This brief presents the findings of an assessment conducted in Peru to understand and verify the adoption, outcomes, and potential impacts of the participatory reflective monitoring tool called "¿Cómo vamos?" (How are we doing?) in multistakeholder forums (MSFs). MSFs are recognized as a means of fostering transformative change to address the environmental and social impacts of the climate crisis. In Peru, the Protected Areas Service (SERNANP) mandates the establishment of MSFs or management committees (MCs) involving various stakeholders in the management of protected areas. The tool was co-developed and tested by CIFOR and SERNANP with eight MCs. The positive reception and interest in the tool led SERNANP to publish it as an official document and require its annual implementation by the MCs of its 75 protected areas. This assessment provides insights into the adoption, outcomes, and potential impacts of the tool in Peru.

This handbook introduces "How are we doing?", a tool for participatory monitoring in multi-stakeholder forums (MSFs). It helps MSF participants reflect, assess progress, and plan for achieving their goals. Developed in collaboration with MSF members, it focuses on inclusive decision-making and collective learning.

This article explores the development and application of frameworks in the sciences and the science-policy interface. While frameworks are valuable tools for synthesizing and communicating core concepts, their development and application are often vague and lack transparency. The article emphasizes the importance of positioning frameworks within a theory of science to understand their purpose and value. It introduces a meta-framework that visualizes the four mediating processes involved in framework development and application: empirical generalization, theoretical fitting, application, and hypothesizing. The article concludes by providing guiding points for scholars and policymakers using or developing frameworks in their research.

There are so many burning questions around this carbon offsets business, aren't there? Just when you were getting your head round REDD+ and its potential to fund your Integrated Landscape Management project, along came The Guardian and set fire to it all. Should you persist or desist? We, as the Landscapes For Our Future Central Component, can’t answer that for you, but we can provide a primer that might help you to blaze a trail through the embers.

Could a long line of grass hedge against erosion? An integrated landscape management project in Zimbabwe is proving that it might.

You do not have to be an experienced advocate to be effective. This toolkit will provide you with a basic knowledge of the policy process and advocacy techniques to ensure you are ready to engage effectively and make the voice of wildlife professionals heard.

This paper proposes a reformulation of the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (SLF) fit for the 21st century. The article explores the rise and usage of the original SLF, highlighting how its popularity among development practitioners emerged both from its practical focus, and its depoliticization of wider shifts in the development landscape at the time.

This field manual describes the LDSF field survey methods and is designed to be used in training and as a reference in field during survey campaigns.

Though each landscape is singular, landscape partnerships all encounter common challenges in carrying out collaborative action. To make the process easier, more effective and more inclusive, the 1000L initiative provides this generic, locally adaptable, conceptual process and practical guidance for carrying out ILM.

Insights for more equitable and resilient multi-stakeholder forums – an infobrief by Anne M. Larson and Juan Pablo Sarmiento Barletti.