The Restoration Diagnostic in Practice
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•2,126 views
A method for developing forest landscape restoration strategies by rapidly assessing the status of key success factors. Find out more: http://www.wri.org/events/2016/04/webinar-restoration-diagnostic
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (20)
Similar to The Restoration Diagnostic in Practice
Similar to The Restoration Diagnostic in Practice (20)
More from World Resources Institute (WRI)
More from World Resources Institute (WRI) (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
The Restoration Diagnostic in Practice
- 1. WEBINAR: The Restoration Diagnostic in Practice Craig Hanson Global Director, Food, Forests and Water Programs World Resources Institute Kathleen Buckingham Research Associate, Global Restoration Initiative, World Resources Institute Miguel Calmon Senior Manager, Landscape Restoration Knowledge International Union for Conservation of Nature
- 2. THERE’S HOPE… Source: Global Partnership on Forest Landscape Restoration 2bn hectares with opportunities for restoration 2
- 4. WHAT IS RESTORATION? SOURCE: Tony Rinaudo, World Vision
- 5. WHAT IS RESTORATION? SOURCE: Ecological Society of India
- 6. FOREST LANDSCAPE RESTORATION VARIES ALONG SEVERAL DIMENSIONS
- 7. WHAT IS THE RESTORATION DIAGNOSTIC? SOURCE: Michelle Szejner Sigal/GIZ
- 8. HOW WAS IT DEVELOPED?
- 9. IT’S BEEN DONE BEFORE… SOURCE: Korea Forest Service South Korea, 1960 South Korea, 2000 • Forest cover from 35% to 64% • Forest density increased 13x, population 2x, economy 25x
- 10. Loess Plateau Before: 1999 Loess Plateau After: 2005 • ↓ soil erosion on 920,000 hectares • 99% ↓ in sediment in water • 2.5 million people out of poverty 10 IT’S BEEN DONE BEFORE… SOURCE: World Bank
- 11. New England Swift River Valley Before: 1850 11 IT’S BEEN DONE BEFORE… SOURCE: Harvard University, Harvard Forest Archives New England Swift River Valley After: 2000 • Created 30,000 jobs • Provide critical habitat for 338 species • >$5 billion in recreational benefits
- 16. CAVEATS • Not every case example has everything • Not every factor required for success • Geographic scale matters
- 17. STEPS WHEN CONDUCTING THE RESTORATION DIAGNOSTIC
- 18. STEPS WHEN CONDUCTING THE RESTORATION DIAGNOSTIC
- 19. STEPS WHEN CONDUCTING THE RESTORATION DIAGNOSTIC
- 20. STEPS WHEN CONDUCTING THE RESTORATION DIAGNOSTIC
- 21. WHO CONDUCTS IT? • Government agencies • Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) • Landowners and communities • Companies • Development agencies • Technical advisors
- 22. • Government agencies • Experts at non-governmental organizations (NGOs) • Experts at research institutions • Land managers/owners • Private sector managers • Published research • Landscape monitoring systems • GPFLR Learning Network INFORMATION SOURCES
- 23. • Quick assessment, short time period • Literature review • Interviews • Time period: weeks • Revisit once every five years TIMING
- 25. STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOP IN KIGALI
- 26. RWANDA DIAGNOSTIC RESULTS: MOTIVATE
- 27. RWANDA DIAGNOSTIC RESULTS: ENABLE
- 28. RWANDA DIAGNOSTIC RESULTS: IMPLEMENT
- 29. 29 STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOPS IN RIO AND SÃO PAULO
- 31. BRAZIL DIAGNOSTIC RESULTS: MOTIVATE
- 32. BRAZIL DIAGNOSTIC RESULTS: ENABLE
- 33. BRAZIL DIAGNOSTIC RESULTS: IMPLEMENT
- 34. Select “yes,” “no,” or “partly” RESTORATION DIAGNOSTIC ASSESSMENT TOOL
- 35. RESTORATION DIAGNOSTIC ASSESSMENT TOOL
- 36. RESTORATION OPPORTUNITIES ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY (ROAM) 1. Stakeholder engagement 2. Geospatial mapping 3. Economic analysis 4. Carbon analysis 5. Enabling conditions 6. Financial analysis 7. Monitoring systems
- 37. Thank you Kathleen Buckingham Research Associate Forest and Landscape Restoration World Resources Institute kbuckingham@wri.org For more information: Wri.org/restorationdiagnostic
Editor's Notes
- Over the course of this webinar, we will present what we mean by forest landscape restoration, places around the world with opportunities for restoration, as well as a method on how to asses the best way forward in terms of restoring a landscape – the Restoration Diagnostic.
