Without hands-on training, many groups struggled with basic hive management, harvesting techniques, and recognizing ripe honey. This led to low yields, colony absconding, and even spoilage of harvested honey. The ToT model allowed for local knowledge sharing, but follow-up mentoring is critical to reinforce learning and avoid skill gaps. Including government officers in the training proved beneficial, as it helped bridge the gap between producers and support services. In some cases, livestock officers lacked demonstration equipment and had not received prior training in hive management, limiting their ability to support communities. Trainings need to include practice with real hives, not just demonstrations. In future, ToTs should always receive refresher courses and facilitation to provide ongoing peer support in their communities.

Local carpenters were eager to participate and could absorb high-volume orders, but lacked understanding of key design features without dedicated training. Training content must go beyond woodworking and include bee biology to ensure hive functionality and ease of inspection. Substandard hive production leads to poor occupancy and reduced trust in apiculture as a livelihood. Continued quality control remains a challenge and should be addressed through follow-up support. The model works best when carpenters are embedded in local markets and directly interact with beekeepers. Training carpenters also shifts the local economy from donation-driven models to community-based entrepreneurship. A shared understanding between beekeepers, extension officers, and carpenters helps avoid misalignment between hive design and management practices. The success of this approach shows that supporting upstream actors in the value chain can improve outcomes for end users.

1. Financial Plans Require Regular Updates 

A 4-year financial projection is useful for long-term vision, but real-world variables (material costs, demand shifts) require Monthly reviews to stay accurate. 

2.  Long-Term Budgets Can Be Too Optimistic 
   Our 2 to 3 year goals were sometimes too ambitious compared to what we actually spent. 
    
3. Feedback Forms Should Be Simple 
   In the first round, our form was too long (5 pages), so even close friends didn’t finish it in given time. 
     
4.  Institutional Partnerships Take Time 

Schools/colleges often delayed surveys due to bureaucratic processes. 

 Advice 

• Start small: Test financial and feedback tools in small groups before scaling up. Make your Financial plan flexible and check key numbers every month to stay on track. 
• Keep it short: A one-page feedback form often gives you most of the information you need. 
• Leave room for change: Set aside 15–20% of your budget for adjustments and unexpected costs. 

What Worked Well: 

• Partnering with Girls' Schools and Hostels helped us reach first-time users and young women, many of whom became regular users. 
• User Committees were effective in creating a sense of ownership. Members took pride in being local sellers and advocates of a biodegradable solution. 
• Municipality Endorsement helped legitimize our work and opened up funding or distribution opportunities through local government health budgets. 

Challenges Faced: 

• Uneven Partner Commitment: Some organizations expressed interest but lacked follow-through. Vetting partners based on past delivery capacity is essential. 
• Sustaining Local Entrepreneurs: Some user committee members needed ongoing motivation, guidance, or sales training to continue actively. 

 Advice for Replication: 

• Support Local Entrepreneurs Beyond the Initial Training: Offer refresher sessions, recognition, and a clear sales incentive model. 
• Start Small and Scale with Trustworthy Partners: Pilot with a few committed institutions before expanding. 
• Document Everything: Keep records of meetings, partner roles, and expectations to avoid misalignment later. 
• Regular Check-Ins: Monthly or bi-monthly calls or visits help keep local committees active and reinforce accountability. 

Creating a multi-stakeholder process, especially one involving local communities, requires time and well-structured, interactive sessions. Continuity through regular workshops is essential. Moderators must ensure ongoing engagement, respect all voices, and value each contribution. Activities like valorisation training, offering new insights, are vital.

Joint plans and written agreements are only possible once trust has been established. This trust requires repeated, open, and sometimes intense discussions. For example, defining roles led to deep exchanges between communities, traditional healers, and researchers. As communities realized they had need to contribute, even share protected knowledge, fears had to be voiced - and some discussions ran until 10:30 p.m. These moments were crucial to clarify short-term outcomes and what needs more time.

The government’s role remained a point of contention, as national authorities saw themselves not as partners, but as decision-makers due to their financial role.

One of the key lessons learned is that the absence or vagueness of legal and policy frameworks for co-management has limited the effectiveness and sustainability of ESA interventions at the initial stage of the project. Where clear, recognized backing was formed, community roles were more respected, rights were defined, and conservation outcomes became more enduring.

Equitable benefit sharing is essential to the success of ESA co-management. In the We-walkele ESA, conservation efforts were designed to align with local livelihoods, particularly by enhancing the cane-based handicraft industry. Through training, market linkages, and in-stitutional support, communities gained stable incomes while actively contributing to biodi-versity conservation. This mutually beneficial arrangement demonstrates that when communi-ties share both the responsibilities and rewards of managing an ESA, conservation efforts become more inclusive, participatory, and sustainable.
 

Start by Listening to Local Actors: Health workers, teachers, ward officials, and community leaders bring grounded knowledge of social norms, barriers, and opportunities. Gathering perspectives across all operational levels builds a clearer picture of the landscape, leading to better-informed decisions and more effective design.

Community Engagement Builds Ownership: When local stakeholders are involved in decision-making—not just implementation—solutions gain legitimacy, traction, and long-term support. It takes time, but that investment pays off. People are more likely to champion the work and even take on responsibilities when they feel their input genuinely shapes the outcome.

