Category: Theme 2: Management and conservation of forest and tree resources


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Latest Agroforestry Species Switchboard offers additional plant databases

Latest Agroforestry Species Switchboard offers additional plant databases


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Baobab (Adansonia digitata) tree. Get information on this and other tree species on the Agroforestry Species Switchboard. Photo by Stepha McMullin/ICRAF
Posted by

FTA
Baobab (Adansonia digitata) tree. Get information on this and other tree species on the Agroforestry Species Switchboard. Photo by Stepha McMullin/ICRAF
Baobab (Adansonia digitata) tree. Get information on this and other tree species on the Agroforestry Species Switchboard. Photo by Stepha McMullin/ICRAF

By Roeland Kindt and Ian Dawson, originally published at ICRAF’s Agroforestry World Blog

The Agroforestry Species Switchboard is a “one-stop-shop” to retrieve data about a particular plant species across a wide range of information sources. Its objective is to provide information that supports research on trees and tree-based development activities such as agroforestry and wider restoration initiatives.

The recently released Version 1.3 of the Switchboard documents the presence of more than 26,000 plant species across 24 web-based information sources. Where available, hyperlinks to individual species are given, providing an easy pathway to data on biology, value, ecology and many other important aspects of plants that determine their use and management. Version 1.3 of the Switchboard provides over 221,984 hyperlinks at species level.

A list of some of the databases available on the Agroforestry Species Switchboard. The databases have navigable links to further information on the listed species.

  • The RELMA-ICRAF Useful Trees was created in 2016 to provide species-based factsheets on the useful trees and shrubs of Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia. Information assembled in earlier Regional Land Management Unit (RELMA)-ICRAF book publications has now been digitized. Information on the ecology, uses, propagation, management, local names and botanical names of trees is included.
  • The IUCN “Especies para restauración”, translated as species for restoration, contains factsheets on mostly Mesoamerican plant species. It provides information on botanical and local names, distributions, habitats, and propagation and silvicultural methods, with a view to supporting their use in restoration initiatives.
  • The USDA Food Composition Databases provides information on nutrient content for more than 8000 different food items.
  • The Wood Database provides profiles of a range of several hundred woods used globally, including information on specific gravity, modulus of rupture, shrinkage, grain and workability.
  • The PlantSearch is a global database of living plant, seed and tissue collection hosted by Botanic Gardens Conservation International.
  • The USDA National Plant Germplasm System database allows queries for germplasm and taxonomic information, and provides access to USDA National Plant Germplasm System more widely.

The most recent addition to the Agroforestry Species Switchboard is a link to the website of the African Orphan Crops Consortium that aims to sequence, assemble and annotate the genomes of 101 traditional African food crops to improve their nutritional content.

The developers of the Switchboard welcome feedback and are committed to further develop it with new links in future versions. Recommendations on species names that may need to be updated due to recent taxonomic revisions or suggestions for other databases to be linked to the Switchboard can be sent directly to the authors or to switchboard@cgiar.org

The Agroforestry Species Switchboard can be accessed via URL: http://www.worldagroforestry.org/products/switchboard/

Documentation for the Switchboard is available via URL: http://www.worldagroforestry.org/output/agroforestry-species-switchboard-13

Corrrect citation: Kindt R, John I, Ordonez J, Smith E, Orwa C, Mosoti B, Chege J, Dawson I, Harja D, Kehlenbeck K, Luedeling E, Lillesø J-P B, Muchugi A, Munjuga M, Mwanzia L, Sinclair F, Graudal L, Jamnadass R. 2016. Agroforestry Species Switchboard: a synthesis of information sources to support tree research and development activities. Version 1.3. World Agroforestry Centre, Nairobi, Kenya.

This research forms part of the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry.

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Gender relations in forestry: beyond a headcount

Gender relations in forestry: beyond a headcount


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Photo by Tri Saputro/CIFOR.
Posted by

FTA

By Kate Evans, originally published on CIFOR’s Forest News

A Kichwa woman takes a rest from cutting down the forest. They are clearing an area to sow corn to feed their livestock near the Napo River in Orellana, Ecuador (Photo by Tomas Munita/CIFOR).
A Kichwa woman takes a rest from cutting down the forest. They are clearing an area to sow corn to feed their livestock near the Napo River in Orellana, Ecuador (Photo by Tomas Munita/CIFOR).

The land boundary dispute with the neighboring village had gone on for years.

But Aditi*, the 60-something female president of her local Forest Rights Committee, used skillful negotiation to convince the neighboring chief that both communities, including members of different indigenous groups, could work together to protect the forest, and continue to collect forest products there – resulting in a positive outcome for all.

This recent story, from the Indian state of Odisha, highlights the role women can play as ‘critical actors’ in defending and managing their forests, says Ph.D. candidate and gender researcher Priyanka Bhalla from the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy in Singapore.

“A lot of times when people talk about success stories they focus on the numbers – one third of the committee were women, etc. – but they forget about women as agents,” she says.

“I wanted to get away from the numbers, to change the language and say, women are positive agents, they are implementing positive processes and they have been doing so for a long period of time at many different scales.”

In a chapter of a new book on Gender and Forests published by the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Bhalla examines women’s participation in India’s forest tenure reform process in the state of Odisha, and the ways critical events and processes have influenced their involvement.

In 2006, following a nationwide mobilization demanding local rights over forests, India passed its Forest Rights Act. The new law legitimized the rights of tribal groups (and some other forest dwellers) to access and use ancestral forest lands, providing a framework for communities to govern these territories through village-based Forest Rights Committees (FRCs) and assemblies known as gram sabhas.

The Act came into force in 2008, and required that a third of FRC members be women, and that women make up at least half of assembly attendees.

BEYOND THE NUMBERS

Bhalla volunteered her time with an Odisha-based NGO called Vasundhara, and visited villages in four different districts, investigating how the FRA is being implemented on the ground.

The quota system isn’t enough to ensure women’s participation in decision-making, she discovered.

“Even though the committee is supposed to be comprised of a third women, most of the time there are one or two token female members, and they’re often individuals that don’t know anything about forest rights or indigenous rights.”

Higher caste women and wives of local authority figures tend to be over-represented, she says.

“You can’t assume that just by putting a woman on the committee that she is going to speak for all women – in fact, normally she doesn’t. If she’s a landowner, she’s not going to take into consideration the issues of landless women, for example.”

And in India’s predominantly patriarchal society, “there’s a community culture of women’s exclusion that’s been there for a really long time,” Bhalla says.