- “You’ve convinced my government that embarking on forest landscape restoration is in our national interest, and your global map has inspired us to map our local restoration opportunities. When it comes to restoration, our question now is no longer what, why, or where, but rather how.” Most countries around the world have an untapped resource opportunity lying within their borders: the restoration of forest landscapes. Governments, civil society, and companies need to get the “how” of restoration right if landscapes are to be restored on a large scale. It is with this question in mind that WRI and IUCN developed The Restoration Diagnostic.
- By “forest landscape restoration” we mean the long-term process of regaining ecological functionality and enhancing human well-being across deforested or degraded forest landscapes. It’s about “forests” because it involves increasing the number and/or health of trees in an area
- It’s about “landscapes” because it involves entire watersheds, jurisdictions, or even countries in which many land uses interact.
- It’s about “restoration” because it involves recovering the biological productivity of an area in order to achieve any number of benefits for people and the planet.
- Finally, it is about a “process” because it typically takes a long time for a forest landscape to recover, although some of the ecological functions and human benefits provided by restoration may appear early on. It also recognizes that a landscape might contain several adjacent or otherwise interconnected ecosystem types (not all of which may be forests or should have an increase in tree cover).
- So now we know what forest landscape restoration is, but how do we do it? To gain a better understanding of the “how,” we looked back on historical forest landscape restoration experiences to discern the approaches and conditions that appear to facilitate restoration. In this effort, we identified several key factors for successful restoration. We converted these insights into a diagnostic—a structured self-assessment to comprehensively identify which factors for forest landscape restoration success are already in place, which are partially in place, and which are missing within a landscape being considered for restoration. This diagnostic can help decision makers and stakeholders identify gaps in key success factors and thereby focus their efforts on the most important of them to get into place, maximizing the return on invested human, financial, and political capital. The diagnostic is intended to serve as a rapid yet holistic assessment. It is qualitative yet substantiated with quantitative data where relevant. When applied prior to a restoration process, the diagnostic can help decision makers and restoration stakeholders focus on putting the key success factors in place before large amounts of human, financial, or political capital are invested. When reapplied periodically as a landscape is undergoing restoration, the diagnostic can help decision makers and stakeholders adjust and refine their strategies as part of adaptive management.
- When developing the diagnostic, our premise was that forest landscape restoration experiences from history could provide insights into which ecological, social, political, and economic conditions facilitate successful restoration. We believed these insights could inform the design and execution of future restoration initiatives, increasing the likelihood of success. Data sources (16 case studies, literature review) We started by surveying peer-reviewed literature on forest landscape restoration, summarizing the factors that this research observed as conductive to restoration. We complemented this literature review by identifying, researching, and profiling 16 historical forest landscape restoration experiences from around the world. Crossing five continents, these case examples span both developed and developing countries. Some of these restoration experiences started in recent decades, while others started more than a century ago. Some cover millions of hectares while others just a few thousand. Some profile wide-scale restoration, while others profile mosaic restoration, including restoration into agroforestry systems. And while some are commonly cited case examples, others are less heralded.
- Almost half a century of war wreaked havoc on South Korea’s forests during the first half of the 20th century due to excessive harvesting of wood for timber and fuel. By 1952, the nation’s forest stocks were less than 50 percent of pre-war levels, threatening national energy security because firewood and charcoal accounted for a majority of power production. Today, it’s a different story, as South Korea is widely regarded as one of the world’s most significant restoration successes. Between 1953 and 2010, national tree-planting and public-pride campaigns increased the country’s forest cover almost two-fold and its tree density 13-fold, while the population doubled and the economy grew 25-fold. The estimated monetary value of the benefits from these restoration efforts—including increased water storage capacity and curtailed erosion—is greater than $92 billion, approximately 9 percent of the country’s GDP.
