Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

The evolution of the Sentinel Landscape initiative


Published on

Presented by Anja Gassner, the Sentinel Landscapes coordinator during a seminar presentation at the World Agroforestry Center on March 21st 2014

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

The evolution of the Sentinel Landscape initiative

  1. 1. Sentinel Landscapes Quo Vadis? An evolution of the SL network 21 March 2014 ICRAF Anja Gassner: Coordinator
  2. 2. 2009 CGIAR STRIPE “The panel strongly recommends renewed emphasis on multidisciplinary social science research on productivity growth by and for the poor, perhaps especially on ex ante research prioritization, on long‐term, field‐based data collection in a range of sentinel sites in order to identify and measure changes in the behavior and well‐being of rural peoples, especially the poor.” sciencecouncil/Systemwide_and_Ecoregional_ Programs/SSSR_for_web.pdf
  3. 3. Main Purpose – Annex 4 • Cross regional comparison • Integrating Biophysical & Social data • Long-term presence (~ 10 years) • Co-locating research activities (share resources) – Between Components – With Partners – With other CRP’s
  4. 4. Sentinel Landscape Definition The landscape has to comprise of parts of a contiguous forest transition curve. This means a) that the landscape should consist of a connected forest/woodland ecosystem, that has been or is about to be subjected to various anthropogenic influences, resulting in a high spatial variation of tree cover or b) that the landscape consist of different stages of the forest transition curve that form together a temporal continuum.
  5. 5. 2 approaches • Classical comparative study : set of 8 very different geographical bounded landscapes in Africa, Asia and Latin America • Thematic research questions to guide the selection of a network of study sites across Asia, Latin America and Africa.
  6. 6. A meta-analysis to identify patterns between livelihood outcomes and trees
  7. 7. Comparative Research Sources: Based on Sartori (1970) and Mair (1996)
  8. 8. The universe of landscape has been intentionally selected and is significantly smaller than a global selection Use the “Comparing few country” methodology
  9. 9. Comparison of few landscapes ‘case-oriented’ comparison with the focus of the analysis is much more on the specific unfolding of events and variation in political developments within each country than variation in macro- variables between countries. (Ragin 1987) Ragin,C.C.(1994)‘IntroductiontoQualitativeComparative Analysis,’inT.JanoskiandA.Hicks(eds)TheComparativePolitical EconomyoftheWelfareState,Cambridge:Cambridge UniversityPress,299–320.
  10. 10. Comparison of few countries the method sacrifices in some degree the broad generalizations made possible through a truly global analysis, but allows a deeper understanding of the landscapes that feature in the analysis, as well as their similarities and differences.
  11. 11. Design workshop held in 2012 1. Selection of 3 nested hypothesis to be analyzed by landscape comparison 2. Identification of relevant causal propositions to be studied (construction of path diagrams) 3. Identification of variables/proxies/indicators that can be measured 4. Brainstorming of appropriated methods to collect variables/proxies/indicators
  12. 12. Design workshop – Key Hypothesis developed 1. Is their a relationship between the variation in Tree cover/Tree quality and the variation of any of the four system level outcomes reduction in poverty increased global food security improvement of nutrition. better management of natural resources. 2. What explains spatial and temporal variation of tree cover?
  13. 13. Integrating Biophysical & Social Data 3 conceptual Frameworks developed for integrating social science into the long-term ecological research (LTER) sites:  Drivers-pressures-states-impacts-responses (DPSIR) approach (EEA, 2005, EEA, 2007)  Press/Pulse (Collins et al., 2011)  socioeconomic metabolism approach (Haberl)
  14. 14. Underlying assumption for ALL 3 frameworks: “Mitigation of pressures on biodiversity through modification of their underlying socioeconomic drivers is thought to be the most effective and durable option to reduce the rate of biodiversity loss” Integrating Biophysical & Social Data
  15. 15. 1) Drivers-pressures-states-impacts-responses (DPSIR) approach Used in CRP6 Component 3: Van Noordwijk, M., B. Lusiana, G. Villamor, H. Purnomo, and S. Dewi. 2011. Feedback loops added to four conceptual models linking land change with driving forces and actors. Ecology and Society 16(1): r1. [online] URL:
  16. 16. An integrated conceptual framework for long-term social–ecological research, Collins et al., 2011 2) Press and Pulse Model
  17. 17. Human appropriation of net primary production” (HANPP) is a measure of socioecological material flows. (Haberl et al., 2001, Haberl et al., 2007a) 2) Adding Social Metabolism as pressure factor
  18. 18. Drivers-pressures- states-impacts- responses (DPSIR) approach Human appropriation of net production (HANPP) Pressure & Pulse (Collins et al., 2011) Integrative Science for Society & Environment (ISSE) Good conceptual models! How do we make these operational?
  19. 19.  Develop a working definition of sentinel landscape  Select a set of priority landscapes  Develop standardized protocols for data collection  Form multidisciplinary teams in each landscapes  Collect the data  Process the data (clean, verify, aggregate)  Conduct the meta analysis January 2012: The Challenge In 3 Years with 3.7 Million US