“Sometimes women aren’t informed about meeting times, they won’t know about the agenda of the meeting, or they’ll arrive and the meeting is already over, and the men just want their signature in the registration book.”

So in looking beyond the numbers, Bhalla focused her attention on “critical actors” and “critical acts” – that is, individual women like Aditi who had made an impact, and influential events that provide an opportunity for change to benefit women.

Photo by Aulia Erlangga/CIFOR.
Photo by Aulia Erlangga/CIFOR.

One of those acts occurred in 2012, when the FRA was amended to introduce specific guidelines for its implementation: how to properly constitute the Forest Rights Committees, how to do the process of land verification, and how to actually distribute the titles.

This amendment made a huge difference, Bhalla says, with many FRCs re-constituted, thereby increasing participation by women and indigenous groups.

“I went to a couple of different villages where people said again and again, ‘We had a committee from 2008, but we weren’t really sure what it was supposed to do – but then in 2012 it was explained to us how [the FRA] works and why it was done, and since then things have been better,’” Bhalla says.

SIGNS OF PROGRESS

The Vedanta Case was another ‘critical act’ in Odisha, according to Bhalla. Mining company Vedanta Resources wanted to develop an open-cast bauxite mine in the upper reaches of the Niyamgiri hills – an important wildlife habitat and sacred place for the Dongria Kondh indigenous group.

In 2010 the Ministry of Environment and Forests refused to approve the project. The company contested it in India’s Supreme Court – which in 2013 ordered that, under the Forests Rights Act, the decision had to be made by the Niyamgiri villagers themselves.

A series of gram sabhas (village assemblies) in 12 villages in 2013 made it clear that the people did not want the mine to go ahead – and the Supreme Court backed them.

“That was another turning point because it showed that this whole issue of consent can actually be taken seriously,” Bhalla says.

HANGING IN THE BALANCE

However, she’s concerned a new piece of Indian legislation threatens to undermine the recent gains for women and indigenous people.

The Compensatory Afforestation, Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA) Bill, introduced in July 2016, could shift power back to the central government, Bhalla says.

“It’s basically in direct conflict with some of the content in the Forest Rights Act, in particular getting consent from local people through the forest committees,” she says.

“So it’s really problematic – let’s say a group has community rights in their village, but under this new bill, the Forests Department can waltz in and undertake planting projects wherever they want.”

“I’m worried about what is going to happen. Nobody knows yet what the scale of its consequences will be.”

* Disclaimer: To protect the identity of individuals, names has been changed.

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Long-term partnerships benefit research on tree genetic resources

Long-term partnerships benefit research on tree genetic resources


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
The work on the African Orphan Crops Consortium includes partners such as Mars. Photo: Cathy Watson/ICRAF
Posted by

FTA

unknownIn the next phase starting in 2017, the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (FTA) will feature a new Flagship 1: Tree genetic resources to bridge production gaps and promote resilience. It includes elements of what is now Flagship 2 Management and conservation of forest and tree resources, coordinated by Laura Snook of Bioversity International. Before the start of Phase II, Ramni Jamnadass, Co-Leader, Tree Diversity, Domestication and Delivery at the World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF) and Coordinator t of the future Flagship 1 reflects on the most important partnerships within her research area. Read more on partnerships here.

Tree genetic resources are crucial for productive and sustainable landscapes, but this importance is not yet universally recognized. Research in this area lacks coordination and appropriate investment; quality planting material needs to be developed and promoted more effectively for socio-economic and environmental benefits. Currently the tools and approaches to achieve this are inadequate.

One example of a fruitful partnership.
One example of a fruitful partnership.

With the restructuring of the Flagships, activities on safeguarding genetic diversity, domestication and delivery of planting material will be subsumed under a single Flagship. We’ll bring together work that was previously dispersed across different components of FTA. Key strategic partners in the new Flagship are ICRAF, Bioversity International (who previously led the Flagship) and the University of Copenhagen.

Like the other Flagships, we have partnerships with a range of advanced research institutions in Europe (such as the James Hutton Institute), America (such as the University of California, Davis) and elsewhere.

Noteworthy is the training program for 250 African plant breeders set up with the University of California, Davis, which sits under the partnership with the African Orphan Crops Consortium.

The work on the African Orphan Crops Consortium includes partners such as Mars. Photo: Cathy Watson/ICRAF
The work on the African Orphan Crops Consortium includes partners such as Mars. Photo: Cathy Watson/ICRAF

Recently, the University of New Hampshire has come on board, and we have been approached by Scotland’s Rural College (SRUC) that wants to expand their international work on orphan crops.

In terms of international organizations, we also a have very fruitful collaboration with the UN Food and Agricultural Organization, on a range of initiatives such as the State of the World’s Forest Genetic Resources. The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has been a really good partner.

There are some evolving partnerships, which will depend on mutual expectations and if we can meet each other’s, but it’s not at all about money. One such new partnership is with the International Network for Bamboo and Rattan (INBAR) where synergies exist within work on best approaches for germplasm improvement and delivery. INBAR will be a managing partner in the next phase of FTA.

Also read: Seeing the trees as well as the forest: the importance of managing forest genetic resources

I want to also highlight partnerships with the private sector, for example with Mars, Unilever, and Natura. The partnership with Mars is both upstream, on genomics to support breeding work under the African Orphan Crops Consortium; and downstream, on cocoa farm upgrading through the use of improved planting material in Cote d’Ivoire.

The engagement with Unilever has grown over almost 12 years. Such work has established a pathway for difficult species where there’s been no investment previously but where potential for market use is high.

More on partnerships:

Robert Nasi: Partnerships make forests, trees and agroforestry program work

Diversity, commitment, challenges and shared goals: How CIRAD looks at FTA

Long-term relationships and mutual trust—partnerships and research on climate change

The best science is nothing without local voices: Partnerships and landscapes

Influence flows both ways: Partnerships are key to research on Livelihood systems

Alignment is key to make partnerships work

Partnership increases number of academically trained foresters in DR Congo from 6 to 160 in just ten years

Bringing in the development expertise: INBAR to join CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry

Connecting with countries: Tropenbos International to join CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • “Scientists without borders”: ICRAF’s Director General on CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees Agroforestry

“Scientists without borders”: ICRAF’s Director General on CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees Agroforestry


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Tree seedling distribution in Ethiopia: Germplasm research is one of the key areas of FTA. Photo ICRAF
Posted by

FTA
Photo: ICRAF
Photo: ICRAF

Before the start of the second phase of the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (FTA), Tony Simons, Director General of the World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF) gave us his take on the achievements of the program, some challenges and why partnerships are key to success. Read more stories on partnerships here.

