocacy: why should we advocate, what to advocate for and who to target? What is advocacy?

Why advocate? Progress in effecting change through policy can be achieved when engaging directly with relevant policies, people and institutions. Advocacy work enables opportunities to change policies and ultimately actions.


Advocacy often has one or more of the following aims: • To influence public policy and practice • To influence corporate policy and practice • To influence public attitudes and behaviour • To influence decision-making • To be more inclusive of community needs and empower communities to influence decisions.

Advocacy is the process of effectively communicating with and influencing a target audience. Advocacy aims to make people aware of a cause or issue and influence their opinion, decisions and actions. In this manual, we are specifically considering policy advocacy.

To achieve long-lasting change and mainstream the conservation of biodiversity into both international and national policy agendas, there is a need to influence policy decision-making processes. Advocacy work can be a powerful tool to achieve that.

An example of policy advocacy is lobbying key entities (e.g. government agencies, industry, stakeholder groups) that can influence a policy process (e.g. an international convention or national policy) with information to elicit a particular outcome or result. Some ways that this can be achieved are in-person meetings, emails, letters and, sometimes, petitions (see Section 2.2. on tools and tactics).

Through advocacy work, Civil Society Organisation (CSOs) can encourage certain topics to be included on policy agendas such as biodiversity mainstreaming. Reform of policy(ies) and more effective implementation and enforcement of existing legislation can be achieved through an effective advocacy campaign.



Whom to influence? Advocacy can be used at the national level to petition those in a position to make or influence laws and regulations, or those in charge of resources. Advocacy is deliberate and intentional, so it is critical to determine who to influence and what policy(ies) to change. Policy-makers can be a range of people working in a variety of institutions. For government-led processes, this will be national, regional or local government representatives, for example those leading on national policies or engagement with multilateral environmental agreements (e.g. the Convention on Biological Diversity1). For the private sector, this will be company representatives that are responsible for setting company policies and guidelines or those working to influence industry standards.

Box 2.1

Policy advocacy and BirdLife BirdLife International’s advocacy work seeks to influence policy and its implementation to help achieve our strategic and science-based objectives for species and habitats, ecological sustainability and people. Our policy work is grounded in sound science, with a focus on benefits for birds and biodiversity, and for all the people who depend on their conservation now and in the future. We work on both science and policy advocacy in parallel. Each BirdLife Partner can define the policy issues most important to their work and national community through developing an advocacy strategy, which will also identify how this can be conveyed to decision-makers. The aim is to convince local representatives and influencers of why conservation objectives such as mainstreaming (considering) biodiversity in various sectors is crucial for sustainable development. To read more:

2.1.2 How to influence policy? Strategic thinking is necessary to enable maximum impact and effectiveness in influencing policy at various levels. Some basic questions to ask when considering advocacy: • Whom do you want to advocate to? What is the best way to reach these people? • Why do you want to advocate to them? • What do you want them to know? • What actions do you want them to take? • Are there policies or systems already in place that need to be changed or updated to address the issue or does something new need to be created?


Developing an advocacy strategy will help you: • Answer the questions above • Plan resources (time, money and skills) effectively – you will need to determine how much your strategy will cost and if there is a budget for it • Identify and minimise risks as well as make use of opportunities • Determine options for cooperation – you will need to decide if you/ your organisation has the capacity and skills to carry out political advocacy and who you could partner with for additional support • Align advocacy work with other organisational objectives and priorities • Monitor the success of advocating for a particular policy outcome. There is no perfect structure for an advocacy plan, as its specifics depend on the size of the task and what you are trying to achieve and where. Nevertheless, the following sections outline a plan for most advocacy aims.

References 1



2.2 Section 2.2

Š Ken & Nyetta, Flickr

Advocacy strategies: tools and tactics

Section 2.2

Advocacy strategies: tools and tactics Objectives In this section, we outline how to plan an advocacy strategy and introduce some tools that you may choose to include in it. Examples as well as tips and tricks for each tool will be provided.

2.2.1 Planning an advocacy strategy The components of an advocacy strategy can be described as the planning stages. During these stages, you determine what you are trying to achieve, what the objectives are, what the context is and who can be and who should be involved. In order to create a successful advocacy campaign, you need to determine the: • Aim: What is the final outcome you are trying to achieve? • Objectives: What are the short-term outcomes that are needed for you to achieve your aim? • Context: What is happening in your region/ area of work and what risks or opportunities will this present to your advocacy plan? • Target audiences, stakeholders and partners: Whom are you trying to influence? Who will support your plan? Who will reject your plan? Who can help you achieve your goals? • Tools and tactics: What evidence, support, power and methods do you have to help you achieve your objectives? • Timing: What is the timeframe within which you want to achieve your aim?

• Activity plan: listing activities, who is responsible, timelines and evidence (see section 2.3) • Monitoring and Evaluation: What are the indicators of success? How can they be measured? (see section 2.3)


Box 2.2

Defining the problem The more specific a problem can be defined, the better informed the campaign design and monitoring will be, and the more likely the advocacy is to succeed. It is crucial to identify problems accurately, as otherwise it is not possible to identify appropriate solutions. A problem statement or advocacy vision needs to be developed. These are statements of how you want the world to look when you have addressed the problem; this is your desired future-to-be state. What outcome and objectives are you hoping to achieve? Your problem statement should include: • A description of the situation to be changed (the problem) • The cause of the problem • The consequences (effects) of the problem It is important to define objectives that are SMART: • Specific: what, where, when • Measurable: quantity rather than quality • Achievable: realistic • Relevant: necessary to address the issue



Box 2.3

Key points for an advocacy process • Define / know the problem you want to address

strategy is through research. You need to identify what the current situation is and what you want to change. This could be the absence of a policy, an adverse or inadequate policy, or the improper enforcement of a policy.

• Determine your intervention approach • Know the capacity you have to mount an intervention and address the gaps • Have supporting information and data, which is key • Know your targets – stakeholders (public and private; local, national and international; donors) • Be sure your target stakeholder(s) know(s) your intention – building trust • Understand their priorities – any opportunities for building on related initiatives? • Identify easy wins – any reviews, new legislation (national/international laws and policies, strategic plans, operational procedures, decrees) • Which supporting tools are and are not available? • Advocacy can be a lengthy process – sometimes successes are based on relationships and they take time to build • Take advantage of the existing enabling legal and institutional frameworks – national and international (e.g. Multilateral Environmental Agreements)

Aims The ultimate question when setting the aim of your advocacy strategy is: what final outcome or objective are you trying to achieve? It is important to focus on what real world change you want to achieve. Such an aim could be establishing a new protected area or securing a particular policy change. The following two steps can help you determine your aim: 1. Defining what problem or issue you are trying to solve (see Box 2.2.) 2. Exploring what solutions can be used to address the problem. Step 1 can be done through problem analysis. Problem analysis (also called policy analysis) narrows down what the focus of your advocacy

By analysing your policy issue, you will pinpoint the problem (what), the specific causes of the problem (why) and the people affected by the problem in the policy realm (who).


The next step is to explore what solutions you are advocating for. This can be done by looking at where there is room for change and where you can make the most impact. It is a way of mapping out what options for change there are and which ones are most likely to have the most effect in line with your objectives. Questions to ask when assessing where you can make the most impact include: • Which of the policy solutions is likely to have the largest and most lasting impact? • Which policy solutions are readily achievable and which are likely to be expensive or time consuming? • Which policy solutions are likely to garner significant support or alternatively, which will face significant opposition? • Are some of the policy solutions riskier than others? Can such risks be mitigated? In your policy analysis, you will also need to figure out whether your policy issue has been addressed previously. Have others campaigned for this issue? What was the outcome? Where did they encounter roadblocks? If you find out why and under what circumstances this policy was approved or blocked, supported or opposed, it will make your advocacy work much easier. For example, if someone has already expressed support for your cause, it will be much simpler to reach out and convince them to back you again. Likewise, any previously stated opposition may be easier to prepare for and address.



