This step uses brainstorming to address key questions, the focus of the questions moving gradually from the general to the specific. The number and nature of the questions posed will be determined largely by specific user needs and their experiences in using guides.
Key questions will include (but not be limited to):
•
What is a field guide?
•
What do you want a field guide to do for you?
•
What are your priority topics for a new field guide?
•
What guides do you currently use?
•
What should a field guide include in order to identify a plant? This question stimulates discussion about the important characteristics needed to identify plants.
•
What are the benefits of using guides in your work? This question stimulates discussion to help define the impact of field guides.
Occasionally, it helps to ask further questions, such as why do you need to know about the plants or know their scientific name?
Step 3: Collate and summarize participant responses Attempt to identify patterns in the comments and statements regarding the requirements and characteristics of an ideal plant guide. Write these on a flip chart (or deliver them verbally), presenting them to the participants in a series of point-form summary statements.
Ask the group for confirmation that the summaries are substantially correct. Amend if not.
Step 4: Participant reviews of plant guide types
The aim of this activity is to collect a range of factors that users want to see, and find practical, in a guide. Additionally, the four aspects of a guide (text, illustrations, access systems and physical attributes) should be analysed. Key information on the preferences of the participants can be revealed during their review of existing guides.
The participants’ views on the usability of existing guides are fundamental to developing a plant guide tailored to addressing specific user needs. This phase of the workshop terminates with ranking the guides in order to summarize participants’ criteria:
•
The facilitators introduce the step, highlighting the objectives and emphasizing that participants must now decide what types of guide formats meet their needs. Users should have control of the process.
•
The facilitators sort the plant guides into the types available – for instance according to user (guides for scientists and guides for communities) or according to objective (guides for plant identification, guides for management) etc. If the facilitators have an idea of what the participants’ needs are, they will probably select the type of guide that the users prefer.
•
The facilitators explain what is meant by the four aspects of field guides:
–
text: content (language, themes, accessibility of the information);
–
illustrations: drawings and photos;
–
access systems: resources that help to locate the information;
38 Plant Identification
–
physical aspects (size, durability and quality of the materials).
•
Replace the definitions with those provided by the user group.
Step 5: Evaluating guides
•
The facilitators ask the participants to choose the guides to be analysed. These can be selected from a range of guides brought to the workshop by the facilitators, or by the participants (one that they use), or both. The participants then work in pairs, each analysing a different guide.
•
The facilitators ask the pairs (or individuals) to analyse their guide according to the four aspects mentioned above (text, illustrations, access systems and physical aspects).
•
The facilitators write, on separate cards, positive and negative reactions to each of these aspects, ending up with eight cards in total (use different coloured cards for the different aspects).
Step 6: Summary/categorization of working group evaluations A summary of key points from the evaluation exercise is presented on a flip chart, including strengths and weaknesses/good and bad points of each guide based on the four criteria (text, illustrations, access systems and physical aspects).
Step 7: Ranking the guides (plenary)
Each participant gives each guide a score, ranging from 1 (poor) to 5 (very good). The total or average scores show the overall group preference. Debate the results. Ask why some guides are better than others, and discuss whether any guide is ideal in all aspects or whether there are trade-offs.
To conclude the workshop, results should be documented and the information used to help plan guides.
without feeling criticized or intimidated by anyone else’s views, and where everyone’s interests are covered. This will lead to a ‘long list’ of species that might be included, and that will need to be organized and prioritized.
Box 3.3 provides methods for how to sort and rank species. These methods, in addition to helping participants to prioritize species, help to elicit the criteria that people use when judging whether a species is important or not. This, in turn, provides useful information for the guide (see Chapter 7).
Nevertheless, participatory processes must combine the best of both local and scientific knowledge, and the final list cannot be decided upon without some expert input.
Only specialists will be able to advise, for example, about:
•
species that might be confused with the selected ones – this is particularly important in a guide to medicinal or edible species;
•
how much is known about these species, and how feasible it is to obtain new information about these species.
By this stage you may be beginning to realize why the process is an iterative one: you cannot just plan your guide, collect the information and publish it. There will always be
Planning and budgeting 39
BOX 3.3 PARTICIPATORY BRAINSTORMING METHODS
FOR SPECIES SELECTION
•
Objective: to quickly generate a broad range of ideas and then prioritize them with a group of stakeholders.
•
Output: list of species/groups of species to include in the guide.
•
Staff: experienced facilitator.
•
Participants: representatives from all stakeholder groups.
•
Time: two hours.