Looking back at the first phase of the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (FTA), how would you assess its success?

You can fund research in three ways, at project, program or at an institutional level. In the past, donors had been focused on organizations, so there was core funding to centers, to legal entities. And then people got a bit nervous about that and they jumped to projects.

So when we started FTA the world was very focused on projects. But one of the problems of jumping to projects is that you end up with a very fragmented agenda, very dispersed, hard to connect. So the programmatic approach that straddles the project and institutional one was seen as a next stage in that evolution. And I think that was largely a good approach.

Also read: Diversity, commitment, challenges and shared goals: How CIRAD looks at FTA

When ICRAF started constructing the program in 2010, together with the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) and others, we decided to put about two thirds of our research into that one CGIAR Research Program. CIFOR put 100 percent of its effort into FTA, and we wanted to match them financially so that it became a true partnership.

I think that the evolution of the program, of the contents, of the priorities has gone very smoothly. While identifying what those priorities are there wasn’t a lot of arm-wrestling about what was really important.

Because forestry and agroforestry and the perennial landscape issues that we address are long term, you can’t keep chopping and changing. It has to be a longer-term program. That has been really good.

Click to watch: Tony Simons and Peter Holmgren discuss FTA
Click to watch: Tony Simons and Peter Holmgren discuss FTA

CIFOR’s Deputy Director General Robert Nasi has done a fantastic job as FTA Director in the first phase. He’s been very sensitive to institutional issues, he has been very open with sharing information, he has been very careful to not overpromote CIFOR. And it’s good that we now have a website that no longer starts with www.cifor…, but is dedicated to FTA exclusively.

We’re enthusiastic about the next phase of FTA research. We are committed to it. And we want to make it a success. We will continue with our high-profile work on Livelihood Systems, (now called Flagship 1, in the next phase running as Flagship 2), which is already 85 percent funded from bilateral sources. Bilateral funding partners strongly support the work and want to see it happen.

So what was really important in research on forests, trees and agroforestry, what stands out for you from the past five years?

If we look at the global Gross Domestic Product, four percent is agriculture, one percent is forestry. And yet the investment in forestry is very low.

The UN Forum on Forests indicated that we need between 100 and 200 billion dollars a year to achieve sustainable forest management in all its forms, natural forests, plantations, trees on farms and savannah tree cover. So that’s a huge gap.

Also read: Robert Nasi: Partnerships make forests, trees and agroforestry program work

FTA is the world’s largest research program on forests, trees and agroforestry, with the largest expertise, with the greatest legacy of publications, with the widest network of partners in the developing world. This is a fantastic opportunity to work towards global goals.

The incremental investments in our research program have not been overwhelming but they’ve been a useful trigger to change behaviour, to change attitudes, to leverage a lot of the previously fragmented work.

I think being part of this large research program has also given people another way of describing their work, articulating their work. And although we could do a better job in branding ourselves as FTA, the researchers within the program are actually very proud of it.

In a way it’s like scientists without borders, without being constrained by institutional issues.

Farmer group training: The AgFor project in, Sulawesi, Indonesia, is recognized as one of the most successful partnerships of FTA. Photo: Enggar Paramita/ICRAF
Farmer group training: The AgFor project in, Sulawesi, Indonesia, is recognized as one of the most successful partnerships of FTA. Photo: Enggar Paramita/ICRAF

What were the challenges in the partnership?

We’ve faced challenges when it comes to the allocation of discretionary funding. So the Steering Committee were very wise when they empowered the Flagship leaders. A relatively small amount of the budget is used for management support and other central issues. Most of the discretionary funding is put into the hands of the middle managers and the decisions are made at that level. This is how we could overcome this challenge.

We were a little slow in developing performance matrices, asking what does success actually look like? How do we reward those who are over-performing and assist those who are under-performing? Often turning off the supply of money is not the best way of raising performance.

There has been an asymmetry between partners’ contribution. The big ones, CIFOR and ICRAF have put in 10 to 20 times more than the smaller partners, around 90 percent of the total resources. This means additional bilateral resources, and projects and teams and staff and facilities and datasets that people are bringing into the program.

CIRAD puts in a lot in kind, i.e. fully paid staff in the projects, but this doesn’t flow through the budget.

This has to do with the fact that the original four partners took different approaches when the 15 CGIAR Research Programs were created in 2011. ICRAF signed up for six of them, with FTA as the largest.

Other centers signed up for many more programs, which means that they had to spread out their money over this larger number. So they are much more reliant on the discretionary resources from FTA but were not able, understandably, to deliver at the same level as the bigger partners. Of course, with a smaller contribution, how much attention do you pay to the program?

Tree seedling distribution in Ethiopia: Germplasm research is one of the key areas of FTA. Photo ICRAF
Tree seedling distribution in West Shewa, Ethiopia: Germplasm research is one of the key areas of FTA. Photo ICRAF

Which partnerships within FTA worked best and why so?

Partnerships work best when they are among equals. That is quite different from just subcontracting someone to do some work for you. So partnerships are about long-term relationships, about recognizing the strength of others, about respecting them, valuing them.

The partnerships that have worked well within FTA are the ones where people have voluntarily brought in resources to join efforts and enthusiastically worked together. The Agroforestry and Forestry in Sulawesi: Linking Knowledge with Action (AgFor) project is a good example.

It all comes down to scientists voting with their time. If they see the benefit of working together they will collaborate, it doesn’t have to do with how many emails senior leadership sends. But if they’re not convinced of the logic of it, it doesn’t matter how much you try and coerce them: it’s not going to happen.

The partnerships were good that have been able to bring in people from outside the CGIAR, because the Research Programs are not just about the CG system. Bringing CIRAD and CATIE into the Steering Committee has helped to open up the program.

I also want to mention the collaboration with the University of Copenhagen on germplasm research, because that was based on 40 years of support from DANIDA, so we’re harvesting that legacy.

What kind of partnerships do you want to put more emphasis on in the next phase?

It is always important to bring in new partners. All partnerships are equally valuable, because we need all of them, researchers, implementers, governments, and more and more the private sector. CIFOR and ICRAF are about to sign a Memorandum of Understanding with Asia Pulp and Paper on bringing agroforestry into forest concession areas.

ICRAF works a lot with the private sector, one third of the private money that comes into the CGIAR goes directly to ICRAF. There’s a growing awareness within the CG, and among the scientists, of how one can combine public goods with private interests in a beneficial way.

There could be policies that FTA adopts as well. FTA is not a legal entity, but it still could have policies on environmental safeguards, social safeguards, private sector engagement. ICRAF was the first CG center to have a private sector engagement policy.