- Soil erosion in China’s Loess Plateau created massive sand storms in Beijing throughout the 1980s and 1990s, including the infamous “Black Wind” of 1993. Soil erosion reached such extremes that the plateau contributed more than 90 percent of the total sediment entering the Yellow River. Farmers were forced to abandon their land due to soil degradation, resulting in economic losses of approximately $1.28 billion and threatening food security. So the government turned to restoring degraded landscapes through policy changes. After 1999, the government banned cutting trees, growing crops on slopes, and allowing unrestricted grazing in the Loess region. Combined with the replanting of vegetation, these bans allowed the perennial vegetation cover to double by the mid-2000s and decreased the number of sandstorms. There have been many benefits. For example, sediment in water declined by 99 percent between 1998 and 2007, a reduction of approximately 300 million tons per year into the Yellow River. This helped reduce the need for measures to prevent downstream flooding
- Three common themes emerged from our analysis: A clear motivation. Decision-makers, landowners, and/or citizens were inspired or motivated to restore forests and trees on landscapes. Enabling conditions in place. A sufficient number of ecological, market, policy, social, and/or institutional conditions were in place that created a favorable context for forest landscape restoration. Capacity and resources for sustained implementation. Capacity and resources existed and were mobilized to implement forest landscape restoration on a sustained basis on the ground. Within each theme, the literature review, interviews, and historical case examples suggest a number of factors that when present―either they were already there naturally or people took steps to make them present—may have facilitated restoration within the landscape. We call these “key success factors” for forest landscape restoration. These themes helped to shape the Diagnostic’s framework, which groups key success factors into these three themes.
- After identifying the suite of key success factors, we converted them into a set of simple questions designed to help decision makers and stakeholders quickly but comprehensively identify which factors a candidate landscape already satisfies or has in place, and which are not yet in place. This set of questions forms the core of the diagnostic.
- The Diagnostic is designed to yield a number of benefits to users, including: Understand key success factors. The Diagnostic can help users understand what the key success factors for restoration are. Identify gaps. Although there is no generic recipe for restoration that is applicable everywhere, there are some common ingredients to success―the key success factors. The Diagnostic can help users identify which of these factors are already in place for the candidate landscape, which are partially in place, and which are missing. The latter two are gaps to be addressed. Focus strategies. Decision-makers typically face constraints and thus an efficient allocation of resources is an important―and understandable―desire. By identifying the gaps, the Diagnostic can help users identify on what to focus their policies, incentives, and practices. Insights and caveats to note include: Our analysis does not prove “causation” between the key success factors and successful restoration. The presence of the key success factors does not necessarily guarantee successful restoration. Rather, what we identified are patterns that hint at correlations between certain factors and whether or not restoration has made progress in terms of hectares restored, achievement of benefits, and stakeholder support.
- The three steps of the diagnostic are designed to help decision makers and stakeholders rapidly embark on the process of getting the right key success factors in place for restoration
- The three steps of the diagnostic are designed to help decision makers and stakeholders rapidly embark on the process of getting the right key success factors in place for restoration The three steps to applying the Restoration Diagnostic are: Step 1: Select the scope. Choose the “scope” or geographic boundary within which to apply the diagnostic. The selected scope is the “candidate landscape” During this step, users define clear boundaries within which the diagnostic will be applied. Defined boundaries provide clarity on what will be assessed, avoid irrelevant research, prevent unnecessary work, and ensure that the diagnostic will yield actionable results.
- Step 2: Assess the status of key success factors. Systematically evaluate whether or not key success factors for forest landscape restoration are in place for the candidate landscape. During this step, users evaluate in a rapid yet structured and comprehensive manner whether each key success factor for forest landscape restoration is in place in the candidate landscape. The purpose is to rapidly identify where there might be potential challenges to successful restoration.
- Step 3: Identify strategies to address missing factors. Identify strategies to close gapes in those key success factors that are not in place or only partly in place in the candidate landscape. The third step addresses the missing key success factors- those deemed “not in place” or only “partly in place.” During this step, users brainstorm, propose, and record policies, incentives, practices, and other interventions that could address the missing ksf’s in the candidate landscape. The purpose is to identify strategies that maximize the likelihood that restoration will be successful.
