Develop stakeholder engagement plan

Engaging landscape stakeholders throughout the assessment process is essential to ensure the accuracy, credibility, and local relevance of results. Stakeholder participation also ensures that local perspectives are incorporated effectively into the assessment process.

During Step A, the assessment team must document a plan for how stakeholders will be engaged throughout the entire assessment process, indicating the focus and forms of stakeholder engagement that are anticipated during each step. The plan should also identify which stakeholders or stakeholder groups will be prioritized for engagement and what kinds of engagement modalities will be used.

Approaches to stakeholder engagement

Different landscapes require varying levels of stakeholder engagement. LandScale offers flexibility in how stakeholders are engaged across the assessment steps (Steps A, B, C), allowing the approach to align with the specific context of each landscape. Below are three common approaches:

1. Comprehensive engagement throughout all steps: Under this approach, stakeholders are actively involved at every stage of the assessment process, including defining the landscape boundary, selecting indicators and metrics, and participating in data collection and analysis. This approach is recommended for landscapes that have existing multi-stakeholder collaborations and partnerships, as well as where there is a significant level of capacity and interest from local stakeholders to engage in the process. Although it requires more time and coordination, this approach helps ensure that the assessment reflects diverse stakeholder perspectives. As a result, the local review in Step C may be more efficient, with fewer revisions needed.

2. Focused engagement during the review stage: Under this approach, the assessment team conducts Steps A through C independently, except for Goals 2.2 and 3.2, which require stakeholder input. This results in a more expert-driven assessment and may be appropriate when high-quality secondary data are available and/or when stakeholder capacity is limited. This approach can enable faster implementation but may result in more significant stakeholder feedback during the local review process in Step C, requiring the team to revisit and revise earlier steps.

3. Hybrid approach: The hybrid approach allows the assessment team to engage stakeholders selectively, focusing on areas that require qualitative insights while handling other areas through desktop work. For example, stakeholders may be more involved in pillars 2 (human well-being) and 3 (governance), which depend more on qualitative data and stakeholder perspectives. Meanwhile, pillars 1 (ecosystems) and 4 (production) can be assessed with less stakeholder input. This approach balances efficiency with meaningful stakeholder engagement but requires careful coordination.

In all cases, local stakeholders must be engaged in the three sets of required engagement activities.

Required stakeholder engagement activities

The following activities define the required stakeholder engagement points for Goal 2.2, Goal 3.2, and the local review in Step C.

Goal 2.2: Respect, protect, and fulfill human rights.

Human rights data at the landscape level is often limited, necessitating extensive stakeholder consultation. The consultation process has two objectives:

1. Assessing indicator applicability (Step B): Engage stakeholders to determine if the additional human rights indicators (e.g., child labor, women's rights, forced labor, Indigenous peoples' rights) are relevant to the landscape context.

2. Designing and evaluating performance metrics (Steps B and C): Develop context-specific metrics during Step B, and assess their performance in Step C with stakeholder input.

Relevant stakeholders include rights holders (e.g., affected communities) and duty bearers (e.g., government agencies). Full details of the stakeholder engagement requirements for Goal 2.2 are available in the Human Rights Assessment Guidelines.

This consultative process is required for the indicators and metrics within Goal 2.2, and is also recommended for any human rights-related indicators that the assessment team chooses to define and include within the assessment scope.

Goal 3.2: Promote transparency, participation, inclusion, and coordination in landscape policy, planning, and management.

Assessing indicators 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, and optionally 3.2.4 requires the use of the Sustainable Landscapes Rating Tool (SLRT). This tool relies on participatory rating exercises to generate metric results, ensuring diverse stakeholder input.

Stakeholders involved may include:

• Government entities, including representatives from various ministries, agencies, and administrative levels.

• Producer organizations, including those representing smallholders.

• Private sector organizations involved in land use activities.

• Social and environmental NGOs.

• Civil society organizations, including those representing the interests of Indigenous peoples and local communities.

Optionally, indicator 3.2.4 (illegality and corruption related to land and resources) may also involve stakeholder consultations, for instance, if surveys on local perceptions are carried out to assess the performance metrics for this indicator.

