Cornell Landscapes Research Forum Slides (Dr. Christine Negra)


Published on

In October 2013, the Cornell Landscapes Research Forum brought together faculty and guest speakers interested in socio-ecological landscape approaches to understanding complex problems and opportunities at the interface of ecosystem conservation, sustainable agricultural production, livelihood security, and multi-stakeholder governance, and in designing or scaling up strategies to address them.

In this slideshow, Dr. Christine Negra discusses the work of the Landscapes for People, Food and Nature (LFPN) Inititative, an international collaborative initiative of cross-sectoral knowledge sharing, dialogue and action to support the integrated management of rural landscapes for food production, ecosystem conservation, and sustainable livelihoods. Dr. Negra, who is co-Leader of the research working group of the Initiative, discusses the five working groups of the Initiative and some of the exciting knowledge products they have released so far.

For more information about LPFN, please visit

Published in: 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
  • [Journal paper to be submitted shortly]
  • Given the challenges of aligning action in rural landscapes across scales, sectors, and stakeholders, it is logical to expect that landscape approaches would rarely be pursued when simpler options were likely to suffice. In fact, we did find that the initiatives generally had strong motivations related to addressing challenges that stakeholders felt could not be resolved in other ways. In the majority of the cases, these challenges centered around a natural resource management issue (e.g., watershed management, wildlife habitat connectivity, or disaster risk reduction) combined with alleviating rural poverty, building agricultural value chains, reconciling past conflicts, and building more effective governance structures. Our results related to initiative motivations, contexts, and stakeholder participation suggest integrated landscape management to be, fundamentally, a problem-solving approach driven by context-specific demand—not merely a new conceptual paradigm or development model that is being applied in a top-down way…most of the initiatives had registered significant progress and alignment of stakeholders relative to the first two stages of landscape engagement (landscape identity and landscape institutions), but not always relative to the third and fourth stages (landscape action and landscape results ).  The life cycle of the initiatives include four critical stages: create landscape identity accepted by stakeholders, establish / strength institutions that lead landscape management, implement actions to improve landscape management and deliver results at landscape scale.Initiatives progress is not linear but cyclic, since each one of the stages is "visited" several times facing new or the same challenges/factorsFactors such as policy, funds, social conditions, stakeholders interest, landscape size and population density are factors present in all the stages either undermining or boosting the initiatives progress at each stage.Initiatives life cycle and undermining/boosting factors offers empirically-rooted guidance to identify initiatives needs and target actions by governments, civil society organizations, and donors actively involved or highly interested on promoting integrated landscape approach
  • Cornell Landscapes Research Forum Slides (Dr. Christine Negra)

