LSP Working Paper 27 Access to Natural Resources Sub-Programme Making rights a reality: Participation in practice and lessons learned in Mozambique Christopher Tanner, Sergio Baleira, Simon Norfolk, Boaventura Cau and Janete Assulai 2006 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS Livelihood Support Programme (LSP) An inter-departmental programme for improving support for enhancing livelihoods of the rural poor. Making rights a reality: Participation in practice and lessons learned in Mozambique Christopher Tanner, Sergio Baleira, Simon Norfolk, Boaventura Cau and Janete Assulai 2006 Photograph by ORAM Zambezia: Community land rights meeting in Zambezia This paper was prepared under contract with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). The positions and opinions presented are those of the authors alone, and are not intended to represent the views of FAO. Making rights a reality The Livelihood Support Programme The Livelihood Support Programme (LSP) evolved from the belief that FAO could have a greater impact on reducing poverty and food insecurity, if its wealth of talent and experience were integrated into a more flexible and demand-responsive team approach. The LSP works through teams of FAO staff members, who are attracted to specific themes being worked on in a sustainable livelihoods context. These cross- departmental and cross-disciplinary teams act to integrate sustainable livelihoods principles in FAO’s work, at headquarters and in the field. These approaches build on experiences within FAO and other development agencies. The programme is functioning as a testing ground for both team approaches and sustainable livelihoods principles. Email: [email protected] Access to natural resources sub-programme Access by the poor to natural resources (land, forests, water, fisheries, pastures, etc.), is essential for sustainable poverty reduction. The livelihoods of rural people without access, or with very limited access to natural resources are vulnerable because they have difficulty in obtaining food, accumulating other assets, and recuperating after natural or market shocks or misfortunes. The main goal of this sub-programme is to build stakeholder capacity to improve poor people’s access to natural resources through the application of sustainable livelihood approaches. The sub-programme is working in the following thematic areas: 1. Sustainable livelihood approaches in the context of access to different natural resources 2. Access to natural resources and making rights real 3. Livelihoods and access to natural resources in a rapidly changing world This paper addresses why laws have at times not lived up to their promise of benefiting local people in terms of poverty impact and greater local participation in resource management decisions. It is not enough to say that such laws are impractical or too idealistic. In order to help “make rights real”, this report attempts to kickstart a systematic approach to monitoring the practical application of new legislation in Mozambique. Participation in practice and lessons learned in Mozambique TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................1 2. STEPS TOWARD PARTICIPATION ..........................................................................4 2.1 Natural Resources Legislation..............................................................................5 2.2 Judicial Training...................................................................................................8 2.3 Conflict resolution................................................................................................9 2.4 Local level planning and decentralization..........................................................11 2.5 Community Based Forestry and Natural Resource Management ......................14 2.6 Natural resource access and sustainable livelihoods..........................................17 3. PARTICIPATION IN POLICY PROCESSES...........................................................20 3.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................20 3.2 Political power and policy process before intervention .....................................23 3.3 Control over resources and incentive structures.................................................24 3.4 Policy impact: who was affected, who benefited? .............................................25 3.5 Potential impact of the organizations/projects on the policy environment?.......26 3.6 Political environment .........................................................................................27 3.7 Procedures and mechanisms...............................................................................30 3.8 Analysis of methods and strategies used............................................................30 3.9 Opportunities and constraints.............................................................................35 3.10 Impact of policies...............................................................................................38 3.11 Critical factors....................................................................................................39 4. THE WORKSHOP........................................................................................................41 4.1 Opening remarks................................................................................................41 4.2 LSP research exercises .......................................................................................42 4.3 Case studies........................................................................................................45 4.4 Working groups..................................................................................................51 4.5 Conclusions ........................................................................................................55 4.6 Recomendations of participants .........................................................................59 4.7 Conclusions and closing remarks.......................................................................60 5. DISCUSSION.................................................................................................................64 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................70 iii Making rights a reality iv Participation in practice and lessons learned in Mozambique 1. INTRODUCTION This paper represents part of an area of work which analyses access to natural resources in Mozambique. An initial paper examined the extent to which Mozambique’s recent regulatory changes to natural resource access and management have had their intended effects (LSP Working Paper 17: Norfolk, S. (2004). “Examining access to natural resources and linkages to sustainable livelihoods: a case study of Mozambique”). This paper is complemented by LSP Working Paper 28: Tanner et al. (2006). “Mozambique’s legal framework for access to natural resources: The impact of new legal rights and community consultations on local livelihoods”. Background In the last decade, several important and innovative policies and laws have been passed in Mozambique, designed in part to enhance rural livelihoods by strengthening rights of people – especially the rural poor – to natural resources. The most notable of these are the Land Policy and Law (1997) and the Forestry and Wildlife Policy and Law (1999), all of which contain provisions to protect existing local rights on the one side, and promote local level participation in resource management on the other. The 1997 Environment Law also explicitly calls for local participation in its implementation, and creates new “diffuse rights” that apply to social groupings and which can be collectively exercised and defended. Key instruments such as the Environmental Impact regulations insist on full consultative processes involving all stakeholders and including local people. There have been notable “success stories” where these instruments have been used in a way that has genuinely benefited local people. Overall however, it must be said that these cases are limited in number, and that to date these new laws have not lived up to their promise in terms of poverty impact and greater local participation in resource management decisions. These questions take on added significance in Mozambique today, when the newly elected government is developing new strategies for rural development and food security, in which resource management and local participation issues are central areas of concern. Why is this and what can be done about it? There are many possible answers concerning causes. Some observers point to conceptual weaknesses and ambiguities in the laws themselves. Others emphasise a lack of political will and financial resources to actually implement the laws. Institutional incapacity to implement worthy but impractical social principles is also often cited – if the laws cannot be made to work, then they should be changed or replaced by laws which more closely reflect the real capacity of the country to implement them. These are no doubt valid observations, and merit serious and sustained attention. But it is equally true to say that they are only valid if sufficient attention has indeed been given to 1 Making rights a reality addressing weaknesses in the capacities of a wide diversity of stakeholders