Natural Resource Governance Training Course

Participants can define resource-system boundaries and compare competing social, economic and ecological values.

• Resource-system boundaries defined through stocks, flows, users and institutions
• Ecosystem services classified as provisioning, regulating, cultural and supporting
• Natural capital accounts linking physical resource data and economic values
• Trade-off matrices comparing conservation, livelihoods, revenue and energy objectives
• Cumulative impacts assessed across linked projects, users and ecosystems
• Scenario planning tests resource futures under climate, market and policy changes

Participants can assess institutional mandates and identify policy contradictions affecting resource decisions.

• Formal mandates mapped across ministries, regulators, local authorities and courts
• Customary institutions examined alongside statutory authorities and administrative procedures
• Policy coherence review identifies conflicting sectoral targets and implementation duties
• RACI matrices clarify decision rights, approvals, consultation and enforcement roles
• Regulatory impact assessment tests proposed rules against stated policy objectives
• Intergovernmental coordination mechanisms address cross-boundary resource management

Participants can map formal and customary rights and identify tenure-related governance risks.

• Bundle-of-rights analysis separates access, withdrawal, management, exclusion and alienation
• Tenure maps identify overlapping statutory, customary, seasonal and informal claims
• FAO VGGT principles applied to legitimate tenure-rights recognition
• Gendered access analysis identifies differentiated control over resources and benefits
• Land acquisition risks screened through displacement, compensation and livelihood criteria
• Boundary disputes documented using evidence chains, claims registers and mediation options

Participants can design proportionate participation processes for affected groups and decision makers.

• Stakeholder salience mapping uses power, legitimacy and urgency criteria
• Interest-influence matrices distinguish decision makers, affected groups and intermediaries
• Participation spectrum defines inform, consult, involve, collaborate and delegate choices
• Engagement plans specify audiences, methods, timing, records and feedback loops
• Accessible consultation methods address language, disability, literacy and mobility barriers
• Disclosure registers track commitments, evidence requests and responses to participants

Participants can plan rights-respecting engagement where Indigenous Peoples and cultural heritage are affected.

• FPIC conditions examined through free, prior, informed and consent requirements
• Representative institutions identified without assuming community leadership structures
• Culturally appropriate information packages support informed community decision making
• Traditional knowledge protocols protect ownership, access conditions and benefit claims
• Chance-find procedures establish reporting, protection and authority notification steps
• Consent records distinguish agreement, conditions, dissent and unresolved issues

Participants can identify power relations, rent-seeking incentives and conflict triggers around resources.

• Political economy analysis maps actors, interests, incentives, power and institutions
• Resource-rent chains trace payments, discretionary decisions and capture opportunities
• Conflict sensitivity identifies dividers, connectors, triggers and local capacities
• Red-flag indicators detect bribery, elite capture and licensing irregularities
• Problem-driven iterative adaptation tests feasible reforms against political constraints
• Conflict escalation pathways connect grievances, mobilisation, violence and settlement options

Participants can specify credible evidence requirements for resource governance decisions.

• Baseline studies define indicators, spatial boundaries, seasonal variation and data gaps
• GIS layers combine tenure, ecosystems, infrastructure, hazards and community locations
• Data-quality assessments test accuracy, completeness, timeliness, consistency and provenance
• Participatory mapping records local resource use, access routes and culturally significant sites
• Remote-sensing outputs verified through ground-truthing and documented interpretation protocols
• Evidence registers link claims, sources, limitations, reviewers and decision relevance

Participants can use strategic assessment to shape resource policies, plans and programmes before project approval.

• Strategic environmental assessment distinguishes policy-level choices from project-level impacts
• Theory of change connects governance reforms, outputs, outcomes and assumptions
• Alternatives analysis compares location, technology, timing, scale and demand options
• Carrying-capacity thresholds define acceptable pressures within resource-system limits
• Spatial planning zones conservation, production, settlement, corridors and restricted areas
• Decision criteria weight legal duties, environmental effects, equity and economic value

Participants can review ESIA documents and specify mitigation and management requirements.

• Impact pathways connect project activities, receptors, exposure and consequences
• Mitigation hierarchy applies avoidance, minimisation, restoration and offsetting sequence
• Significance matrices rate magnitude, sensitivity, duration, extent and reversibility
• Cumulative impact assessment considers existing, planned and reasonably foreseeable activities
• Environmental and social management plans assign actions, indicators, owners and budgets
• Independent review checks baseline adequacy, alternatives and consultation evidence

Participants can design transparent allocation and permit controls for resource rights.

• Allocation mechanisms compared across auctions, tenders, applications and negotiated awards
• Prequalification criteria test technical capacity, financial standing and integrity records
• Licence conditions define work obligations, environmental duties and reporting requirements
• Permit registers disclose applicants, decisions, conditions, transfers and expiry dates
• Decision matrices document scoring, conflicts of interest and approval rationale
• Compliance calendars coordinate inspections, submissions, renewals and corrective actions

Participants can assess fiscal and benefit-sharing arrangements for public value and local legitimacy.

