Landscape management for forest goods and services: 
between wishful thinking and economic forces


Published on

This presentation by several CIFOR scientists focuses on model forest linkages, local perceptions of goods and services vs. actual deforestation processes, the example of pollination services, mechanisms to influence the current trends, PES efficiency and lessons for REDD+.

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Photo by RasElased BorealisFrench Guianan tropical forest.
  • In 2006 CIFOR’s Board and Management began a process of developing a new 10 year strategy, in order to better respond to current and future challenges, and remain a relevant source of timely analysis and knowledge on tropical forests and the people who depend on them. After two years of internal debate and external consultation we are confident that the new strategy has positioned CIFOR in such a way as to ensure our research is not only relevant, timely and accurate, but that it reaches the right people in order to have a genuine impact. The new strategy provides significant continuity with the past and retains our core purpose, which is to advance human well-being, environmental conservation, and equity. But in doing so it also addresses new challenges – such as climate change and the dramatic rise of forest-related trade and investment – that now characterize the literal and figurative landscape in which we work. Tomaximisethe likelihood of success in translating research into impact, the strategy focuses CIFOR’s research on six research “domains”.
  • Photo: CIFOR Slide Library #20332 – by Adrian AlbanoNepalGiven that most forest biodiversity occurs outside protected areas, it’s important that we find a balance between sustainable land use and conservation. In other words, we need to weigh up the needs of people and the need to protect tropical forests. Both are important, but neither can be the sole priority. In an ideal world, there are win-win situations, but more often that not we have to accept trade-offs between the two. For example, many people living in poor rural areas in Africa rely on bushmeat as a source of protein but certain mammal populations have become vulnerable because of the extent and scale of hunting. This situation presents a challenge to policy-makers at all levels: how can locals still gain access to important food sources and how can biodiversity be protected in these areas? A recent report from CIFOR and the UN Convention on Biological Diversity recommended developing policies to protect endangered species, while allowing sustainable hunting of so-called “common” game. This is what’s known as a “rights-based approach” to conservation; equipping locals with the knowledge and responsibility to use the land sustainably, without diminishing their livelihood and their capacity to source essential items. Our recommendations attracted criticism from hardline conservationists who advocate blanket-bans on hunting in the interests of biodiversity. One of the key components of this area of research is understanding payments for environmental services – or PES. This is a system where landowners are compensated for conserving forest areas, based on the premise that these forests provide crucial services for the broader community through things such as carbon sequestration, watershed protection, aesthetic landscape value and biodiversity. Our research in this area focuses on who’s benefiting from these payments; if the payments are actually stopping deforestation; the transparency of the transactions; and whether or not local communities are marginalised in the process.
  • Landscape management for forest goods and services: 
between wishful thinking and economic forces

    1. 1. Landscape management for forest goods and services: between wishful thinking and economic forces Jean-Laurent Pfund, Sven Wunder, Terry Sunderland, Manuel Guariguata Burgos – March 2011 THINKING beyond the canopy
    2. 2. Presentation outline 1. CIFOR - Model Forest linkages 2. Local perceptions of goods and services vs actual 3. 4. 5. 6. deforestation processes The example of pollination services Mechanisms to influence the current trends PES efficiency Lessons for REDD+? THINKING beyond the canopy
    3. 3. CIFOR and Model Forests: Local Communities in sustainable Forested Landscapes 1 2 Enhancing the role of forests in mitigating climate change Enhancing the role of forests in adapting to climate change 3 4 Improving livelihoods through smallholder and community forestry 5 6 Managing impacts of globalised trade and investment on forests and forest communities Managing trade-offs between conservation and development at the landscape scale Sustainably managing tropical production forests THINKING beyond the canopy
    4. 4. Research domain 4 Managing trade-offs between conservation and development at the landscape scale  Most forest biodiversity occurs outside protected areas  Trade-offs are often required between the needs of people and the need for forest conservation  Payments for Environmental Services (PES) are a mechanism to mitigate tradeoffs • including carbon, watersheds, aesthetic value, biodiversity THINKING beyond the canopy
    5. 5. Different sites, different entry points Some case studies THINKING beyond the canopy
    6. 6. Perceived importance of forest goods and services in 5 landscape mosaics 80 70 60 50 40 30 Indonesia Tanzania Madagascar Laos Cameroon 20 10 0 Food and selfMarketed items consumed and income goods Regulating services Cultural services THINKING beyond the canopy
    7. 7. Deforestation rates in these agricultural landscapes 90% 3.50% 80% 3.00% 70% 2.50% 60% 50% 2.00% 40% 1.50% Annual deforestation rate outside protected area Non-forest cover 30% 1.00% 20% 0.50% 10% 0% 0.00% Takamanda Viengkham Manompana Usambara Jambi THINKING beyond the canopy
    8. 8. Indonesia: targeted landscapes Rubber AF 100% rubber 100% oil palm THINKING beyond the canopy
    9. 9. Pollination of passion fruit in Colombia Valle Meta Huila THINKING beyond the canopy
    10. 10. Limitations to value pollination services for habitat conservation  Valle: isolated and dense cultivated areas, frequent  pesticide and manual pollination Meta: lower intensity (density, pesticide application), cultures still relatively isolated from natural/semi-natural forests but depending on bee pollination  Concept of pollination services for habitat conservation low because of already remote natural habitats, important intensification processes and possible substitution of the service THINKING beyond the canopy
    11. 11. So… How to influence the “normal” trends?  Command and control?  Economic schemes?  • • Certification for organic schemes Conditional payments for ecosystem services REDD+ as a promising opportunity “but”… • It will have to be adapted to very variable contexts  Spatial variations of service delivery, threat and accessibility, insecure tenure and variable poverty conditions  Thus will have to be integrated into wider cross-sectoral programmes addressing several drivers of deforestation and degradation • The efficiency of REDD+ mechanisms is very different if assessed from a cost or a social point of view THINKING beyond the canopy
    12. 12. Intra-landscape variations Perceived importance forest income generation Actual income generation 60000 Maromitety 50000 40000 Forest Ambofampana 30000 Income NTFP Agroforest Income timber Farmland 20000 Other Bevalaina 10000 0 Maromitety 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Ambofampana Bevalaina 100% THINKING beyond the canopy
    13. 13. Optimizing REDD policy options Deforest PES Incentive mix Policy decision Land user decision Conserve C&C Implementation costs Fine Effectiveness PES – opportunity cost Welfare impact THINKING beyond the canopy
    14. 14. Tenure effects: PES welfare impacts in the Brazilian Amazon THINKING beyond the canopy
    15. 15. PES costs in the Brazilian Amazon THINKING beyond the canopy
    16. 16. PES or control? 70% overlap at district level THINKING beyond the canopy
    17. 17. Tradeoffs to bridge… ecological, social and economic efficiency?  Will need societal choices (multistakeholder  processes, etc.) To be defined in the current “complex, muddled realities of landscape governance”  Thus will need monitoring and possible adaptations over time THINKING beyond the canopy
    18. 18. Ten “tenets” of good practice underpinning landscape approaches 1. Continual learning and adaptive management principle 2. Common concern entry-point principle 3. Multiple scale principle 4. Multifunctionality principle 5. Multistakeholder principle 6. Negotiated and transparent change logic principle 7. Clarification of rights and responsibilities principle 8. Participatory and user-friendly monitoring principle 9. Resilience principle 10.Strengthened stakeholder capability principle THINKING beyond the canopy
    19. 19. Thank you And say hello to Titin THINKING beyond the canopy