DESIGNING PROJECTS IN A RAPIDLY CHANGING WORLD

The initial system description could build upon the
focus developed in the Theory of Change component.
The description is not a static snapshot of what
the system looks like, but rather a dynamic description
of what is changing and why, the connections
between system components, and significant crossscale
interactions.
The output of this component will be used in the
System Assessment to assess system properties,
such as resilience, adaptive capacity, opportunities
for transformation, critical decision points and points
of no return.
3.4.2 Use in the phases of project cycle
In the identification phase of a project cycle, the
system description may be done by the project team
as a rapid desktop assessment which can inform the
initial Theory of Change in the subsequent design
phase. A more developed system description is
recommended for the project design and implementation
phases of the project cycle. Once the project is
in either of these phases it is very important to involve
key stakeholders in creating the system description.
3.4.3 Steps to conduct the System
Description
Step 1 Explore stakeholders’ views of the system,
including what they value and why, and what stresses
they anticipate
This step clarifies what you are seeking to make
resilient, and to what stresses: “Resilience of what,
to what”
• Define the socioeconomic and biophysical boundaries
of the system, beginning with the provisional
boundaries outlined during Scoping. These boundaries
define the scale of assessment for all other
components. The boundaries are unlikely to follow
neat lines on a map, and the biophysical and social-economic
boundaries often do not coincide.
Potential reasons include household members earning
wages in cities and remitting some income to
the family; livestock being taken to remote pastures
when feed is scarce locally; local stream flow being
controlled by a distant dam, and others. You may
decide to include the city, remote pasture or dam as
part of the system, or treat them as system drivers,
and outside of the control of the studied system.
• Identify what people value in the system now and
potentially into the future (e.g. crops and livestock
marketed or consumed, reliable high quality water
supply, a safe home for raising children, a choice
of future livelihood options, iconic species), and
the drivers that affect or might affect these valued
system properties or products. Common drivers
are markets and technologies, national and international
policies, and climate.
• Identify the “drivers” of the system – i.e. the things
that influence the system from the outside, and are
not themselves influenced by the system. Common
ones are markets, technologies, international policies,
and climate. Climate change scenarios for the
region should show potential trends and uncertainties,
which can be related to potential consequences
in the region.
• Identify previously-experienced or potential future
“shocks” that the system may face, such as a new
crop disease, a collapse in market prices, a flood, a
drought, or a major policy change.
• At all steps in the System Description component,
use the project goals and impacts, and the clarity
about “resilience of what, to what” as a filter on
what to include in the system description. You are
not trying to describe everything in the system, but
you are trying to identify system components that
affect the goals and features that you care about.
Step 2 Describe the social and economic aspects,
including institutions and governance of the system
• Describe the main social groups that characterise
the social structure of the system, and if necessary
stratify into relatively homogenous groups (e.g. by
demography, access to or ownership of land).
• Describe livelihood strategies, interests and influence,
as well as the underlying social and biophysical
variables that support livelihoods, such as
the cover of grass or dry-season fodder trees, the
depth of soil on arable land, or distance to permanent
water, social cohesion (iterate with Step 1, resilience
“of what” above).
• Describe the pre-existing governance arrangements
for the area (i.e. this is not about project
governance), the extent to which power and/or decision-making
is hierarchical, decentralized or polycentric,
the formal and informal rules for resource
access and use and the social processes and institutions
for implementing them.
• Identify key decisions, decision-making organizations
and individuals who are critical to implementing
interventions to achieve the goals and impact
pathways.
• Understand how current values, knowledge and
rules (i.e. laws, policies, traditions) define the context
within which decisions will be made – e.g. what
may constrain or empower decision makers, and
RAPTA guidelines for project design 57