Multi-Criteria Analysis (MCA) is a decision-making tool developed for complex problems. In a situation where multiple criteria are involved confusion can arise if a logical, well-structured decision-making process is not followed. Another difficulty in decision making is that reaching a general consensus in a multidisciplinary team can be very difficult to achieve. By using MCA the members don't have to agree on the relative importance of the Criteria or the rankings of the alternatives.

This manual provides methods for the development and evaluation of criteria and indicators (C&I) which can then be used to assess the sustainability of forest management. The manual is written primarily for researchers, people or groups interested in evaluating C&I for assessments of forests in new areas, or as a reference for readers wanting to know how CIFOR’s Generic Template was produced. The methods presented are aimed at the development of sets of C&I for natural forest at the forest management unit (FMU) level, especially in the tropics.

Governments in many countries are decentralising to give more control over decision making and budgets to local administrations. One expectation of this change is that local governments will more effectively and efficiently respond to the poorest citizens in their jurisdictions. Decentralisation is especially significant to forest communities, which have historically benefited little from government services and poverty reduction programmes because of their physical isolation and social marginalisation.

This is designed to supplement 'the BAG' and 'the Grab Bag'. It provides a scoring method that can be used with the two manuals, to come to a decision about particular criteria and indicators in particular forest and human settings. Following the section on scoring is a section on analysis. It begins very simply, leading the user through the steps of making a spreadsheet, and concluding with more complex statistical analyses that may be desirable in some circumstances. Different teams have different requirements for quantitative and statistical sophistication in their analyses.

In 2014 the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing took effect and is being implemented by countries. This is important for fair and equitable sharing of benefits derived from genetic resources. However, scientists are concerned about its effect on non-commercial research, which has scientific, societal and environmental benefits beyond commercial gains. Such research may be delayed by cumbersome procedures and hampered by poor understanding of its scientific purposes and research requirements.

The overall aim of this study was to explore what the development community can do, or facilitate, to significantly improve livelihoods in semi-arid systems.The authors based their analysis on two case-study sites in the communal lands of southern Zimbabwe. The main tool was a detailed livelihood questionnaire, supplemented by participatory appraisal and observation, action research, biophysical analysis and systems modelling.

Many people want to improve the governance of forest areas, yet what is considered good governance is not necessarily self-evident or agreed upon by everyone. This study demonstrates the diversity of views held by communities and government officials in Malinau, Indonesian Borneo about what they consider to be good governance. Each group described how they thought decisions about forests should be made, including how to represent interests, allocate land rights, distribute cash benefits from forests, share information and manage forests.

This report is based on a case study looking at the change in decentralization laws from the highly decentralized system under 22/1999 to a moderate system under 32/2004. It specifically analyses the implications of such change for local-level forest decision making processes related to forestry, spatial planning, shared revenues and village-level institutions in Luwu Utara district, South Sulawesi province. The research is a continuation of previous ACIAR/CIFOR collaborative research under the theme “Can Decentralization Work for Forests and the Poor?”.