Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • FTA Highlight No. 12 – Adaptation to Climate Change with Forests, Trees and Agroforestry

FTA Highlight No. 12 – Adaptation to Climate Change with Forests, Trees and Agroforestry


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

Trees and forests are a vital part of any global effort to address climate change. They contribute to mitigation and to adaptation through the provision of ecosystem services, including carbon sequestration.

Forests and trees are also affected by climate change, which threatens their critical function to underpin the adaptation of farming systems, other economic activities and the people who depend on these activities. Adaptation strategies are needed to reduce the negative impacts of climate change on forests and trees themselves and to enhance their contributions to adaptation of other sectors.

Download the volume! [PDF]

These two fundamental aspects can be summarized as “adaptation for forests” and “forests for adaptation.”

As part of “FTA’s highlights of a decade,” a new series focusing on its main results since being established in 2011, the FTA program is now publishing the volume on Adaptation to Climate Change with Forests, Trees and Agroforestry.

Climate change adaptation and mitigation have been one of the five components of the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (FTA) since it was created in 2011, with clear links with the other components of the program.

The work of FTA has helped build a deeper understanding of how trees and forests will have an increasing importance in adapting to intensified climate variability, to buffer shocks and facilitating livelihood resilience in the future. FTA’s research and advocacy work also raised awareness on the vital role of trees as providers of environmental services in multifunctional landscapes and how this equilibrium is vulnerable to climate change.

The ecosystem products and services provided by forests and trees contribute to local climate regulation in rural and urban areas; protect coastal areas from climate extremes; protect watersheds; contribute to climate regulation at the regional and continental scale; and support the resilience of farming systems and households.

Photo gallery

Climate change is increasing the risks of fire.  FTA research has improved the understanding of the drivers of fire through interdisciplinary research, quantified their consequences in terms of greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution and supported the elaboration of polices and measures to address them.

FTA researchers have helped develop methodologies and approaches to assess vulnerability, which has many dimensions: environmental, economic, social, political and geographic. The climate analog approach can support vulnerability assessments of agricultural systems. In forest- and tree-based landscapes, the different cultural, domestic and economic roles that women and men play affects their varying adaptive capacities.

Ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) explicitly relies on ecosystems for adaptation to climate change.

Techniques for studying the relationships between trees and climate change include dendrochronology, which provides information on the growth rates of trees and past climate conditions, and using the carbon isotope composition of riparian trees to assess ecological responses to climate change, as shown in Ghana.

An atlas developed for Central America draws current and future suitability maps for 54 tree species. A study of the impacts of climate change in Mesoamerica showed that 55–62% of current coffee production areas would no longer be suitable by 2050.

A sustainable supply of diverse high-quality tree germplasm is fundamental to the success of tree-based systems and adapting to climate change. AlleleShift R, developed under FTA, predicts how climate change would affect adaptive traits.

Since its inception, FTA has provided evidence of the potential of forests, agroforestry and trees to contribute to both adaptation and mitigation, and has analysed their synergies and trade-offs. In that aspect FTA contributed to shaping global narratives on mitigation and adaptation, especially to correct the imbalance in the global narrative that often depicts forests and trees mainly having a mitigation role, when in fact the paradigm should be inverted as forests and trees have a major fundamental to play in adaptation of other sectors: farming, water, energy, cities, etc.

FTA research has also emphasized the key contribution that forests and trees can make to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and to the synergies between climate action and the achievement of the SDGs.

FTA has in particular helped bring to the forefront of the international agenda the many ways in which, forests, trees and agroforestry contribute to food security and nutrition and to household resilience to climate change. FTA managing partners have developed decision support tools such as the Capacity-Strengthening Approach to Vulnerability Assessment (CaSAVA) and the software ShadeMotion, a useful way for teaching agroforestry at all levels.

FTA promotes the application of integrated ecological, economic and social principles can contribute to the resilience of smallholder farming systems, including climate-smart agricultural adaptation as a farm diversification method.

There is increasing recognition of the need to consider landscapes as a level of implementation for climate policies, including for REDD+. It provides opportunities to best implement adaptation and enhance synergies between adaptation and mitigation and with other SDGs. of the relationship between governance and adaptive capacity in Africa examined risks and potential solutions.

Download the publication to find out more about the the role of forests, trees and agroforestry in adaptation to climate change and FTA’s fundamental research.

Published volumes until today include:


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • 2021 International Day of Forests - interviews to Julia Wolf and Alexandre Meybeck

2021 International Day of Forests – interviews to Julia Wolf and Alexandre Meybeck


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

On 21 March 2021 we celebrate the International Day of Forests!

Co-publication between FAO and FTA [PDF]
For this occasion we interviewed Julia Wolf (FAO) and Alexandre Meybeck (FTA), lead authors of the recently published co-publication “Addressing forestry and agroforestry in National Adaptation Plans: Supplementary guidelines”, a report that provides specific guidance for national adaptation planning in the forestry sector. These guidelines are intended to be used by national planners and decision–makers working on climate change issues in developing countries and authorities and experts who are contributing to climate change adaptation and NAP formulation and implementation. From the introduction of the report:

These supplementary guidelines therefore aim to:

    1. show the need for adaptation of forests and trees;
    2. show the importance of forests and trees for adaptation; show the need to appropriately integrate forest and trees in the NAP process;
    3. support NAP practitioners in integrating the management of forest and trees in NAPs;
    4. support actors in the forestry and agriculture sectors in their engagement and contribution to the process, at national, economy wide level, and both locally and in their sector/value chain; and
    5. trigger and facilitate a forward-looking intersectoral policy dialogue that fully integrates forests and trees in adaptation planning of all sectors.

The interviews touch upon the reasons why FAO and FTA decided to issue these guidelines, whom they are addressing, while also discussing some of the examples in the report. The potential of trees and forests to adapt to climate change and at the same time help other sectors, especially vulnerable systems, is one of the core elements of this publication.

This report was also recently presented at the 7th Asia-Pacific Adaptation Forum (APAN) and is now also available in Spanish. French and Arabic are forthcoming.

A full transcript of the interviews will be available in the next days.

Julia Wolf’s interview




Alexandre Meybeck’s interview






This article was produced by the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (FTA). FTA is the world’s largest research for development program to enhance the role of forests, trees and agroforestry in sustainable development and food security and to address climate change. CIFOR leads FTA in partnership with ICRAF, the Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT, CATIE, CIRAD, INBAR and TBI. FTA’s work is supported by the CGIAR Trust Fund.


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Towards Natural Rubber as a Response to Climate Change - Proceedings of the workshop

Towards Natural Rubber as a Response to Climate Change – Proceedings of the workshop


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

FTA, together with the International Rubber Study Group (IRSG), the International Rubber Research and Development Board (IRRDB), the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), and the French Agricultural Research Centre for International Development (CIRAD), just released the proceedings and extended abstracts of the digital workshop on natural rubber systems and climate change organized on 23-25th June 2020. Video recordings of all the sessions from the workshop can be streamed below.

Download the [PDF]

Natural rubber is a key global commodity, above 85% produced by small-holder farmers. As recalled by Datuk Dr Abdul Aziz S.A. Kadir, Secretary General of the IRRDB, “Natural rubber sustains 13 million small holders and 40 million people including their families”. It has a great potential to contribute to sustainable development, both poverty alleviation and rural development, and to the bio-economy. However, as emphasized by Jerome Sainte Beuve, Rubber Value Chain Correspondent, CIRAD “climate change is already impacting rubber production”. As stated by Dr Vincent Gitz, Director of FTA, “Natural rubber has a key role to play for both adaptation and mitigation of climate change”. There is an urgent need to understand how global natural rubber production can be safeguarded and sustainably increased on a lasting basis under climate change, while contributing to climate mitigation goals.