Let’s look ahead 20, 30, 40 years, we want people to say that the changes that took place in the early 2000s triggered a greater recognition and impact of the work on forestry and agroforestry. This is why we need strong partnerships.

More blogs on partnerships:

Robert Nasi: Partnerships make forests, trees and agroforestry program work

Long-term relationships and mutual trust—partnerships and research on climate change

The best science is nothing without local voices: Partnerships and landscapes

Influence flows both ways: Partnerships are key to research on Livelihood systems

Alignment is key to make partnerships work

Long-term partnerships benefit research on tree genetic resources

Partnership increases number of academically trained foresters in DR Congo from 6 to 160 in just ten years

Bringing in the development expertise: INBAR to join CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry

Connecting with countries: Tropenbos International to join CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Diversity, commitment, challenges and shared goals: How CIRAD looks at FTA

Diversity, commitment, challenges and shared goals: How CIRAD looks at FTA


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
It is estimated that only a quarter of tropical forests are pristine. Photo by TmFO
Posted by

FTA

2cbf1c4-1

Plinio Sist is the Director of the Research Unit Forests and Societies at the French Agricultural Research for Development (CIRAD), one of the core partner institutions of the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (FTA). In this interview, he talks about CIRAD’s involvement in the program, key achievements and expectations for the new phase of the research partnership starting next year. Read more blogs on partnerships here.

Why did CIRAD become involved in FTA?

CIRAD and CGIAR centers, particularly the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), the World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF) and Bioversity International, had a long collaborative history with the research unit Forests and Societies, which was formerly part of CIRAD-Forêt. This research unit had, for example, seconded between four and six researchers to CIFOR in Bogor, Lima, Yaoundé, Burkina Faso and Ethiopia. The implication of CIRAD in FTA therefore came naturally, in order to strengthen our collaboration framework within a big challenging research program.

How did the partnership develop?

In phase 1 of FTA, the research unit Forests and Societies collaborated in Flagship 2 Management and conservation of forest and tree resources, coordinated by Bioversity. Forests and Societies brought in two projects dealing with Central African forest management and future Dynamique des Forets d’Afrique Centrale (DYNAFOR) and CoForTips for the Congo Basin.

Later, we participated in the Sentinel Landscapes research, launched in mid-2012, developing the Tropical managed Forest Observatory (TmFO), which now includes 17 different institutions.

Many landscapes in the tropics are now covered by forests that have been disturbed by logging. Photo: TmFO
Many landscapes in the tropics are now covered by forests that have been disturbed by logging. Photo by: Ervan Rutishauser

Forests and Societies also participated–with CIRAD’s research units Green and Selmet–in another pantropical Sentinel Landscapes project on the expansion of oil palm in Latin America, Africa and Asia.

Overall CIRAD researchers of five different units collaborated in all the five Flagships of FTA from 2011-2016. Because of its engagement, CIRAD became a member of the FTA management group and sits in the steering committee, and is involved in strategic decision making.

What was most valuable for you in working within FTA?

FTA showed to be an outstanding opportunity to work in groups of scientists from different disciplines and cultures, dealing with different research topics, but with common main objectives like poverty alleviation through sustainable management of forests and trees for the benefit of local populations and the society in general.

Could you give an example of a particularly good collaboration?

In 2012, we initiated the Tropical managed Forest Observatory. This network of 17 different forest research institutions and universities aims to assess the resilience of logged tropical forests in the context of climate change and high pressure of human activities towards the conversion of tropical forests to agricultural lands.

Although it is obvious that efforts are needed to preserve undisturbed primary forests by creating conservation units, these units alone will not be able to ensure the conservation of all species on a pan-tropical scale, due to economic and political reasons.

Plantation forest. It is estimated today that only a quarter of tropical forests are pristine. Photo: TmFO
Plantation forest. It is estimated today that only a quarter of tropical forests are pristine. Photo by: Ervan Rutishauser

It is estimated today that only a quarter of tropical forests are pristine. Therefore, it has to be accepted that the conservation of biodiversity and of the forest ecosystems of tomorrow will mostly take place within logged, domesticated forests, but only if they are well managed.

Currently, about 400 million hectares of tropical rainforests worldwide are designated as production forests, about a quarter of which is managed by rural communities and indigenous people.

However, there remains an important gap in the current knowledge: Are product harvesting and related ecosystem services in these tropical production forests sustainable in the long term?

Indeed, it is essential to assess forest regeneration capacities on a regional scale following logging, in terms of wood volume, biodiversity and carbon, and to make silvicultural recommendations that are adapted to the different types of forests encountered in a given region.

The TmFO aims to assess the impact of logging on forest dynamics, carbon storage and tree species composition at regional level in the Amazon basin, Congo basin and South East Asia. TmFO is unique as it is the only international network looking at logged tropical forests.

Another good example is the collaboration for a Forests special issue on global research questions such as forest landscape governance.

What do you expect from the next phase ?

The first phase of FTA was an exciting period. We worked with hundreds of colleagues in a new framework of cooperation that brought together different centers and addressed new global challenges.

The second phase must be considered as an opportunity to develop big projects with challenging objectives. One of them may be forest degradation, which is just as dramatic as deforestation in some regions like the Amazon and South East Asia.

Many landscapes in the tropics are now covered by forests that have been disturbed at different gradients by illegal and predatory logging, planned logging, and fire among others. In many of these regions, people are willing to stop deforestation and develop programs to restore forests.

But there are some challenging questions to ask that I hope FTA will help us to answer: How will these degraded forests be considered in such programs? What will be their role in providing both goods and environmental services and their contribution to restoration programs?

To make progress in finding the answers, we need to work together more closely and with more interactions between the clusters of activities within a research theme, but also with more interactions between the five Flagships themselves.

More on partnerships

Robert Nasi: Partnerships make forests, trees and agroforestry program work

Long-term relationships and mutual trust—partnerships and research on climate change

The best science is nothing without local voices: Partnerships and landscapes

Influence flows both ways: Partnerships are key to research on Livelihood systems

Partnership increases number of academically trained foresters in DR Congo from 6 to 160 in just ten years

Bringing in the development expertise: INBAR to join CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry

Connecting with countries: Tropenbos International to join CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Right tree right place: vegetationmap4africa and Uganda Tree Finder

Right tree right place: vegetationmap4africa and Uganda Tree Finder

28 October, 2016

Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Posted by

FTA communications

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • The challenges of conserving tropical forests

The challenges of conserving tropical forests


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Posted by

FTA communications
Photo: Lucy McHugh/CIFOR
A view of the Kapuas Hulu river hints at the complex reality of tropical forest landscapes. Photo: Lucy McHugh/CIFOR

By Tara Lohan, originally published at CIFOR’s Forests News

Too often, the debate about forests in policy circles is reduced to two options: deforestation or total protection, according to Francis E. Putz.

