Background

The Cancun Agreements issued at the Conference of Parties (COP) 16 held in Mexico in 2010, and subsequently the “Warsaw Framework on REDD+”, agreed at COP 19 in 2013, provide strong support for policy approaches that deliver positive incentives for countries and their actors to engage in REDD+. REDD+ stands for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries; and the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries.

Appendix 1 of the Cancun Agreements lists safeguards that “should be promoted and supported” when implementing REDD+ actions.  Two of these are:

  • Transparent and effective national forest governance structures, taking into account national legislation and sovereignty;
  • The full and effective participation of relevant stakeholders, in particular indigenous peoples and local communities

Taken together, these safeguards indicate the need to design and implement a grievance mechanism, or grievance mechanisms, that allow stakeholders to raise issues in a non-threatening environment, and have confidence in the fair and equitable resolution of disputes.

The Cambodia REDD+ Roadmap identifies a range of actual and potential disputes and conflicts that create risks for REDD+ implementation. It commits the Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC) and its partners to strengthen conflict resolution mechanisms in order to achieve REDD+ goals in Cambodia. The Roadmap states Conflicts have been widely documented in sustainable forestry and natural resource management in Cambodia. The NFP and 2008 Protected Area Law contain measures to manage conflicts and for conflict resolution (e.g. for community forests), however these have not yet been operationalised. Development of these mechanisms will be supported through the R-PP and their suitability for REDD+ assessed. Where possible, mechanisms mandated by existing laws and policies where possible (sic) to avoid creating duplicate or redundant structures (Cambodia REDD+ Roadmap, p71).

A scoping mission, funded by the UN-REDD Global Programme in January 2013, found that most of the types of conflicts and disputes likely to be encountered in Cambodia’s National REDD+ Programme are being handled informally and ad hoc, rather than through formal mechanisms for dispute resolution.

In identifying options for strengthening REDD+/forest sector dispute prevention and resolution mechanisms, the scoping mission report noted that REDD+ grievance and dispute resolution mechanisms are intended primarily as “reactive” tools to respond to concerns raised by REDD+ stakeholders. However, there are important opportunities for proactive dispute prevention for the pilot sites, and for Cambodia as a whole. These opportunities should be actively considered, in order to address longstanding issues and reduce the demand on grievance mechanisms.

Dispute prevention options for consideration include:

  • Substantially greater investment of funds and staff to accelerate participatory boundary demarcation and zoning for State Forests and Protected Areas, and for Community Forests (CFs) and Community Protected Areas (CPAs)
  • Continuous education for local and provincial governance bodies, communities and external stakeholders
  • Joint, integrated local land use planning and zoning

At the level of local forest governance, options for strengthening dispute resolution include:

  • clarifying the roles and responsibilities of Community Forest Management Committees (CFMCs)/Community Protected Areas Committees (CPACs) and Commune Councils for dispute resolution, both for the benefit of the local governance bodies, and for community residents
  • establishing joint CFMC/CPAC-Commune Council dispute resolution committees. The committees would link the two governance bodies for dispute resolution. They would have responsibility for regular communication and discussion about new and ongoing disputes, for communicating with community members where appropriate, for documenting disputes and their resolution, and for requesting assistance from higher levels of governance when necessary.

At the provincial level of forest governance (including Provincial government, Forestry Administration (FA) Division and General Department of Administration for Nature Conservation and Protection (GDANCP) Protected Area staff), it may be useful to develop an inter-agency team to receive requests for dispute resolution, and to respond to those requests with well-coordinated use of government authority and resources. Such a provincial inter-agency team or body could have the following design elements:

  • mandate to resolve disputes involving CFs/CPAs and external actors when requested by local governance bodies, FA, GDANCP, or senior provincial leadership;
  • established under the auspices of the provincial governor, with explicit terms of reference for participation of national Ministry counterparts (FA, GDANCP), and representation from Community Forest Networks and supporting Nongovernment organizations (NGOs)/Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) where they are present;
  • authority to use a variety of means of resolution, including regulatory action by government agencies, direct dialogue, education and negotiation, and use of independent mediation where available and appropriate.

At the national level of forest governance, options for providing significant support to local and provincial level dispute resolution include:

  • Substantially expanded budget and staffing to support participatory boundary demarcation and zoning for Protection Forests, Protected Areas, CFs and CPAs;
  • Allocating budget and resources for local capacity building for CFMCs, CPACs, and Commune Councils, including training in dispute resolution processes, establishment of documentation and reporting capacity, and ongoing periodic evaluation;
  • Authorizing staff of FA Divisions/GDANCP Protected Areas, Ministry of Land Management  Urban Planning and Construction (MLMUPC), and other national agencies as appropriate to participate in provincial inter-agency dispute resolution teams, and providing guidance on the ways that they can work with provincial counterparts to resolve disputes;
  • Designating an existing interagency body, or creating a new body, to receive and respond to requests for assistance with dispute resolution from provincial inter-agency teams and governors; and to oversee, evaluate and support ongoing local and provincial dispute resolution systems.

The report concluded that it is important to explore more deeply the findings and the options presented above, especially the potential for a “linked” system that more clearly defines procedures and supports for local government to request and receive dispute resolution assistance from the provincial level, and for the provincial level to request and receive assistance from the national level.