Salvatore Pinizzotto, Secretary General of the IRSG emphasized that “Climate action needs to be grounded on science, on a common understanding of issues and means to address them”.

This is why the International Rubber Study Group (IRSG), with the International Rubber Research and Development Board (IRRDB), the CGIAR research program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (FTA) led by the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), and the French Agricultural Research Centre for International Development (CIRAD), organized an open digital workshop on natural rubber systems and climate change on 23-25th June 2020.

The workshop reviewed recent research results on impacts of climate change on natural rubber production, potential means of adaptation and contribution to mitigation of climate change, to identify knowledge and research gaps as well as recommendations for action.

The workshop considered:

  • the impact of climate change on natural rubber systems and potential changes in the geography of production (session 1)
  • the role of natural rubber systems for climate mitigation and adaptation (session 2)
  • the integration of natural rubber systems in the broad perspective of climate change and sustainability policies (session 3) and in the international discussions on climate change (session 4)

and reflected on a way forward for the sector (session 5).

Natural rubber is a strategic raw material essential for human being mobility, welfare and safety. Furthermore, it is a resource of economic prosperity for many countries and communities worldwide. IRSG, together with CIFOR/FTA, CIRAD and IRRDB believes that there is no time to wait for the rubber sector and industry to initiate actions, together. This workshop, by reviewing existing knowledge, identifying gaps and bringing relevant information to the climate change community and to decision makers can play a major role in raising the visibility of natural rubber and its responses to climate change challenges.

Rubber tree plantation in Indonesia. Photo by Ryan Woo/CIFOR

The first session (divided in 3 sub-sessions) reviewed the state of knowledge about climate change impacts on natural rubber production systems, now and in the future. Rubber production is already impacted by increased variability, droughts, changes in rain patterns, extreme events. Little is known on potential effects of higher average temperatures on the physiology of rubber trees and thus on latex flows. Of particular concern are also increased risks of fungal attacks. The impacts of climate change are different in the different natural rubber producing regions, with potential effects on geographical distribution.  There are a lot of useful results from the research conducted these last 10-15 years with important findings for adaptation through management and breeding for traditional as well as marginal areas.










Session 2 (divided in 2 sub-sessions) considered how can rubber contribute to climate change mitigation and the role of rubber systems for adaptation. Two types of complementary strategies are available for adaptation of rubber cultivation to climate change: improved Hevea genetic resources, and climate-resilient agronomic practices.  Regarding breeding, the use of modern technologies and new genomic selection methods, such as genomic marker assisted selection, can fast forward the development of climate-resilient, high yielding clones, with an optimized use of the germplasm (looking especially to other Hevea species). International cooperation is key, for multinational clone exchanges and for testing. Going forward, this also raises many R&D avenues on improved land management through optimized agricultural practices including agroforestry, integrating carbon offsets into the rubber plantation economy, as well as new downstream applications of natural rubber as a green substitute to synthetic rubber.







Session 3 considered the Opportunities for better integrating natural rubber in broad Climate Change and Sustainability Policies, including Economic and Social Dimensions. Natural rubber, as a renewable material, and because of its contribution to the livelihoods of millions of small holders has a considerable potential to contribute to sustainable development in its three dimensions, economic, social and environmental.  It offers a good opportunity to be part of future economic development trends towards a circular, forest-products based bioeconomy. It is a natural product with many positive characteristics which make it an essential part of plastic substitution and future uses in industry, textiles/footwear, and construction. Mechanims in place in other tree-commodity sectors, reviewed at the workshop, can provide starting points to develop similar initiatives for the rubber sector to strengthen sustainable production and consumption.




Session 4, titled “Rubber and Climate Change in the International Fora” explored the possible pathways to raise the importance of the rubber sector at international level in relation to Climate Change. A strong partnership among stakeholders in the natural rubber value chain can bring discussion on integration of rubber in mitigation policies, measures, and adaptation policies in the wider climate dialogues.




In session 5, the final panel, building upon the findings of the previous sessions, discussed a way forward for the sector to fully tackle climate-change related challenges. Natural rubber has a key role to play for both adaptation and mitigation of climate change. It is an important land user, a producer of renewable materials (rubber and wood), a major economic activity in many countries, supporting the livelihoods of millions of small holders. However, this role is not properly accounted for. The participating organizations are calling to build upon the workshop to construct a follow-up agenda on natural rubber systems and climate change. They are now bringing the related issues to the awareness of a greater range of stakeholders, including climate policy makers. Part of this goes by bringing rubber as a discussion topic to the UNFCCC.





The document:

Pinizzotto S, Aziz A, Gitz V, Sainte-Beuve J, Nair L, Gohet E, Penot E and Meybeck A. 2021. Natural rubber systems and climate change: Proceedings and extended abstracts from the online workshop, 23–25 June 2020. Working Paper 9. Bogor, Indonesia: The CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (FTA).


This article was produced by the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (FTA). FTA is the world’s largest research for development program to enhance the role of forests, trees and agroforestry in sustainable development and food security and to address climate change. CIFOR leads FTA in partnership with ICRAF, The Alliance of Bioversity and CIAT, CATIE, CIRAD, INBAR and TBI. FTA’s work is supported by the CGIAR Trust Fund.


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Uganda now has a new 10-year National Bamboo Strategy and Action Plan

Uganda now has a new 10-year National Bamboo Strategy and Action Plan


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Monopodial bamboo. Copyright: International Bamboo and Rattan Organisation (INBAR)
Posted by

FTA communications

FTA provided key technical and financial support for the strategy

Bamboo is extremely versatile. Its sturdy, wood-like nature makes it useful in construction, and it is also a source of paper, packaging, furniture and fabric. It can be used to produce biofuels, charcoal and crafts, as well as stick-based products like curtains, mats, toothpicks, incense sticks and skewers. It is also a source of fuelwood and fodder.

A bamboo house in Uganda. As well as handicrafts, furniture, fuel and fodder, bamboo can also be a durable construction material. Copyright: International Bamboo and Rattan Organisation (INBAR)

As one of the fastest-growing plants in the world, it is a major carbon sink. It acts as a windbreak and its  extensive root systems help control soil erosion, prevent flooding and landslides, retain moisture and raise water tables, thereby reversing desertification. Various iconic animals, including panda, gorilla and monkeys, rely on bamboo for food and shelter. Managed sustainably, it could help many countries reach their global land restoration, climate change and sustainable development commitments.

Yet it is often seen as the poor cousin to timber – viewed as less durable and with few market opportunities.

Uganda has 55,000 hectares of bamboo, including species that can be used for everything from fodder and fuel to furniture and flooring. But, despite high demand for bamboo as a construction material, few farmers are planting the crop, and the country is missing out on a global market worth an estimated USD 60 billion.

“Bamboo has huge potential in terms of timber substitute products, energy products, fiber products, furniture and crafts, as well as soil and water conservation, and climate change mitigation and adaptation,” said Michael Malinga, Uganda National Coordinator for the International Bamboo and Rattan Organisation (INBAR).

Riders on a bamboo bike tour in Uganda, in 2018, to raise awareness about the plant’s potential uses (the frame of all the bicycles is made out of bamboo – light and solid). Copyright: International Bamboo and Rattan Organisation (INBAR)

“Bamboo can be an available, scalable solution to some of Uganda’s pressing development challenges, but as in other countries, Uganda’s bamboo sector needs a more supportive policy environment to reach its full potential,” said Charlotte King, INBAR’s communications and press specialist.

Fast-growing, versatile and easy to process, bamboo grows across much of East Africa. Copyright: International Bamboo and Rattan Organisation (INBAR).