Putz and Claudia Romero, both researchers at the University of Florida, chose to take a different approach.

“We looked at a large area of forests that falls outside these two existing options,” said Putz. “We are trying to inform decisions about forests that aren’t in protected areas.”

In a recently published study by the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) under the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry, Putz and Romero examined the different forest management and conservation options that exist today for the world’s tropical forests.

It is a subject that can be contentious.

“It’s a hard story to tell because we are not promoting logging,” said Putz. “We are saying that there are acceptable and unacceptable forest management methods and if you want to achieve the latter, there are several issues that need to be considered.”

Practical thinking

Many researchers, said Putz, document the impacts on tropical forestry and conclude that there is no other option for forest protection besides converting them into parks.

“I’d like to convert the remaining forests in the tropics into one protected area for future generations to enjoy, but that’s unfortunately not going to happen,“ said Putz.

“That’s why we are trying to find a solution for land that falls between complete protection and conversion. It’s still going to be forest, but it’s going to be managed forest, not primary forest.”

Putz contends that protection is not a viable option in many areas, especially those close to roads and well-settled areas.

“All land is not equivalent in its productive capacity or in its ecological importance, so we need to plan at landscape scales,” said Putz.

Impacts are of course to be expected when forests are managed, but the sorts and extents of those impacts vary with whether the area is being managed responsibly or not.

“But where alternative land uses such as oil palm plantations are very lucrative, we need to do everything we can to make natural forest management financially attractive and sustainable in terms of yield and biodiversity. If we don’t, the opportunity costs of maintaining forests will simply be too high.”

So what constitutes good forest management?

“Most people will agree that there are forest management practices that clearly minimize  downstream damage, avoid biodiversity losses, and keep workers safe. But after instituting those basic improvements, what constitutes responsible forest management varies with factors that range in scales from individual trees to entire landscapes,“ said Putz.

“There are some principles of good forestry that span the gamut from high-intensity plantations to the lightest selective harvests, but after that, the details differ.”

Contestations

Adding to the complexity of the issues related to tropical forestry are the different stakeholder groups involved.

“We need to understand that tropical forests are located in contested territories where claims by indigenous communities overlap with those of mining companies and other industries,” said Romero. “Governments need to juggle all these competing claims regarding tropical forests.”

“We found that there are a lot of opportunities to manage forests for timber and other products that need to be considered to help manage competing needs of different stakeholders.”

“Forest managers make decisions based on criteria that include market pressures and global demand. Policy makers need to be more sensitive to those signals in order to tailor appropriate policies for responsible forest management,” Romero added.

“Good forest management is possible at all scales, from large industrial concessions to small community-owned forests. But one of the keys to success is awareness and capacity building,” said Putz. “The certification program of the Forest Stewardship Council, for example, has substantially raised awareness about responsible forest management.

“What we don’t yet know is just how much of a difference certification is making, which is our next project,” said Putz. “We’ve been trying for years to get unbiased field-data on the impacts of certification.”

Romero said the essence of their current work is to increase the visibility of good forest management in the tropics.

“The core of resource management is adaptive management and the core principle of adaptive management is experimentation,” she added. “We won’t know if certain things work until we try them and have a robust means of learning about their impacts.”

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • FTA event coverage: How can we use trees and conserve them, too?

FTA event coverage: How can we use trees and conserve them, too?


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Posted by

FTA
prunus-africana
Prunus Africana bark harvest can kill the trees if not done properly. Credit: T. Geburek

Laura K Snook, Bioversity International, writes about the challenges and opportunities for rural populations in continuing to use the trees they depend on for food and other products while conserving them, too.

Can rural populations in developing countries continue to use the trees they depend on while conserving them, too? As human populations grow in rural areas of the tropics, the populations of wild trees that provide them with food, fuel, medicines and construction materials are diminishing due to overharvesting and forest and woodland degradation and loss. These declines are closing off future options for sustaining or domesticating these valuable resources.

The challenges and opportunities for making conservation compatible with use were showcased at a workshop sponsored by Bioversity International during Tropentag 2016: Solidarity in a competing world — fair use of resources in Vienna, Austria.

The well-attended event explored approaches, tools and arrangements that could promote both conservation of trees and forests and their better use. Four research projects in Africa and Latin America were highlighted, led by Bioversity International and funded by Austrian Development Cooperation and the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry.

The event, described as a ’highlight‘ of Tropentag, explored approaches, tools and arrangements that could promote both conservation of trees and forests and their better use.

Laura Snook, Leader, Forest Genetic Resources Programme, Bioversity International, gave a keynote address, which was followed by four short presentations from panelists and discussions moderated by Judy Loo of Bioversity International.

Thomas Geburek
Thomas Geburek: Photo: Tropentag

Thomas Geburek of the Austrian Research Center for Forests shared innovative approaches for prioritizing which tree populations to conserve across Sub-Saharan Africa.

Presenting research on African cherry (Prunus Africana), which is threatened due to demand for its medicinal bark, he showed how genetic information and climate change modeling revealed which stands of trees, across multiple countries, should be prioritized, both because they conserved the most unique or diverse populations and because the sites would not become inhospitable for this montane species as a result of projected climate change.

Barbara Vinceti, of Bioversity International, noted how local preferences and understanding of rules for access to trees as well as changing land uses affected options for conserving and enhancing use of the important food tree, Parkia biglobosa, in Burkina Faso.

Dietmar Stoian of Bioversity presented insights into the enabling conditions for community forestry that both conserved forests and CITES-listed mahogany trees (Swietenia macrophylla). In the Maya Biosphere of Guatemala, harvesting and processing timber provides income sufficient to pull participants out of poverty. He contrasted this situation with the constraints that inhibit the development of community forestry in Nicaragua.

Timber harvesting, processing and sale in Guatemala has conserved the forest and mahogany trees of the Maya Biosphere Reserve. Credit: Bioversity International/L. Snook
Timber harvesting, processing and sale in Guatemala has conserved the forest and mahogany trees of the Maya Biosphere Reserve. Credit: Bioversity International/L. Snook

Camila Sousa of IIAM, Mozambique described how relearning traditional harvesting techniques based on the use of repellent plants and tree climbing, in lieu of setting fires and felling hive trees, made wild honey harvesting compatible with conservation in the Niassa Reserve of Mozambique. In contrast, uncontrolled logging had left too few standing trees of commercial species to provide a resource base for the kind of community forestry that has so successfully sustained forests, trees and livelihoods in Guatemala.

