Communication played a key role in the success of this project. KWCA held a number of virtual meetings from the planning stages to the assessment stage. The choice for virtual meetings was necessitated by the covid-19 pandemic and the associated government measures to control its spread including  country lock down thereby disrupting mobility and physical meetings. Some of the virtual calls included planning meetings, inception meeting with the conservancy members to enhance a shared understanding of the project scope and manage stakeholder expectation. Virtual meetings were also held to create awareness of SAGE to the key stakeholders, and to also collaboratively map out the conservancy stakeholders.

The lead consultant, with support from the assistant facilitators, spearheaded the translation of the SAGE principles and questions to the local language for wider uptake especially by the stakeholders who were only proficient in the local language.

Issues of poisoning are sometimes sensitive and people might be reluctant to share much-needed information. To gain their trust, the implementer approached the local government authority and signed a Memorandum of Understanding which enables us to work in the area. Another engagement meeting was done with the local leadership (chiefs, headman) to discuss our intention in the area as a conservation organization. These steps increased our transparency as an honest organization. Building on these strong relations and trust with local communities is essential to ensure that they share such information.

The SAGE Assessment is a participatory process involving all the key stakeholders of the conservancy.  Identification of stakeholders was carried out at the planning phase of the assessment. This stakeholder mapping was spearheaded by the SAGE consultant and involved Kenya Wildlife Conservancies Association (KWCA), Taita Taveta Wildlife Conservancies Association (KWCA landscape level Association working within Tsavo Landscape) and Amboseli Ecosystem Trust (KWCA Landscape level Association working within Amboseli Landscape). The following stakeholder groups were identified and invited for the assessment workshops: Conservancy management, Conservancy Investors, Youth, Men, Women and Board.  The  assessments were attended by a total of 99 participants.

Each assessment was followed by a synthesis workshop where each group selected two to three representatives to attend the synthesis workshop. The findings of the assessment workshops were presented at the synthesis workshop and ideas for action were discussed. A total of 46 stakeholders from two conservancies attended the synthesis workshop.

The engagement of all relevant stakeholders in the SAGE ensures that stakeholders are all heard and invested in the actions that they collectively decide on. 

Implementation is the desire of any plan. It is the “boots on the ground” that counts. A portion of the equation is developing a protected area enforcement plan. Equally important is the capacity to implement. To determine ability to implement, an organization must carry out a self-analysis. The plan can outline fundraising needs: capacity needs, equipment and tools. Additionally, an organization can have a buildup period for implementation showing donors the full picture of desired impact.

This process involved peer-to-peer learning among the different sites of the project beneficiaries, to learn from one another, adopt some good governance practices and adapt to their local situations such as how to structure good benefit-sharing mechanisms.

Blue Parks relies heavily on collaborations with other conservation NGOs, communications and marketing professionals, government leaders, MPA managers, scientists, and local ocean champions. Growing the network of Blue Parks and amplifying the Blue Park standard for conservation effectiveness requires many partners.

To shift from unsustainable to sustainably produced charcoal and alternative fuels (e.g. briquets from agricultural residues) they need to be competitive in the market. This can only be achieved with government support by regulating charcoal production and enabling competitive prices. These include the setting up of a formal sector and a sustainable forest management system (see building block 2).  

The effectiveness of training is increased if follow-up with participants is ensured. This allows the organisers to check on the feasibility of follow-on activities discussed during the training and can account for the follow-up needs[NM1]  of the participants. Follow-up activities can range from webinars to on-site activities in the respective countries

 [NM1]Needs: unclear. = if something has not been understood or if there are follow up questions, or resources needed or something of the sort?

If so: see suggestion for possible re-formulation.

Integrating FMNR with livelihood activities is strongly recommended. For example, alternative livelihood development activities can support FMNR uptake by reducing household dependence on unsustainable timber harvesting for subsistence and/or sale. Complementary livelihood activities to support FMNR outcomes include: 

1. Agricultural development activities that promote sustainable intensification and/or diversification of smallholder agricultural production. Combining trees on cropland and pasture with conservation agriculture practices has proved to increase crop yields and improve livestock productivity.
2. Market development activities that support more profitable marketing of products produced by smallholder farmers. They enhance the adoption and sustainability of FMNR by increasing smallholder incomes, thereby reducing the need for households to adopt coping strategies that can further damage the natural environment and reduce biodiversity.
3. Energy-saving solutions (e.g. clean cookstoves) that support FMNR by reducing household demand for wood, thus increasing the likelihood that trees that can regenerate will not cut down or felled for their wood in unsustainable ways.

The institutional capacity to support EbA technology transfer has been built through training and the joint development and implementation of the Long-Term Research Programme (LTRP) in partnership with local universities, for measuring the short- and long-term effects of EbA interventions. The activities included establishing monitoring sites, conducting research activities, collecting data, and publishing findings as technical reports, research papers, bachelor theses, master theses, Ph.D. theses, and peer-reviewed papers.

In Nepal, for example, the development of EbA interventions started with assessing local practices and determining whether these practices can be improved or upscaled before introducing new approaches. Based on these findings, the Chinese and South African experts designed possible interventions together with the local expert and advised on their implementation and monitoring against project indicators and targets.

The technology transfer also took place through inter-regional capacity-building, with the EbA experts, and the project coordinators regularly meeting through the steering committee, workshops, training, site visits, and conferences.