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.

The Center for International Forestry Research has developed and adapted various participatory tools for use with forest communities and other natural resource dependent groups. The tools have diverse applications: stakeholder identification, decision making, planning, conflict management, information collection, landscape assessment and other uses. The Guide to Participatory Tools for Forest Communities is intended for environment and development practitioners, researchers and local government officials.

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.

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?”.