Box 2.4

Problem Tree Analysis of threats and Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas (IBAs) Problem Tree Analysis is a methodology to identify main problems, along with their causes and effects, to help project planners formulate clear and manageable objectives and strategies for how to achieve them. The causes represent the “root” of the problem, the core problem is the “trunk” and the effects of the problem are the “crown” of the tree. The Problem Tree approach can be used to, for example: • Identify the imminent threats to IBA trigger species (those that trigger the designation of an IBA) and their habitats • Establish facts relating to IBA species • Focus on threats that have the biggest impact on trigger species and their habitats (e.g. illegal hunting) • Determine the underlying causes behind these threats and try to address these (e.g. the reason behind an increase in illegal hunting may be lack of resources for law enforcement and / or a sudden increase in the price of bush-meat in local markets). Some important questions with regard to the impact of threats: • What is your baseline (e.g. habitat extent, bird populations at the time of IBA selection) • Are there studies from which you can infer the likely impacts of the threats? • Do you need to do research to determine the impacts? • Will the threats have direct or indirect impacts or both? • Will the impacts be on breeding, roosting or feeding sites? • Will impacts affect prey species? • Are there cumulative effects of different developments? • Are there impacts on wildlife other than birds? • Can the impacts be avoided, mitigated or compensated for? For more information, see:

Objectives Now that you have determined the overall aim for your advocacy strategy, you need to break it down into short-term outcomes. What do you need to do to achieve your overall aim? Examples include: • Gaining political support for a policy • Establishing a community network • Organising an awareness-raising event • Alerting the media


Make sure to map out what intermediate steps you need to take to achieve these outcomes. This will help you focus your work and work with the right people in the right timeframe to get things done. Keep adding to or altering this list throughout the development of your advocacy strategy and work.

Context When planning any advocacy work, consider the context of your place of work. What is going on in the region and how will this positively or negatively influence your advocacy work? Local circumstances in politics, policy and the economy can affect the extent to which you are able to carry out your planned activities, the people you are hoping to meet and communities you are keen to engage with. Examples of things you might consider include: • How do local communities view the action of Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) and Non-governmental Organisations (NGOs) in the area? • Are there any local elections or civil unrest? • Politically, how achievable are your aims and objectives in the context of the current political situation? • Are any influential industries opposed to your suggested changes?



It is critical to know the rules, restrictions and conditions that you have to operate within. Depending on the political restrictions in your country, certain topics may be dealt with more openly than others. More open political systems generally have more room for advocacy work. Selecting the exact problem or policy to engage with and the right actors to work with is crucial.

Target audience, stakeholders and partners In the previous sections, we have identified how to define advocacy aims and objectives. After this it is necessary to identify the people that make decisions or in some way influence policies and explore how to engage with them. This is commonly done through a stakeholder analysis. Who is a stakeholder? It is necessary to determine who the key stakeholders are related to the issue you have identified and to what extent they need to be engaged (see Box 2.5). Stakeholders can be individuals, groups, institutions or CSOs that have declared or have conceivable interest or stake in the issue, policy, project or programme being promoted, and whose participation and support are crucial to its success or failure. These stakeholders can be international, national, political, commercial/private, civil society, public, labour and / or users/consumers. Stakeholders can differ depending on the project or sector the advocacy strategy deals with. For implementation of any successful intervention, it is crucial to involve anyone who is impacted by or has a keen interest or influence over the outcome. In the following section, the process of stakeholder analysis is outlined in terms of how to map stakeholders and their influence, who has decision-making authority and who might support or undermine the policy goal.

Box 2.5

Who are the key stakeholders – IBAs as an example 1. Groups that may not align with the policy goal to designate a new IBA: • Businesses / private sector (e.g. timber companies, developers, farmers) • Government agencies (e.g. Ministry of Mining, Ministry of Agriculture) • Financial institutions (e.g. World Bank, national or regional development bank) • Local or regional government (with interests of socio-economic benefits or votes) • Local communities (considering members of all socioeconomic groups and genders)


2. Potential allies for your case: • Local communities (including Local Conservation Groups) • Indigenous groups • Other NGOs • Scientists • Ministry of Environment • Opposition parties/politicians • International conventions (e.g. CBD) • Groups benefitting from ecosystem services or natural resources (e.g. eco-tourist lodges, hunters, water bottling plants, organic coffee producers, birdwatchers) 3. • • •

Groups who may be neutral: The general public Media (press, TV, radio) Communities in the wider area around the IBA

It is essential to identify key individuals within wider stakeholder groups who have the power and opportunity and may either help or hinder you in achieving your policy goal (in this case, to designate a new IBA). This may be for example a President or Prime Minister, Minister of a government agency, the local Mayor, local opinion-formers, or businesses. It is necessary to determine what their position is in relation to your policy goal (whether they support or oppose it).

What is stakeholder analysis? Stakeholder analysis is the process of systematically gathering and analysing information to determine whose interests should be taken into account when proposing, developing and implementing policies or programmes. Identifying key stakeholders, such as influencers,



and analysing their interests is an important step in developing an advocacy strategy. Stakeholder analysis is a way of understanding a system through its stakeholders. It looks at their interests, objectives, power and relationships. By understanding the system, it is possible to facilitate change. The objectives of a stakeholder analysis are to: • List and characterise the major stakeholders, including an understanding of gender, social and other differences • Understand each stakeholder’s present and potential roles and responsibilities • Understand each stakeholder’s interests, concerns and potential • Draw conclusions for planning of the project • Identify potential synergies and obstacles with and within different groups. The importance of stakeholder identification The process of stakeholder engagement has gained traction in policy and project management over the last two decades. It is important to analyse stakeholders - their knowledge, interests, positions and alliances – because it allows policy-makers and project managers to interact more effectively with these key groups of people and increase support for implementing desired advocacy outcomes. By identifying and describing the key players that can make policyrelated decisions and those that might influence others relating to a policy goal, you are targeting the correct audience in your advocacy strategy. It is important to determine who might support and oppose specific policy outcomes and what their influence, resources and interests in the issues are. For example, there is formal power, such as that held by national and local governments, government agencies, senior civil servants and regulatory bodies, as well as informal power held by businesses, professionals, celebrities, media, faith leaders, civil society, the general public and international organisations. However, the way to engage with them may be different.

Box 2.6

Building relationships and trust with stakeholders Conservation is often a social process that is about people. Policy processes and mainstreaming biodiversity in various sectors such as forestry, agriculture, fisheries and energy can be heavily influenced by socio-cultural dynamics, such as gender and cultural values. Intangible cultural heritage, such as local knowledge, can be a key driver of successful programme management. Especially in the context of biodiversity conservation and natural resource management, the knowledge and wisdom of local and indigenous communities can clarify how processes work on the ground.


To engage with these communities and cultures effectively and respectfully, an understanding, appreciation and respect for their traditional user rights, language, religion, history, lifestyle, decision-making bodies, communication methods and social structure is required. The attitudes of people within different cultures will also differ. Being mindful of people’s behaviours, power relationships, personal relationships and community dynamics is key to working with them effectively. Employing a cultural lens allows policy-makers to analyse to what extent a program respects cultural diversity principles. This includes cultural practices, attitudes, knowledge and know-how. The cultural lens can help you make informed decisions rooted in awareness of the cultural dimensions of development.

The more information you can gather about your key stakeholders, the easier it will be to devise an advocacy strategy that works. By analysing this, ways can be found to prevent opposition or misunderstandings about the intervention. It is generally agreed that better decisions are implemented with less conflict and more success when they are driven by stakeholders. Analysing influence and interest: Mapping the stakeholders Stakeholder analysis is incomplete without examining relationships and interests. Performing a stakeholder analysis before advocacy can increase the impact of an intervention or help to achieve the aims sooner. Interest in the project or programme and the ability to exercise power or influence over its outcome may vary per stakeholder and therefore it is crucial to map the extent of interest and influence each one has – this is



Prioritising which stakeholders to consult with is based on their attributes and deciding how important they are to the development and outcome of your project or programme. Stakeholder analysis can: • Map relationships between stakeholders • Encourage critical thinking about where the real power to change systems lies • Map power relations that go beyond official structures to reveal unofficial but influential stakeholders • Identify possible channels of influence, both direct and indirect • Show who could be allies and who could be opponents • Help to assess which uncommitted stakeholders or opponents are worth lobbying and influencing • Highlight potential risks for advocacy goals. The four steps of stakeholder analysis are: 1. Choosing a specific issue to advocate for (aims and objectives) 2. Listing all stakeholders (identifying them with formal and informal power) 3. Mapping the power influence of stakeholders (see Figure 3) 4. Categorising stakeholders according to their level of influence and support. We can categorise stakeholders as belonging to one of four categories: 1. ‘Nudge’ group (high influence/neutral support): Mainly formal power-holders who theoretically have a neutral position or whose stance is not yet known. It is necessary to inform and prepare these stakeholders with the aim of moving each of them from neutrality into positive support for the policy goal being sought.