  20. 20.  Only select landscapes with pre-existing work and information available.  Only select landscapes that FTA had a working partner network on the ground.  Do not develop our own “new” methodology, make use of existing efforts and link to existing data bases. Decisions made
  21. 21. Building on existing efforts
  22. 22. Learning from others  CGIAR benchmark approach  International Long-term Ecological Research (ILTER)  International Forestry Resources and Institutions (IFRI)  A Long-Term Biodiversity, Ecosystem and Awareness Research Network (ALTERNet)  European network for a long-term forest ecosystem and landscape research programme (ENFORS)  National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON)  Alternatives to Slash and Burn (ASB)  Tropenbos International (TBI)  Poverty Environment Network (PEN)  Tropical Ecology Assessment & Monitoring (TEAM)  Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute (STRI)  Rewarding the Upland Poor for Environmental Services (RUPES)  Smithsonian forest networks (SIGEO/CTFS)  World Bank Standard of living survey
  23. 23. The network Central Asia
  24. 24. Landscape Indicators Productivity Livelihood Policy Environment Social Land use Net Primary Production Crop Yield Welfare Income Food security Nutrition Dependency on Natural Resources Institutional strength Local autonomy Governance of natural resources Market access Market pressure Land health Soil carbon Tree cover Above Ground Biomass Surface Wetness index Biodiversity Intra- household wealth distribution Social networks Social mobility
  25. 25. How has the SL initiative evolved since June 2011?  Provide hard evidence on key indicators important to landscape management  Information platform for decision-making  Backstopping for data management/data mining/data analysis  Tool to allow greater cohesion, interdependence and alignment of stakeholders within as well across the landscapes  Close the gap between intention and implementation
  26. 26. Major Accomplishments 2011-2013 • Criteria developed • Priority Landscapes selected • Interdisciplinary regional teams established • Research design & Core Methodology developed • Methodology tested in 2 landscapes • Meta analysis in 4 landscapes ✔
  27. 27.  More than 60 partner organisations actively involved  SL network integrated into major existing data collection efforts  Presented to IUFRO, Warsaw Landscape Forum, Consortium,  IFRI, IUCN, CIRAD, CATIE as partners Major Accomplishments 2011-2013 Part 2
  28. 28. Looking Beyond the Forest cover • Soil condition • Productivity • Land degradation risk • Forest cover • Climate vulnerability (risk)
  29. 29. Farmers are making more diverse land management changes Farmers are making less diverse land management changes Determining the environmental constraint envelop HOW DO BIOPHYSICAL CONDITIONS AND CONSTRAINTS INFLUENCE HUMAN DECISION MAKING AND ULTIMATELY DEVELOPMENT? CASE STUDY: CCAFS VILLAGES IN AFRICA INDICATORS FOR SOCIAL-ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS
  30. 30. Linking land health indicators with socio-economic studies
  31. 31. Training Partners
  32. 32. Training Partners
  33. 33. Training Partners
  34. 34. Institutional Mapping: linking sites with the landscape Policy,legalandinstitutionalframework Coherency and adaptability of the framework Supremacy of property rights Clarity of the definition of mission, mandates and responsibilities Effectivenessofformalrules Simplicity of implementation and administrative bureaucracy Inter- intra- organizational and inter- sectorial coordination Effectiveness and influence of rules on users’ behaviors related to NR Obtaining concrete results Existence of conflicts and their resolution Capacity to implement formal rules Decentralizationandparticipationindecisionmaking Decentralization and participation in decision making Facility of understanding policy and legal framework Existence of mechanisms of participation, effectiveness and intensity of participation, inclusion of marginalized or minority actors Transparencyandaccountability Existence of mechanisms or opportunities to denounce or object Transparency of management and free circulation of information Corruption and traffic of influence Equityandfairness Distribution of benefits within the society Access to justice and fairness in the application of sanctions Fairness in decision making
  35. 35. Institutional mapping  Two different political and legal systems – More than 30 formal laws and regulations relating to NRM – About 15-20 public agencies with mandates and responsibilities in NRM  An heterogeneous NR governance within each country Example of a map of influential stakeholders in policy making in Nicaragua
  36. 36. Workshop at CATIE
  37. 37.  Linking Households with Landscapes  Sampling Tree diversity/ use diversity across the landscape  Gender add-on module  Research ethics- how to engage with communities  Sharing data  Co-locating FTA projects with sentinel landscapes  Intervention options  Cross CRP projects Working groups
  38. 38. We need to quantify the different factors that influence farmers behavior to design tailor made interventions External/ physical factors Management Objectives Behavior Networks Individual differences Personal preferences Picture: Dave Fleetham Gassner, Coe, Sinclair (2013)
  39. 39.