1. National Assessment of the Potential for Forest & Landscape Restoration (FLR) – a new tool to support landscape restorationStewart MaginnisGlobal DirectorNature-Based Solutions GroupIUCN
2. Different Landscapes – Different DynamicsProtected Degraded Primary ForestPrimaryForest Secondary forest PlantationsSecondary forest Degraded Permanent Lands pasture Permanent pasture Intecnsive agriculture land Permanent pasture
3. Where and what to restore?
4. Objectives of National Assessment of FLR potentialAssessments designed to help:• bring different agency staff together with civil society actors and researchers to look at the landscape, its challenges and opportunities, through a multi-sectoral lens.• collectively assemble “best estimates” in data deficient situations (and help define evidence gaps)• establish a common restoration framework• align with national priorities eg REDD+ strategy.• identify restoration priorities and develop „value for money‟ restoration investments.
5. A flexible method: different approaches depending on data availability and end needs Single na onal Na onal level process Use geometric Assessment? model for first Yes. Data exists for level of Sub-Na onal level all indicators assessment of Assessment? Mul ple workshops selected for at sub-na onal level assessment FLR poten al Single na onal Use mixture of Na onal level process geometric Assessment Country is modeling and rich in GIS par cipatory Sub-Na onal level Mul ple workshops data? Some data assessment Assessment? at sub-na onal level exists for some indicators No. Limited or no Single na onal data exists for any Na onal level Use process indicators par cipatory Assessment Assessment of FLR poten al Sub-Na onal level Mul ple workshops Assessment? at sub-na onal level
6. Mexico – a country rich in geographical data Used multiple criteria to select sites for restoration: Areas where restoration is necessary, e.g. 1. Priorities for restoration according to Forest Zoning
7. Many national institutions participated inselecting criteria for prioritizing FLR sites and provided relevant data layers. Some criteria for where restoration has more or less probability of success: 2. Socio-economical Pressure Index/ Deforestation Risk
8. Different criteria were weightedaccording to relative importance 3. Susceptibility to erosion by type of soil – including levels of priority
9. Physical & environmentalcriteria were balanced with socio-economic criteria 4. Geographical distribution of the dominant patterns of land tenure in the priority zones for FLR in Mexico
10. Multiple data layers wereanalyzed with geometric model 5. Priority for restoration based on probability/resilience to fires by type of vegetation
11. Final product: A map showing priority areas for restoration based on multiple criteria Areas with potential for forest landscape restoration – darker colour indicates higher priority based on agreed criteria.
12. Assessment outcomes• Rapid response that used available GIS data• Good geographic prioritization and helped 3 different government agencies develop a common restoration framework• To be followed with sub-national analysis including: • Local stakeholder consultation • Specification of interventions • Economic analysis
13. Ghana – less available data. So local expertise and stakeholder knowledge integrated more intimately with spatial analysis Starting from To a new where the assessment of woody biomass on-reserve currently is forest condition concentrated: To anAnd concluding approximationwith classifying where keylandscapes ecosystemwhere new goods andopportunities services arecan missingbe found.
14. Landscape Restoration InterventionsLand Type Land sub-type General Category of Landscape Restoration Intervention If the land is without trees, there 1. planted forests and woodlotsForest land: are two options: 2. natural regeneration Ø Suitable for “Wide- Scale” Restoration. If the land is degraded existing 3. silviculture forests: If the land is under permanent 4. AgroforestryAgricultural land management: Ø Suitable for “Mosaic Restoration” If it is under intermittent 5. Improved fallow management:Coastal areas Ø Suitable for “Mangrove 6. Mangrove restoration Restoration”
15. 1.In sub-national workshops base maps were modified Eliminate Irrelevant Areas with local knowledge from different sectors
16. On-reserve opportunities for wide-scale restoration: with an appropriate mix of interventions ascribed to each polygon
17. Followed by portfolios of options in the non-forest landscape (mosaic restoration)
18. Accompanied with best estimates of costs and benefits 0.5 ton of carbon
19. The National Assessement in Ghana helpedquantify the potential of different landscape restoration interventions Avoided Deforestation Silviculture 127 303 Planted Forests Agroforestry 202 565 Regeneration 267 Fallow 168 Source: Greeley, 1925 (in Williams 2006)
20. Ghana Landscape Restoration Carbon Abatement Curve ..and the understandingNet benefits per ton of CO2e sequestration (Cedis) the potential net return CO2e sequestration potential (Mt)
21. Which in turn was used for regional prioritisation ABATEMENT CURVES – ( map – bullets – map) Volta Region Central Region Today: Forests are coming back AD AD Source: Greeley, 1925 (in Williams 2006)
22. Concluding remarks• Assessment methodology is an analytical tool: it is not designed for spatial planning• The methodology – even at the pilot stage - has proven its ability to generate relevant knowledge that informs national planning• Different emphasis can be given to different components depending on local requirements; • Mexico:- • Ghana • Facilitated common • Informed prioritisation in the prioritisation among govt Ghana FIP agencies • Maps less important and key • Maps are an important role was to provide spatial representation of broad estimates for economic geographic potential analysis.