A lively discussion ensued among the academics, students, development agency professionals and donors from around the world who attended the event, about ways research could effectively support development.

A synthesis at the end of the event drew out several key points.

1) One was that different kinds of science are complementary: modern genetic tools do not replace, but complement provenance trials and other traditional approaches to biodiversity research. We need to understand the limitations of what we can learn from different research approaches.

For example, while some kinds of genetic variation can be seen (larger or sweeter fruit or faster growth), genetic diversity is invisible; laboratory analysis is needed to be able to set conservation priorities that will ensure that this diversity and its associated adaptive capacity is safeguarded.

Similarly, in landscapes managed by farmers who select and protect certain individuals for their traits, they steer evolution; while this leads to better or more desirable yields, it also reduces diversity. Conservation needs to focus on retaining diversity and reproductive processes to allow for continuing genetic recombination so that trees, which may live for centuries or even thousands of years, can adapt to change throughout their lifetimes, as well as passing on sufficient diversity to their offspring to allow future generations to thrive.

The participants discussed if rural populations in developing countries can continue to use the trees they depend on while conserving them, too. Photo: Tropentag
The participants discussed if rural populations in developing countries can continue to use the trees they depend on while conserving them, too. Photo: Tropentag

2) Another key point was that people are central to both conservation and use. It is crucial to involve them and understand their benefits and incentives to promote the kinds of practices and policies that are needed to make conservation and use compatible.

Using participatory research methods allows local people to learn from researchers and share their own knowledge. This empowers everyone to recognize or develop management choices that benefit both people and their resource base.

Several participants described the benefits of developing monitoring tools that local people could use to evaluate the impacts of their management practices. Another point raised was the value and importance of donors’ contributions, both in supporting research and in creating opportunities for “learning by doing”, such as implementing community forestry or supporting second tier organizations that can in turn support communities.

These transformations take time – support may be needed for decades, not just the three year term of a typical research project. Follow up is needed to ensure that research results reach their full potential through adoption of recommendations and changes in policy.

For more information, please contact l.snook@cgiar.org

This research is also funded by the Austrian Development Cooperation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Landscape Restoration in Southern Africa

Landscape Restoration in Southern Africa

24 October, 2016

Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Posted by

FTA communications

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Challenges for women’s participation in communal forests: Experience from Nicaragua’s indigenous territories

Challenges for women’s participation in communal forests: Experience from Nicaragua’s indigenous territories

13 October, 2016

Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Posted by

FTA communications

This paper analyzes sex-differentiated use, decision-making and perceptions regarding communal forests in indigenous communities of Nicaragua’s Atlantic coast. Methods include a survey, focus groups, participant observation and adaptive collaborative management processes over a two-year period. Results revealed that while a higher percentage of men than women participate in the harvest of eight forest products, women participate substantially in product sales and have some control over income. A majority of men and women believe that women participate in decision-making, but that participation was of low efficacy. Women face significant obstacles to effective participation in forest decision-making in the community: weak community organization, pressure by spouses, difficulty organizing among themselves and informal sanctions. Improving meaningful participation of women in decision-making requires addressing challenges and obstacles at multiple levels; obstacles at the communal level, where the future of the forests will be decided, cannot be overcome without attention to the household.

Source: CIFOR Publication

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • It takes a village to re-raise a forest

It takes a village to re-raise a forest

10 October, 2016

Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Posted by

FTA

To stem the effects of climate change on the country and its people, Ethiopia is looking towards forestry as a key solution.

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Regreening Ethiopia

Regreening Ethiopia


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Posted by

cifor

Ethiopia – Forest landscape restoration (FLR) is the ongoing process of regaining ecological functionality and enhancing human well-being across deforested or degraded areas.

CIFOR’s FLR research work is funded by the International Forestry Knowledge (KNOWFOR) Program. KNOWFOR aims to provide policymakers and practitioners in developing countries with useful evidence, tools and analysis on forests, trees and climate change.

KNOWFOR’s ongoing work will be presented at the IUCN World Conservation Congress, held from 1-10 September in Hawai’i, USA.

x

 

Q&A: Lessons from China for forest landscape restoration


This topic will be featured by
CIFOR at IUCN World Conservation Congress
1-10 September 2016 | Honolulu – Hawai’i, USA
See event details here

See the rest of the story at mysite.com

Related:
Q&A: Lessons from China for forest landscape restoration
VIDEO: Laporan dari Pasifik: ‘Perubahan iklim itu nyata’
VIDEO: Restorasi hutan hujan di Asia Pasifik

Source: Forests News English

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Reversing deforestation, restoring landscapes

Reversing deforestation, restoring landscapes


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Posted by

FTA communications
Photo: CIFOR/Boy Haqi
A woman in Aceh carries firewood from the forest for cooking. Forest landscape restoration considers the diverse values of forests, including to support livelihoods. CIFOR/Boy Haqi

By Catriona Croft-Cusworth, originally published at CIFOR’s Forests News

Asia Pacific – Regional leaders gathered this month in Brunei Darussalam to discuss ways to slow, halt and reverse deforestation in the Asia-Pacific. But what does it mean to ‘reverse’ deforestation? And how can it be done without reversing the rapid development that supports the economies and livelihoods of the region?

In discussion at the 2016 Asia-Pacific Rainforest Summit, experts in government, research and development addressed these questions in a panel session titled ‘Restoring our rainforests’. Panelists in the session argued that reversing deforestation does not simply mean reforestation, but requires an approach that integrates the goal of restoring forests with other diverse objectives within the forest landscape, including livelihoods, economic growth and climate change mitigation and adaptation.

Li Jia, representing the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and as the moderator for the session, described this in her organization’s terms as ‘forest landscape restoration’ (FLR).

Taking a landscape approach to restoration, FLR integrates the goal of reforestation with other land uses, including sustainable agriculture and agroforestry to support economic development.

Chetan Kumar, another member of the panel from IUCN, explained further:

“It is important to recognize that [forest] landscape restoration is about regaining ecological functionality as well as enhancing human wellbeing. So we are not just talking about carbon benefits or adaptation, but a whole range of benefits,” he said.

GLOBAL COMMITMENTS, LOCAL PRESSURES

In the densely populated and rapidly developing Asia-Pacific region, forests are under pressure to meet local needs, build national economies and contribute to global goals.

“Many developing countries in Asia-Pacific regions, they would like to increase the economic wellbeing of their people. However, at the same time this often in the field translates into degradation drivers for forests and pressures for forests,” Jia said.