New plan for bamboo

Now, that potential will be more fully tapped, as Uganda begins to implement its National Bamboo Strategy and Action Plan for 2019–2029. With technical and financial support from INBAR/FTA, the Ugandan Forest Sector Support Division (FSSD), the Ministry of Water and Environment (MoWE) and the National Forestry Authority (NFA) developed the strategy in 2019.

Research by INBAR’s Dutch-Sino-East Africa Bamboo Development Programme generated important evidence about the potential significance and contributions of bamboo to sustainable growth in Uganda, informing key aspects of the strategy. This included a regional remote sensing assessment, a property test of indigenous bamboo species, a value chain analysis and training materials.

“The focus of Uganda’s bamboo strategy is on managing the country’s bamboo resources to provide economic, social and environment benefits for all. Its vision, goal, guiding principles, strategic objectives and strategies are all tailored towards achieving a viable and sustainable bamboo industry in Uganda,” said Malinga.

The strategy is in line with international obligations to which Uganda is a signatory, like the UN Sustainable Development Agenda, as well as with national policies and planning frameworks such as the Uganda Vision 2040, the Uganda Forestry Policy 2001, the National Forest Plan 2012, the National Land Use Policy 2013, and the National Energy Policy 2002.

The strategy was approved and released by Hon. Dr Goretti Kitutu Kimono, Uganda’s Minister of State for Environment, on 24 September 2019 in Kampala. “This strategy will go a long way in redeeming the bamboo industry in this country. Bamboo could help Uganda to restore forests and create jobs,” said Dr Goretti.

A collaborative effort

A wide range of stakeholders were involved in the consultative process to develop the Bamboo Strategy and Action Plan. Two national-level stakeholder consultation workshops and a series of internal reviews from task forces, as well as senior management of the Ministry of Water and Environment, National Forestry Authority (NFA) and FTA partner the International Bamboo and Rattan Organisation (INBAR), contributed to the development and validation process.

One of the highlights of the latest FTA Annual Report

The overall goal of the strategy is to ensure the coordinated development of the bamboo industry to stimulate green economic development and the production of high-value products for domestic, regional and international markets.

Planting and managing bamboo will contribute an estimated 15% towards Uganda’s goal of restoring 2.5 million ha of forest landscape by 2030, of which about 28% will be on government land and the remaining on private land. The Ministry of Water and Environment estimates that the strategy will help create 150,000 full-time jobs, producing 140 million bamboo poles each year.

Long term, this could lead to the creation of 700,000 full time jobs, with 230,000 ha of bamboo planted on farms and 60,000 ha of regenerated natural bamboo forest.

Early growth

Progress is well underway, and Phase II of the Dutch-Sino-East Africa Bamboo Development Programme for Uganda was designed in response to the strategy. Collaborative efforts by various stakeholders are under way to assess the country’s potential for bamboo industrialization. This is expected to supplement the information on suitable species of bamboo.

In 2020, researchers identified bamboo-growing areas and grouped them in the following clusters:

  • West Nile
  • Mt Elgon
  • Western
  • Acholi
  • South Western
  • Karamoja
  • Albertine
  • Teso

The clusters were ranked according to present status, potential for participating households, bamboo resource base, gender dynamics, current business/marketing practices, and product knowledge and skills, among other criteria. The team also started developing specific clusters for integrated bamboo development, in partnership with the National Forestry Resources Research Institute of Uganda.

The government of Uganda began the process of developing bamboo clusters for small and medium-sized enterprises and industries, tasking an ad hoc committee to develop a plan on how the country will advance the bamboo sector, and also advocate for the inclusion of bamboo in the National Development Agenda.

Planting bamboo does not stop with the pandemic! Moments during INBAR’s bamboo propagation techniques training in Moyo (23/9/2020). Copyright: International Bamboo and Rattan Organisation (INBAR)

Despite the COVID 19 pandemic, the Ministry of Water and Environment planted nearly 80 ha of bamboo in several districts, along with over 2,000 seedlings in terraces around Echuya Forest Reserve communities to protect their hills from soil erosion. This was done in partnership with INBAR and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and local partner the Mgahinga Craft and Cultural Centre.

More on-the-ground workshops! INBAR’s bamboo propagation techniques training at the National Tree Seed Centre in Namanve, Wakiso near Kampala (19/9/2020). Copyright: International Bamboo and Rattan Organisation (INBAR)
A shot from INBAR’s bamboo propagation techniques training in Kabale (15/9/2020). Copyright: International Bamboo and Rattan Organisation (INBAR)

By the end of July 2020, the production of quality bamboo seedlings had reached over 500,000 from government and community-based nurseries, while private enterprises had produced over 2 million seedlings. And by the end of August, 144,000 seedlings were supplied to the refugee-hosting districts of Kikuube and Moyo, of which 29,600 seedlings were planted as a buffer in Bugoma and Era central forest reserves, which are in close proximity to refugee settlements. Seed imports amounted to 16 kg of quality bamboo germplasm, and another 18 kg were already in transit – an amount capable of producing more than 400,000 seedlings.

A bamboo nursery established as part of the INBAR-led Dutch-Sino-East Africa Bamboo Development Programme. Copyright: International Bamboo and Rattan Organisation (INBAR)

Finally, although the pandemic restrictions limited awareness-raising efforts to virtual channels, INBAR organized 10 online seminars between July and August, around two themes: environmental management of bamboo, and bamboo for poverty reduction and livelihood development. The topic of bamboo also featured in a talk show on the current state of Uganda’s forestry sector on the country’s NBS TV channel.

“INBAR is proud to have worked with Uganda’s Ministry of Water and Environment to support the development of this bamboo strategy, which should be an important step forward for the sector’s development,” said King.  


This article was written by Erin O’Connell.

Produced by the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (FTA) together with one of its managing partners, the International Bamboo and Rattan Organisation (INBAR). FTA is the world’s largest research for development program to enhance the role of forests, trees and agroforestry in sustainable development and food security and to address climate change. CIFOR leads FTA in partnership with Bioversity International, CATIE, CIRAD, INBAR, ICRAF and TBI. FTA’s work is supported by the CGIAR Trust Fund.


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Natural Rubber Systems and Climate Change - Materials from the workshop

Natural Rubber Systems and Climate Change – Materials from the workshop


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

Last June 23-25, together with the International Rubber Study Group (IRSG), the International Rubber Research and development Board (IRRDB) and the French Agricultural Research Centre for International Development (CIRAD), FTA organized a digital workshop on natural rubber systems and climate change.

With over 500 registered attendees, the 3-day event showcased 30 presentations with the most recent research on the correlations between climate change and rubber production, with discussions on adaptation strategies and the potential that rubber plantations can offer to mitigate the effects of climate change.

The workshop was an occasion to stir a lively debate with the audience and to underline the research gaps and identify recommendations for future actions.

Now all presentations are available to download and recordings of all sessions can be replayed fully.

Click here to access everything!

 


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Agroforestry to heal damaged land from fires

Agroforestry to heal damaged land from fires


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Agroforestry systems have a great potential for enhancing biodiversity by combining conservation with production
Posted by

FTA communications

By Florencia Montagnini, originally posted on the World Agroforestry website.

‘Well-written book useful to farmers, foresters, landowners and policy makers,’ says world expert in agroforestry in Latin America at Yale

Agroforestry systems (AFS), which combine trees and crops on the same land, can increase productivity in the short and long term while promoting biodiversity and bringing social, environmental and economic benefits to the farmer and society. They are also increasingly relevant in conservation, adaptation and mitigation of climate change, and restoration of degraded ecosystems.

This is the premise of Agroforestry Systems for Agroecological Restoration: How to reconcile conservation with Production, Options for the Cerrado and the Caatingaa book just released in English. Rich in technical and scientific information, it will be useful to many. Brazil’s Ministry of Environment has reprinted 4000 copies of the Portuguese version since it was published in 2016.

mapThe Cerrado and Caatinga are two vast biomes that are less well known outside Brazil than the Amazon rainforest but are also critically important, not only for the country, and are both facing formidable threats.

