The Restoration Agenda: Some Practical Issues. By Lalisa A. Duguma, Anthony Kimaro and Peter Minang - ICRAF Some countries are transitioning from commitment to implementation and a number of important issues need to be well articulated. Looks at social, economic and practical considerations, with reference to the Shinyanga restoration success in Tanzania

1. The Restoration Agenda: Some Practical
Issues
Lalisa A. Duguma, Anthony Kimaro and Peter Minang
World Agroforestry Center (ICRAF) &
ASB Partnership forTropical Forest Margins

2. Restoration Opportunities: By Continent
1
Source: The Global Partnership on Forest landscape Restoration
http://www.wri.org/sites/default/files/world_of_opportunity_brochure_2011-09.pdf

3. Growing Commitments!
2
AFR100 – 100 M ha
I20X20 – 20 M ha
USA - 15 M ha
Bonn Challenge FLR
>150 M ha
Indonesia – 28.88 M ha

4. And Now….
Some countries are transitioning from commitment to
implementation and a number of important issues need to be
well articulated.
What is the landscape we want to achieve?
What are we intending to restore?
Which pathway or trajectory is appropriate?
Restoration from whose perspective?
What are the options for sustainable financing of restoration?
3
But, can we learn from past experiences on how
to deal with some of these pertinent issues?

5. General Features
• 600-800 mm RF
• Semiarid
• Agropastoral communities
• ‘The desert ofTanzania’
The drivers of change
• Woodland clearance &
Expansion of cotton farms
• Climate change
• Villagization
Drought
Ecosystem degradation
Wood, food and feed scarcity
The Shinyanga region, Tanzania

6. The history: the drivers, the processes…
5

7. Committed Government
Committed People
Committed Donors
Committed partners
Empowered
communities
Recognition of
local knowledge
and practices
HASHI (Shinyanga Soil Conservation Programme) (1986-2004)
611 ha of managed
Ngitili in 1986
611 ha of managed
Ngitili in 1986
378,000 ha restored
area in 2005
378,000 ha restored
area in 2005

8. The Benefits
Carbon sequestration
1986 - 611 ha (27,428 t C)
2005 - 377,756 ha
(17 M t C)
Biodiversity conservation
Bird species reemerged : 22-65
Mammal species reemerged : 10
Plant species in restored Ngitili:152
Economic values (Monela et al. 2005)
Per capita economic value : 168 USD /year
Rural per capita expenditure : 102 USD /year
Other ES benefits
Hydrological functions:
Dam construction and
water management
(“Water markets”)
Soil management:
Erosion control
SOM build-up
Social and
Intrinsic values
- Social cohesion
- ‘Social security’
REDD+ piloting is
already ongoing!!
REDD+ piloting is
already ongoing!!

9. 1. What is the landscape we want to
achieve?
8
Do we a ‘view’ of what we want
to achieve?
What are the determinants of
success? And, How do we
measure it?
History: What led to the degradation?
Dynamics of the drivers: Some drivers may fade
while new ones may emerge.
Context: In what context is restoration to
happen?

10. 9
1930 1986
Sustainable agropastoral
livelihood system
Ngitili (fodder bank
system)
Indigenous Miombo
and acacia woodlands
Tse tse fly eradication
(clearing of woodlands)
Cash crops expansion
Overstocking
Increasing wood
demand
Deforestation for
villagization
Ngitili
Onfarm tree
conservation
Improved fallows
Rotational woodlots
The reference state The degradation phase The restoration phase
Community
empowerment
Long-term investment
from NORAD and ICRAF
Insecure
tenure rights
The reconstruction of the dynamics in Shinyanga

11. 2. What are we intending to restore?
• Interests – Often, landscapes are
composed of multiple actors who have
different priorities.
• Tradeoffs between functions
• A negotiated process to accommodate
varying interests and perspectives
10
Priority functions/services targeted in Shinyanga
Feed for livestock
Wood supply for energy and constructions
Restoring watershed services

12. 3. Which pathway or trajectory is
appropriate?
• What degree of flexibility do we
allow to accommodate unforeseen
changes? (Adaptive
management….)
• Which pathway is relatively
effective, efficient and fair?
• Which pathway can meet the needs
and interests of the various
stakeholders?
11
AA
BB
Options in the Shinyanga case
Ngitili (traditional)
Enhanced Ngitili with AF systems
Woodlots and plantations

13. 4. From whose perspective?
• Whose vision is it?
• Who makes the decision on what
has to be achieved?
• Did we capture the voice of all
relevant stakeholders?
In Shinyanga, local people and local traditional
institutional formed the main actors in the whole
restoration process. Hence the implementation
process was largely driven by the community.

14. 5. Dealing with the sustainable financing
of restoration?
• What kind of public-private
partnerships could effectively work
for restoration?
• How do we make restoration
attractive for private investment?
Tanzanian Government
Norwegian Government
REDD+ (carbon financing)
Smallholders investment (Local enterprises - honey, feed
market, water marketing, Tourism, …)
1986 2005

15. Output of the diagnostics of the success factors for restoration
in Rwanda (Using ROAM)
14
https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/2014-030.pdf

16. Degraded grazing land
Restored area using Ngitili

17. Thank You!