My argument                                                                      •• Plantations of fast-growing exotics gr...
Recent large reforestation initiatives But changes may be underway •• In past - reforestation to produce ‘‘goods’’        ...
Types of reforestation                                                           Types of reforestation                 SI...
Some silvicultural optionsThere are many types of mixtures                                                                ...
4. Ecological   Restoration•• Advantages   –– Best method for conserving      biodiversity   –– Good watershed protection ...
Time to provide ecological services                                                                                IN ADDI...
Back to the beginning - my Choice of silvicultural method                                               original argument ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Regreening the hills

429 views

Published on

Presentation by David Lamb on alternative methods for tropical forest restoration. Besides large scale reforestation activities, David Lamb argues to look for smaller scale silvicultural alternatives as well which are more suitable for farmers.

Published in: Education, Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
429
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Regreening the hills

  1. 1. My argument •• Plantations of fast-growing exotics grown in monocultures will continue to play a role Regreening the barren hills: alternative methods of tropical •• However, should not be seen as only way in which reforestation can be done forest restoration •• Farmers are different to large companies - David Lamb they deserve a wider range of silvicultural alternatives to suit their circumstances University of Queensland Australia •• Likewise, those (Governments, NGOs, communities) interested in supplying ecological services need alternatives 1 2 In the last 100 years …… Human populations have grown Need for agricultural land has increased Forest cover has declined Many remaining forests have been heavily logged 3 4 Consequences In response•• Much wealth generated - but continued •• Reforestation to create new forest resources rural poverty and replace those lost •• Worlds plantations now 6.6% of total forest•• Increased agricultural land but much cover* under-used/degraded lands –– Area of Imperata across SEA region = 20+ •• Annual global plantings = 5 mill ha/y* million ha (Cambodia = 17.6 m ha, Phillipines = 29.8 m ha) •• How is this being done? Mostly:•• Future forest resources? –– a few fast-growing exotic species 5 –– simple monocultures 6 *FAO 2010 1
  2. 2. Recent large reforestation initiatives But changes may be underway •• In past - reforestation to produce ‘‘goods’’ Country Scale Date and Purpose such as timber (m ha) Korea 2 1950s; originally production, •• Now - increasing demand for reforestation to but later ecological services supply ecological services as well as goods Vietnam 5 1998; 3 m ha production, 2 m –– Clean water ha for protection –– Stable hillsides China 32* 2001; protection forests –– Habitats for biodiversity (* this just in Sloping Land Conversion Program) –– Carbon stores, etc. Brazil 15 2009; Ecological services •• Temperate counties and tropical countries (Atlantic Forest Restoration Pact) India 5 2010; Ecological services 7 8 Who has done reforestation in Who does reforestation? past? Area of productive plantations in 2005 (x1000ha) •• Initially by governments (develop Public Corporate Smallholder Other (NGOs?) methods, reduce risks) Global 77,352 27,176 49,980 492 •• Then by private companies SE Asia 6,758 636 2,302* 65 •• But also by smallholders * May be under-estimate • Indonesia and Myanmar classify all plantations as publicly owned • Thailand so same except rubber 9 (Source: FAO 2006 Planted Forests and Trees Working Paper FP38) 10Questions Arising From this Background In this talk ……. 1. Will the types of plantation used in 1. Consider some alternative types of the past still be suitable? reforestation •• Can they supply the required ecological services? 2. Look at capacity of these to supply Ecological Services 2. Are the silvicultural methods developed for industrial-scale 3. Look at capacity of these to benefit reforestation able to benefit farmers (and so encourage these smallholders? farmers to use them) 11 12 2
  3. 3. Types of reforestation Types of reforestation SIMPLE MONOCULTURE MIXED-SPECIES ECOLOGICAL •• Monocultures –– fast growing exotics (e.g. PLANTATIONS RESTORATION C2 D A Acacia mangium) O C1 STRUCTURE •• Monocultures –– slower growing species (e.g. E teak, native species) BIOMASS REGULATED •• Mixed-species plantations LOGGING PRODUCTION F B POORLY REGULATED •• Ecological Restoration LOGGING •• Natural regeneration BIODIVERSITY 13 14 2. Monocultures- slower growing1. Monocultures- fast growing exotics higher value (native?) species •• Widely used by Government, Corporations and some •• Advantages smallholders –– Higher priced timbers •• Advantages •• still profitable when distant from roads or markets –– Seeds and silvicultural technology available –– Other products (resins, medicines, fruits) –– Productive (including on poor soils) –– Commercially attractive –– Better future markets as natural forests decline? •• Disadvantages •• Disadvantages –– Narrow range of products –– less suited to small farmers? –– Unable to supply some ecological services –– Slow growth = delayed financial return –– Logs cannot be transported long distances –– Less tolerant of highly degraded sites –– Risky •• Ecologically (diseases and pests) –– Seed less available •• Economically (one product for single market) 15 –– Silviculture less understood 16 Australia 3. Mixed-species plantations Vietnam •• Advantages –– Wider range of products –– reduce economic risks? –– Wider range of ecological services –– Some production/nutritional advantages –– Some financial advantages –– Reduced ecological risks?With long rotations1. Simple plantations may become •• Disadvantagesmore complex over time –– More difficult management2. Colonist join canopy layer –– Must have complementary species –– not random3. A failure or success? mixes 17 18 3