Rainforests in the Asia-Pacific are disappearing at a rate of 1.35 million hectares a year. Fires, land-clearing for cash crops, and unsustainable logging are driving deforestation and forest degradation on a massive scale.

Global and regional resolve is building to reverse this trend. REDD+ initiatives promise rewards for restoration of forests. The Sustainable Development Goals call for restoration to achieve a “land-degradation-neutral world”. The Paris Agreement highlights the need to enhance forests as carbon sinks. And the Bonn Challenge, as the world’s biggest initiative for restoration, calls for global commitment to restore 150 million hectares of forest by 2020 and 350 million hectares by 2030.

Asia-Pacific countries have responded positively to these initiatives and instigated their own, including from governments, regional bodies, the private sector and civil society. The APEC Forest Cover 2020 Goal, for example, aims to restore 20 million hectares of forest in the region by 2020 – about 77 percent is estimated to have been achieved already.

But beyond meeting regional and international commitments, restoration efforts need to bring benefits for the entire forest landscape, including for people who depend on them for their livelihoods.

The Government of Brunei Darussalam, the host of the Summit, is looking to expand eco-tourism to find additional benefits for restored or protected forest landscapes. The country has already committed to protecting 22 million hectares in the Heart of Borneo, together with Indonesia and Malaysia, and has pledged to limit its agricultural use to one percent of its land area.

“It takes time to replant and regrow,” said panelist Noralinda Ibrahim, Acting Deputy Director of Brunei’s Forestry Department. “But we have managed to restore some areas as close as possible to their natural state.”

Panelist John Herbohn, Professor of Tropical Forestry from the University of the Sunshine Coast in Australia, shared success stories of community-based forest landscape restoration in the Philippines.

After reforestation efforts failed four times over 20 years, the switch to a landscape approach finally found success in the Philippines’ Biliran Province, Herbohn said. The results improved biodiversity, food security and market access for forest products, and increased income for local people.

One key to success was to balance reforestation efforts with local needs for agroforestry and agriculture in a diverse forest landscape.

“There is a difference of experience between governments and communities,” he said. “For communities, diverse landscapes work best.”

RAINFOREST RESILIENCE

Ferry Slik, an Assistant Professor at the University of Brunei Darussalam, reminded the panel that a diverse forest landscape is not only good for human wellbeing, but also for biodiversity.

“The more diversity there is, the better the chance of survival,” he said.

Slik said that from a biologist’s point of view, there’s no problem with developing land, so long as a network of original forest fragments can be retained – and that requires careful planning.

Even in cases where careful planning hasn’t been applied, hope for successful restoration can still be found in the natural resilience of species, he said. He pointed to the example of devastating forest fires on the island of Borneo, saying that many of the original species can still be found there.

“The forest can recover by itself,” he said. “Even after burning, it can still recover.”

This research forms part of the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry.

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Firewood collection taking a toll on Uganda’s forests

Firewood collection taking a toll on Uganda’s forests


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Posted by

FTA communications
Photo: Douglas Sheil/CIFOR
Scientists urge sustainable firewood collection efforts to fully consider the needs of the local population. Douglas Sheil / CIFOR

By Michael Casey, originally published at CIFOR’s Forests News

Uganda – Protecting tropical forests in Africa often means directing conservation and law enforcement efforts towards fighting illegal logging, hunting and poaching.

But scientists under the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry decided to take a closer look at a largely overlooked challenge – the collection of firewood.

In many parts of world, fuel wood is the main source of energy. That is especially the case in sub-Saharan Africa, where rural communities depend on wood and charcoal to cook meals, boil bathwater and heat their homes.

Much of that wood is collected from tropical forests, including from national parks that are home to endangered primates, elephants and big cats. Yet, until now, there has been very little research on the impact, if any, this wood collection is having on local flora and fauna.

Douglas Sheil of the Norwegian University of Life Sciences and doctoral student Marieke Sassen of Wageningen University in the Netherlands decided to examine fuel wood collection in the forests of Mt. Elgon National Park in Uganda. Located near the Kenyan border, this park is known for its vast collection of rare plants and is home to more than 300 species of birds, as well as a 4,321-meter-high extinct volcano that is believed to be nearly 24 million years old.

“During my research at Mt. Elgon, I found that illegal fuelwood comprised the most important use of the forest, following agriculture and grazing,” Sassen said.

“Then, during my follow-up study of human impacts on forest structure and species richness, I found indications that allowing people to collect fuel wood also possibly contributed to forest degradation and slowed down regeneration, so I decided to investigate this further.”

DEMAND AND DEGRADATION

After conducting surveys and interviews with nearly 200 households, the researchers found that wood collection had an impact on the park, especially up to a thousand meters from the park’s boundary and the densest portion of the park.

 Rural women should be empowered to take the lead in forestry

The most popular species of trees were also those favored for timber use like Prunus Africana, Popocarpus milianjianus and Allophylus abyssinicus.

“Demand for wood fuel from tropical forests is still likely to grow in the foreseeable future,” the researchers wrote in their study.

“Our results indicate that the forest may become more degraded as a result, with negative consequences for conservation, as well as for the people who depend on the forest.”

Sheil described wood collection as “a major, but very localized threat if not well-controlled.” He added that people used the opportunity to cut trees, set snares and engage in other illegal activities.

“In many larger, less densely-populated forests, there are bigger threats like  land-clearing for large-scale agriculture, grazing or plantations,” he said. “Those threats are more severe and more likely to be permanent.”

“But fuel wood collection is significant near forest edges where forests occur in areas with dense human populations that live mainly on subsistence lifestyles. So this is certainly a problem in many other East African forests.”

CREATING LOCAL SOLUTIONS

The authors cautioned that it wouldn’t be easy to combat the problem with measures like limiting access to the park, since so many rural communities depend on fuel wood for their survival. In many cases, they have no alternative sources of energy, nor the money to buy wood from other places.

Complicating matters, Sheil added, is the colonial legacy that colors the debate in places like Uganda, where many parks were established during British rule and included controversial measures like evicting entire communities in the name of conservation. Park access thus remains a sensitive topic, and calls to open parks to farmers and others are a common campaign issue during elections, according to Sheil.

“Excluding people will make them even more hostile and less supportive of the park,” he said.

“So it is a balancing act. My own feeling is that we can permit firewood collection if we can also set up a process to require those involved to accept a role in protecting the park. It’s not easy to do, but conservation is seldom simple.”

What is evident, however, is that any solution must fully consider the needs of the local population living around the park.