The Cerrado is a savannah, South America’s largest and the world’s most biodiverse. Interspersed with forest, its 2 million km² provide livelihoods to about 470,000 small farming families, over 80 indigenous groups, and groups like extractivists, which include rubber tappers, and quilombola communities founded by escaped slaves.

‘Some have lived there for hundreds of years and live with its diversity and extract its natural resources sustainably, while others still depend on traditional slash-and-burn,’ says the book. But rather than being a rural idyll, the Cerrado is ‘one of the world’s most endangered ecosystems due to the expansion of mechanized agriculture and the annual monocropping of soybeans, maize and cotton.’

These and other activities, such as the opening of new areas for livestock, new forests planted for pulp and charcoal, and new hydroelectric dams, lead to the clearing of some 30,000 km² per year. The Cerrado – known as ‘the cradle of water in Brazil’ – also saw an 800% rise in fires in 2019. According to the book, agroforestry could offer a solution for these problems: ‘AFS are excellent alternatives, because they respect the potential of local resources and the region’s ecological and productive possibilities.’

Geraizeiro community crossing a spring in the Cerrado of Northern Minas Gerais State. Photo: Peter Caton/ISPN
Geraizeiro community crossing a spring in the Cerrado of Northern Minas Gerais State. Photo: Peter Caton/ISPN

The Caatinga is South America’s largest dry tropical forest, covering about 844,000 km². ‘Life is extremely hard for locals, known as sertanejos,’ says the book. ‘Ever since Brazil was colonized by Europeans, the region has suffered from forest clearing for cattle grazing and charcoal production, which are still its main economic activities. Its plant cover had declined by nearly 50% by 2009.’

book coverIn the Caatinga, agroforestry systems to produce animal feed, short-cycle crops and fruit-bearing trees can improve the quality of life for farming families and others of its 27 million inhabitants, who face longstanding drought. The practice of agroforestry, says the book, can also reduce socioeconomic inequality, reverse desertification, counter soil degradation soils, and protect and make better use of native vegetation.

The book was funded by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), and its lead author is Andrew Miccolis, who heads World Agroforestry in Brazil. Its five chapters begin with basic concepts of ecological and landscape restoration, using a multidisciplinary, holistic approach. Likewise, several chapters present the definition of agroforestry systems and their most frequent types with details on design, implementation, financial analysis and adoption.

Andrew Miccolis, lead author
Andrew Miccolis, lead author

In total, the authors describe 11 agroforestry systems practiced in the cerrados and caatingas, placing emphasis on farmer objectives, key species, and management practices. The description of one specific system to restore a riparian zone begins with ‘No agrochemicals or heavy machinery should be used.’ The next step in this process is to plant ‘a row of fruit, wood and biomass trees (as well as bananas) followed by rows of ornamental plants, food crops and medicinal herbs’ because many of these species ‘play an important role in occupying the lower stories, maintaining microclimate and replacing grass, which is a major contributor to forest fires’. It further advises ‘intensive management of the cultivated strips and selective weeding and pruning in the natural regeneration strips to promote succession. Resulting organic matter should be piled around the native plants valued by the farmer’.

Backed by up-to-date literature, such highly detailed passages are good examples of where productive agriculture can achieve food security, landscape restoration, biodiversity conservation, and climate change resiliency, using appropriate agricultural practices that support functioning agroecosystems.

The book also displays testimonies from practitioners. Luiz Pereira Cirqueira from Araguaia in the Cerrado compares the meagre returns from five cattle on a hectare of grass with the far higher returns from a hectare of cassava with trees, saying ‘The agroforest is the way I found to make a living and I’m happy, which makes me an example for others.’

illustration

From Ceará state, farmer Ernaldo Expedito de Sá describes how agroforestry transformed his land in the Caatinga. “This area was very ugly. It was nearly all desertified, which is what happens to fallow land if you don’t feed it or protect it, out in the sun all day. Then ten years ago, I met Chico and Elviro, who were working with AFS. My dream was to produce food both for me and nature too.’

The authors also place emphasis on the use of species for recovering degraded areas, a section which is particularly beautifully illustrated. ‘Species able to store water can be vital for situations with extreme water shortage, including most of the Caatinga and Cerrado, where the

Xylopods, veritable water tanks. Source: https://goo.gl/0x4Q0z
Xylopods, veritable water tanks. Source: https://goo.gl/0x4Q0z

yearly dry season is well-defined and prolonged,’ says the book, adding that some species like Jacaratia spinosa and cajá-mirim

(Spondias purpurea var. lutea) have underground storage structures called xylopods that are ‘veritable water tanks’.


The conversion of degraded, simplified systems to diverse, agroecological, resilient systems is challenging, and the scaling-up of these systems will require a combination of scientific and technological innovation, policy, economic, and market incentives tailored to different scales.

The book lays out how AFS can be a tool for rural development and provides a series of successful experiences that are also in use or can be used in other tropical dry regions of Latin America as well. It is greatly enriched by diagrams, figures and excellent pictures of the AFS and other land uses, which will make it particularly useful to farmers, foresters, landowners, land managers, land use planners, and policy makers researchers and students at academic institutions. Though focused mainly on family farmers, its techniques and options can also be applied by medium to larger farmers.

Agrosilvocultural system
Agrosilvocultural system

Agroforestry Systems for Agroecological Restoration is a welcome addition to reading lists of textbooks on agroforestry and restoration that can be used by instructors and students of a full range of educational levels. It is very pleasant to read and a welcome addition to the assemblage of published works on restoration and AFS with interest and emphasis on both Latin America and worldwide.

The book can be purchased at no profit to ICRAF from Amazon.co.uk HERE or downloaded from the link below.

Reviewer Yale’s Florencia Montagnini has written ten books on agroforestry in Latin America.

Florencia Montagnini is a Senior Research Scientist and Director, Program in Tropical Forestry and Agroforestry at the School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale University. Dr. Montagnini has written ten books on agroforestry systems and ecological restoration, including a major textbook in tropical forest ecology and management, and over 250 scientific articles. She participates in Yale’s Environmental Leadership Training Initiatives (ELTI) and teaches and advises individual project courses in agroforestry, landscape restoration, and soil conservation and management. She holds honorary professorships at several universities in Latin America.

Miccolis A, Peneireiro F, Marques H, Vieira D, Arco-Verde F, Hoffmann M, Rehder T, Pereira A. 2019. Agroforestry Systems for Agroecological Restoration: How to reconcile conservation with Production, Options for the Cerrado and the Caatinga (English edition) World Agroforestry. Instituto Sociedade, População e Natureza. Brasilia. 240 pp.


This research was conducted by World Agroforestry (ICRAF) as part of the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry, the world’s largest research-for-development program to enhance the role of forests, trees and agroforestry in sustainable development and food security and to address climate change. The Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) leads the Research Program in partnership with Bioversity International, Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza (CATIE), Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement (CIRAD), International Bamboo and Rattan Organisation (INBAR), ICRAF and Tropenbos International (TBI). The work of the Research Program is supported by the CGIAR Trust Fund.


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Time to rethink the role of trees, forests and agroforestry in the fight against climate change

Time to rethink the role of trees, forests and agroforestry in the fight against climate change


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Open lands used for cabbage plantations in Sukabumi, Jawa Barat, Indonesia. Photo by R.Martin/CIFOR
Posted by

FTA communications

The role of forests and trees in mitigating climate change and capturing and storing carbon in biomass and soil is well recognized. Over the past few decades, a variety of schemes, including REDD, REDD+,  4per1000 and AFR100 have been designed to leverage this mitigation potential.

