Once demonstration sites are selected, local ASM groups receive training and are contracted to implement FRM through six steps:

1. Preparation & Planning: degradation, boundary, hydrological & equipment assessments; labor, volume estimates; waste management; OHS standards
2. Technical Rehabilitation: infill, regrading and reprofiling; use of limited mechanisation
3. Topsoils: identification, conservation and re-distribution across sites
4. Biological Rehabilitation: topsoil enrichment ; natural regeneration assessments; identification of native and key vegetation communities; seed collection; seeds and natural fertilizers distribution into topsoils; tree, shrub and grass plantings
5. Mitigation Hierarchy: integrating rehabilitation planning into active ASM design and operations so as to reduce primary environmental impacts and unnecessary rehabilitation efforts
6. Handover of completed rehabilitation site to relevant government administrations for approval/sign-off

On the basis that government ministries are willing and able to work together to develop solutions to address impacts of ASM on the wider environment, Protected Areas and on stakeholders impacted by such mining activity, a national working group (which includes such ministries, agencies and relevant representative stakeholders) needs to be established. This will help steer the process of project engagement with local government, artisanal miners and wider stakeholders at the local level to set the scene for Frugal Rehabilitation Demonstration (FRD). A key step in this process is to select sites for FRD that can serve the development and application of the methodology within the ecological, economic and social context. The purpose of establishing this FRM working group is to ensure a participatory, consultative approach to the development of the methodology, and to enable a demonstration site selection process that ensures an informed and strategic approach based on agreed criteria. Sites selected for methodology demonstration need to be typical, representative and associated with formalised ASM capacity to undertake the rehabilitation.

Acknowledging and identifying conflicts between ministries and sectoral stakeholders is important. It is important at the early stages of an initiative to recognise these problems and to establish and work through a consultative platform to make the case for a methodology that is of value to all stakeholders, that is inclusive of artisanal miners and the stakeholders impacted by such mining as well as government ministries. It is only through such collaboration that a methodology can be developed that addresses environmental concerns, meets artisanal miners needs for performance-based incentives and access to land, and can be valued by government in formalising condition-based permitting for mining. It is within the context and platform of engagement that the FRM can be demonstrated to be of value to all stakeholders, and deliver outcomes at the local as well as national level.

As a strategy of connection and contribution of the citizenship, because in the first edition (2013) We were able to finance all expenses, a conservation fund was generated from the collection of the cost of the registration of the event, the fund was delivered to the Promoter Group CPY and it was invested in conservation actions and sustainable use of the territory, with the fund was bought trap cameras for monitoring biodiversity.
This proposal was not sustainable for following editions, due to the considerable increase of the participation and the associated costs, currently we use the fee of the registrations to complete the event financing.

To improve local governance in the Sumpul River, it was crucial to mainstream the ecosystem approach into land management, and train accordingly water local governance structures, local authorities, and farmers. Together they implement EbA measures to face drought and variability such as: soil conservation practices, protected spring water and implemented agroforestry systems.

Capacity building was delivered to: 

• >100 farmers through a "learning by doing" approach to attain demonstrative results in the field. The EbA measures implemented focused on the ecosystem services of water and soil, on productive diversification and on mitigating the impacts of climate change and variability (winds and extreme rainfall) on crops and goods and  improve water infiltration and availability in the area. 
• Water Committes on organizational and management skills as well as on integral water management, in order to influence their understanding of the importance of water ecosystem services.
• Leader and farmer women were trained on communication skills.
• Municipal officers were part of a regional climate change adaptation training and exchange of experience with other 30 local governements of Mesoamerica. 

Governance for adaptation requires flexible policy and legal frameworks. Therefore, the upper sub-basin’s governance platforms required management instruments that would enable those adaptation options and forms of governance that brought about the greatest socio-environmental benefits to be valued and institutionalized. The Internal Regulations of several ADESCO Water Committees and the sub-basin’s Binational Community Committee were drafted, with the latter also updating its Strategic Plan (five-year plan) and Annual Operating Plan.