High More face-to-face

Interest of stakeholder

a power analysis. Conducting a power analysis regularly can help to track changes and alter strategies and activities accordingly.

Ac ti

Ke ne y pl ed aye str rs on – gb uy -in

ve co n







Ke e




lta tio


int ere





Influence of stakeholder


Figure 3. Stakeholder influence/ interest matrix with communication strategies2

2. Advocates (neutral to high influence/high support): Approach individuals to act as positive voices and examples. Speak with these people about the science that you have on an issue to increase their ability to influence. 3. Quiet supporters (low influence/high support): Brief to ensure groups are accurately reflecting the science and reduce non-scientific messaging. Brief this group to ensure that science is accurately reflected and non-scientific messaging reduced. 4. Opposition group (high influence/low support): Anticipate arguments and prepare evidence and science for counter-arguments. Keep in mind that the range of stakeholders and the different roles they play may be constantly changing. It is important to try to see beyond different actors’ roles. It should also not be assumed that all actors within one category are homogenous in their perceptions. Also key is prioritising who to engage with.



2.2.2 Communicating your message Multi-channel delivery of messages

Case Study 2.1

Advocacy for Western Siem Pang in Cambodia

What tools and approaches will you use to reach your advocacy aims and objectives? What steps will you take to achieve your goals and implement your agenda?

Western Siem Pang district in Cambodia is an area of forests, wetlands and rivers. The area supports globally important breeding populations of five Critically Endangered bird species, including 50% of the world’s population of White-shouldered Ibis and 20% of the Giant Ibis population.

There are a number of ways to carry out advocacy work. Some examples of advocacy tools include: • Setting up in-person meetings • Sending emails or letters • Making phone calls • Disseminating policy position papers • Writing and disseminating briefings • Participating in consultations • Organising events (e.g. seminars, conferences, lectures, press conferences) • Sending out newsletters • Visiting sites to showcase a cause (e.g. an IBA) • Engaging in partnerships • Engaging with the media • Using digital and social media • Writing letters to members • Starting petitions • Having member lobbying days

However, a large part of the land on which these species dwell is currently designated for economic activity and licensed out to economic sectors. Advocacy work has been needed to encourage more protection of the area in order to safeguard the critical habitat of threatened species.

When employing these advocacy tools, always consider how they fit into your advocacy strategy to achieve a policy result. The advocacy strategy, as previously mentioned, is a way of organising your advocacy work to make the most impact.

The timing for advocacy Another key consideration when thinking about what advocacy tools and tactics to use is the timeframe in which you want to achieve your aims. By when do you want to have a policy result? Are there any external


In 2004, work started on species and habitat monitoring. In 2007, work commenced to cancel the economic concession license. This was followed by research and development of a long-term plan for the area. Management activities on the ground were oriented to show long-term commitment to the area, backed by community outreach activities and partnership development. Between 2010 and 2014, negotiations began to turn the land into a protected area by removing the economic concessions. In 2014, 70,000 hectares were designated as protected forest and an ad-hoc committee was established to manage the site. In 2015, another economic entitlement was dropped and campaigning was underway to designate that site as a protected area too. This was done through partnerships with the private sector, via financial and sustainable strategy development. In May 2016, a second protected area was designated, increasing the size of the site to over 130,000 hectares. The stakeholders engaged throughout the process were local communities, local authorities, government focal points, economic land concession owners, law firms, government through ad-hoc committees, inter-ministerial committees, CSOs, donors and businesses. The lessons learned through this process are that with high commitment and longterm planning, engaged organisations can change the fate of a site of biodiversity importance. Resources, assigning the right leading staff and stakeholder inputs are all crucial for success. It is crucial to identify the stakeholders involved and develop some into champions for the cause. Also, the role of sound research and public awareness raising is important. To read more about the site: forests-hope-site-western-siem-pang-forest-cambodia and 202015.pdf



dates that you should bear in mind when designing your strategy? For example, are there any upcoming elections or community meetings? Make sure to note down all these key time frames and events and tailor your advocacy tools accordingly.

Developing a good policy brief Written communication to stakeholders and policy influencers should always be done in a succinct and focused way. Long policy documents should always be accompanied by policy summaries or policy briefs which should only be a couple of pages long. Writing a good policy brief is a crucial tool in effectively conveying the message about a policy goal. Policy briefs are one of the most commonly used advocacy tools and are particularly useful when outlining why an issue needs to be addressed, the related science and the policies you are trying to create or amend. Policy briefs can be sent to government officials and others before or after a meeting. Many policy briefs include the following sections: • Summary of the issue • Analysis of the problem • Political and economic context • Position sought or counter arguments to an existing position • Outcome that is sought (based on science) • Proposed solution and approach • Contact details Briefings should be targeted, relevant and concise. Listed below are some tips: • The entire document should not exceed two A4 pages. • Identify your key message in the title and in the first paragraph. • Write about supporting social and economic factors and also address scientific information and biodiversity conservation objectives.

• Break up the brief into easy to read sections/paragraphs. • Highlight key message(s) in a bold font. • Make the brief pleasing to look at with a consistent layout. • Avoid using jargon or acronyms. • Use words that will resonate with your target audience, e.g. partnerships, transparency, democracy. • Write with a specific audience in mind and adjust your tone accordingly. • Make sure you have your arguments and facts presented in a logical way.


Box 2.7

Position papers and briefs for conventions For meetings of conventions such as the Convention on Biological Diversity, position papers are the primary form of communication. For example, when BirdLife attends CBD meetings, it will write short (2 page) position papers outlining the comments it has on various agenda items that will be discussed there, for example recommending particular language for the draft decisions and recommendations that will be an output of the meetings. BirdLife will circulate position papers to government representatives attending the meeting, either in person or via email, as governments are able to make decisions about final content. As discussions progress on each agenda item at the meetings, short discussions with governments may need to take place, for example requesting a specific line of text in a longer draft decision. This can often be done more informally, such as through having a short discussion in person with a government representative followed by the specific text being communicated via a paper copy or email. BirdLife Partners can also communicate with their government representatives ahead of these meetings, using a more traditional policy brief and the position papers developed by the BirdLife International policy team. See:



Writing an effective e-mail/letter As part of an advocacy strategy, you can write an email or letter to a government official or senior representative of an organisation to discuss your cause or request relating to a policy outcome. These people generally receive a large amount of correspondence and they might have staff filtering their mail. Therefore, it is crucial to make sure that your message is to the point, personalised and has a clearly defined request. Some tips: • Make sure your message is relevant to the official you are writing to. • State a clear reason early on for writing the email / letter. Make sure the message has a purpose and it is clearly visible to the reader. • Make it clear who you are and which organisation you are affiliated with. • If your message has an action point (e.g. to consider an issue), make this very clear and state it early, for example, use a header or subject line. • Personalise your message. Where possible, make sure to tailor it to the person’s role and use case studies that speak to them. • Alter the tone of your message depending on who you are writing to. • Check the title and contact details of the person you are writing to. • Spell check! • Get someone else in your organisation to proofread your message.

Meeting an important representative One of the most commonly employed advocacy tools is meeting with government officials, in particular when trying to communicate information about a complex or detailed issue. Setting up a meeting • Send an e-mail or letter to request a meeting (or sometimes at meetings and conferences you may be able to approach them directly). • Clearly indicate in the subject line or header that you are requesting a meeting and who you are. • Follow up with a phone call or if needed.

• If you can meet the representative in person, do so. For example, if attending the same conference or meeting, try to set up a discussion there. If others are available instead, they might be able to connect you further or be a useful contact in the future. Advisors might also be able to speak more openly about what you want to know. • Ask people you know to connect you with the person you need to communicate with. Check with others in your organisation or your broader network. A direct introduction is always more effective than a letter or email to a general address.


Some tips for meeting in person: • Determine how much time you have and prepare your talking points accordingly. • Research the person’s role, work, interest, and abilities. Tailor talking points to their scope of work and interest. • Have a clear intent for the meeting. Think about what you would like this person to consider and to do. • Ask the person for their feedback, advice and input. • Listen to the person you are meeting with and be prepared to address any questions or concerns. • Be careful not to promise what you cannot deliver. • Be honest when answering questions. If you do not know the answer, follow up later. • Thank the person(s) you have met for their time and consideration. • Leave a short policy brief that has information about the issue and states your case. If requesting support at a meeting on a particular topic (for example on a mainstreaming decision at a CBD meeting), state the specific text that you want proposed and whether you are asking for the Party itself to propose it (which is often stronger) or support your proposal. • Have a follow-up item or action point to keep the conversation going after the meeting. • Where relevant, ask the person to share the information you have provided with colleagues and others. • Dress according to the circumstances of the meeting. • Be on time: consider possible security checks on your way in.



