Partnering for Impact_Brussels Köhlin


Published on

"Partnering for Impact: IFPRI-European Research Collaboration for Improved Food and Nutrition Security" presentation by Gunnar Köhlin, Director, Environment for Development, University of Gothenburg, on 25 November 2013 in Brussels, Belgium.

Published in: Education, Technology
1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • •Colombia, Costa Rica, Botswana, Madagascar, Philippines (India, Vietnam..) •Australia, Norway, UK, Canada, Spain (Andalusia), Netherlands
  • Partnering for Impact_Brussels Köhlin

    1. 1. Land policies: Actions to make up for lost times Areas for partnering? Gunnar Köhlin Director, Environment for Development University of Gothenburg November 25, 2013
    2. 2. Representing a global network of environmental economists - EfD •
    3. 3. 3
    4. 4. Published by Palgrave Macmillan August 2013 • PART I: Land Redistribution Reforms • PART II: Tenure Security and Transfer Rights Enhancing Reforms • PART III: Forest Tenure Reforms • /landtenurereforminasia andafrica/SteinHolden 4
    5. 5. WAVES: Wealth Accounting and the Valuation of Ecosystem Services • Pilot will implement natural capital accounting in 6-10 countries – 65 countries have signed up! • Incorporate natural capital accounts in policy analysis and development planning • EfD will partner with Swedish EPA and WB to develop methodology for valuation of certain ecosystem services for inclusion in SNA. • Reduced dam sedimentation might very well be one of the first values to focus on. We need IFPRI experience, incl SWAT calibration.
    6. 6. SFM and devolution • Positive impacts on forest quality, but… • Careful with equity/gender implications… • Little attention given to silvicultural management… • PES not necessarily efficient for conservation • Need for broad, long-term impact evaluation of forest devolution reforms. See eg China! • Focus area for EfD in China, ETI, TAN, KEN, CR
    7. 7. Conversion from forest to ag – yes • But, – Substantial investment in private plots in China after Community Forest Tenure Reform. – Even planting for fuelwood in Ethiopia! => Reduce deforestation and support SFM and forest investments by reducing access to open access forest!
    8. 8. Impact evaluation of SLM/SAT • Kassie studies: One size doesn’t fit all! Planning tools needed for implementation of SLM interventions. • Teklewold studies: important interactions between technologies – look for optimal mix! • Revive IFPRI/EfD collaboration in Ethiopia!
    9. 9. Importance of land policies on SLM • Bezabih findings from Ethiopian certification program: • Certification has significant and positive impact on tenure security and conflict resolution. • Certification has significant and positive impact on land related investment and productivity. • Women enjoy slightly higher productivity benefits from certification. • Certification has positive impact on the use of both short term and long term productivity-enhancing technologies. • Certification has significant and positive impact on trust and happiness.
    10. 10. Implications • Direct and tangible local benefits should form basis of decision making – profitability important to hh investments, but pro-social behavior is too… • Incentives Build SLM on solid ground – effective governance – tenure security is key! Flexible/multiple technologies. • PES programs can enhance SLM/SFM – especially if they are grounded on local buyers and sellers of ecosystem services In practice PES is mostly gov’t approach to deal with externalities! The gov’t has bigger toolbox… • R&D will help increase intensification – lead to saving the forests (but most important is land policy reform for commons to increase opp cost – and this is lagging)