An Acai nursery in Acre, Brazil. Photo by K. Evans/CIFOR

However, much less attention has been given to the role of forests and trees in helping farmers and farm systems adapt to climate change. Today, with climate change impacts already having immediate, dramatic impacts on smallholder farmers, it is time to have a more balanced approach.

That’s why we are calling for a shift of focus from trees and mitigation to trees and adaptation. There is a need to explore what forests, trees and agroforestry can bring to the adaptation of other sectors, particularly agriculture.

This coincides with a need to change perspectives, from a dominant global perspective centered on carbon, to a local perspective centered on what works for farmers in a particular place. There is growing understanding that tree planting initiatives for mitigation won’t happen unless they benefit farmers locally. Farmers, however, will plant trees if they see how they help their livelihood systems become more resilient to climate change.

At the recent 4th World Congress on Agroforestry, our colleagues from the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (FTA) gave a series of presentations that illustrates this farmer-centered, place-based approach. They showed how agroforestry can allow farmers to adapt to climate change, improve their livelihoods and contribute to resilient systems, while also working toward mitigation objectives.

Read also: Agroforestry: Development underdog headed for center stage in global sustainability efforts

Trees for adaptation

During the congress, Roeland Kindt (ICRAF) and collaborators presented their work on a climate change atlas being prepared for Africa, with habitat change projected for 150 tree species native to Africa. This work follows a publication by World Agroforestry (ICRAF), in collaboration with Bioversity International, CATIE and Hivos, on habitat suitability maps for 54 tree species that are widely used in Central America for shade in coffee or cocoa agroforestry systems.

Tea pickers at work in Pangkalan Limus village, Mount Halimun Salak National Park, West Java, Indonesia. Photo by A. Erlangga/CIFOR

To adapt to climate change, preserving the diversity of genetic resources is crucial. Alice Muchugi (ICRAF) and collaborators explored the challenges relating to the conservation of high-value tree genetic resources and proposed options to facilitate their conservation and use.

In order to better achieve restoration targets through agroforestry, Lalisa Duguma (ICRAF) and collaborators proposed to change the discourse from “tree planting” to “tree growing”. They highlighted the discrepancy between the short time span of most restoration projects and the time needed to ensure a good survival rate of planted trees, especially when accounting for future shifts in climate.

Soil organic carbon

The increase of soil organic carbon, an indicator of carbon sequestered, should also be seen as an adaptation measure. It is key to soil fertility and to water retention and storage in the soil. It  can therefore help boost and stabilize the productivity of agroforestry systems, even in the face of climate change impacts.

A study by Sari Pitkänen and collaborators conducted in Southeast Sulawesi, Indonesia, showed that carbon stocks in agroforestry systems correlate with tree diversity.

Amango plantation in Yalka village, Burkina Faso. Photo by O. Girard/CIFOR

However, despite knowing the importance of soil organic carbon, measuring it has long been slow, expensive and difficult to standardize. In response to this, Keith Shepherd and collaborators from ICRAF have tested infrared spectroscopy technology that can provide a robust, low-cost, integrated indicator of soil organic carbon levels. They have demonstrated that inexpensive handheld infrared instruments can be used for measuring soil health changes.

Being able to easily measure soil organic carbon levels allows for evaluating the impacts of restoration initiatives. In another study, Ermias Aynekulu (ICRAF) and collaborators examined the effects of two decades of annual prescribed burning of grazing lands in Burkina Faso and three decades of livestock exclosures in Ethiopia.

Shepherd suggested prioritizing efforts to promote good land management practices at scale to prevent carbon losses, rather than trying to restore already degraded land. This would mean looking at policy interventions to prevent degradation and maintain or enhance soil fertility – for example by promoting agroforestry practices.

Read also: A five-part road map for how to succeed with agroforestry

Local knowledge and land restoration

Land restoration can play a considerable role in addressing climate change, both adaptation and mitigation, and for this agroforestry is key. Several presentations at the congress explored some of the dimensions that determine the likelihood of success for restoration projects. Key among these factors were accounting for and leveraging local knowledge.

A farmer in Tintilou village, Burkina Faso. Photo by O. Girard for Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR).

Mary Crossland (Bangor University) and collaborators, in a study in northwest Ethiopia, noted that national objectives and local perceptions and priorities are often different. Local actors are often reluctant to accept the exclosure of areas that are not yet highly degraded, even though it has been shown to be a more effective strategy than focusing on very degraded land. Farmers with a large amount of livestock or little land were strongly opposed to exclosures. This example shows the need to understand how livelihoods interact with different restoration interventions and to take measures that compensate for their impacts on the most vulnerable people.

Anne Kuria (ICRAF) and collaborators explored the role local knowledge can play in adapting land restoration options to local contexts and farmers’ circumstances in Ethiopian drylands. Farmers identified 12 contextual factors that influence the suitability of restoration options for local contexts. Biophysical factors were soil erosion type, soil type, soil depth, slope of the field, field location along a slope and field size. Socioeconomic factors were livestock management systems, land tenure systems, labor, gender, technology and skills. This study also demonstrated that farmers utilized their local knowledge to adapt and modify land restoration interventions to suit their needs and context.

Making agroforestry count

Understanding the potential of agroforestry as a climate change adaptation strategy is one thing, but how can it become a key element of countries’ climate policies?

Here, key mechanisms are the national adaptation plans (NAPs) that countries are preparing under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) as an opportunity. Ninety-one countries are currently in the process of developing their national adaptation plans.

An organic cabbage plantation on the mountain of Gede Pangrango Sukabumi, West Java, Indonesia. Photo by R. Martin/CIFOR

In a review that we conducted of the 15 national adaptation plans published so far, the word ‘agroforestry’ is present in two-thirds of the plans, but agroforestry practices are referenced more frequently, as a means of adaptation and as serving a great variety of purposes related to natural resource management. These include restoring degraded land, reducing soil erosion, restoring water catchments, protecting water tanks and rivers, protecting against wind and storms and providing shade.

These recommendations generally focus on single biophysical benefits and often neglect integration of the trees with other crops as well as agroforestry’s potential socioeconomic benefits. The NAPs are generally silent on measures related to the enabling environment needed for planting trees, such as measures for tenure as well as seed and seedling systems.

Because the UNFCCC clearly says that the NAPs have to be guided by the “best available science”, we now have a huge responsibility to bring scientific information to the attention of decision-makers.

By Vincent Gitz, Director, FTA and Alexandre Meybeck, Senior Technical Advisor, FTA.


The CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (FTA) is the world’s largest research for development program to enhance the role of forests, trees and agroforestry in sustainable development and food security and to address climate change. CIFOR leads FTA in partnership with Bioversity International, CATIE, CIRAD, ICRAF, INBAR and TBI. FTA’s work is supported by the CGIAR Trust Fund.


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Connecting the policy dots: linking adaptation, mitigation and sustainable development for climate-resilient land use planning

Connecting the policy dots: linking adaptation, mitigation and sustainable development for climate-resilient land use planning


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 TEAM

In the land use sector mitigation, adaptation and development policies are all closely linked and can impact each other in positive and negative ways. It is therefore essential that these relationships are taken into account in order to enhance synergies and avoid or reduce trade-offs. This can be achieved through a specific form of Climate Policy Integration (CPI), which integrates first mitigation and adaptation policy processes and subsequently mainstreams climate policies into development processes. We have explored these processes through case studies in the land use sectors of Brazil and Indonesia. CPI in the land use sector presents a number of challenges related to cross-sectoral and cross-level integration. Unless a governmental CPI authority mandates that sectoral ministries integrate their efforts, sectoral competition over control of decision-making processes may prevail, hampering CPI. Cross-level integration is weakened by differences in understanding, priorities and power across levels of governance.


