272
Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA), but the knowledge exchange relationship
existed only between NFA and MDLG, not with UWA. The SNA also identified
institutions that acted as bridges for other institutions that would otherwise not be
connected to the knowledge network (e.g., Bungokho Rural DC). In both MSPs, the
district local governments were among the institutions better connected in terms of
knowledge sharing. This further justifies the strategy of hosting the district MSPs
within the local governments as a way to promote sustainability, knowledge
exchange and coordination of local climate-change actors.
23.3.2.2 Influencing Subnational and National Policies
The platforms’ meetings played a role in promoting collective action to influence
national and subnational policies. In both Uganda and Tanzania, the platforms’
actions were decided in plenary on the basis of the research-based evidence on
CSA, responsive and equitable policymaking and climate change adaptation.
MSPs were able to contribute and influence key national policies. In Uganda the
Climate Change MSP was recognized as having influenced and complemented a
number of policy reviews and strategic development plans (Semambo 2017). In
both Uganda and Tanzania the national platforms were also active in influencing
national climate change policy (Table 23.2).
Like the national platforms, the district platforms had regular meetings that
involved the sharing of experiences with context-specific adaptation strategies
and locally appropriate CSA options. Key representatives of the district platforms were also members of the national platforms, ensuring coordinated action.
District platforms engaged in participatory zonal planning of their territories for
the prioritization of adaptation investments—an example of the type of initiatives aimed at fostering a conducive policy environment for the scaling up of
CSA practices which MSPs are especially well suited to address precisely
because they require the collaboration of stakeholders from different sectors and
across different scales. Stakeholders began by defining the zoning criteria and
dividing the area into different zones based on what they perceived as locally
important factors: the main source of livelihood and farming system (Rakai),
altitude (Kilolo), rainfall gradient (Luwero) or a combination of these (Lushoto).
The fact that districts differed in the zoning criteria they employed and the number of zones they identified highlights the fact that adaptation needs and local
priorities are unique to each territory. The zoning was usually followed by stakeholder discussions on each of the zone’s main enterprises, the effects of climate
change on these enterprises, and the pertinent policy issues and adaptation measures needed to overcome these constraints.
In subsequent meetings, district officers and representatives of the platforms
would prioritize the issues to be integrated in the district development plans. Since
the formation of the platforms, there has been progress in incorporating CSA
components in the District Development Plans in Uganda and in the District
Agriculture Development Plans in Tanzania. For example, in Lushoto, Tanzania,
M. Acosta et al.
Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA), but the knowledge exchange relationship
existed only between NFA and MDLG, not with UWA. The SNA also identified
institutions that acted as bridges for other institutions that would otherwise not be
connected to the knowledge network (e.g., Bungokho Rural DC). In both MSPs, the
district local governments were among the institutions better connected in terms of
knowledge sharing. This further justifies the strategy of hosting the district MSPs
within the local governments as a way to promote sustainability, knowledge
exchange and coordination of local climate-change actors.
23.3.2.2 Influencing Subnational and National Policies
The platforms’ meetings played a role in promoting collective action to influence
national and subnational policies. In both Uganda and Tanzania, the platforms’
actions were decided in plenary on the basis of the research-based evidence on
CSA, responsive and equitable policymaking and climate change adaptation.
MSPs were able to contribute and influence key national policies. In Uganda the
Climate Change MSP was recognized as having influenced and complemented a
number of policy reviews and strategic development plans (Semambo 2017). In
both Uganda and Tanzania the national platforms were also active in influencing
national climate change policy (Table 23.2).
Like the national platforms, the district platforms had regular meetings that
involved the sharing of experiences with context-specific adaptation strategies
and locally appropriate CSA options. Key representatives of the district platforms were also members of the national platforms, ensuring coordinated action.
District platforms engaged in participatory zonal planning of their territories for
the prioritization of adaptation investments—an example of the type of initiatives aimed at fostering a conducive policy environment for the scaling up of
CSA practices which MSPs are especially well suited to address precisely
because they require the collaboration of stakeholders from different sectors and
across different scales. Stakeholders began by defining the zoning criteria and
dividing the area into different zones based on what they perceived as locally
important factors: the main source of livelihood and farming system (Rakai),
altitude (Kilolo), rainfall gradient (Luwero) or a combination of these (Lushoto).
The fact that districts differed in the zoning criteria they employed and the number of zones they identified highlights the fact that adaptation needs and local
priorities are unique to each territory. The zoning was usually followed by stakeholder discussions on each of the zone’s main enterprises, the effects of climate
change on these enterprises, and the pertinent policy issues and adaptation measures needed to overcome these constraints.
In subsequent meetings, district officers and representatives of the platforms
would prioritize the issues to be integrated in the district development plans. Since
the formation of the platforms, there has been progress in incorporating CSA
components in the District Development Plans in Uganda and in the District
Agriculture Development Plans in Tanzania. For example, in Lushoto, Tanzania,
M. Acosta et al.