• Bring photo identification (e.g. a passport) as this might be requested (particularly for convention meetings). After a meeting: • Send a “thank you” message. Take note of any new insights, points of view or counter-arguments. Carefully document what you learnt at the meeting. • Follow up on any action points discussed. • Provide feedback internally to relevant colleagues in your organisation or network. • Think about next steps. What did you learn and what needs to happen next? Does the person you met need more or different information? • Gauge how effective the meeting was and whether it is necessary to meet again or to meet different individuals. How does further engagement fit with your advocacy strategy?

Visiting a site It is often effective to take organisational representatives and other stakeholders to a site that illustrates the issue you are communicating to them about. By doing so, you may convince them of the necessity for certain interventions and policies or showcase the work that you would like supported. For example, you could take a donor or government representative to see an IBA or protected area. In order to have a successful visit, you can follow the suggested steps and tips below. Planning: • Identify whom you need to contact: both at the site and from the stakeholder group you are hoping to take on the visit. • Make clear and agree with the representative and site staff on the purpose of the site visit. • Set people’s expectations. These include the expectations of the visitor and the hosts of the site/people on the ground. • Identify and contact tour guides, speakers and possibly facilitators. • Send an invitation for the visit and communicate the details.

• Make sure to confirm dates, times and places. Double-check a few days before the visit that all details are confirmed. • Develop a preliminary agenda and send it to all involved parties. • Circulate information about the site. • Make sure all necessary equipment is on site (e.g. projectors). • If necessary, hire a translator. • Make sure to develop the appropriate press material and contact the media if relevant. Check with the representatives you are hosting that media communication is acceptable. • If possible, do a pre-site visit to check the surroundings and facilities. • Determine a meeting point and communicate that to your representative. • Ask if there are any requests and aspire to meet people’s expectations.


On site: • Have a briefing about the schedule of the visit and talk through any logistics. • Make sure to have refreshments (food and drinks). • Allow extra time in case of delays. • Follow the agenda as much as possible. • If the visit is more than a couple of hours, make sure to schedule independent time for people to relax and unwind. • When required, show respect and appreciation through gifts. • Be respectful of cultural differences and requirements. • Debrief with the teams involved. • Take notes. Follow up: • Send “thank you” messages to all parties (including visitors, the press and hosts). • Follow up on any identified action points. • Answer any clarifications needed. • Ask for feedback from those who attended, hosts and colleagues. • Evaluate the outcome of the site visit and follow up actions.



Influencing the media It may be appropriate to share information about the policy outcome that you are trying to achieve via the media. This may be the case in particular if you need to generate awareness and interest from the public. This can be achieved through various methodologies including: • Information on your website • Social media (e.g. Twitter, Facebook) • Emails / newsletters • A press release leading to possible newspaper articles or tv / radio interviews • Press conference Press conference You may be able to use a press conference as a platform to communicate about your cause, project or programme with different media representatives and the wider public, if your visitors agree. Press conferences can be a great way to generate interest in a topic or news item that will be conveyed to a wider audience. Press conferences should either be seen as a special event or a venue to convey newsworthy information. This is important to ensure that they are picked up by news agencies. Some examples of when you might arrange a press conference include: • Promoting a large-scale or important event with a prominent person (e.g. a site visit) • New science or information affecting species conservation • Promoting a new influential campaign, project or programme • Reacting to new political developments or social issues that affect your work. Some examples of reasons why you might wish to hold a press conference include: • To communicate widely and to the public about an issue, new information or event • To have an interactive exchange with the press

• To correct misunderstandings, wrong assumptions and misinformation • To provide more in-depth or elaborate information on your cause. Depending on the type of press coverage (e.g. print vs. visual media), the press may ask you questions that you can answer right away and in person. You can highlight certain issues that you might not otherwise be able to convey as strongly. Press conferences can become necessary at very short notice when you need to react or comment on an issue. If you do have time, your team should start preparing 1–2 weeks before the event takes place. The next steps can help you organise and prepare for a press conference.


Determine the key take away message Clearly define what information and message you are trying to convey to the public. Your aim might be to draw attention to new science or achievements, announce a new programme or project, or to respond to a news story. Summarise your message in 3–5 key points. If any logistical information for a future event is part of your message, make sure to repeat it several times and feature it clearly and prominently. Double check all information in your message. Schedule the date and time Try to not schedule your press conference during other major press events. You want the press to attend and to hold their undivided attention. As you are competing with all other news, factor in that you might not draw the crowd you want. Some tips for scheduling your press conference to draw the largest audience and have the most chance of being reported on include: • If you can, schedule your press conference on a day which is not too busy with other news. In most countries, Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday are generally slower news days. • Schedule your press conference at a time of day when you are likely to get maximum attendance and journalists have time to write the story for the afternoon paper and evening news (e.g. between 10 and 11 am).



Pick the location Make sure your event takes place in a venue that is easy to reach for reporters, with ample parking space and good public transport connections. Make sure the room has good working conditions for the media, e.g. free from background noise, plenty of power plugs and extension cords, good internet access. Also, it helps to choose a spot that is significant to your topic or near where the activities are occurring. Select and train your spokesperson Whoever will be speaking at the conference needs to be knowledgeable about the key message and topic, as well as articulate and engaging. They need to be able to handle difficult questions and press scrutiny with confidence. People with high credibility in the community you work in, for example directors of your organisation or community representatives, tend to make good spokespeople. Tips for spokespersons: • Be clear, concise and to the point. Avoid jargon, provocative statements and saying “um” and “ah”. • Always speak based on confirmed and established science and information. If you do not know the answer, be honest. • Practice, practice, practice! Test out your press conference with your team and prepare for any questions that may be asked. It is often possible to obtain interview questions from the media ahead of time, which can be very helpful. Find a moderator A moderator can facilitate the conversation between the spokesperson and the press. He/she can guide the press conference and conversation. Find someone who has experience managing the press and knows about the issue being discussed. Contact the media • First, make a list of all the important media that you want to invite to your press conference. Make a mailing list of all assignment editors at television stations, as well as news directors for the radio and major newspapers. Include news agencies like the Associated Press and

Reuters if you are aiming to reach an international audience. Also, include the contact information of reporters and media professionals you have worked with in the past on similar issues. Keep previous relationships warm and build new ones during the press conference – ultimately press relations is all about networking. • Design a press advisory, which is a press release with additional background for your media contacts. E-mail the press advisory to your media contacts approximately one week before the event. Follow up by telephone three days after sending it to remind your media contacts. Follow up again on the morning of the event to remind them about attending the press conference.


Develop a press kit If you have the time, budget and staff to develop a press kit, this can go a long way in helping the press report on your story. A press kit is a folder of information about your press conference. On one side of your folder, have a press release detailing the position/issue being addressed with highlights and quotes. On the other side, have a list of speakers and conference participants as well as short biographies, background information about the issue being discussed, accompanying photos and related news stories from reputable news sources. Prepare the room Set up tables and chairs. Set up any visuals you might have including banners and signs, projection screens and projectors and test these. Set up the audio (e.g. microphones) and test these out. Have a sign-up sheet for the attending reporters and a station for them to collect press kits. Set up coffee/tea/refreshments. Set up any recording devices or feeds and test them. At the press conference Welcome all members of the press on arrival, give them press kits and sign them in. Start on time as much as possible; reporters are generally busy and will attend different events. The conference should last no longer than 45 minutes and each speaker should speak for 3–5 minutes with allocated time for questions to follow.



After the press conference Try to have a casual chat with members of the main press after the formal press conference has finished. This builds relationships and breaks down any barriers if they have additional questions. For those who were unable to attend, send follow up e-mails with digital press kits and the outcome so they can still report on the event. Evaluation With your team, evaluate who came to the event and what media coverage resulted. How did the process go and what could be improved for next time? Determine the effect of the event.