Step C: Local review

The local review ensures that stakeholders with in-depth knowledge of the landscape provide feedback to validate the credibility and accuracy of the source data and assessment results prior to publication. This feedback helps:

• Identify and inform any necessary improvements to the results.

• Document any limitations in data accuracy or result interpretation.

The local review takes place during Step C and requires the participation of at least one local reviewer per indicator for which validation is sought. Further details on the local review can be found in conduct the local review.

Recommended stakeholder engagement activities

In addition to the required activities, we recommend consulting stakeholders throughout the process to strengthen local buy-in and enhance the quality of results. Engagement can take place through any suitable combination of modalities, such as interactive workshops, multi-stakeholder dialogues, interviews, or open consultations.

Step A: Early engagement and boundary delineation

• Identify target stakeholder groups, considering local communities, government bodies, NGOs, private companies, and other relevant stakeholders that directly or indirectly impact the initiative's results.

• Determine the specific communication and participation methods to engage each group, ensuring effective collaboration and continuous feedback. Consider face-to-face meetings, workshops, public consultations, online surveys, and digital communications platforms, among others.

• Inform stakeholders about the purpose and timeline of the LandScale assessment as well as the points at which their input will be requested.

• Consult stakeholders about the delineation of the landscape boundary, ensuring the boundary reflects their interests and needs (as appropriate).

Step B: Input on indicators and data resources

• Consult stakeholders to assess the applicability of additional indicators for inclusion in the assessment scope.

• Invite stakeholder input on the identification of complementary metrics that fit the local context.

• Consult stakeholders on data resources to ensure data collection leverages local knowledge and expertise.

Step C: Data collection and metric assessment

• Seek stakeholder support in collecting data and providing context-specific insights to enhance the assessment of metrics.

Note that stakeholders consulted during Step C differ from local reviewers. Local reviewers review and provide feedback on metric results and data resources once draft assessment results are complete.

Report building (optional)

• Incorporate stakeholder perspectives into the final landscape profile and assessment report, for instance, to inform narrative interpretations of the assessment results and provide qualitative insights.

LandScale's role in the landscape management cycle

LandScale can be applied at different stages of the landscape management cycle, depending on where partnerships stand and what outcomes are needed.

The five elements of integrated landscape management from the “The Little Sustainable Landscapes Book”: WWF, EcoAgriculture Partners, The Nature Conservancy, IDH The Sustainable Trade Initiative, & The Global Canopy Programme. (2015). The Little Sustainable Landscapes Book.

Below are two examples of how LandScale has supported stakeholders at different stages of the landscape management process:

Example: Building stakeholder engagement and a shared understanding in Guatemala

In a landscape on the southern coast of Guatemala, local stakeholders identified natural resource contamination and exploitation as shared challenges that required collaborative action. However, there was no shared understanding or agreement on what interventions were needed or the appropriate scale for them.

To address this, Rainforest Alliance and Solidaridad used LandScale as a framework to organize efforts, identify common goals, and create a shared action plan for the landscape. Through consultations, key stakeholders shared their needs and challenges, which were shaped into a shared vision, goals, and targets. An accompanying action plan for integrated management of the landscape then outlined how these goals and targets could be pursued. Importantly, the goals were aligned with the LandScale assessment framework’s indicators and metrics to ensure they were quantifiable and measurable.

Example: Monitoring impact in Ghana

In Ghana's Kakum and Juabeso-Bia Hotspot Intervention Areas (HIAs), a shared vision was already in place when the LandScale assessment was conducted. These landscapes are priority areas for coordinated interventions at the farm and landscape level to combat the country’s high deforestation rate. A formal multi-stakeholder platform—comprised of government agencies, the private sector, and civil society—collaborated with community-based governance bodies to develop management plans for each HIA.

LandScale was used to measure the impact of coordinated actions within these landscapes and to drive continuous improvement. The assessment also helped demonstrate the stakeholders' progress toward commitments to reduce deforestation under the Cocoa and Forests Initiative.