The process took into account new dynamics and trends in the sub-basin, as well as the EbA approach. The formulation of municipal policies was also supported (Local Adaptation Plans for La Palma and San Ignacio, El Salvador). Given that adaptation to climate change is immersed in a series of uncertainties about future climate impacts and development trajectories, these frameworks and instruments must be constantly evolving, always taking into account lessons derived from field and governance experiences. In this way, adaptation to climate change can move forward under a flexible approach, and through iterative cycles, generate short-term strategies in view of long-term uncertainties.

Adaptation to climate change is immersed in a series of uncertainties regarding future climate impacts and development trajectories. Therefore, adaptation must proceed under a flexible “learning by doing" approach, integrating flexibility into legal and policy frameworks, and into sequential and iterative decisions that generate short-term strategies in view of the long-term uncertainties. In Goascorán, the lack of regulatory and policy frameworks for the management of shared basins limits the capacity to jointly respond to climate change - and therefore to be flexible and learn. This limitation was remedied by integrating adaptation into various management instruments at the micro-watershed, municipal and national level, and in transboundary agendas between local actors. The effectiveness of these (and other new) frameworks should be evaluated in interim periods, to allow for revisions and adjustments as knowledge about climate change increases; the same is true for EbA measures in the short term. The information that underpins these iterative processes must integrate Western science with local knowledge. In this way, it is possible to be flexible and identify new adaptation options and criteria for its evaluation.

Governance options and responses for adaptation to climate change are new and must be constantly evolving; desicions and governance pklan need to be flexible; hence adaptation must move forward under a flexible approach. This is possible with the application of EbA measures with a "learning by doing" while using best available sicientific information on climate scenarios and informing policy local and national instruments.

Climate vulnerability in Esquichá was assessed using the CRiSTAL tool ( “Community-based Risk Screening Tool – Adaptation and Livelihoods.")

After a first planing of EbA activities, actions for integrating flexibility were:

• The periodic evaluation of field EbA actions and the adoption of short-term decisions
• Monitoring and evaluation results will be key to include important adjustments
• Inclusion of EbA measures in the Microbasin Management Plan
• Assessment of measures to inform the municipality Development Plan.
• Informing of results to competent authorities as the municipality of the Forest Institute (INAB). This has lead INAB to seek tools to improve the way incentives are assigned and to identify communities located in key water catchment areas.

Ecosystem-based adaptation and conservation of non-PAs is possible only in done at a landscape level. Multiiple stakeholders with varying interests and agendas co-exist and influence a landscape, including the communities that resides within them. It is critical to create consensus among these stakeholders. Getting stakeholders together requires a driving force - it can be an individual/ group /organisation/a set of organisations - they can be public/private or civil society. Working together especially if done with govt agencies helps create widespread impacts and ensure optimum utilization of resources (financial, time, human, common, physical). More often than not, interventions done on EbA/ conservation are done in isolation, do not achieve the devised outcomes and lead to failed investments. Working together reduces this risk. It gains further importance in a country like India with complex adminstrative structures and conflicting priorities among stakeholders. Working together leads to the pooling of resources, including knowledge and learning, essential for tackling the complexity of prevalent issues in landscapes like the KPC. "Working Together" is a value that RBSFI and other stakeholders have adopted through the PSC platform and it forms the basis of project success.

Farmer groups develop business and advanced marketing plans to guide their continued activities and farm and business growth. When we initially select farmers, we ensure they are a part of a farmers group, which enhances their power as sellers, as they can sell in bulk and work as a group to market crops.. In Kaffrine, Senegal and Singida, Tanzania, some of our farmers grow higher-value crops like Hibiscus, Cashew, and Sunflower:We build capacity of farmers to approach buyers in regional capitals  export quality crops . In Kenya, we work with a dairy cooperative to offset their cattle feed costs, and give them the opportunity to sell extra tree fodder they product to other cooperative members. Ownership of the project is fully transferred to the farmer groups. After graduation, farmer groups continue to support each other as a team in the on-going development and management of Forest Gardens and marketing of products.  

After the 4-year project, farmers are expected to continue their Forest Gardens, given the significant successes they have seen and training they have received.  In the future, TREES is hoping to follow-up with farmers after the program, however we do not yet have the capacity to continue monitoring farmers outside of the 4-year program.