Abstract

The paper presents a systemic and participatory assessment approach and scrutinizes how methodological changes necessitated during the Covid-19 pandemic implicated the process and its outcomes. The approach was applied in rural Tajikistan to evaluate changes effected by a development project that promoted the enhancement of biodiversity and ecosystem services in agrarian landscapes. The central building block of the assessment consisted of participatory workshops in 2018 and 2020 with farmers and other stakeholders to develop a systemic knowledge map and to evaluate the promoted strategies based on local expertise. The methodological basis was MARISCO (adaptive MAnagement of vulnerability and RISk at COnservation sites), a holistic and participatory approach to ecosystem-based assessment and management that requires well-trained facilitators. While the activities in 2018 could be implemented as planned, major changes in the work plan were necessary in 2020 due to severe travel restrictions and social distancing rules. Conducting virtual workshops was not possible, as it would have excluded key stakeholders from the process. Instead of conducting a comprehensive assessment workshop guided by two German MARISCO facilitators as originally planned, a series of short and small workshops could be realized. These workshops were facilitated by Tajik scientists after receiving virtual training from their German colleagues. Although it was possible to bring the assessment to a satisfactory conclusion, the methodological changes revealed significant drawbacks. Radical simplifications of the methods were necessary that led to reduced depth of the assessment and missed learning opportunities for participants. Limited experience in workshop guidance by the new facilitators posed challenges to the participatory process and the quality of its outcomes. While the adapted method created training effects that would otherwise have been missed, it also put additional pressure on the capacities of local partners. Our experience during the pandemic offers valuable lessons learned for future applications of systemic-participatory approaches. Whereas, a complete shift to remote applications is problematic, there is a need to put greater emphasis on capacitating local partners. Methodological trade-offs are necessary for partially remote working processes, but principles of participation and systemic thinking should not be compromised.

Highlights

  • Given the increasingly severe consequences of resource overuse and impacts of global climate change, there is an urgent need for a shift toward more sustainable farming systems that conserve and enhance ecosystem services while being resilient to emerging threats (Gliessman, 2014; Gerten et al, 2020)

  • Covid-19 has posed new challenges to participatory processes, with lockdowns, travel restrictions and social distancing measures often requiring teams to shift to predominantly virtual working modes

  • We presented a participatory assessment in rural Tajikistan where such a shift was not possible due to technical limitations and, most importantly, because it would have excluded key stakeholders from the process

Read more

Summary

INTRODUCTION

Given the increasingly severe consequences of resource overuse and impacts of global climate change, there is an urgent need for a shift toward more sustainable farming systems that conserve and enhance ecosystem services while being resilient to emerging threats (Gliessman, 2014; Gerten et al, 2020). The exercise of drawing results webs for individual strategies is helpful in this regard: the threats and contributing factors likely to be influenced by the selected strategy are translated into assumed outcomes, which are visualized in the form of detailed cause-effect relationships based on the connections predefined by the systemic knowledge map These methods of visualizing the systemic effects of strategies are useful for two more steps that had to be omitted, yet with different effects on the assessment: the strategic gap analysis and the development of complementary strategies. As social distancing rules demanded the limitation of workshops to a handful of participants (apart from the facilitators), we decided to invite only farmers, as their knowledge and viewpoints were of priority for the prime objective of our mission—the evaluation of the strategies promoted by German Agro Action This meant that other stakeholders, in particular decision-makers from local authorities and NGOs did not participate. This experience during the Covid-19 pandemic has provided valuable insights for future work with MARISCO, regarding its adaptability to various workshop formats and the trade-offs to be made when radical simplifications become necessary

CONCLUSION
Findings
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call