•
Equipment: flip chart, markers, pens, cards, board and pins.
Brainstorming
Brainstorming is the name given to the exercise of gathering ideas in a spontaneous and rapid way. It is a useful tool in a group context since members of the group can be stimulated and provoked to formulate new ideas by other members’ suggestions.
There are two ways of carrying out a participatory brainstorming exercise:
•
The group openly shares suggestions, calling out ideas that the facilitator lists on a flip chart; this method can help to stimulate plenty of debate and to recall people’s memories.
•
Each person in the group writes or draws their suggestions on cards – one suggestion per card. This method helps to ensure that shy people are included, and that internal politics in the group does not prevent everyone from being heard.
It is the facilitator’s job to ensure that the activity does not get bogged down in detailed discussion or debate. Everybody’s ideas should be treated equally at this stage.
Sorting
This step allows some order to be given to the plethora of ideas that will emerge from the brainstorming exercise:
•
All the suggestions should be read through by the group or a facilitator without comment or discussion.
•
Participants can then be asked to organize their cards into groups based on similarities. This part of the e
xercise may indicate how participants would naturally order the species.
•
Once all of the cards have been sorted, participants can be invited to comment on the different groups and the positioning of individual cards. This will elicit the reasons for putting cards in particular piles, which can be important in defining people’s criteria for including species in the guide. At this stage, participants can change the position of their cards if they feel that they are in the wrong group.
Ranking or voting
Ranking or voting is a way of assigning importance or prioritizing species or groups.
40 Plant Identification
Figure 3.1 Indigenous villagers in Bajo Paraguá, Bolivian Amazon, prioritize species to include in their Guide to Useful Plants Prioritization of different groups will define criteria for what types of species to include in the guide (for example, ‘medicinal plants’ or ‘trees’), and ranking species will define criteria for which species to include within that group. It may also suggest an order for species to appear in the guide.
Ranking can be carried out in the following ways:
•
Once groups have been established by the sorting exercise, participants can be invited to give their opinion on the level of importance for each group or species that may be included in the guide.
•
If cards have been used and grouped, ranking can then be achieved by counting the number of cards in each group; the more cards in the group, the higher the ranking or priority of the group.
•
Another way of ranking is to ask participants to vote on the different groups or species.
There are two ways of doing this:
1
By a show of hands – the facilitator can go through the different groups and ask the participants to raise their hands for the group that they think is the most important. The group with the most votes has the highest priority.
2
By giving out stickers (for example, three per participant) – the facilitator can request that participants place the stickers by the groups that they think are most important. A count of the stickers, once they have all been added to the board, will provide the ranking for each group.
Planning and budgeting 41
an element of adjusting and redefining the content and illustrative material. Biological, climatic, social and economic factors all need to be taken into account. How wide an area is the user group likely to visit? How feasible is it to produce a guide for a large area; is it uneconomic to produce one that is too local and, hence, has only a small user group? And – the big question – are the resources available to produce the guide you have planned?
STEP 2: REVIEW THE SCOPE IN RELATION TO
AVAILABLE RESOURCES
Having carried out a stakeholder analysis and determined the purpose of the guide and what must go in it, you now need to assess whether you can do it with the resources available. These resources are existing information, time and money.
Available information
In order to fulfil the guide’s purpose, based on the draft species list and the criteria specified by user groups, how much more information will be needed in addition to that which already exists? To answer this, you will need to identify all the existing sources of information, including: species that fit the selection criteria but are missing from the draft list; species identification and names; useful information, both scientific and local, about the species; illustrations; and keys, contents, introduction and indexes.
Chapter 7 gives further guidance on thinking through the sources of information; you may need to do a considerable amount of research at this stage to find out what herbarium and library resources exist. It will help to read Chapters 4 and 5, as well, before producing a guide with many species that have perhaps not been identified properly. Too many guides have been published in which incorrect scientific names are used. One of the biggest mistakes made is to simply repeat scientific names used elsewhere for what is apparently the same species. Specimens of every species must be collected and verified at herbaria in order to ensure correct identification.
Available time
With a clear idea of the information required, you can begin to estimate the time that you will need to produce the guide. How much time will it take to collect new information and assemble existing information; analyse and edit it; design the pages; test, modify and finalize the content and layout; and, finally, publish it? Examples given in Case study 3.3 and Table 3.4 will help you to think through these questions.
It is not just a matter of the total time required, but also the order of events and the way in which they are distributed throughout the year. Many of the activities involved in producing a guide are seasonally dependent because:
•
Plant specimens need to be collected with flowers and fruits (see Chapter 4).