2.2.3 Conflict and negotiation in advocacy When do conflicts occur?

Conflicts are inherent to human relations. It is possible you will encounter conflicts during your advocacy work, when: • the position of parties representing conservation interests are challenged by those holding other views • development and / or conservation decisions impact upon communities or indigenous groups. Conflicts can also be caused by: • Lack of ecological information • Stakeholders differing in their understanding of human–animal relations • Stakeholders being excluded from conservation planning • Stakeholders being disadvantaged in negotiations. ‘Human–wildlife conflicts’ can occur when: • Human interactions with other species lead to negative consequences, or • People who want to conserve an area conflict with people that have other plans for the site and as such negatively impact wildlife. Because both of these situations are caused by human actions, the preferred term has recently become ‘human-wildlife interactions’.

Natural and social sciences have a fundamental role in understanding the root causes of conflicts and resolving them as well as in undertaking conflict mitigation techniques, assessing human-wildlife interactions, and helping parties to explore solutions.

Approaches to conflict management Often when parties are engaged in conflict they refuse to cooperate or compromise, as they only see win-lose outcomes. In game theory, these outcomes are called zero-sum: one party’s gain is the other’s loss. However, non-zero-sum outcomes are also possible, when both sides lose (e.g. if costs of engagement are high) or alternatively when both sides win. The aim of conflict management is to move parties away from zerosum results and seek solutions where both parties gain something.


One way to achieve this is by identifying the underlying values held by stakeholders. These values or priorities might be incompatible and non-negotiable but there may be a space where they overlap, and this is where resolution can take place, through negotiation. If both sides recognise the risks of conflict and view conflict as a shared problem, then mutual cooperation can lead to a win–win strategy. Ways to alter how parties address a conflict include building trust between groups, developing new options, assessing appropriate penalties and compensation schemes, and using adaptive management. The Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) Approach is an example of how to minimise conflicts with indigenous people. Questions to ask groups that have opposing views include: • What needs drive their interests? • What do they want to achieve? • What are they concerned about? • What values are important to them? Prerequisites for conflict resolution include: • Parties recognising problems as shared • Parties engaging with clear goals • A transparent evidence base, and awareness of trade-offs.



Common challenges include: • Willingness of parties to consider a negotiated agreement – e.g. groups with fundamentally different values. For instance, groups might not acknowledge the legitimacy of other parties and therefore might not be willing to negotiate with them. Alternatively, groups might feel that their interests can best be served through means other than dialogue, such as legislation and enforcement. • Parties striving for unrealistic goals. • Spatial and temporal scale – When dialogue occurs over broad spatial scales, there may not be evenly distributed representation of stakeholders, so opportunities for social learning can decrease. Sufficient time will enable parties to develop trust, gather scientific evidence and examine mitigation strategies. • Financial availability to engage in a resolution process – Incentives need to satisfy the economic and cultural needs of parties involved and avoid leading to bankruptcy, dependency, and poverty traps. • Representations of conflict in The media – the media might seek to highlight conflict and sensationalize rather than educate. Media relationships and support for constructive journalism are therefore an important part of conflict management. • Legislation is sometimes ignored by one party or resisted if deemed unfair. Without appropriate flexibility, strict laws can lead to a sense of disenfranchisement to those parties most directly affected and can also reduce the number of alternative solutions that can be developed; ultimately, these factors can exacerbate conflict. Engagement with stakeholders that have contrasting views is important because it contributes to parties reaching good-quality agreements and also can improve relationships. The quality of information available to participants also improves the effectiveness of engagement, suggesting an important role for science communication, so that all stakeholders understand what is currently known about the system in question.

Negotiation Negotiation is a consensus-building approach between parties. Parties always have something in common, it is just a matter of finding where their interests interact or overlap and using that as the starting point for negotiation. Some tips for negotiating: • The more complex the issue is, the more time that is needed for preparation. • Determine your objective and purpose – what is the overall goal? What are you negotiating for? • Decide on the range – what is the worst and the best arrangement? What can you realistically expect? • Know how to present your case confidently and effectively by developing creative approaches for win-win situations • During negotiation, make sure to prepare your best starting offer • Best Alternative to a Negotiated Arrangement (BATNA): In any negotiation, consider what your best alternative would be if you do not negotiate a good arrangement with the other party. If you know what that alternative is, then you know how hard you can push or whether you need to back off in negotiations. • Back-up plan – what will you do if you cannot reach a deal? What are the alternatives to reaching a deal?


The different stages of negotiation: • Discussion stage – learn about the other party(ies), ask questions and listen, test assumptions, build rapport and trust – work on the relationship • Proposal stage – what are the partners prepared to agree on and to what degree • Trading stage – more definite negotiation of who can trade what stance or resource • Agreement stage – there is back and forth between discussionproposal-trading. Sometimes more time is needed to go back to preparation.



The process: 1. Acknowledge other parties’ positions and why they are important to them 2. Find out their underlying needs – ask questions and listen 3. Express your needs 4. Find any common ground and work together to find a solution that meets all parties needs. Influencing other parties for the purpose of advocating for a specific policy outcome needs to be done with integrity – look for winwin outcomes. For example, when working to integrate action on mainstreaming in CBD meetings, work with countries where mainstreaming is a national priority.

2.2.4 Nemawashi: using personal, informal methods to gain support Nemawashi is a Japanese word that literally translates as ‘going around the roots’, particularly in the sense of digging around the roots of a tree to prepare it for transplanting. In business, Nemawashi has come to mean an informal process of quietly laying the foundation and building a consensus of opinion before making formal changes. This is done by talking to people to gather support and feedback. Nemawashi is considered an important element in any major change-making process in Japan. This is rooted in ideas about collective responsibility and cooperation for harmonious communities without conflict. In Japan, the government strives for unanimously adopted approval from cabinet members and Nemawashi is common practice among ministries and organisations.

Cultural norms differ from country to country so the Nemawashi approach might not work in some countries, where negotiation will take other forms, such as consensus-building strategies. Traditional lobbying is the act of attempting to influence the actions, policies, or decisions of officials, most often legislators or members of regulatory agencies. Nemawashi is a rich concept, fundamental to strategy deployment and leadership – it is more than just lobbying.


Box 2.8

The art and science of Nemawashi Relationships 1. Be personable. Be friendly. Say hello. Speak to people in the halls. Be “a part” of the organization. 2. Build partnerships and personal relationships with a select number of people. Converse with them regularly about both personal and work topics. 3. Be proactive and identify the key stakeholders for specific activities. 4. Build the pyramid – understand the “formal” organisation and hierarchy and develop an understanding of the “informal” organisation or layers and who has established relationships.

Communication 5. Be a provider – stay in touch with key stakeholders. Keep them informed of progress or activities. Share information with them. 6. Begin with peers – when building consensus, start with your peers in the organisation and go up through the layers. Return to a lower level if necessary. As you start to gain consensus, others will become involved and use their partnerships. 7. Have preliminary informal discussions; sketch concepts and a story if necessary. Based on: Read more:



Case Study 2.2

Nemawashi during the Ramsar nomination of Kasai Rinkai wetlands in Tokyo Bay The Wild Bird Society of Japan (WBSJ), BirdLife Japan, needed stakeholders’ consensus for nominating the Kasai Rinkai wetlands of Tokyo Bay as a Ramsar site in 2016. A variety of stakeholders were engaged: NGOs, park users, local government, metropolitan government, fishermen, and the public.

Engagement with NGOs • WBSJ held a symposium at Kasai Rinkai Park where it proposed enhancement of nature conservation in the park by registering it under the Ramsar Convention.

Engagement with park users • WBSJ held a bird-watching event and appealed to participants, emphasising that “The nature in the park satisfies criteria to qualify as a wetland of international importance”.

Engagement with local government • WBSJ held an exhibition showcasing the beauty of the park at Edogawa Ward, which is managed by local government, and made a connection with the mayor at the office there.

Engagement with fishermen

Engagement with the metropolitan government • The Tokyo metropolitan government is in charge of Kasai Rinkai wetlands. • At the symposium, WBSJ invited a representative from the metropolitan government to talk about designation of the wetlands as a Ramsar site.


Engagement with the public • WBSJ became a member of the Sustainable Sport NGO and NPO Network, which is aiming to make the Tokyo 2020 Olympic and Paralympic Games a sustainable event. • Through this committee, WBSJ discussed designation of the wetlands as a Ramsar site with people concerned about the Olympics through a stakeholder conference.

Results of the Nemawashi engagement • On March 15th 2017, the Governor of Tokyo declared that “we’ll aim for the listing as a wetland of the Ramsar Convention” for Kasai Rinkai wetlands. • The Ministry of the Environment is working on designating the wetland as a National Wildlife Protection Area.

