Engagement with stakeholders should follow the process outlined in Section 3A. Sites should engage with stakeholders for several reasons, including to:
- gather further information and intelligence about the context
- identify stakeholders
- manage misunderstandings and expectations on both sides
- gather input into the design of controls for managing -related risks and impacts
- gather information about control effectiveness
- assess whether stakeholders can access the grievance process.
Especially in cases where no previous communication or engagement channels with actors exist, initial engagement will be the foundation for trust and relationship building, and therefore needs to be carefully considered and planned.
Sites should engage with stakeholders either directly, or indirectly through a third party:
- Engaging directly with stakeholders - In some cases, it is possible to engage directly with stakeholders and their representatives or leaders. This is often the case in contexts where has existed for a relatively long time and consists at least partially of ‘legitimate’, formal and/or legal activities. Direct engagement can consist of the following:
- As a first step it may be useful for a site to have informal conversations with actors or their representatives. Informal encounters or conversations can be used to build a preliminary relationship, which can be useful to plan more formal engagement.
- Meetings with leaders or representatives: For a first meeting it may be beneficial to engage a smaller group of leaders or representatives, or, conduct informal one-on-one meetings with leaders or representatives to establish an initial point of contact.
- Meetings with a wider set of representatives: In the initial stages it may also be beneficial to extend the engagement to a wider set of representatives beyond the key leaders including marginalised groups (e.g. women, migrants, youth, the elderly, certain ethnic groups, ex-combatants, and so on) and representatives of the different roles in the system.
- Site visits: Sites should consider organising a visit to the site(s), with the help of leaders and representatives. This allows for an in-depth observation of the workings at the site(s), as well as one on one interviews with different types of stakeholders in a variety of roles.
- Formalised engagement: After a period of initial meetings and once a certain level of trust is established, sites should consider establishing regular and formalised points of engagement with stakeholders. Sites should collaborate with stakeholders to understand their preferences for engagement, e.g. involvement in the Community Engagement Forums (CEF).
- Engaging indirectly with stakeholders - Sites should consider that stakeholders may not want or may not be able to engage directly with the site due to the informal or illegal nature of their activity. Engaging with stakeholders directly may in some cases also pose safety and security risks for the site’s employees. In such cases, sites should engage indirectly with stakeholders. This involves collaborating with third parties who can or already have a direct relationship with . In some cases, these third parties could consist of government authorities in charge of monitoring and formalising the sector, though stakeholders acting illegally/informally may be equally hesitant to engage with Government representatives. Other options for third party engagement are traditional authorities, religious leaders, and/or , or a multi-stakeholder initiative or platform. Over time, indirect engagement with stakeholders can progress into direct engagement.
Through stakeholder mapping and analysis, sites should get a better understanding of who the leaders or representatives are, and where the points of leverage in the system might lie. stakeholders may be different from community stakeholders, neither represented in community engagement platforms, nor by the community leaders the site routinely engages with.