1. ANCHOR DETERMINE THECHANGEOBJECTIVE(S) 1.3 DEFINETHEINSTITUTIONALCHALLENGE(S) 1.2 IDENTIFYTHESUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENTGOAL 1.1 KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE & COLOMBIA NICARAGUA, HONDURAS, framework legalandregulatoryContradictory Lack oftrustamongstakeholders Institutional Challenge indigenous communities whilerespecting communities indigenous vision. socialandcultural their The developmentgoalinHonduraswastopromote sustainabledevelopmentof the » effective hindered stakeholders among Weak Mistrust change: for environment » indigenous landindigenous rights. in legislation the policies weakened including contradictions enforcement the of of coherence Lack in land tenure instruments: and policy titling Inefficient building.dialogue and consensus titling policies. titling landrightsintenureindigenous and Introduce consistenttreatment of sandconsensusforchange. build coalition amongstakeholdersto Foster dialogue Change Objective STEP 2:DEFINE 2. DEFINE 2.3 2.2 2.1

IDENTIFY THEMOSTAPPROPRIA DETERMINE INTERMEDIA IDENTIFY P » N » N » IM » E » N » R » R » » » » » » » » » T indigenous peoples. indigenous of rights land to the recognition unprecedented given had Colombia forlegal recognizing framework and lands indigenous territorial and rights, Honduras. with and linguistic history peoples’indigenous land and territorial and shared rights a common cultural of recognition the in progress substantial achieved had countries both because providers knowledge ideal as Colombia and Nicaragua identified procedures of demarcation and titling of communal Miskito lands. land issues. contentious plan to address action of the to leading drafting dismantled) is distrust seated deep (the government Honduran the and people Miskito territories. of indigenous titling and of demarcation process the in proficiency will develop regulation land and titling land implementing roles, procedures, consultation and governance of communal lands. stakeholder frameworks of legal will reveal knowledge improved stakeholders relationship their with government counterparts. aworking build and rights; their affecting of policy drafting the in directly internationallymodels; other network federations; with indigenous participate and involvedframework in recognition the and of protection rights. indigenous NHANCED SKILLS: Representatives of key public agencies responsible for for responsible of key agencies public NHANCED Representatives SKILLS: epresentatives of the Miskito community who would learn about other other about learn would who community Miskito of the epresentatives regulatory land and titling land in agencies of public epresentatives he communities, Miskito Government, Honduran the and World the Bank icaragua was one of the countries in Latin America with the most advanced advanced most the with America Latin in countries of the one was icaragua EW AND IMPROVED ACTIONS: Honduran government establishes clear clear establishes IMPROVED AND EW government ACTIONS: Honduran Honduran with surveys follow-up and KNOWLEDGE: Baseline EW PROVED CONSENSUS: There is a greater agreement and trust between the the PROVED between CONSENSUS: trust and agreement agreater is There ARTICIPANT PROFILES TE OUTCOMES TE KNOWLEDGEPROVIDERS STEP 3:DESIGN &DEVELOP 3.1 SELECT THE PARTICIPANTS Participants from Honduras included Miskito organizations and communities in the Department of “Gracias a Dios” as well as government agencies involved with policies concerning indigenous peoples land and territorial rights: »» 10 indigenous lenders from various Miskito municipalities »» 8 representatives from the Property Institute »» 2 representatives of the National Agrarian Institute »D» irector of the Department of Social Development in the Ministry of Indigenous and Afro-Hondurans

3.2 VERIFY THE OBJECTIVE AND OUTCOMES STILL VALID

3. DESIGN & DEVELOP 3.3 ORGANIZE THE DESIGN AND DELIVERY TEAM »A» n anthropologist specialized in the Miskito culture »A» n expert facilitator specialized in the design and management of knowledge exchanges »R» epresentatives of the main Miskito organization MASTA

3.4 ASSEMBLE THE KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE A. CONSIDER THE OPERATING CONSTRAINTS & OPPORTUNITIES

Budget: US$144,000

Participant Mix: Public and community

Timeframe: 2 years

STEP 3: DESIGN & DEVELOP (continued) (continued)

3.4 ASSEMBLE THE KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE B. BLEND AND SEQUENCE KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE INSTRUMENT(S)

C. SEQUENCE KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE ACTIVITIES 3. DESIGN & DEVELOP

STEP 4: IMPLEMENT STEP 4.1 GUIDE THE PARTICIPANTS ALONG THEIR LEARNING JOURNEY

How can you facilitate a genuine learning experience for participants and empower them to act? 4. IMPLEMENT

STEP 4.2 ORCHESTRATE ENGAGEMENT AND BUILD RELATIONSHIPS

How can you ensure participant needs are being met? How can participants support one another and become collaborators for change?

STEP 4.3 DOCUMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND TRACK RESULTS

How can you adjust to necessary changes in direction?

How can you track these changes?

How can you capture real-time evidence of results?

STEP 5: MEASURE & REPORT STEP 5.1 SYNTHESIZE IMPLEMENTATION DATA

What did you learn during the knowledge exchange process?

STEP 5.2 MEASURE RESULTS Measure Achievement of Intermediate Outcomes

Did the exchange build the capacity, Assess Progress on the Change Objective confidence and/or conviction of participants to act?

Did the exchange influence results at the institutional and systemic levels? Assess Design and Implementation 5. MEASURE & REPORT RESULTS 5. MEASURE & REPORT

STEP 5.3 REPORT RESULTS Identify the Audience and Define the Goals

What results should you highlight for different audiences?

Summary Report Memo Presentation Blog Posting Other How can you Final Report Briefing Webinar Email disseminate results? Results Story Press Release Facebook Page Webpage

END ONE JOURNEY...BEGIN THE NEXT