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Climate-smart land use requires local solutions, transdisciplinary research, policy coherence and transparency

Climate-smart land use requires local solutions, transdisciplinary research, policy coherence and transparency


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 TEAM

Successfully meeting the mitigation and adaptation targets of the Paris Climate Agreement (PA) will depend on strengthening the ties between forests and agriculture. Climate-smart land use can be achieved by integrating climate-smart agriculture (CSA) and REDD+. The focus on agriculture for food security within a changing climate, and on forests for climate change mitigation and adaptation, can be achieved simultaneously with a transformational change in the land-use sector. Striving for both independently will lead to competition for land, inefficiencies in monitoring and conflicting agendas. Practical solutions exist for specific contexts that can lead to increased agricultural output and forest protection. Landscape-level emissions accounting can be used to identify these practices. Transdisciplinary research agendas can identify and prioritize solutions and targets for integrated mitigation and adaptation interventions. Policy coherence must be achieved at a number of levels, from international to local, to avoid conflicting incentives. Transparency must lastly be integrated, through collaborative design of projects, and open data and methods. Climate-smart land use requires all these elements, and will increase the likelihood of successful REDD+ and CSA interventions. This will support the PA as well as other initiatives as part of the Sustainable Development Goals.


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Where the land meets the sea: Governing mangrove forests

Where the land meets the sea: Governing mangrove forests


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Mangroves in East Kalimantan, Indonesia. Photo: Sigit Deni Sasmito/CIFOR
Posted by

FTA

Mangroves in East Kalimantan, Indonesia. Photo: Sigit Deni Sasmito/CIFOR
Mangroves in Kalimantan, Indonesia. Photo: Sigit Deni Sasmito/CIFOR

By Kate Evans, originally published at CIFOR’s Forests News

On December 26, 2004, a magnitude 9.1 earthquake off Sumatra, Indonesia, swept a massive tsunami across the Indian Ocean. The wave forged two kilometers inland in some places, and wiped out towns, crops, lives and livelihoods. In Indonesia’s Aceh province alone, 167,000 people died.

Could anything have reduced its devastating impact? In the tsunami’s wake, global attention fell on the potential of mangroves. Many of Indonesia’s mangrove forests had been cleared prior to 2004 to make way for shrimp farms – and subsequent research showed that mangroves and other forests can help protect coastlines and people from the force of tsunamis, hurricanes, and rising sea levels.

The indigenous people of Pahawang Island already knew that, though. In the 1980s and 1990s, the mangrove forests fringing their island – a speck in a bay at the eastern end of Sumatra – were over-exploited. They were turned into charcoal by Korean companies, cut down for timber, and converted to fish-ponds by migrants from East Java.

By the early 2000s, coastal erosion had become a huge problem for the islanders. Houses, agricultural land and fish-ponds were swept away in storms; fish no longer bred amongst the looping mangrove roots; and malaria and dengue outbreaks became more common.

So village leaders got together and pioneered their own, innovative governance system for their mangroves. They developed an organizational structure, and divided the mangrove area into three territories – a strict protection zone, an area where only non-timber products like firewood could be gathered, and a ‘utilization zone’ where limited timber harvesting was allowed. They also identified areas for reforesting, and secured seedlings and funding.

There’s much to be learned from local experiences like these, say scientists from the Center for International Forestry Research, who have just released a new global study on mangrove governance, involving both a review of international literature and case studies in Indonesia and Tanzania.


BENEFITS OF A BOTTOM-UP APPROACH

“In Indonesia they were very clear: they managed their mangroves to protect their lives, livelihoods and assets from storm surges, from the sea,” says Esther Mwangi, who helped lead the overarching study. “The mangroves are an important buffer against the energy and the strength of the ocean.”

Mani Ram Banjade led the on-the-ground research in Indonesia, focusing on three villages in Lampung province.

 

A researcher measures the diameter of mangrove trees in Kubu Raya, West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Photo: Kate Evans
A researcher measures the diameter of mangrove trees in Kubu Raya, West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Photo: Kate Evans

In Pahawang especially, mangrove protection was a very bottom-up affair.

“The local community leaders took the initiative and developed their own rules, regulations and governance mechanisms. Then they got the approval from the local government as well, and from their personal and political connections they also got some resources from outside.”

It worked so well in Pahawang, he says, because the local government recognised the islanders’ rights over the land and supported their efforts – and because strong leaders harnessed community awareness of the role of mangroves in coastal protection.

“Even if they’re not getting a direct economic benefit from the mangrove, they still value its conservation,” says Banjade.

“It’s a good model,” says Steven Lawry, CIFOR’s Director of Forests and Governance Research, who also worked on the report. “This is an example of how strong leadership and persistence have led to good outcomes with respect to local mangrove conservation. People are out there up to their waists in water, planting mangroves, because they see the importance to their livelihoods.”

BREAKING THE SILOS

In many places worldwide, these kinds of bottom up approaches to governance are necessary, because mangroves often fall through the cracks at the national level, says Mwangi.

Washed by the tides, simultaneously of the land and of the sea, mangroves don’t neatly fit into governance structures. Globally, it’s rare for countries to have specific rules for mangroves. They’re either governed under a hodgepodge of two or three ministries, or they fall under the forestry department.

That isn’t a perfect match, says Mwangi.

“In mangrove forests, the timber is not the biggest thing – the value is in coastal protection, fisheries, carbon sequestration – things that are not forestry. And yet this resource has been placed in the hands of forestry departments. So there is a bit of a tension.”

Where governance is spread among multiple ministries, coordination is a problem. And many efforts to improve it have failed. Indonesia put together a mangrove management and coordination plan in 2012 – but it hasn’t yet been fully implemented.

Even more telling is the case of Tanzania. In 1991 it was one of the first countries to create an integrated management plan for mangroves – and yet to date, 25 years on, it too has not been implemented.

The reasons behind these failures is a prime area for future research, says Mwangi – but perhaps a better approach, she suggests, would be to bring in new legislation that is specific to mangroves, like the rules pioneered on Pahawang.

One could easily say the village regulations are substituting for a national, mangrove-specific regulation that is missing,” says Mwangi.

GENDER DYNAMICS IN CONSERVATION

Something that’s lacking at all levels – from fishing village to academia – is an appreciation of gender dynamics.

“In the literature review there was hardly anything on gender, and then when we looked at the ground level we saw exactly the same thing – a widespread gender blindness in mangrove management.”

People’s relationships to mangroves are gender-differentiated, Mwangi says. Women might gather firewood, while men harvest timber and fish.

Yet in both Tanzania and Indonesia, women rarely sat on management committees, and their participation in decision-making was curtailed in a number of ways.

In Tanzania, researchers found that meetings were often organized in the late afternoon, when most women were fetching firewood and water to cook the evening meal. When women were present, social customs dictated they sit behind the men and ‘say yes to everything’, even when they disagreed.

“Not only as a matter of right, but also in terms of being effective, it makes sense to have women on governance committees,” says Mwangi. “They too have knowledge and use the resource, so their presence and input in decision-making is important.”

Gender aside, there’s a lot national governments can learn from the innovative ways local communities are managing their mangroves. And it’s crucial those villages receive support and assistance to do that from regional and national bodies, Mwangi says.

“With good local leadership and support from others at different levels of government, communities can organise, develop rules and can work together to conserve their mangroves.”

The study found that a transition is underway in a few countries towards increased community participation in mangrove management. Though Latin America has been most enthusiastic, Tanzania’s government is also starting to experiment with community-based approaches in some mangrove areas, says Lawry.

That is encouraging, he says, because the traditional model of mangrove governance – strict top-down regimes that try to protect mangroves by locking local people out – hasn’t worked very well, in Tanzania, Indonesia and elsewhere.

“Despite government intentions to manage them sustainably, governance regimes are generally ineffective at conserving mangroves. They generally fail to involve communities, and at the some time they don’t effectively regulate large-scale commercial users of mangroves, with a result that mangrove loss is accelerating,” he says.