Partnerships Multiply Reach and Relevance: Working with NGOs, schools, and health posts expands your impact and ensures that interventions reflect local realities. These partnerships don’t just support delivery—they open space for dialogue. Through regular exchange, new ideas emerge, unexpected opportunities arise, and your approach stays responsive to real needs.

Trust Is Slow but Foundational: Local trust is built through presence, follow-through, and consistency—not one-off meetings. It also depends on information flow: partners need time to learn about each other’s goals, values, and working styles. Only with that mutual understanding can genuine, lasting collaboration take root.

Tailor Communication to the Audience: Different levels of partners require different approaches—from informal conversations to formal MOUs. A clear communication strategy helps ensure the right tone, tools, and timing. Each partner is different, and taking time to understand their expectations and preferred ways of working allows for more effective, respectful collaboration.

Be Transparent About the Project Stage: If you're still prototyping, say so. Honesty earns respect—even when things aren’t perfect. Being open about key challenges builds credibility and trust. It invites dialogue, creates space for joint problem-solving, and helps manage expectations among partners and stakeholders.

Co-creation Outperforms Top-Down Models: Collaborative design takes time, but it leads to stronger partnerships, deeper user ownership, and better outcomes. When community members and local partners help shape the process from the beginning—not just implement it—they’re more invested and more likely to stand by the work long-term. Co-creation surfaces insights that top-down approaches often miss, and it builds mutual accountability that strengthens resilience when challenges arise.

Women’s Organizations Amplify Impact: These groups bring deep community roots, lived experience, and credibility—especially when working on sensitive topics like menstruation. Their networks open doors that others can’t, and their long-standing presence builds trust faster. Collaborating with women-led or women-focused organizations strengthens outreach, ensures gender-sensitive approaches, and adds critical insight to both program design and advocacy.

Global Learning Adds Value, Not Blueprinting: Engaging with global peers offers inspiration, shared strategies, and insight into what works elsewhere—but direct replication rarely fits. Local realities vary, and blindly applying external models can lead to failure or rejection. Instead, meaningful learning comes from adapting global lessons to your specific context, guided by local knowledge and needs.

National Networks Are Catalysts for Alignment: Being active in national platforms (like MHMPA Nepal) connects your work to policy dialogues, strengthens your credibility, and creates opportunities for joint campaigns, learning, and influence. These networks help keep the project relevant and resilient within a shifting national context.

Start Government Communication Early: Engaging with local and national government bodies from the start builds transparency and reduces resistance later. Officials are more likely to support projects they’ve been informed about early.

Hiring Local Staff Builds Legitimacy: Local team members understand the administrative landscape, cultural norms, and informal power dynamics. Their presence facilitates smoother government relations and enhances community trust.

Visit Similar Factories First: Seeing how others operate—especially those working with sanitary pads or similar machinery—helps avoid design flaws, underestimate space needs, or miss critical compliance steps.

Secure and Legalize Land Before Construction: Ensure land ownership or lease agreements are clear, registered, and aligned with zoning laws. This avoids legal disputes and delays during setup.

Plan for Road and Transport Access: Factories must be reachable by road for raw material delivery, machinery transport, and product distribution. Poor access increases costs and reduces efficiency.

Understand Local Regulations in Detail: From building codes to environmental clearances and import duties—every step must comply with national and local laws. Delays often stem from missed details or assumptions.

Expect Bureaucratic Delays in Importing Materials: Importing machinery or raw materials—especially from India—often involves shifting regulations, unclear timelines, and repeated follow-ups. Strong documentation and regular contact with customs officers are essential.

Get Insurance Coverage in Place Early: Insuring the factory and its assets protects against financial losses from fire, burglary, or natural disasters. It also improves your credibility with investors and partners.

Budget for Legal and Administrative Costs: Legal setup involves more than expected—permits, taxes, certifications, and consultations. Having a buffer for these costs prevents interruption in critical phases.

Evaluate Surroundings Carefully: Avoid building too close to sensitive sites like schools or densely populated areas. A peaceful coexistence with neighbors supports long-term operations.

Legal Compliance Unlocks Institutional Partnerships: Government contracts, school distribution, and institutional sales require formal recognition. Being fully registered and approved enables new opportunities and funding.

• Women are highly motivated actors in conservation when given the opportunity, support, and community structures.
• Combining conservation with financial literacy and livelihood support ensures long-term engagement and reduces resource pressure.
• Local leadership and peer influence (as seen with Alima and Soatombo) are critical to mobilizing broader community participation.

• The implementation of this step-by-step system required considerable work and coordination: working groups were set up to bring together the various stakeholders of the Programme – naturalists and representatives from the golfing world – to shape the current version, which requires clubs to take concrete action following the ecological assessment. In the earlier version of the Programme (prior to 2022), clubs could obtain the Certification simply by completing the ecological diagnostics.
• This step-based system requires strong coordination between the teams at ffgolf and the Museum. Within each organization, a dedicated staff member oversees the Programme: at ffgolf, this person supports clubs through every stage of the process, while at the Museum, they provide scientific and technical guidance.
• Implementing the programme requires genuine commitment from the club manager, as well as from the greenkeeper and the course maintenance teams. The programme is entirely voluntary and is not linked to any regulatory requirements. For some clubs, the cost of participation remains a barrier, which currently prevents all clubs from being able to take part.