74

319 Planning 320 Planning 321 Planning Planning 1 Reed et al. (2009) amalgamated in a table the different stak...

0 downloads 246 Views 12MB Size
319

Planning

320

Planning

321

Planning

Planning

1 Reed et al. (2009) amalgamated in a table the different stakeholder analysis methods, including the resources

required, the level of stakeholder participation, and the strengths and weaknesses of each method.

322

323

Planning

324

Planning

Involvement needs

325

Planning

Stakeholders Interests Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities/ Relationships Impacts threats

Planning

INFLUENCE FACTORS

326

High influence Stakeholders may oppose the intervention; therefore, they should be kept informed and their views acknowledged to avoid disruption or conflict Consultation - Information

Stakeholders require special effort to ensure that their needs are met and their participation is meaningful Consultation - Empowerment

Stakeholders should be closely involved to ensure their support for the project Consultation - Collaboration Empowerment / Delegation

Planning

High interest

Low interest

Low influence Stakeholders are unlikely to be closely involved in the project and require not more than informationsharing aimed at the ‘general public’ Information

327

Influence

Planning

C3: Potential support or threat C4: Ability to get funding C5: Ownership of a potential treatment site

328

Interest C2: Political power

C1: Activity linked with FSM C6: Potential user of a treatment endproduct

Main interests

Opportunities

Involvement needs and required actions

Planning

Stakeholder categories

329

330

Planning

331

Planning

332

Planning

333

Figure 15.6

- international NGO

NGO2

Head of NGO3 is also head of the administration council of NGO1

Technical support

Advisors

Planning

- Solid waste collection and health projects

NGO4

- Manages one disposal site

NGO3

- Municipal mandate for the collection of solid waste from the main market

Use dry sludge from informal disposal site

- Sedentary and nomadic

Cattle breeders

- All year round or seasonal

Vegetable farmers + cereal cultivators

Endusers

Religious leaders

Neighbourhood leaders

Responsible for the management of ancestral land

Traditional leaders

Traditional authorities

Solid waste collection

Request for land

- Support to decentralisation process - Technical support

Latrine builders

- Used to come regularly from capital city - Owner of informal disposal site

Mechanical service provider2

- Comes once a month from capital city

Mechanical service provider1

Mayor Technical services

- Permanent residence - Latrine building and sludge emptying

NGO1

Sludge emptiers

Call for service

- Contract for public latrine management - Orders for emptying service made at City Council

Register to get service from MSP1

Municipal authorities

Example of a diagram of relationships between faecal sludge management stakeholders.

RD social affairs

RD health

RD plan & development

RD urbanism & habitat

RD hydraulics

RD public works

RD sanitation

RG = Regional Directorates

Regional and national authorities

Owners

Users

Households

Enforcement of national laws and regulations

Case Study 15.1 – Part I

Call for service

334

Planning

 

Criteria

Stakeholder

C1 Activity FSM

C2 Political power

C3 Support threath

C4 Funding

C5 Ownership site

C6 Enduse

 

Low influence

Mechanical service provider 1 Farmers Cattle breeders

Planning

Low interest High interest

High influence Regional Directorates Traditional authorities NGO2 Municipal authorities Households NGO1 Mechanical service provider 2 NGO3 NGO4

335

Planning

Stakeholders

336

Roles and responsibilities

Strengths

Weaknesses

Relationships

Involvement needs

Criteria C2 Political power

C3 Support threath

C4 Funding

C5 Ownership site

C6 Enduse

 

Planning

Stakeholder

C1 Activity FSM

 

337

High interest

Low interest

Low influence Cattle breeders

Mechanical service provider 1 Mechanical service provider 2 Farmers

Construction

Management

High influence Regional Directorates Traditional authorities NGO2 NGO3 NGO4 Municipal authorities Households NGO1

Valorisation

To be informed

Municipal authorities

Municipal authorities

Municipal authorities

Households

NGO 1

NGO 1

NGO 1

NGO 2

RD public works

Mechanical service provider 1

Farmers

NGO 3

Mechanical service provider 2

RD health

NGO 4

RD sanitation

Regional Directorates

Planning

Traditional authorities

338

339

Planning

340

Planning