“Where we do see progress towards sustainable mangrove management, it’s in places where communities have clear rights, and they enjoy clear benefits.”


*This research was supported by USAID

For more information on this topic, please contact Esther Mwangi at e.mwangi@cgiar.org or Steven Lawry at s.lawry@cgiar.org.
This research forms part of the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry.

Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Where Land Meets the Sea: A Global Review of the Governance and Tenure Dimensions of Coastal Mangrove Forests

Where Land Meets the Sea: A Global Review of the Governance and Tenure Dimensions of Coastal Mangrove 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

Authors: Rotich, B.; Mwangi, E.; Lawry, S.

This report provides a synoptic analysis of the legal and governance frameworks that relate to the use and management of mangrove forests globally. It highlights the range of challenges typically encountered in the governance and tenure dimensions of mangrove forest management. This assessment forms part of a broader study that includes national-level assessments in Indonesia and Tanzania. It was carried out under the USAID-funded Tenure and Global Climate Change Program. The report provides information on the challenges for mangrove rehabilitation and restoration, legal frameworks for the governance of mangroves, mangrove governance and tenure in practice, and lessons in mangrove governance for policy and practice. Primary findings from this assessment show that authority over mangrove forest management is overwhelmingly vested in state institutions and that mangrove protection is a central objective. Given the ambiguous role of mangroves situated between the land and sea, the configuration of state authority for mangrove management is quite complex. In some countries, there is fragmentation of responsibilities across two or more agencies such as forests, fisheries, environment, and wildlife. This contributes to a high level of segmentation and jurisdictional ambiguity. Frameworks and mechanisms for enabling multi-sectoral coordination across agencies and governance levels are uncommon, and where they exist, they are difficult to put into practice.

Pages: 40p

Publisher: CIFOR and USAID Tenure and Global Climate Change Program, Bogor, Indonesia and Washington, DC

Publication Year: 2016


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Enhancing transparency in the land sector under the Paris Agreement: Non-state actors and corporate pledges, from rhetoric to reality

Enhancing transparency in the land sector under the Paris Agreement: Non-state actors and corporate pledges, from rhetoric to reality


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

FTA

Authors: Gnych, S.; Leonard, S.; Pacheco, P.; Lawry, S.; Martius, C.

Key messages

  • Article 13 of the Paris Agreement calls for enhanced transparency in climate actions. At the same time, non-state actors (NSAs) are increasingly referred to within the text of decisions and initiatives by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). However, the continued use of such a broad and undefined term to represent a complex set of stakeholders – ranging from academia to private sector, civil society to indigenous peoples groups – is unhelpful. There cannot be a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach to NSAs
  • The private sector is a complex and diverse sub-set of NSAs, with significant variations in capacity, motivations and priorities across companies and value chains. Their response to climate change will be key to setting and achieving the nationally determined contributions (NDCs) made by Parties to the UNFCCC.
  • A large number of international corporations have made voluntary commitments to reduce their negative environmental and social impacts in the agriculture and forestry sectors, within their own operations as well as those of third-party suppliers. Many of these pledges have now been registered on the UNFCCC non-state actor platform (NAZCA). As yet, however, there is no systematic way to track and verify these pledges and their impacts.
  • One major risk is that stringent and rapidly implemented corporate commitments related to sustainable and ‘deforestation free’ supply chains will exclude already marginalized smallholders, who often operate within broader informal economies, resulting in indirect detrimental social and environmental impacts. Aside from the Cancun safeguards, such risks remain unrecognized by the UNFCCC.
  • Public funds, such as the Green Climate Fund (GCF), could be used to financially support smallholders and small and medium enterprises (SMEs), and upgrade their production systems through the adoption of improved practices and by facilitating their access to sustainable supply chains.
  • Governments, indigenous peoples groups and civil society organizations, as well as corporations themselves, are monitoring the progress and impact of NSA pledges at different spatial scales. But significant challenges remain regarding the alignment of methods, metrics and data sets, disclosure of information, and the verification and monitoring of indirect impacts.
  • There is currently no systematic way to track delivery of voluntary commitments through transparent processes that are open to wider society. Additional efforts, including national and international political architectures are needed.
  • There is justification for the UNFCCC to develop guidance around NSA engagement in climate mitigation and adaptation actions. This can help to distinguish between different groups of NSAs and track the activities undertaken by diverse private sector actors, to better understand how they contribute to achieving NDCs.

Series: CIFOR Infobrief no. 157

Pages: 8p.

Publisher: Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Bogor, Indonesia

Publication Year: 2016

DOI: 10.17528/cifor/006257


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Climate change: Time to combine mitigation and adaptation

Climate change: Time to combine mitigation and adaptation


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
It is important to combine climate change mitigation (here ICRAF's SAMPLES program for smallholders) and adaptation. Photo: ICRAF
Posted by

FTA

It is important to combine climate change mitigation (here ICRAF's SAMPLES program for smallholders) and adaptation. Photo: ICRAF
It is important to combine climate change mitigation (here ICRAF’s SAMPLES program for smallholders) and adaptation measures. Photo: ICRAF

Yoly Gutierrez interviewed scientist Bruno Locatelli on improving the design of climate change projects, originally published at CIFOR’s Forests News

To combat climate change, one can avoid it via mitigation, or cope with it via adaptation. Even though these objectives are two sides of the same coin, their synergies and conflicts tend to be overlooked.

“Because of the way international negotiations and national policies have separated adaptation from mitigation, two different communities of practices have emerged and they don’t talk to each other,” says Bruno Locatelli, a scientist working for the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) and CIRAD, a French research institute specializing in international agricultural and development issues.

“This separation also occurs on the ground, as projects developed to fight climate change tend to match donor or policy requirements, which generally focus on either adaptation or mitigation.”

This conclusion was drawn after Locatelli and his colleagues analyzed 201 project documents from across Africa, Asia and Latin America. Researchers were surprised to find that 42 percent of the mitigation project documents mentioned a contribution to adaptation while 30 percent of the adaptation project documents mentioned a contribution to mitigation. What’s more, they found, most or all of these projects contained opportunities to contribute to the other objective.

Locatelli spoke with Forests News on the importance of marrying the two to achieve better results when it comes to climate change.


Why is it important for mitigation and adaptation strategies to be combined in climate policy?

In climate change discussions and negotiations, we tend to address the cause of climate change (via mitigation) and its consequences for people and ecosystems (via adaptation) separately. This makes sense analytically because mitigation and adaptation have effects at different timeframes (long vs. short term, respectively) and spatial scales (global vs. local). It makes also sense for some sectors; for example, energy tends to be concerned mostly by mitigation because of its large emissions, whereas health is mostly concerned by adaptation because of its sensitivity to climate variations, such as heat waves.

Photo: CIFOR

But when it comes to on-the-ground activities in land-use sectors such as forestry and agriculture, it does not make sense to separate adaptation and mitigation objectives because land-use management affects both the volume of emissions and the vulnerability of ecosystems and people to climate variations.

Forests and trees produce multiple ecosystem services that are relevant to fight climate change: they store carbon (mitigation) and they protect local communities from climate impacts (adaptation) by regulating water, reducing soil losses, protecting coasts from storms, and diversifying livelihoods.

When a mitigation project in forestry (such as a REDD+ project) aims at livelihood diversification, this may be a first step toward thinking how diversification can reduce people’s vulnerability to climate variations and toward increasing adaptive capacity.

You cannot say that you will plant one tree for its adaptation benefits and another one for its mitigation benefits. Focusing on solely one objective and forgetting the other can be dangerous because of the potential trade-offs and adverse effects.

What are some examples of these trades-offs?