- The diagnostic’s intended users are mid-level managers – particularly those responsible for strategy development or policy design – and the analysts who support them. Target users may come from a variety of organizations, including: Government agencies at national, state, provincial, and/or local levels that are interested in exploring or pursuing forest landscape restoration Nongovernmental organizations and civil society groups that advocate for and/or help implement forest landscape restoration Landowners and communities, or their representatives, in candidate landscapes Companies exploring forest landscape restoration Development agencies and financial institutions considering financing forest landscape restoration programs and projects Technical advisors or consultants to any of the above
- Information, data, and perspectives needed to complete a diagnostic can come from a variety of sources, including: Government agencies Experts and practitioners from nongovernmental organizations Experts from universities and research institutions Land managers, landowners, and local communities Managers from private sector companies Published research Landscape monitoring systems GPFLR Learning Network Input and perspectives from these sources can be obtained through a variety of approaches, including reading, structured or semi-structured interviews, focus groups and workshops
- The diagnostic is designed to be conducted quickly and over a short time period. The more time the user spends conducting a diagnostic, the more detailed the analysis and assessment can be. But via a quick literature review and consultations with people with the appropriate knowledge, it is possible to complete a diagnostic in a matter of a few dedicated weeks. Forest landscape restoration is a long-term, dynamic process. Based on the case example experience, we recommend revisiting the diagnostic once every five years to help restoration stakeholders identify remaining (or new) gaps in key success factors and address them in a timely manner.
- During the development of the diagnostic, we conducted pilot applications in Rwanda, Brazil, and Ecuador. These pilot applications provide insights into how a diagnostic can be conducted with some results.
- WRI and IUCN conducted a restoration diagnostic in Rwanda in 2013. Those involved included representatives from universities, local civil society, and the government – particularly agriculture, forests, and economic development agencies. The diagnostic occurred via a series of five workshops, one per province, with research and interviews conducted in between workshops.
- In 2011, the president of Rwanda made a Bonn Challenge pledge to restore 2 million hectares – 80 percent of the country’s total land area. Given the country’s population density and acute food needs, the vast majority of the proposed restoration will be into agroforestry systems. Participants identified a range of strategies that could address the key success factors that were not or only partially in place. Example strategy: Launch a public awareness campaign to highlight the benefits of a diverse range of trees, especially native seeds
- Participants also highlights gaps in seed availability, government coordination, and extension services, among other factors
- Participants also highlights gaps in seed availability, government coordination, and extension services, among other factors
- In 2012, WRI and researchers from Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies conducted a restoration diagnostic on the Atlantic forest biome in Brazil. Each workshop involved at least 20 people representing federal and state government agencies, nongovernmental organizations, forest product companies, landowner groups, and universities.
- A year before the workshop, the Atlantic Forest Restoration pact – a partnership among nongovernmental organizations, universities, companies, and other stakeholders – had committed 1 million hectares to the Bonn Challenge. This process unfolded for the Atlantic forest as well as for five other biomes in Brazil.
- A year before the workshop, the Atlantic Forest Restoration pact – a partnership among nongovernmental organizations, universities, companies, and other stakeholders – had committed 1 million hectares to the Bonn Challenge. This process unfolded for the Atlantic forest as well as for five other biomes in Brazil.
- Gaps include: land tenure, Forest Law and awareness
- Based on the knowledge that participants in these workshops, as well as those involved in future projects, have about their candidate landscape, they each answered diagnostic questions and supporting notes in an Excel-based tool that contains KSF tables as individual worksheets. This is called the Restoration Diagnostic Assessment Tool In the tool, the user conducts the status assessment of the candidate landscape with a simple template that lists the key success factors, a diagnostic question per factor, and supporting information. The template has three tables, each dedicated to one of the three common themes for successful forest landscape restoration- motivate, enable, and implement. One of the worksheets automatically converts the responses to the diagnostic questions into a color-coded summary table
- In the table, green represents “yes, in place,” red represents “no, not in place,” and yellow “partly in place.” This traffic-light display is designed to make it easy to see and interpret the results.
- The diagnostic is a stand-alone tool as well as a component within the Restoration Opportunities Assessment Methodology. Developed by IUCN and WRI, ROAM is an approach for systematically identifying forest landscape restoration opportunities and designing strategies for implementing restoration at the landscape scale. It guides users on: Mapping where restoration is geographically possible, identifying candidate landscapes for restoration, defining the goals of restoration in a candidate landscape, quantifying the economic, social, and environmental benefits of potential restoration, developing strategies for restoring which KSFs for FLR are missing in the candidate landscape and identifying approaches for addressing them, determining what type of restoration are most appropriate socially and ecologically for a particular area, involving stakeholders in all of the above. The diagnostic is one technical tool of ROAM, providing guidance on item 5
- The world has a significant forest landscape restoration opportunity. Our aspiration is that over the coming two decades the world will make progress toward realizing much of this opportunity. The Restoration Diagnostic is designed to help decision makers and other restoration stakeholders navigate around these potential barriers. We hope that by applying the diagnostic in these landscapes, restoration will be successful and this time in history can be looked back upon as the restoration generation.