• Royalties, fees, taxes and production-sharing mechanisms compared by risk allocation
• Revenue forecasts separate price assumptions, volumes, costs and fiscal terms
• EITI Standard disclosures trace beneficial ownership, contracts, payments and revenues
• Benefit-sharing agreements specify eligibility, governance, payment schedules and reporting
• Sovereign wealth fund rules address savings, stabilisation, withdrawals and oversight
• Revenue-expenditure tracking links resource income to approved public investments

Participants can assess governance controls across the extractives project life cycle.

• Exploration-to-closure lifecycle identifies regulatory gates, risks and accountability points
• Beneficial ownership checks reveal controlling interests and conflict-of-interest risks
• Community development agreements define commitments, governance and dispute-resolution mechanisms
• Mine closure plans cover rehabilitation, financial assurance, monitoring and post-closure liability
• Artisanal mining governance addresses formalisation, safety, markets and child-labour risks
• Contract disclosure enables scrutiny of fiscal terms, obligations and amendments

Participants can develop governance responses to land-use change and biodiversity pressures.

• Land-use planning reconciles agriculture, conservation, settlements, infrastructure and customary use
• Deforestation drivers analysed through commodity chains, tenure incentives and enforcement gaps
• Protected-area governance models compare state, private, community and co-management arrangements
• Biodiversity action plans identify priority habitats, species, threats and measures
• No-net-loss claims tested against baselines, additionality, equivalence and permanence
• Restoration plans set reference ecosystems, targets, maintenance and verification methods

Participants can apply allocation and co-management methods to shared renewable resources.

• Integrated water resources management links allocation, quality, ecosystems and users
• Water-accounting tables reconcile supply, withdrawals, return flows and consumptive use
• Environmental-flow requirements protect ecological functions under competing withdrawals
• Fisheries co-management assigns rules, monitoring duties, sanctions and benefit rights
• Harvest-control rules connect stock indicators to pre-agreed management actions
• Transboundary agreements establish data sharing, notification, dispute and joint-review procedures

Participants can integrate climate risks and distributional effects into resource governance decisions.

• Climate-risk assessments distinguish physical hazards, transition risks and vulnerability
• Just-transition principles address workers, communities, affordability and regional development
• Renewable-energy siting screens biodiversity, tenure, cultural heritage and livelihood impacts
• Critical-mineral strategies assess supply security, environmental burdens and local benefits
• Climate adaptation pathways sequence actions against uncertainty and decision thresholds
• Greenhouse-gas inventories identify material emissions sources, boundaries and reduction options

Participants can establish safeguards and remedy processes for affected people.

• Human-rights due diligence identifies impacts, prevention measures, tracking and communication
• IFC Performance Standards applied to labour, communities, biodiversity and resettlement
• Safeguard screening categorises risks, information needs and specialist assessment requirements
• Grievance mechanisms meet legitimacy, accessibility, predictability and transparency criteria
• Case-management workflows record intake, investigation, resolution, escalation and closure
• Non-retaliation protections safeguard complainants, witnesses, advocates and information sources

Participants can convert governance commitments into accountable implementation and enforcement systems.

• Implementation roadmaps sequence reforms, dependencies, owners, budgets and milestones
• Risk registers prioritise governance threats by likelihood, impact and control effectiveness
• Inspection protocols define evidence standards, sampling, interviews and site observations
• Enforcement ladders match warnings, corrective orders, penalties and licence suspension
• Compliance dashboards track commitments, overdue actions, incidents and escalation decisions
• Integrity controls separate approval authority, payment approval and independent verification

Participants can measure governance performance and revise decisions using verified evidence.

• Results frameworks define inputs, activities, outputs, outcomes, indicators and assumptions
• SMART indicators measure participation quality, compliance, benefit distribution and ecosystem condition
• Monitoring plans specify methods, frequency, baselines, responsibilities and quality assurance
• Social audits compare commitments, expenditures, beneficiary records and community evidence
• Independent assurance tests reported performance against records, field evidence and standards
• Adaptive-management triggers define thresholds, review dates, decisions and accountable owners

Participants can build, review and present a complete natural resource governance action plan for a defined resource decision.

• Problem statement defines resource, decision, affected groups and governance failure
• Institutional map assigns mandates, decision rights, coordination and accountability mechanisms
• Rights and stakeholder analysis identifies claims, risks, engagement and consent requirements
• Safeguard and risk plan specifies controls, grievance routes and escalation thresholds
• Implementation roadmap sequences reforms, resources, owners, milestones and evidence requirements
• Peer review tests feasibility, legality, equity, transparency and monitoring arrangements