Andrew John DOUGILL "Soil organic carbon, poverty alleviation, climate smart development, payment for ecosystem services"


Published on

UNCCD 2nd Scientific Conference

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

Andrew John DOUGILL "Soil organic carbon, poverty alleviation, climate smart development, payment for ecosystem services"

  1. 1. Soil organic carbon, poverty alleviation & climate-compatible development: Lessons from Community- Based Payment for Ecosystem Service projects Andy Dougill (; @AndyDougill)
  2. 2. Climate Finance & Community-based Payment for Ecosystem Services (CB-PES) Projects• Climate finance => flow of funds to help poorer countries mitigate & adapt to climate change (e.g. Copenhagen Accord led to ‘fast-start’ finance of $30bn by 2012 & set up Green Climate Fund)• Growing Voluntary Carbon Market supporting CB-PES projects, especially in forest systems from which to learn lessons• CBNRM lessons show ability for community-empowerment to support Sustainable Land Management in range of settings
  3. 3. What is Climate Compatible Development?o Achieving sustained economic growth & social development in the face of multiple threats of CC, while cutting emissions or storing carbono Working towards ‘Triple-Wins’ & linked to Green Growth strategieso e.g. agroforestry, conservation agriculture, joint forest management, biofuels, clean stove technologieso i.e. Sustainable Land Management with added carbon-storage benefits with CB-PES as route for support
  4. 4. Stringer, Dougill, Thomas et al., 2012. Env Sci & Policy, 19-20, 121-135.
  5. 5. • Study explores institutional characteristics of 3 African community- based carbon projects that seek to deliver carbon-storage & poverty- reduction benefits (Malawi, Uganda & Mozambique)• Reviews rangeland CBNRM literature to identify additional institutional requirements in communal systems• Highlights value of institutional analysis alongside scientific studies to enable links to PES schemes capable of realising poverty alleviation
  6. 6. Institutional Analysis & Lessons• Analysis focused on 8 institutional characteristics of successful CBNRM project design (from Dolsak & Ostrom, 2003)• Project success dependent on: – Strong existing local institutions (linked to traditional authorities) – Clear land tenure (private largely, but can be village-level systems) – Community control over land management decision-making (project design) – Up-front, flexible payment schemes (e.g. micro-credit, nursery support etc.)
  7. 7. CBNRM Lessons from Semi-arid Rangelands• Analysis of semi-arid rangeland CBNRM projects focused on ‘community conservation’ initiatives across sn Africa• Rangeland CB-PES projects also require: – Outline of project boundaries recognising complex communal land tenure – System for benefit distribution linked to existing institutions – Capacity-building for community monitoring of C storage & awareness raising of benefits of C-friendly land management
  8. 8. Soil Carbon Benefits & Challenges• Livelihood benefits of CB-PES projects associated with enhanced SOC storage that increase crop productivity, water retention & biodiversity• Current monitoring methods & coverage limit ability to display SOC benefits of different land use & management scenarios requiring further study• Uncertainties linked to form of C storage (biochar v. SOM) implies more complex monitoring than just SOC as form & profile distribution remains critical
  9. 9. Developing Monitoring Systems & Valuation Assessments• Spatial & temporal variability of SOC storage implies modelling of C budgets is essential to move to a certifiable MRV system• Exemplar projects required to share good practices, e.g. – Trees of Hope, Malawi through work of Local Program Monitors – Kenya Agricultural Carbon Project - first project to market soil C credits. Soil C assessed using Roth-C model & baseline monitoring survey with 60% discounted. Focus on maize in farmer comms.
  10. 10. CCD Project ‘Good Practices’• Community input to project design• Multi-stakeholder partnerships for implementation• Defined roles & responsibilities across partners• Locally-appropriate monitoring systems to assess benefits & enable verification of C storage• Clear communication channels across governance levels of partnerships• National network systems established to share experiences to feed into policy development• Regional networks invigorated to share national lessons explicitly
  11. 11. Thank you• • •