“You are talking about communities that have been accessing these forests for generations,” said Sheil. “They have never needed to collect firewood anywhere else before.”

“Poor people should not become further impoverished because of forest conservation,” Sassen added. “Morally, this does not make sense and it can also lead to conflicts. Conflicts over forest resources rarely benefit conservation or local people.”

COMING TO AGREEMENT

In order to limit damage to the forest, the authors said the answer may lie in giving communities a greater say in park management – under a system where the law-abiding residents would help authorities prevent those who are carrying out illegal activities like logging or laying snares.

Presently, the park has agreements allowing legal access to collect wood, but turns a blind eye to others to avoid conflicts.

“Park management lacks the means to enforce the rules of the agreements and local forest user committees are unable to or unwilling to impose them,” the study concluded.

“What I would like to see is a much more conditional form of access where you negotiate with the local people and say if we are going to allow you to continue this, we need to agree on some rules and you agree that you help police these rules,” Sheil added.

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • From the Congo to the Amazon, hunters speak the same language

From the Congo to the Amazon, hunters speak the same language


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Research suggests hunters in the Congo Basin face similar issues to hunters elsewhere. Photo: Ollivier Girard / CIFOR.
Posted by

FTA communications

By Barbara Fraser, originally published at CIFOR’s Forests News

Although continents apart, hunters in the forests of Africa and Latin America can learn from each other’s experiences in wildlife management and the use of bushmeat, according to experts from the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR).

“In both the Congo and the Amazon, millions of people depend on wild species for food, and hunting and fishing provide a large percentage of nutrients,” said John Fa, senior research associate at CIFOR and coordinator of the Bushmeat Research Initiative.

In addition to hunting to feed their families, hunters in both the Congo and the Amazon Basins sell some of the wild meat they catch. The income provides a buffer against crop failures or other economic crises, as well as money for household expenses, health care or school fees.

AGAINST OVERHUNTING

But wildlife management is crucial to make sure that hunting—or rather, overhunting—does not have excessive negative consequences for ecosystems, Fa said.

For example, overhunting of a certain animal species could reduce the scattering of the seeds of plants on which it feeds, gradually decreasing the number of those plants and, therefore, the food supply.

“Changing the vegetation changes the food supply, which affects the animal species that can survive in that landscape,” Fa said.

Overhunting can be controlled if hunters know how much game their communities are harvesting, said Nathalie Van Vliet, a senior researcher at CIFOR.

“The problem is that hunters know how much they or their neighbors harvest, but not what others harvest, so they don’t know how much the community harvests as a whole,” she said.

ARMED WITH A NOTEBOOK

Community monitoring can fill that gap. In parts of Africa and the Amazon, hunters are armed not only with shotguns, but also with notebooks or cell phones to record information about where and what they hunt and conditions in the forest.

In Namibia, where hunting—including trophy hunting—is an important source of both income and food for communities, game guards keep detailed records that allow community conservancy committees to monitor impacts and adjust quotas, according to Greenwell Matongo of WWF Namibia.

Matongo was among a group of researchers, government officials and hunters who met in Leticia, Colombia, in October 2015, to discuss regulatory changes for legalizing the sale of bushmeat in Colombia.

Hunters in the Ticoya Indigenous Reserve or resguardo near Leticia, along the Amazon River where the borders of Colombia, Brazil and Peru converge, are experimenting with a cell phone app to help them track wildlife.

By becoming citizen scientists, hunters gather data that are valuable to their communities and to researchers, said Brian Child, associate professor in the geography department and the Center for African Studies at the University of Florida.

“People love it—it’s so empowering. They love learning, they love doing graphs, they love understanding what the data are saying, they love presenting it back to communities,” Child said of community-based wildlife monitoring.

“That’s where the real gain is—in the communities themselves becoming paraprofessionals and collecting, analyzing and responding to data,” he added.

A TALE OF TWO BASINS

Although both the Amazon and Congo Basins include expanses of tropical forest that is home to bushmeat hunters, the two regions differ in some significant ways.

The Congo Basin has less than half as much dense forest—1.6 million square kilometers, compared to 3.9 million square kilometers in the Amazon—and more than twice as many inhabitants as the Amazon.

Research in the past seemed to indicate that substantially more bushmeat is consumed in the Congo Basin than the Amazon. According to one rough estimate from 2010, bushmeat consumption in the Congo basin totaled about 3.2 million tons in one year, compared to just under 1 million tons in the Amazon.

But that estimate and others like it are extrapolated from relatively little data, some of which is old, Van Vliet said. More recent studies show that people continue to consume bushmeat even after moving to cities from rural areas, but further research is needed to understand how consumption patterns change, she said.

Community wildlife management is crucial for adapting to changing circumstances, said Van Vliet, who works with hunters in Colombia and Gabon who are designing hunting management plans.

“The hunters in Gabon realized that they needed to set limits on the hunting of partially protected species in their area,” she said. “The question was where to set the limit, because they did not have data showing how much would be sustainable.”

Van Vliet suggested an adaptive management plan, which would begin by setting the limit at the amount currently being harvested. The hunters would then monitor the impacts and adjust the plan as necessary.

“The problem was that no one knew how much they harvested as a community,” she said. “A community monitoring system provides important information to fill in those gaps.”

The hunters in Gabon—who set a limit of 30 bush pigs a year, based on data showing that they had hunted 28 in 2014—are using a monitoring system similar to one used by hunters in the Ticoya resguardo, which is in the southernmost corner of Colombia, near the Amazon River.

PEN PALS

Van Vliet would like the two groups of hunters to be able to learn from each other’s experiences.

“They face similar challenges,” she said. “I think there are fewer differences between a hunter in Gabon and a hunter in the Amazon than a hunter in Gabon and a city dweller in Gabon.”

While meeting with hunters during a recent trip to Gabon, Van Vliet received messages from hunters in the Ticoya resguardo via the smartphone app WhatsApp, and began to think about ways in which the two groups might be able to communicate.

“The problem is language, but they could exchange photos,” she said.

The hunters in Gabon were especially interested in how the hunters in Colombia managed fruiting tree species to attract certain animals.

“They said they felt wildlife was farther away now than in their grandparents’ day,” she said of the Gabon hunters. “They said that could be due to hunting or to logging, which sometimes removes trees that bear fruit.”

The African hunters were intrigued by the idea of planting some of those tree species closer to their villages to attract animals, as communities in the Ticoya resguardo had done.

“I think these exchanges are very useful,” Van Vliet said. “I learn a lot from looking at these different situations, and I think they would, too.”

Latest post


Back to top

Sign up to our monthly newsletter

Connect with us