•
Some stakeholders are more available at certain times of the year – eco-tourists visit during the dry season; farmers have more time for workshops and ethnobotanical research when they are not busy with sowing and harvesting.
42 Plant Identification
If species need to be identified, specimens of both fruit and flowers may be required, and these can take a whole year to collect. If specimens must be sent off to a national or international herbarium for identification by a specialist, do not expect a reply by return post. Botanists are often busy doing fieldwork themselves; even if they are at home, the administrative work needed to process specimens and to return names can take another year, unless you have a close working relationship with the specialist in question. Case study 3.3 sets out an example of the time needed for different activities in Ghana and Grenada.
A timeline or calendar is an easy way of organizing events into chronological order and fitting activities to appropriate seasons. This can be used as a management tool throughout the project in order to assess progress. Table 3.4 shows a summary of the activities carried out in Bolivia to produce a guide (Vargas and Jordán, 2003) to 60
useful species in the indigenous communities around the Parque Nacional Noel Kempff Mercado (PNNKM); the guide took three years to produce. Of course, the authors had other work to do; but given the seasonal importance of access to the field sites, the time that the communities needed to think about their involvement and contributions, and the repeated visits that were required to check on species identification and fill in information gaps, it could not have been completed in less time. The calendar also helps to plan the activities in a logical order. Tips include:
•
Talk to publishers at the start of the project.
•
Begin illustrations early.
•
Aim for a first draft halfway through the available time.
Estimating costs
With a good idea of the guide’s information requirements and the time needed to complete the guide, you can estimate the amount of money necessary to produce it.
First, who will do the work? Case study 3.8 describes the experience of the team in Brazil, and provides tips on deciding who should be included. Will you have to pay salaries or consultants’ fees? How much will it cost to gather all of the information, including field visits to collect specimens and data; workshops with users and other stakeholders; and trips or postage to national or international herbaria in order to check specimen identities?
The real costs of preparing a guide, in time and money, are often much higher than the costs of printing; but it is the printing costs that are often harder to cover. This is because many people who decide to produce guides do not count the cost of their own time, either because they work in NGOs or government organizations where their salary is already paid, or because they are so enthusiastic and dedicated to the idea of the guide that they do not think about such practicalities. Nevertheless, collecting specimens and field data, including local knowledge, costs more than time – transport and materials mu
st also be taken into consideration. Projects often cover these; but it is the costs of printing and distributing the guide that can be overlooked at the outset. A checklist of costs, which need to be considered and included in the project budget, can be found in Box 3.4, and examples of guide format options and costs are presented in Case study 3.5.
Planning and budgeting 43
Once you have prepared your budget, the big question is, do you have this money, and if not, can you get it? If the time and money required are not available, you must go back and revise your ambitions for the guide. Almost every guide takes more time and money to produce than was envisioned at the beginning. Alternatively, if you have a fixed amount of time and money, you can work out how many species your guide can contain and what kind of illustrations you can afford to include. After doing this, you may need to return to your user group to revise the scope of the guide.
CASE STUDY 3.3 GUIDES IN GHANA AND GRENADA:
TIME NEEDED FOR DIFFERENT ACTIVITIES
William Hawthorne
Every field guide is different. Different plants, habitats, available information, countries and cultures will all affect aspects of timing. This case study outlines examples from our projects that provide some estimation of timing in particular cases.
Producing a picture guide to trees in Ghana
Although, in principle, one can take 200 to 300 digital photographs a day, covering perhaps 10 to 30 species, fieldwork never turns out to be as efficient as this, averaged over a long time period and when making a field guide. On the Forestry Research Programme (FRP) trial guides project in Ghana, making a 128-species photo guide to Ghanaian trees took two experienced people about 60 days (120 person days) of fieldwork, including a lot of travelling to cover the forest types of Ghana and to find appropriate individual trees. Once photographed, only about 30 days of more work were required to produce the laminated guide book we tested (and which worked well); but because we were researching alternatives formats, layouts and various digital photo cataloguing devices, we needed a further 30 days.
A workable ‘modular’ field guide, therefore, can be completed by one author with approximately one to two days per species, approaching the shorter end of this estimate as one becomes more experienced. Complex keys, introductions and so on will increase the time required. Picture guides with additional text per species will obviously take longer, depending upon the research required for the content. At this rate, about 100 people could cover all plant species in the world in about eight years! Of course, not all circumstances are so favourable for rapid guide production as Ghana’s trees.
Plant Identification Page 8