• Fishermen using the tidal flats were influential stakeholders and were concerned about restrictions for fishing if the park was designated as a protected area. • WBSJ built a good relationship with the fishermen and facilitated conversation with them. WBSJ invited the fishermen to the symposium.



2.2.5 Data collection and using science and information in policy-making Data consist of a series of observations, measurements, facts and information. Policy-makers and managers may not need scientific data per se, but the information derived from these data is necessary for informed decision-making. Depending on the issue that you want to address with policy-makers, you will likely need to back your arguments with knowledge and facts from the natural or social sciences. For instance, if your goal is to advocate for how mainstreaming biodiversity into forest management will help the traditional rights holders of that forest to continue their traditional practices, you will need to use a combination of both social and natural sciences.

Backing up your advocacy plans with data Some questions to think about with regard to your advocacy plan: • How could a research strategy help? • What are your main data needs? Are they biological data? Sociological data? • What can you achieve by collecting biological or other data? • What are the values of a site and how can you demonstrate values of a protected area as it is currently managed compared to alternative land uses? • How can you meet data needs? Do you need to collect new data or have they already been collected? Can citizen science (where the public collects data) help? What is the price of collecting data? As resources are finite, prioritisation of issues, species and actions is essential. • How are you going to use these data? How should you present data? How can data be misused? Research can help to for example: • Identify key areas for protection (IBAs and KBAs) • Understand species’ requirements and ecological processes • Inform threatened species management methods (for instance habitat management and / or control of invasive species)

• Monitor population trends (which could be used to inform the Red List) • Understand the reason for decline or increase of a population • Determine and assess novel conservation actions • Set priorities for conservation • Monitor the success of conservation measures • Support advocacy and awareness • Increase the credibility of conservation messages • Predict future changes in species and habitats


Case Study 2.3

Mobilising biodiversity data that are relevant to policy and decision-making in Africa Accessible, relevant and reliable biodiversity data are needed for policy and decision-making in the field of natural resource management and many other sectors. For example, economic policy-makers require data on traded biological products like timber, food and medicine; agricultural policy-makers require data on pollinators, crop diversity, and genetically modified organisms (GMOs); water policy-makers require data on biological indicators and invasive alien species; and health policy-makers require data on pathogens and disease vectors. The South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI) received a grant of USD 250,000 from the JRS Biodiversity Foundation to work directly with a network of African biodiversity information experts to develop a Biodiversity Data Mobilization Strategy for Africa, whilst enhancing regional collaboration and capacity. This 2-year project aimed to define priority policy-relevant data; conduct a gap analysis of priority data; identify data-holding institutions; foster collaboration and data-sharing between institutions; develop appropriate online support tools; and inform the development of academic curriculum. Read more: Toolkit to identify biodiversity-relevant data: http://biodiversityadvisor.sanbi. org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Toolkit_29Jan2016.pdf



Box 2.9

Box 2.10

BirdLife’s world-renowned science has three main objectives: • Identify species that have a high risk of extinction (Red List – see Box 2.10) • Identify important sites for biodiversity (IBAs, KBAs – see Box 2.9) • Determine what policies affect birds and biodiversity at the landscape or habitat level.

The IUCN Red List assesses the conservation status, or threat of extinction, of plants, fungi and animals at the global level. The Red List Strategy 2017–2020 is a component of the IUCN Species Strategic Plan and links to the CBD Strategic Plan for Biodiversity and Aichi Targets (2011–2020).

The three pillars of science at BirdLife International

Learn more here: The BirdLife International Data Zone:, which includes Red List threatened species: species/search IBAs: important-bird-and-biodiversity-areas-ibas and IBA inventory and monitoring: and case studies:

Box 2.11

BirdLife’s State of the World’s Birds State of the World’s Birds is BirdLife International’s flagship science publication which uses global bird assessments to gauge the condition of ecosystems as a whole: It pinpoints major trends and changes in bird populations, explores the causes and identifies conservation solutions. There is additional information and a Country Profile section on the BirdLife website, which presents national level information: The most recent State of the World’s Birds report was released in 2018 and outlines state, pressure and response: what we know about the conservation status of birds, why birds are declining, and the actions needed to conserve birds and biodiversity. Facts and case studies are included throughout. This information directly assists BirdLife’s ability to contribute to international policy meetings, for example in providing current information on threats to birds that can be addressed through policy mechanisms, such as work on mainstreaming biodiversity into sectors such as energy (using information on bird strikes and electrocution, and techniques to avoid losses of birds in this way).

The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species

Read more: and dev/files/iucn_programme_2017-2020-final_approved.pdf


BirdLife International is the Red List Authority for birds, coordinating the regular evaluation of all the world’s bird species against the Red List Categories and Criteria to assess their extinction risk. You can search the BirdLife Data Zone for this information. BirdLife also uses the data to produce the State of the World’s Birds report: There are also Red List assessments for Europe, including for birds:, and also for many countries: The Red List Index (RLI) shows trends in the conservation status of different taxonomic groups that have been repeatedly assessed over time, such as all birds, mammals, corals and amphibians. It shows that for birds, the overall trend is one of decline: iucn-red-list-threatened-species/red-list-index Red List Indices can be disaggregated, for example to show the effect of specific threats to a taxonomic group, such as utilised bird species: http:// See also:

See also:



Using science in advocacy

Case Study 2.4

Decision-makers seeking to make evidence-based decisions must balance the desire for knowledge with the need to act despite uncertainty.

Illegal killing of birds is a growing concern across the Mediterranean. For example, in 2015 it was estimated that more than 25 million birds are illegally slaughtered in the region each year. For some species, the combined impacts of legal hunting and illegal killing can be substantial. Harvest information for both legal and illegal take is necessary to assess the sustainability of exploitation. Migratory species may be subject to mortality through illegal killing and legal hunting in multiple countries, so that assessing cumulative effects is particularly important.

Generating science that will effectively inform management and policy decisions requires the production of information that is relevant and timely, credible (e.g. peer-reviewed) and legitimate in the eyes of both researchers and decision-makers (developed via a process that considers the values and perspectives of all relevant actors).

The complex conservation problem of illegal killing of birds

As the issue of illegal killing of birds is very complex, involving a variety of stakeholders including local and national law enforcement agencies, hunting groups, national government authorities, NGOs and international policy instruments, addressing it requires action at local, national and international scales. It may be beneficial to develop an action plan to agree and guide multi-stakeholder action on illegal killing, such as the ones recently implemented in Egypt and Cyprus to address illegal trapping of birds. Collecting, collating and synthesising illegal killing data promotes more effective management of legally hunted bird populations and facilitates the setting of sustainable national harvest limits. In a recent assessment, the number of birds of all species killed each year in every Mediterranean country was assessed using a diverse range of data sources and expert knowledge. International policy instruments could also facilitate flyway-scale data collection, collation and analysis of illegal killing that could contribute to national and international policy-making. See more: and article/preliminary-assessment-of-the-scope-and-scale-of-illegal-killing-andtaking-of-birds-in-the-mediterranean/34A06A94874DB94BE2BBACC4F96C3B5F


Key challenges are: • Scientists and policy-makers/ managers may have contrasting perceptions about the relevance of research • Decision-makers may think that stronger scientific credibility compromises relevance and legitimacy • Different actors can have conflicting views about what constitutes legitimate information. There is also a threat of science becoming politicised – scientists may be perceived as biased if they advocate for conservation positions or work for an organisation involved in advocacy, so their actions must always be based on science. There is also a risk that scientists themselves might frame questions or interpret results favourable to a particular outcome and that stakeholders might focus solely on research that supports their position. Stakeholders can also have misapprehensions about science. Thus, scientists need to consider their role and how their values may alter the dynamics of advocacy. Some institutional frameworks producing scientific data that can inform management and policy include: • Environmental organisations that span the boundary between science and management • Research scientists embedded in resource management agencies • Decision-makers and scientists at research-focused institutions.



