138
65 Tatiana López Piedrahita and Carlos Heiler Mosquera
different perceptions of the issues. The
interviews were carried out by IIAP, but all
activities were accompanied by an
ASOCASAN representative.
IIAP disseminated and agreed the
proposal with the ASOCASAN major council (the individual community councils are
‘minor’ councils). Once validated, the
methodological activities were developed in
three general stages, in which the same
group of people were continuously involved:
• Dissemination of the idea: initial
exchange with the community to understand their perceptions of environmental
problems and their expectations for the
development of the BCP.
• Defining, using questions, issues relating
to the community and its relationship with
natural resources, problems and challenges. In this way, the most important
resources are identified.
• Identifying the main problems perceived
(pre-diagnosis). Facilitated by IIAP and
Natural Justice, the community defined the
most important resources, associated traditional systems and problems (Table 1).
With this information and with the
community and the support of
ASOCASAN, the content and structure of
the BCP were jointly defined.
Drafting, development and dissemination
of the final document
Activities in this phase involved integrating various legal frameworks with the
aspirations that the community expressed
in the workshops. This process was refined
through consultations with community
leaders. The final result was shared with
community representatives.
The structure of the BCP and the associated national policy frameworks (Table
2) were arranged into two parts. The first
expressed issues relating to the community
and land in a language that reflected the
local culture of the community. The second
presented specific frameworks and case
laws which support the rights and claims
of the community in a more technical
language – to provide a reference during
dialogue with external actors. The text was
adjusted by representatives of the major
council to ensure that the language was
easily understood by the community.
The document was approved at a
general assembly held by the community
as an internal document for the major
council, to be adjusted according to the
communities’ own laws and in light of
changes in national law. This ended the
formulation stage. As a first management
step, it was proposed that the BCP be
promoted to regional planning bodies and
to the government environmental agency
to generate synergies with key players in
the territory as part of a new process.
Lessons learnt
The main lesson from the formulation
process was that the existence of an organisational structure like ASOCASAN, which
links all communities in the area, facilitates
the stages of dialogue, diagnosis, the
formulation of alternatives and follow-up
actions. ASOCASAN not only links socioeconomic welfare with food security,
working to improve living conditions in
harmony with nature – it also strengthens
the communities’ identity and autonomy.
The official participation of State representatives from the land planning and
environmental departments is essential for
the impact of the BCP, since this generates
initial processes of dialogue that can then
become instances of community participation in planning processes. Such
participation is important to link community exercises of land use planning and
natural resource management to municipal budget planning, so that municipal
budgeting supports community initiatives
and strengthens local processes.
The methodology for these types of BCP
processes is varied and can be adapted to
the specific context of each community.
There is no single formula, only guidelines
for developing these community processes.
In planning BCP processes it is crucial to