  4. 4. Some silvicultural optionsThere are many types of mixtures Mono- cultures Mixtures Uniform Trees un-even aged Trees even-aged age Mono- Mixtures 1 2 3 4 5 cultures Trees only Trees + understorey Trees only Different rotation Single long rotation lengths Uniform Trees un-even aged Trees even-aged Simple NTFPs Plant Sp 1 short Permanent age plantation under established target spp. Sp 2 long under mixture trees nurse trees1 2 3 4 5 To match species with sitesTrees only Trees + Trees only Different Single long understorey rotation rotation lengths To improve cash flows To improve variety of goods, improve resilience andLandscape NTFPs Plant Sp 1 short Permanent generate a conservationmosaics of under target Sp 2 long mixture of benefitsimple established spp. under few or manyplantations trees nurse spp. To facilitate establishment To improve cash flow trees 19 of preferred species 20 Model 1: monocultures form mixtures at a landscape scale •• Embed monocultures with a species-rich matrix (regrowth?) Model 2 •• Have a mosaic of monocultures –– fit species to preferred sites? –– protect regional biodiversity? A D H •• Diversity occurs at level of landscape C E F A B rather than site 21 Model 3 Model 5 22 G Silviculture of mixtures •• Much to discuss about –– Which species? –– What proportions –– How to manage stands as they age •• Many farmers have used similar techniques in their agroforestry practices •• Foresters could learn much from them Model 4: Short rotation and Long Rotation Complementary pairs – differing market values and canopy architectures 23 24 4
  5. 5. 4. Ecological Restoration•• Advantages –– Best method for conserving biodiversity –– Good watershed protection –– Buffered against disturbances•• Disadvantages –– Costly –– Needs knowledge of species biology –– Methods? •• Framework •• Maximum diversity Thailand - 800 ha restoration planting, 15 years 25 26 Enrichment 5. Natural forest regrowth planting•• Advantages Sabah –– Many trees already present (no planting needed) –– These are adapted to site –– It provides many ecological services 30,000 ha –– It can provide some goods –– It can be improved by enrichment•• Disadvantages Line planting –– We know surprisingly little about •• Extent •• The age classes present •• The species present •• The changes underway (productivity, composition) After 10 y –– Often seen as worthless and available for replacement 27 28 These types of reforestation differ inReminder - the original questions their capacity to provide ecological services!1. Will the types of plantation used in Type Carbon Water Biodiversity the past still be suitable? Habitats Can they supply the required ecological Monocultures (L or H)* (L)** L services? Mixtures M* H M Mixtures2. Are the silvicultural methods developed for industrial-scale Ecological M*** H H*** Restoration reforestation able to benefit smallholders? Natural M*** H H*** regrowth 29 Depends on - * market rules; **understorey; ***age 30 5
  6. 6. Time to provide ecological services IN ADDITION…… •• Delivery may depend on Scale –– May need minimum area (natural + restored) forest service provided –– Hence many landholders? (and higher transaction costs?) •• Effectiveness can depend on Location –– Biodiversity (need connectivity) –– Watershed protection (best on steep slopes, riverine areas) 31 32 Raises new questions!!! Reminder –– the original questions•• How much reforestation? 1. Will the types of plantation used in•• Where should this be the past still be suitable? located? Can they supply the required ecological services?•• What type of reforestation at these locations? 2. Are the silvicultural methods•• Who decides? developed for industrial-scale•• How to achieve reforestation able to benefit agreement amongst smallholders? stakeholders? 33 34 NOT ALL FARMERS ARE THE SAME A classification of farmers in northern VietnamFarmers and silvicultural options C 8% D 6% “well off” Can tolerate some risks Household income Enough food B E and some•• Farmers not the same. Differ in –– 44% 18% spare income OK but no –– Household income (off-farm income?) A F 19% 6% spare income Cannot tolerate risks –– Amount of household labour < 2 ha > Land available to household for reforestation –– Land area and quality (and tenure!) Proportion in each class wanting more –– Technical knowledge of tree-growing technical information –– Knowledge of markets C 80% D 67% “well off” Can tolerate some risks Household income –– Tolerance of risk Enough food B E and some 96% 94% spare income•• All these affect silvicultural choices OK but no A F 93% 100% spare income Cannot tolerate risks < 2 ha > 35 Land available to household for reforestation 36 6
  7. 7. Back to the beginning - my Choice of silvicultural method original argument was ……•• Industrial silvicultural methods OK if •• Plantations of fast-growing exotics grown in monocultures will continue to play a role 1. Market for chips or small logs nearby 2. They can afford fertilizer (2R) 3. Farmers have large land areas •• However, should not be seen as only way in which reforestation can be done•• Alternative methods may be better if 1. More isolated - not near market •• Farmers are different to large companies - they 2. Plantations not primary income source deserve a wider range of silvicultural alternatives to 3. Farmers need to diversify to minimize risks suit their circumstances 4. There are funds to establish protection forests 5. There is a market for ecological services (eg. watershed protection, C) •• Likewise, those (Governments, NGOs, communities) interested in supplying ecological services need alternatives 37 38 Conclusions1. There are a variety of other reforestation options available2. Some have the potential to provide more ecological services than monocultures of exotic species3. Likewise some more suitable for many smallholders than fast-growing exotics4. BUT if this is to occur •• More work needed to develop silvicultural systems •• More landscape planning for strategic interventions •• Greater linkages between foresters and economists/sociologists 39 7

×