Box 2.12

Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas (IBAs) and Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) IBAs have been designated primarily for their importance to birds: https:// KBAs extend the IBA concept to other taxonomic groups: KBAs include Alliance for Zero Extinction (AZE) sites:, Freshwater KBAs: and KBAs identified under the CEPF hot-spot profiling process: https://www.cepf. net/our-work/biodiversity-hotspots. There are more than 13,000 IBAs worldwide as of 2018, forming one of the pillars of BirdLife International’s conservation efforts. These sites provide the BirdLife Partnership and others with a focus for conservation action, planning, and advocacy. IBAs are large enough to safeguard a viable population for a species, group of species, or entire avian community during at least part of its life-cycle, but are small enough to be conserved in their entirety. The BirdLife Secretariat develops and maintains the list of ‘trigger’ species (those for which sites are selected) and associated population thresholds to be used for each IBA category, as well as making sure the criteria are applied in a consistent way. At the global level, IBAs have been identified using a standardised set of four internationally agreed criteria based on the following: • Globally threatened species (CR, EN, VU) • Restricted-range species • Biome-restricted species • Congregatory species

At the regional level (Europe, Middle East, USA), the following types of criteria are used: • Regionally threatened species • Species largely restricted to the region • Congregatory species Sub-regional criteria have been developed for the European Union and South Africa, as well as for the Caribbean (waterbirds and seabirds only). While the means of site selection are set globally, the entire process is founded upon locally-collected, ground-truthed data that are analysed nationally.


BirdLife’s IBA programme has produced the only global, site-based, spatiallyexplicit set of information on biodiversity, which has been recognised by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) as the basis of a worldwide network of priority sites for conservation. The status and trends of IBAs are outputs that can be included in CBD national reports as well as in National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans. In many regions, IBA inventories have been used to identify potential Ramsar sites (wetlands of international importance). In the European Union, IBAs have been used as the basis for designating Special Protection Areas (SPAs) under the Birds Directive. IBAs are included, explicitly or implicitly, in the safeguard policies of international banks as critical habitats. Marine IBAs have been used for the designation of Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas (EBSAs) under the CBD. Hundreds of IBAs overlap with World Heritage Sites and UNESCO Biosphere Reserves, which provide additional leverage for their protection. For more information, see: programmes/sites-habitats-ibas-and-kbas



Box 2.13

Box 2.14

• Monitoring species, habitats or threats • Working with other organisations and stakeholders at local or national levels (e.g. donors, other NGOs, environment agencies or consultancies) • Networking and staying informed about economic activities in IBAs • Monitoring national and sub-national land use plans • Monitoring development projects approved by international or national banks • Forest cover monitoring: analysing global, regional and national deforestation maps • Analysing other land cover maps: agriculture, infrastructure, urban areas, etc. • Evaluating mining concessions

The African Sites Casework on Emerging Threats Taskforce (ASCET) is a subcommittee of the Africa Policy and Advocacy Working Group (APAWG) which supports partners in responding to IBAs under threat. It plays a key coordination role ( and derives its mandate from the Council for Africa Partnership.

Ways to identify threats to IBAs

Action to secure IBAs facing serious threats from damaging developments can include work to: • Oppose development • Accept development with some changes • Oppose development until further information is available • Provide data/expertise Establish the facts: Determine who the developer and consultant are and what you can learn about their history. What is the type and stage of the development and the relevant regulatory process? What is the location? What bird species are of interest? Are there any other ecological or community impacts? Will it affect an IBA/site where a Partner is working? Has the Partner or BirdLife been involved in similar cases? Should BirdLife get involved at a regional or global level? Who are the other potential allies at the national level? Visit the site! And remember: You likely will not be able to access ALL information, but can still take action based on collecting as much as possible.

IBAs under threat


Case selection criteria ASCET prioritises work on sites where there is: • Conservation interest – the most important bird sites are affected. • Scale of threat – a significant adverse impact on site/species/population is likely. • Imminence of threat – immediate action is required. • Strategic/political considerations – an emerging conservation issue (e.g. adaptation to climate change) exists and / or there is an opportunity for a precedent to be made. ASCET works on IBAs under threat to: • Carry out campaigns against harmful developments. • Apply the recommendations of the Audit Report of IBAs Facing Serious Threats. • Engage and influence key sectors mentioned in the Audit Report, namely agriculture, energy and mining. • Test ASCET criteria in prioritising site casework. • Build capacity for casework, policy and advocacy. • Support development of strategic partnerships. • Fund policy and advocacy work. Partners can support Local Conservation Groups through building capacity on policy and advocacy, including through mentorship and sharing experiences and successes from other regions.

Africa Casework Resources & Support

Africa casework booklet: 20Casework_Final.pdf Site casework web page: Global casework guide: Casework+Guide+and+resources



2.2.6 Online toolkits to support policy advocacy IBAT

BirdLife International with Conservation International, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and the United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEPWCMC) have developed the Integrated Biodiversity Assessment Tool or IBAT.3 This online tool is a platform to provide access to different global and national data sets for governments, businesses, researchers, civil society organisations, scientists, conservationists and others. IBAT combines three databases: the World Database of Key Biodiversity Areas™ 4, the World Database on Protected Areas5 and the Red List of Threatened Species database™.6 It is an interactive mapping tool that enables researchers, planners and decision-makers to easily access and use this up-to-date information to identify biodiversity risks and opportunities within a project boundary. The data can be used for research, planning, programme development and projects.

TESSA The Toolkit for Ecosystem Service Site-based Assessment, or TESSA, is a rapid assessment method for evaluating the benefits people receive from nature. TESSA is an online interactive PDF tool7 developed by the collaborative work of six institutions (Anglia Ruskin University, BirdLife International, University of Cambridge, RSPB, Tropical Biology Association and UNEP-WCMC). It allows people at field sites (as well as academics, CSOs and increasingly consultants and the private sector) to be able to understand the ecosystem services their site provides. TESSA assessments provide ecosystem services data which can help inform research, planning and policy decisions. The tool is grounded in simple techniques that makes it accessible to everyone.8

PRISM Practical Impact Assessment Methods for Small and Medium-sized Conservation Projects (PRISM)9 is a monitoring and evaluation toolkit designed to:

Box 2.15

Data collection and analysis for policy and legislation It is useful to determine what national and international legislation and policy, as well as datasets, are relevant to work you are doing on: • nature conservation and protected areas • specific sectors (e.g. renewable energy, agriculture, water) • land use planning and biodiversity offsets • Environmental Impact Assessments/ Strategic Environmental Assessments • Access to Information/ Access to Justice • international Conventions (e.g. CBD, CMS, Ramsar) • safeguard policies of international financing institutions • Corporate Social and Environmental Policies/ standards of the relevant industry, e.g. Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) Principles and Criteria for the Production of Sustainable Palm Oil


It is also useful to determine what processes and their timings can influence your work: • Environmental Impact Assessment: data collection, public consultation, approval • Environmental and other permits, consents and licenses • Legal cases: what are the main steps, timing, and requirements? • National elections • Development of new legislation • Development of land use/ spatial plans • Dates of meetings of international Conventions and other relevant bodies

• Demonstrate the effectiveness of projects • Learn from experience and develop and apply good practice and approaches that work • Share experiences to benefit the global community. The overall aim of PRISM is to “support small-to-medium sized conservation projects to effectively evaluate the outcomes and impacts of their work”. Small and medium-sized projects are those with the following characteristics: • Project budget <$100K • Small teams • Short timeframes (1–3 years)



• Low capacity • Little or no evaluation beyond measuring outputs • Increasingly asked to deliver and demonstrate outputs and impacts. PRISM: • Provides a simple overview of the theory behind evaluation relevant to small and medium-sized conservation projects • Guides users through a step by step process for evaluating project outcomes and impacts • Provides practical, easy to use methods to collect and analyse evaluation data that can be adapted for specific conservation scenarios • Helps projects to interpret, communicate and apply evaluation results to improve current practise.


The theory behind PRISM’s evaluation is: • Guidance should simplify the language around project design and evaluation • What do we mean by evaluation? • What do we mean by outcomes and impacts? • What project design frameworks exist (logframes, theory of change, etc.) and how can they be used to inform project evaluation? • Evaluation should be more than demonstrating success • Evaluation should provide useful information, while still remaining feasible to implement.



