Natural Resource Governance Framework
Geographical coverage
| Geographical scale of the assessment | Global |
|---|---|
| Country or countries covered | |
| Any other necessary information or explanation for identifying the location of the assessment, including site or region name |
This assessment, led by IUCN, is currently under development |
Geographical scale of the assessment
Global
Country or countries covered
Any other necessary information or explanation for identifying the location of the assessment, including site or region name
This assessment, led by IUCN, is currently under development
Conceptual framework, methodology and scope
Assessment objectives
The overarching goal of the IUCN Natural Resource Governance Framework is to arrive at a situation where decision-makers at all levels make better and more just decisions on nature and the use of natural resources as well as the distribution of nature’s benefits, thus enhancing the contributions of ecosystems and biodiversity to sustainable development.
The immediate purpose of the IUCN Natural Resource Governance Framework is to provide an independent, robust and credible approach to ascertaining the strengths and weaknesses of natural resource governance, including related decision-making and implementation processes.
Mandate for the assessment
This is one of the six priority IUCN Knowledge Products as identified in the 2013-2016 IUCN Programme which was adopted by IUCN members in the 2012 World Conservation Congress, and is available here:
Conceptual framework and/or methodology used for the assessment
Other (please specify)
Natural Resource Governance Framework
URL or copy of conceptual framework developed or adapted
A key step in designing the Framework will be developing a shared understanding of what is being assessed. Part of the challenge in this will be developing consensus on what we believe good governance is. Existing IUCN work on governance provides a starting point. An IUCN definition of governance is relayed above. Regarding governance quality - or ‘good governance’ –while there is no global consensus, IUCN has identified the following as the core governance principles and related elements: 1. Inclusion (including Participation and Voice; and Respect and Trust) 2. Legitimacy (including Integrity and Commitment; and Authority and Representativity) 3. Direction (including Strategic vision; Interconnectedness, Coherence and Contextualization) 4. Performance (including Responsiveness; Effectiveness and efficiency; Subsidiarity; Capacities; and Financial Sustainability) 5. Accountability (including Transparency) 6. Fairness (including Equity; Rule of Law; Consensus orientation; Human rights and Cultural Practices; Do no harm; and Access to justice)
System(s) assessed
- Marine
- Coastal
- Island
- Inland water
- Forest and woodland
- Cultivated/Agricultural land
- Grassland
- Mountain
- Dryland
- Polar
- Urban
Species groups assessed
Ecosystem services/functions assessed
Provisioning
Regulating
Supporting Services/Functions
Cultural Services
Scope of assessment includes
Drivers of change in systems and services
No
Impacts of change in services on human well-being
No
Options for responding/interventions to the trends observed
No
Explicit consideration of the role of biodiversity in the systems and services covered by the assessment
No
Timing of the assessment
Year assessment started
Year assessment finished
If ongoing, year assessment is anticipated to finish
Periodicity of assessment
Unknown
Assessment outputs
Website(s)
Report(s)
Communication materials (e.g. brochure, presentations, posters, audio-visual media)
Journal publications
Training materials
Other documents/outputs
Tools and processes
Tools and approaches used in the assessment
Process used for stakeholder engagement in the assessment process and which component
Key stakeholder groups engaged
The number of people directly involved in the assessment process
Incorporation of scientific and other types of knowledge
Supporting documentation for specific approaches, methodology or criteria developed and/or used to integrate knowledge systems into the assessment
Assessment reports peer reviewed
No
Data
Accessibility of data used in assessment
Policy impact
Impacts the assessment has had on policy and/or decision making, as evidenced through policy references and actions
Independent or other review on policy impact of the assessment
No