    1. 1. Integrated landscape management for people, food and nature Dr Christine Negra Research Program, EcoAgriculture Partners Landscapes Research Forum Cornell University October 10, 2013
    2. 2.
    3. 3. Objective: To catalyze scaling up integrated landscape management (ILM), for: ● Climate-resilient, diversified agricultural production ● Secure access to food, fuel, fiber ● Rural livelihoods and culture ● Biodiversity ● Watershed functions ● Terrestrial climate mitigation
    4. 4. ● Synthesize diverse knowledge sets ● Promote learning and document experience across communities of practice ● Foster dialogue and action among diverse groups ● pool resources for advocacy and outreach ● link high-level policy initiatives and landscape actors N Palmer (CIAT) LPFN ‘Value-Added’
    5. 5. Multi-Stakeholder Dialogue Nairobi International Forum Committee for World Food Security. 39th Session Summit for Sustainability in Africa (Botswana) IUCN World Conservation Congress Climate-Smart Agricultural Global Science Conference (UC Davis) Rio+20 Stockholm World Water Week UNFCCC COP 18 (Doha) Second Global Conference on Agricultural Research for Development (GCARD 2) Second Global Conference on Agriculture, Food Security, and Climate Change (Hanoi)
    6. 6. Organization of LPFN Initiative ● 9 Co-organizers ● Many strategic partners ● 6 working groups ● Secretariat: EcoAgriculture Co-Organizers Secretariat Strategic Partners Working Groups
    7. 7. Some LPFN strategic partners
    8. 8. Examples of current EcoAg / LPFN funders ● UNEP-GEF: core LPFN support ● NORAD: civil society engagement in ILM ● Moore: business engagement; governance; ILI review (LA) ● Int’l Finance Corporation: biodiversity & agricultural commodities ● CGIAR: agricultural C projects; ecosystem services and resilience; ILI review (Asia) ● World Bank: scaling up ‘agroforestry’; environment & commodity landscapes ● TerrAfrica: sustainable land management
    9. 9. Global Review – ILM ‘knowledge products’ • Continental reviews of integrated landscape initiatives • Social and institutional aspects Landscape Strengthening, WG1 • Supportive policy and governance Policy, WG2 • Supportive market mechanisms • Priority investments • Landscape science for development research agenda Business, WG3 Financing, WG4 Science & Knowledge, WG5
    10. 10. Global Review Products Completed  Continental reviews of landscape initiatives  Climate-smart landscape planning  Linking climate change mitigation & adaptation  Agro-ecological intensification  Finance for climate-smart agriculture  Impact of eco-certification  Landscape approach to sustainable sourcing  Water management in landscapes
    11. 11. Global Review Products Underway       Agrobiodiversity in landscapes Market mechanisms for ILM Financing ILM Policy tools for ILM Governance for ILM Producer movements
    12. 12. Global Review: some examples
    13. 13. Agroecological intensification (KP 1.3) ● Meta-review of yield, ecosystem services (ES) and extent of AEI ● Five illustrative AEI approaches: ● ● ● ● ● Conservation agriculture Holistic grazing management Organic agriculture Precision agriculture System of Rice Intensification (SRI)
    14. 14. Agroecological intensification (cont.) ● Evidence of outcomes ● SRI: positive and win-win outcomes ● Other AEI: mixed ● Extent of adoption ● 1st order estimates ● Best data for organic agriculture ● AEI literature gaps: ● Multi-functionality ● Temporal dimensions ● Quantification of yield and ES
    15. 15. Review of ILIs in Latin America (KP 0.1) ● Surveyed 104 integrated landscape initiatives in 21 countries ● Motivations and outcomes for 4 ‘domains’ of multi-functionality: ● Agriculture ● Conservation ● Livelihoods ● Institutional planning / coordination
    16. 16. ILIs in Latin America ● ILI ‘life cycle’: 4 stages ● Identity –> institutions –> implementation –> results at scale ● Success factors: policy, funding, social conditions, stakeholder interest, landscape size and population density ● Research needed: ● Objective, quantitative assessments of the outcomes of ILIs
    17. 17. Landscape approach for sustainable sourcing (KP5.1) ● Understand when and why agribusinesses think – and act – at landscape scale ● Global scoping: 27 examples, 3 case studies Strategic Advisory Committee: World Business Council for Sustainable Development, IFC, Rio Tinto, Unilever, Nestlé and Mars Inc. Working Group: Conservation International, Rainforest Alliance, Solidaridad, African Wildlife Foundation, World Resources Institute, Fauna and Flora International, Root Capital, University of Greenwich, and EcoAgriculture Partners.
    18. 18. Starbucks and CI: landscape approach to coffee in Mexico, Indonesia and Brazil ● Risks / rationales  Volatile market prices, farmer incomes  Declining production (climate, aging farmers)  Env’l risks (deforestation, GHGs, water) ● Modes  Supply chain intervention (C.A.F.E. practices)  Regional producer support interventions (farmer loans)  Carbon payments ● Research needed:  Potential of landscape approach to reduce risks in key sourcing regions
    19. 19. A few other EcoAgriculture projects
    20. 20. ● Grant-making facility (IFC, Chemonics International, EcoAgriculture Partners) ● Protect biodiversity in agricultural commodity landscapes through BMPs, supply chain approaches ● Market Transformation Strategies for palm oil, soy, and cocoa ● 20 projects in 9 countries for a total $6.3m
    21. 21. Brazil: Solidaridad and Sustainable Soy ● Inclusion of Biodiversity Friendly Smallholder Soy in Preferential Markets ● Assist producers with certification under Round Table for Responsible Soy (RTRS) ● Smallholder Soy Self-Assessment Toolkit ● BMP demonstration and training ● Link certified soy to CSR frontrunner companies ● Innovative no-till weed management pilot
    22. 22. Tree-based ecosystems approaches (TBEAs) ● Literature review of TBEAs at scale ● 40 different TBEAs across 111 sites in 53 countries ● Drivers: improve soil, income, subsistence production ● Wide variety of quantitative and qualitative descriptions of impacts ● Poor description of TBEA adoption and extent
    23. 23. ● Shared conceptual framework for assessing impacts across different sites ● Spatial analyses to determine geographic distribution and extent of TBEAs ● Comprehensive case studies to understand scaling up processes and dynamics at landscape scale D Van der Made TBEAs: recommendations
    24. 24. Directions for research collaboration ● Address literature gaps in multi-functionality, temporal dimensions of ILM ● Agree definitions / metrics for ILM adoption and scaling up ● Test meta-hypothesis: ● Improved multi-stakeholder processes  improved practices and policies  increased multi-functionality in landscapes
    25. 25. Today ● Get to know each other and find areas of common interest / synergy October - December ● Identify existing projects where we could usefully support each other ● Work toward proposals that tackle complex, multidisciplinary challenges January ● Bring strategic partners and prospective funders to Cornell to design research for development initiatives
    26. 26. Discussion groups ● Topics of high interest for EcoAg / LPFN ● Scaling up ILM (incl private sector) – Rice 300 ● Understanding / managing multi-functional landscapes – Bruckner 224 ● Managing / governing multi-stakeholder ILM systems – Rice 109 ● Initiate a concept note ● Research for development problem statement ● Indicative research activities ● Ideas for funders and partners (Cornell and beyond) to investigate
    27. 27. Thank you!