2.2.7 Further reading Advocacy toolkits

Climate Change and Resilience Information Center advocacy toolkits: Community Tool Box – Changing Policies: implement/changing-policies/overview/main Project planning, including fundraising and implementation: http://www. Community Tool Box: Identifying and Analyzing Stakeholders and Their Interests: identify-stakeholders/main Planning and process tools, including Problem Tree Analysis and Stakeholder Analysis:

Stakeholder analysis tool_english.pdf

Advocacy vs campaigning Advocacy_Guide.pdf


Framing Nature Toolkit


Books and scientific articles

Pielke Jr, Roger A. (2007) “The honest broker: making sense of science in policy and politics.” Cambridge University Press. FAO (2010) Developing Effective Forest Policy: A guide. i1679e/i1679e00.htm P.J. Simmons (1998) “Learning to Live with NGOs,” Foreign Policy. Voinov, Alexey and Francois Bousquet (2010) “Modelling with stakeholders.” Environmental Modelling & Software 25(11): 1268–1281. Reed, Mark S., Anil Graves, Norman Dandy, Helena Posthumus, Klaus Hubacek, Joe Morris, Christina Prell, Claire H. Quinn, and Lindsay C. Stringer (2009) “Who’s in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management.” Journal of environmental management 90(5): 1933–1949. Oates, Jennifer and Dodds, Lyndsey A. (2017) “An approach for effective stakeholder engagement as an essential component of the ecosystem approach” ICES Journal of Marine Science 74(1):391–397. BirdLife State of the World’s Birds:

How to make a power/interest grid:

References,, 4 5 8 To learn more about TESSA read assessing-ecosystem-services-tessa and see webinar at watch?v=Dn2Vd0HCprc 9







2.3 Section 2.3

Š Andy Chilton

Advocacy strategies: implementation and evaluation

Section 2.3

Advocacy strategies: implementation and evaluation Objectives The following section will discuss ways to implement your advocacy plans and make sure the outcomes and outputs are measurable.

2.3.1 Activity plan After undertaking the first stages of developing an advocacy strategy and establishing what issue your plan is going to address, what the nature of this is, and what solutions you are advocating for, it is time to prepare an activity plan or campaign.

method you use to convey your message and how you will go about this. At times you may have to use different communication strategies simultaneously and engage with different people at different levels. To determine whether you are achieving your campaign goals in the most effective way, describe each phase of action in your campaign in detail, and always ask yourself: What is this step doing? How does this action contribute to conveying my key messages? How is this action moving me closer to the end goal? See the example below:

Actions Developing a powerful message will tie your campaign together. If you want to influence people, make your message strong and engaging. If you have too many messages or one that is too vague, people will not be drawn to support your cause. Your primary message should include: • A statement: articulate the cause of the issue and why change is important • Evidence: support your statement with simple facts and figures • An example: provide a scenario that demonstrates the issue • A goal: clarify the change that you want to achieve • Action needed: the solution to the issue. This is the method for achieving the desired change.


e.g. Set up meeting with local Minister of your sector to discuss mainstreaming

Responsibility e.g. Policy officer

Timeline (if relevant)


e.g. Before January 2019

e.g. Minutes from meeting

The next step is to convert these key messages into step-by-step campaign goals. To do so, it is important to ask yourself: how am I conveying this message and when? It is important to clarify what



2.3.2 Monitoring and evaluation In designing your advocacy strategy, you need to think about how you will measure success. When has an intervention or campaign succeeded in reaching its target? What makes for a successful action and when has it failed? To do this, you need to develop indicators and how you will measure them. Developing indicators of success can be an easy way to monitor progress. By testing whether a specific campaign goal has been achieved, you will have a much clearer picture of progress made. For example, you decide to host a press conference and plan for 20 reporters to come. When those 20 people indeed attend, that is a measure of success. Monitoring and evaluation is a critical component of the project cycle. It allows you to keep track of any progress made and improvements needed to achieve true outcomes and successes. Moreover, monitoring and evaluation is useful for: • Problem solving and decision-making • Accountability and excellence • Knowledge and capacity-building • Advocacy and influence

What do we measure? • Baseline – What is the current situation that you want to change? Clarify this and measure change going forward. • Inputs – What human, financial or physical resources are put into a project? • Outputs – The direct products resulting from the action. • Outcomes – The results or consequences of the project. • Indicators – The system put in place to measure how well something has been achieved. Indicators can be quantitative or qualitative and should be objective.

Through monitoring and evaluation, you can begin to understand the reality and progress made on a project. You set a way of measuring indicators of progress and success. Monitoring measures inputs and outputs, the effort put into an action and level of progress. Indicators are explicit measures of the achievement of an objective that can be used to monitor and evaluate your advocacy plan. They should ideally measure changes of state rather than processes and should be SMART (see Box 2.2).


There are two key types of evaluation: process evaluation and impact evaluation. Process evaluation looks at how well the running of the project has gone, whereas impact evaluation examines the extent to which the project has affected or changed the problem. Implementation of your advocacy plan: • Your plan will not probably play out as you expect so you will need to adaptively manage changes. • It is important to regularly revisit your advocacy plan and assess it against your indicators, so that you can learn and adapt appropriately. • A monitoring framework and data collection practices may need to be established so that appropriate information is collected and shared. • It may be necessary to develop methods of effectively sharing and learning from the evaluation process, for example through meetings, workshops, publications, etc.

2.3.3 Fundraising for advocacy Sustainable financing is essential to the functioning of any organisation. In this section we discuss some basic strategies for general fundraising. A part of the budget obtained by general fundraising can be allocated for advocacy purposes. You will also need to consider which funds are unrestricted and which ones are attached to a project. It is recommended that a policy component be integrated into project proposals whenever possible. We also introduce some specific sources for advocacy fundraising.



The basic steps of developing a sustainable fundraising plan are: 1. Assess your organisation’s potential competitors (in the conservation sector) 2. Review current unrestricted fundraising sources (which can be used for any purpose) and what it would take to double them 3. Identify potential new sources of unrestricted income 4. Propose an unrestricted fundraising strategy 5. Develop a detailed plan to achieve unrestricted income growth 6. Determine other organisational support required to achieve growth.

It is important to manage risk when growing unrestricted income through: • Developing a ‘mix’ of funders and donations • Creating a fundraising pyramid – different sources of varying amounts. It helps to plan how to achieve a target by breaking down the overall amount sought into segments which determine which audience to target and what funds are being sought. A fundraising ‘pyramid’ describes a desired income mix.

Unrestricted vs project income

Medium risk


Low risk


Market/audience penetration Medium risk

Product development High risk


A stepped approach makes it possible to set a more achievable target as step one, with a view to growing that in the longer term. Four key steps to achieving desired unrestricted income are: 1. Implement a proposed fundraising plan to increase unrestricted income. 2. Review progress every six months to help identify areas for further growth. 3. Ahead of the next financial year, review the proposed unrestricted fundraising plan and set new targets. 4. Implement the revised unrestricted fundraising plan and review it annually.



Every opportunity should be taken to include advocacy work in project funding applications where funders are open to it. It may also be possible to use unrestricted funds that can be used for any purpose for advocacy – unrestricted funds may be able to be generated from donors, membership in your organisation or sales, among other methods. Fundraising events are a staple of many charities and can range from events such as dinners, fetes, sponsored cycle rides and runs to events organised by volunteers. A fundraising dinner (or similar event) could be used to showcase your organisation’s work to influential and wealthy individuals, recruit future patrons or secure sponsorship for elements of your organisation’s work.



Market extension/ new audiences


Figure 4. Ansoff matrix. Source: Ansoff, I.: Strategies for Diversification, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 35 Issue 5, Sep–Oct 1957, pp. 113–124



2.3.4 Further reading Monitoring and evaluation

Vogel, Isabel (2012) Review of the use of ‘Theory of Change’ in international development. UK: Department for International Development (DFID). Kusek, Jody Zall, and Ray C. Rist (2004) Ten steps to a results-based monitoring and evaluation system: a handbook for development practitioners. World Bank Publications. 296720PAPER0100steps.pdf?sequence=1


International Initiative for Impact Evaluation

Conflict management LOT3_Task%201-European_review.pdf Dues, Michael (2014) The Art of Conflict Management: Achieving Solutions for Life, Work, and Beyond. Teaching Company Redpath, S. M., J. Young, A. Evely, W. M. Adams, W. J. Sutherland, A. Whitehouse, A. Amar, R. A. Lambert, J. D. C. Linnell, A. Watt, and R. J. Gutiérrez (2013) Understanding and managing conservation conflicts. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 28:100–109. Cook, C. N., M. B. Mascia, M. W. Schwartz, H. P. Possingham, and R. A. Fuller (2013) Achieving Conservation Science that Bridges the Knowledge–Action Boundary. Conservation Biology 27:669–678.

Information on how to obtain funding

Potential funding sources Le Fonds français pour l’environnement mondial (FFEM) accueil, GEF small grants program: