Implications for sparing, sharing and
caring – Meine van Noordwijk, ICRAF Indonesia

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0_uh38ayOM

V.6 Segregate/integrate multifunctionality
debate (sparing-sharing-caring)

Who is the driver
Why is she
speeding?
Where are they
heading?
Are passengers
happy?
Who pays the
fare?
Who bribes the
police?
Who sets the
timetable?
Who owns the
bus company?
What are the points of leverage: accelerator, brake, gearshift,
running out of fuel, change in contractor company, change in
timetable and roadmap? Less passengers? Higher fines?
Who pays fines
& tickets?

Wherever we went on Sumatra we found
anger, confusion and destruction…
…a company responsible, entirely legally, for
the destruction of large areas of forest…
Last year you planted 100 million trees,
which sounds a lot, but how many ha’s did
you deforest?
“Can you repeat the question?”
Can I get a sense of the scale of
deforestation from APRIL, please?
“We are not involved in deforestation, our
efforts are concentrated on sustainable
forest management … we are a pioneer in
the introduction of sustainable forest
management methods.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-
development/video/2013/may/24/sumatra-
indonesia-rainforest-video
The rainforest of Sumatra in Indonesia is steadily being turned into a giant industrial plantation
that can neither support the wildlife that lives there nor the native human population.

1. Undisturbed natural forest
2. Undisturbed + sust. logged natural forest
3. Closed canopy undisturbed + logged forest
4A. as 3 + agroforest
4B. as 3 + timber plantations
4C. as 3 + agroforest + timber plant’s + estate crops
4D as 4C + shrub
Rainforest foundation
Conservation agency
Modis data
Ministry of Forestry
Forest ecologist
UNFCCC definition
Stakeholder:

Table 1. Land cover transition matrix for six land use types, ranked by time-averaged
carbon stock; transitions above the diagonal imply a net loss of carbon, those below a
net gain; depending on the operational forest definition (in the example between AF and
P1), forest degradation, deforestation and non-forest degradation contribute to gross
emissions, improved forest management, reforestation and restocking outside forest to
C-stock gains, and the matrix as a whole to net emissions. Each cell tends to have its
own ‘actors’ (motivated by a direct benefit) but they may respond to common ‘drivers’

Forest and tree cover transitions: a unifying concept
across CRP6
Temporal
pattern, X-
axis
Spatial
pattern,
X-axis
Institutional
challenge at
turning point
X-linkage of
actions in
landscape
Core
Choice
of Y-axis
1
2 3 4 5
6

Sparing and Sharing

Pattern of tree cover  Processes of change  Drivers of tree cover transition
What disappears?
What stays
What comes back?
TIF =
Trees Inside Forest
TOF =
Trees Outside Forest

2013
1995

Pattern of change,
with relevant legend
Consequences
Actors:
Smallholders local
Poor migrants
Local investors
Large scale operators
Remote sensing ima-
gery/groundtruthed
Land use options & their profitability
Technology
& input
markets
Value chains
& output
markets
Roads,
infrastruc-
ture
ES-related
incentives
Demo-
graphy
Rights
Prefer-
ences
Local
experience
Research Demand Dev. Banks REDD
Demo-trials,
extension
LocalNational government
LU and development planning
A.
B.
C.
DiagnosticAttribution
Leverage
Models
Access to
credit

Landscape Space
People
Land Use
Systems
Institutions
Functions,
services
Geology
Land forms
Climate
Vegetation
Flora&fauna
Hydrology
Value chains Landscape -
Planning, Incentives
multifunctionalityTenure

Drivers of deforestation: leverage
points and REDD+ efficiency: Impli-
cations for sparing, sharing and caring
• Drivers depend on location, time and context
• Policy responses need to use the right mix of
carrots, sticks & sermons
• Ultimately, enlightened self-interest (caring)
will have to be the primary reason to
keep/promote forests & trees
• In the short run a combination of sparing &
sharing is needed to achieve sustainable
development goals