This proposed analysis will build on the former analysis undertaken during the scoping mission in January, 2013, and review existing grievance mechanisms in terms of:

  • Legitimacy: enabling trust from the stakeholder groups for whose use they are intended;
  • Accessibility: being known to all stakeholder groups for whose use they are intended;
  • Predictability: providing a clear and known procedure with an indicative timeframe for each stage, and clarity on the types of process and outcome available and means of monitoring implementation;
  • Equitability: seeking to ensure that aggrieved parties have reasonable access to sources of information, advice and expertise necessary to engage in a grievance process on fair, informed and respectful terms;
  • Transparency: keeping parties to a grievance informed about its progress, and providing sufficient information about the mechanism’s performance to build confidence in its effectiveness and meet any public interest at stake;
  • Rights compatibility: ensuring that outcomes and remedies accord with internationally recognized human rights;
  • Enabling continuous learning: drawing on relevant measures to identify lessons for improving the mechanism and preventing future grievances and harms;
  • Based on engagement and dialogue: consulting the stakeholder groups for whose use they are intended on their design and performance, and focusing on dialogue as the means to address and resolve grievances.

Duties and Responsibilities

Meet with officials from FA, GDANCP, Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)/Ministry of Environment, Fishery Administration (FiA), and other Ministries and Agencies, as appropriate: The consultant will meet with key officials from relevant ministries and agencies.  The RTS will assist in setting up meetings.  Identification of key officials will be through correspondence between the consultant and REDD+ taskforce secretariat (RTS) staff.

Provide a presentation to a meeting of FA/GDANCP/FiA and UN officials to discuss findings: On the final day of the mission to Phnom Penh, the consultant will provide a presentation to officials of the Cambodia REDD+ Programme, together with UN officials and staff of other development partners, highlighting the findings of the mission and outlining ideas for options for a seamless REDD+ grievance system in Cambodia.

Prepare a synthesis report in the form of an options paper to be presented to the National REDD+ Taskforce: Following the mission, the consultant shall prepare a report/document in the format of an options paper to be presented to the National REDD+ Taskforce, and review by the Stakeholder Engagement Technical Team and Consultation Group.  The options paper shall outline a number of options for establishing/strengthening existing grievance mechanisms so as to create a seamless REDD+ grievance system.  In order to ensure consistency with other elements of the emerging REDD+ architecture for Cambodia, the consultant shall work closely with the RTS Technical Advisor.

A draft document will be prepared and circulated to RGC and UNDP reviewers, following which a final option paper will be prepared addressing review comments provided.

Expected Outputs and Deliverables

An options paper for presentation to the National REDD+ Taskforce and Consultation Group, outlining options for, inter alia:

  • Joint, integrated local land use planning and zoning;
  • Clarified roles and responsibilities of CFMCs/CPACs and Commune Councils for dispute resolution;
  • Establishing joint CFMC/CPAC-Commune Council dispute resolution committees;
  • Developing of provincial inter-agency teams to receive requests for dispute resolution, and to respond to those requests;
  • Providing significant advisory support from the national level to local and provincial level dispute resolution mechanisms.

Competencies

Functional Competencies:

  • Ability to work effectively in a cross cultural environment; and strong facilitation and coordination skills;
  • Demonstrated high level of technical expertise in dispute resolution and providing policy guidance for designing grievance mechanisms;
  • Strong analytical, writing and communication skills in the field of conflict resolution, grievance redress mechanisms, including the ability to articulate ideas in a clear and concise manner (e.g. a record of publication);
  • Good interpersonal skills and ability to work well in a team;
  • Very good understanding of forestry, biodiversity conservation, natural resource management, and REDD+ development at international, national and local levels.

Corporate Competencies:

  • Demonstrates commitment to UNDP’s mission, vision and values;
  • Exerts strict adherence to corporate rules, regulations and procedures;
  • Familiarity with the internal control framework and results-based management tools is a must;
  • Displays cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality and age sensitivity and adaptability.

Required Skills and Experience

Education:

  • A master’s degree in law, natural resource management, environmental economics, conflict resolution, OR a related field. A PhD is considered an advantage.

Experience:

  • A minimum of 10 years of working experience in consensus building and conflict resolution mechanisms on forest and natural resource related issues in complex context;
  • Experience in design and use of grievance mechanisms at both corporate and country level;
  • Experience in stakeholder assessment, process design, training, multiparty mediation and facilitation;
  • Prior working experience with the UN-REDD Programme, conflict resolution and in Cambodia is a significant asset.

Language Requirement:

  • Fluent English.

Important note:

Interested offeror is strongly advised to read the Individual Consultant (IC) Procurement Notice, which can be viewed at http://procurement-notices.undp.org/view_notice.cfm?notice_id=17446 for more detail about term of references, instructions to offeror, and documents to be included when submitting offer.

Documents to be included when submitting the application:

Interested offeror/individual must submit the following documents/information.

UNDP reserves right to reject any applications that is incomplete.

Please be informed that we don’t accept application submitted via email.

Interested candidate is required to submit application via UNDP jobsite system, because the application screening and evaluation will be done through UNDP jobsite system. Please note that UNDP jobsite system allows only one uploading of application document, so please make sure that you merge all your documents into a single file. Your on-line applications submission will be acknowledged where an email address has been provided. If you do not receive an e-mail acknowledgement within 24 hours of submission, your application may not have been received. In such cases, please resubmit the application, if necessary.

Any request for clarification/additional information on this procurement notice shall be communicated in writing to UNDP office or send to email dalis.heng@undp.org and/or procurement.kh@undp.org. While the Procurement Unit would endeavor to provide information expeditiously, only requests receiving at least 5 working days prior to the submission deadline will be entertained. Any delay in providing such information will not be considered as a reason for extending the submission deadline. The UNDP's response (including an explanation of the query but without identifying the source of inquiry) will be posted in Individual Consultant (IC) Procurement Notice page as provided above. Therefore, all prospective Offerors are advised to visit the page regularly to make obtain update related to this Individual Consultant (IC) Procurement Notice.