 The Land at Scale program aims to strengthen essential land governance components for men, women and youth to contribute to structural, just, sustainable, and inclusive change at scale in lower and middle income countries, regions, and landscapes. This program is supported by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands and the Netherlands Enterprise Agency. Knowledge management is essential to the effective implementation of the Land at Scale program. It is conceived in a comprehensive and adaptive way that integrates documentation, learning, and sharing. Knowledge management means bringing in state-of-the-art insights to strengthen interventions, reaching out to make relevant knowledge available to the right people at the right time, and sharing lessons learned in the program with a wide audience. In this series of short videos, we explore three key aspects of the Knowledge Management program within Land at Scale. These are adaptive programming, South-South Exchange, and monitoring and evaluation. Each of the video presents evidence and insights from experts working in the land governance sector. This video is focused on South-South Exchange and the relevance of joint learning within a larger program. Through South-South Exchange, partners can share and learn from each other's knowledge and experiences. In this video, we have asked a range of questions to experts to share their insights. In the context of Prindex, actually, we have looked both at experiences between the Global North and the Global South, but particularly South-South Exchanges. And I would put it less in terms of deliberate efforts to encourage South-South Exchanges, but just a very natural progression. And that just being a very natural space for shared learning to happen. We have regional engagement coordinators in Prindex. They are a key part of our strategy to be able to generate learning for us to learn from our partners in the South. And they are very active across the different countries in the regions that they supervise. So we have, for example, a regional engagement coordinator for the Latin America and Caribbean region, one for Southeast Asia. We have it for the Uneki region, the African region and the MENA region. And we have a hub with a partner in India, the National Centre for Economic Research, the NCAR in India, who runs the South Asia regional engagement hub. So it really does emerge very naturally from the activities that are carried out there, where we work very closely with the ILC and through their networking in some regions, particularly with FAO. So we tap into those networks as well and all the partners and organizations that are operating there. And as I said, it's not so much of a deliberate strategy to encourage learning, it just happens innately, actually. It is really paramount that this exchange should be initiated and follow up and in a continue and a sequence basis. Yeah, we did the first South-South exchange. That was a pilot, testing how this can be done and how we can really do it in a systematic and structured way where we can really harvest the outcome, the positive outcome and put it in a help to develop knowledge product that can be shared with other stakeholders. In 2019, we organized the first meal learning day in Bogota, in Colombia, where we brought all our partners from the South. And the basis, the intention were to listen and understand our partners' capacity and knowledge about result-based monitoring. What do they know about it doesn't monitor? What have they been doing in the other project supported by other donors on this? What are the key gaps, the key challenges and how can we better support them? And what is their understanding about cross-cutting issues when we talk about it? So in that exchange, we enabled the partners to share among them those from Africa, Southeast Asia, and Latin America. They are different understandings and experience on result-based monitoring and evaluation. So based on that, we could identify some partners that have more capacity, more experience, more exposed. And then we could identify some partners that have very limited capacity and limited experience in result-based monitoring. And then we developed now support strategies. Capacity needs support, certainly, on how we can better improve or strengthen the capacity and support them in their project monitoring and evaluation. Yeah, that was the first. And then we all initiated to conduct auto monitoring, which is a South Side collaboration in this different region where we worked. The first one was planned in 2021 in Africa, but we couldn't do it because of COVID. So we are hoping to do this first South Side collaboration in Africa in 2022. Because it is difficult to do this online, because we really need the partners to be physical so that they can better engage and understand other. And that type of engagement also be a sense of trust and also be a sense of community where they can now mobilize to do things together in areas where they have commonalities. When we do exchange among partners, we don't only focus among the partners. We bring in the duty bearers, the government. Government agencies that are involved in land governance and land institutions, because they are the guarantor of right. It is important to understand that securing land tenure, you cannot do it without the government. So we bring the government agencies on board to be part of that exchange. Because also we realize that in some of the countries that we work, there's a lot of work to be done on land administration, on land governance. That is the authoritative mandate from the government. So we also bring them on board to understanding processes. And in that process, also strengthening their capacity. And in that process, also build trust. We will be very successful in doing that. For example, in Panama, where we have helped our indigenous people organization, now being very good relationship with the Ministry of Environment. And they are now very there's a lot of more increased collaboration and cooperation, which were not before. They were like two enemies. In Liberia, it's another very important case where our partners are really create a very clear platform for dialogue team and they value increase their relationship with the Liberia land authority and the working together. We think at ILC that South-South learning exchanges are extremely important because we know that ILC members hold a lot of knowledge that they can share with their peers, both at country level and also across countries. At the moment at ILC, the main initiative through which this learning happens is land collaborative. And the focus of land collaborative is specifically on land practitioners at country level and specifically those that are part of multi-stakeholder engagement at country level. And this learning happens mainly in dedicated learning cycles or knowledge exchange sessions. And what we really want to promote is horizontal learning between participants in these cycles or sessions. Also, what land collaborative tries to do is to support the implementation of this learning so that the learning doesn't stop when a learning event or a cycle finishes. Something that is also very important is to make sure that what is exchanged is properly documented. So especially in a network like ILC, we really want to make sure that this learning and exchange goes beyond the participants of a certain program or initiative and is also available to other ILC members. Building in resources into a program to take into account the investment that's needed to build close partnerships, particularly if you are trying to organize data collection and analysis together and learn from each other and make sure that you really understand the way that each organization works. And I think it's very important to build into the structure of any program. And be realistic. We are very ambitious with Prindex. We're constantly responding to a lot of requests from different countries to engage and build partnerships there, which we're delighted with. And we do have to be careful that we have the capacity to respond to those because on both sides, there are different institutional cultures, or not on both sides, because it's not just a bilateral arrangement or relationship. But yes, as I say, it's getting to know the institutional cultures, the individuals involved, the way that each institution operates. And really making sure that you build in time to create those personal relationships and that trust. I think the other thing that we've learned is that it would be helpful in these programs to have more structured entry points for learning. So we think, for example, that the NELGA initiative is a really good way to build partnerships on knowledge management and knowledge generation. And there are large economies at scale of doing that. If you can, for example, co-generate a curriculum with the partners in the NELGA initiative, if you can use that curriculum to then jointly deliver capacity building or technical learning programs, I think that that could be a great way to scale up learning beyond investing in individual or bilateral partnerships. We have learned that it is essential to collect information on learning needs of potential participants in learning cycles. So that's why Land Collaborative has carried out the needs assessment, focusing both on thematic interests and also on more technical capacity building needs. So this way, we can make sure that the opportunities for learning that we make available to land practitioners that are part of our members are really responding to what is most important to them. And securing indigenous people land right is paramount. It's a strong enabling condition. It's a strong trigger for other developmental goals to happen. We've also learned from these different issues that if you secure collective land right, it will have reduced conflict. Another important aspect that we have paid attention on in the past has been the need for research that ILC members have expressed in different ways, different fora. And we have tried to address such needs by supporting and facilitating research initiatives that have brought to results data findings that we have made available to ILC members and also, of course, to the broader land community. One example is the research initiative on land inequality that the ILC has led in 2019 and 2020 and that has culminated in the publication of 17 reports on land inequality and a synthesis report called an even ground. The way in which the research has been conducted has been by facilitating a collective effort in which a number of ILC members have participated. So the research has been a collaborative research that has really relied on the capacities and the strengths of the previous research and the expertise of ILC members.