An example is related to reforestation. If I want to maximize carbon sequestration in one area facing the problem of water scarcity and I start a forest plantation with intensive management and fast-growing tree species that consume a lot of water, it wouldn’t add up. Sure, I would achieve my goal of addressing global climate change by removing carbon from the atmosphere, but I would exacerbate the local water problems. People living downstream may suffer water shortages and become more vulnerable to climate change.


Another example is related to adaptation in agriculture. For example, I can reduce the vulnerability of agriculture to drought by using energy-intensive irrigation, or by increasing fertilization, both of which would emit more greenhouse gas. My crops would be less sensitive to climate change but I would contribute to an increase in global climate change.

It sounds contradictory, doesn’t it? But this is what happens when we think too narrowly about either adaptation or mitigation.

Photo: CIFOR
When I am sick, my doctor tries to fight the cause and the consequences of the disease at the same time. If an infection (the cause) results in high fever (the consequence) and a doctor gives me medicine that treats the infection but increases the fever, we are in the same situation as with mitigation initiatives having adverse effects on adaptation.

If this doctor gives me medicine that lowers the fever but increases the infection, we are in the same situation as with adaptation initiatives having adverse effects on mitigation. In both cases, the narrow analysis of the doctor can lead to severe problems. This is exactly what could happen with climate change initiatives that fail to see the big picture.

So should all projects and policies address adaptation and mitigation jointly?

We should not force the integration of adaptation and mitigation in all projects and policies. Project developers and policymakers must have a good reason to do it. But first, they must be aware that this is possible.

Many opportunities for integrating adaptation and mitigation in the agriculture and forestry sectors can be captured without forcing a marriage between adaptation and mitigation through the provision of adequate information, tools and guidance to project developers or policy makers, as well as by providing incentives.

How can international funds and standards help projects to harness synergies?

The institutional settings of most international climate funds do not create incentives for projects to search for synergies between adaptation and mitigation. International funds could provide more information and technical assistance, or prioritize projects that integrate both goals or assess the costs and benefits of considering the other goal. For example, mitigation projects that assess climate risks and decide on integrating adaptation.

There is hope that the development of the Green Climate Fund can lead to better consideration of synergies between adaptation and mitigation. This organization could ensure that projects capture opportunities to provide multiple adaptation and mitigation benefits without excessively increasing project cycle complexity and costs.

The Green Climate Fund could test innovative approaches to the integration of adaptation and mitigation and stimulate changes at the national level in recipient countries and at the local scale in projects, contributing to the mainstreaming of climate change in development.

International standards can also play a role in improving the integration of adaptation and mitigation. For example, we saw in our analysis that mitigation project documents developed in the framework of the Climate Community Biodiversity standards more often described adaptation measures and outcomes, as these standards provide guidance on adaptation and require adaptation to be addressed to achieve a Gold Level certification.

Verification on the ground of implemented projects could help us understand whether such standards make a real difference in practice, or whether they simply provide lip service by adding adaptation elements in project documents.

For more information on this topic, please contact Bruno Locatelli at B.Locatelli@cgiar.org.
This research forms part of the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry.

Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • An integrative research framework for enabling transformative adaptation

An integrative research framework for enabling transformative adaptation


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

FTA

Authors: Colloff, M.J.; Martín-López, B.; Lavorel, S.; Locatelli, B.; Gorddard, R.; Longaretti, P-Y.; Walters, G.; van Kerkhoff, L.; Wyborn, C.; Coreau, A.; Wise, R.M.; Dunlop, M.; Degeorges, P.; Grantham, H.; Overton, I.C.; Williams, R.D.; Doherty, M.D.; Capon, T.; Sanderson, T.; Murphy, H.T.

Transformative adaptation will be increasingly important to effectively address the impacts of climate change and other global drivers on social-ecological systems. Enabling transformative adaptation requires new ways to evaluate and adaptively manage trade-offs between maintaining desirable aspects of current social-ecological systems and adapting to major biophysical changes to those systems. We outline such an approach, based on three elements developed by the Transformative Adaptation Research Alliance (TARA): (1) the benefits of adaptation services; that sub-set of ecosystem services that help people adapt to environmental change; (2) The values-rules-knowledge perspective (vrk) for identifying those aspects of societal decision-making contexts that enable or constrain adaptation and (3) the adaptation pathways approach for implementing adaptation, that builds on and integrates adaptation services and the vrk perspective. Together, these elements provide a future-oriented approach to evaluation and use of ecosystem services, a dynamic, grounded understanding of governance and decision-making and a logical, sequential approach that connects decisions over time. The TARA approach represents a means for achieving changes in institutions and governance needed to support transformative adaptation.

Pages: 10p.

Publication Year: 2016

ISSN: 1462-9011

Source: Environmental Science and Policy

DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2016.11.007


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Reflections on COP22 and gender

Reflections on COP22 and gender


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Photo by Marco Simola for Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR).
Posted by

FTA

7047147467_8197b76c61_z1

By Markus Ihalainen, originally published on CIFOR’s Forests News

Thanks to lobbying efforts by gender equality advocacy groups, the recent climate talks in Marrakesh yielded a significant decision that extended the mandate of the Lima Work Program on Gender (LWPG) over the next three years.

The two-year work program – first adopted at COP20 in Lima – contains a two-fold objective of: 1) Enhancing the gender-balance in the negotiations and 2) Providing guidance to Parties on gender-responsive climate policy.

Actions under the program included trainings for delegates on gender-responsive climate policy, capacity building for women delegates, and developing guidelines for implementing gender considerations in climate change activities.

While the extent to which the LWPG has achieved its objectives is debatable, it has opened up a space for more specific discussions and recommendations with respect to enhancing the gender-responsiveness of various policies and mechanisms under the UNFCCC. The decision to extend the mandate of the work program was thus received with much appreciation by gender equality advocates at COP22.

Here’s a look at some key dimensions of this decision in the context of the broader debates around gender and climate change.

Photo by Marco Simola for Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR).
Photo by Marco Simola for Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR).

ALIGNING CLIMATE POLICY WITH COMMITMENTS

One of the criticisms of the previous iteration of the LWPG is that despite its mandate, it “failed to articulate work on gender-responsive climate policy in relation to broader international obligations to human rights and gender equality”. This, in turn, allowed for a fair amount of confusion with respect to what ‘gender-responsive climate policy’ actually means.

It is thus positive that the preamble to the new decision maintains the ‘importance of coherence between gender-responsive climate policies … and the provisions of international instruments and outcomes’, including the Beijing Declaration, the Convention of Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and now the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

What this text actually means for policy design, implementation and monitoring remains unclear. It is, however, essential that the above provision guide the work under the new iteration of the LWPG, as it opens up a crucial space for conceptualizing the role of gender equality and women’s empowerment in climate policy and action in a much broader sense.

Instead of viewing empowerment or equality as a vehicle for achieving other policy objectives, this framing allows us to flip things around and look at how various policies can impact equality or empowerment across a much wider set of political, economic, social and cultural indicators.

As such, this ‘rights-based’ framing departs from popular ‘business case’ arguments, which assert that women’s empowerment will lead to better economic, environmental or social outcomes. A rights-based argument does not ignore women’s contributions to promoting development and conservation; however, it does not make the granting of rights contingent on how effectively women contribute to the latter.

A strong rights-based framework is especially important now that policies and programs are increasingly aligning themselves to the SDG framework. Anchoring ‘women’s empowerment’ in broader international conventions could help mitigate the unfortunate tendency to water down empowerment to tokenistic participation in meetings simply to allow policies and programs to ‘hit as many SDGs as possible’.

Instead of simply assuming win-wins between social, economic and environmental objectives, a rights-based approach also allows us to have a much clearer and more honest conversation about leveraging synergies – as well as reconciling potential tensions – between the different SDGs.

Photo by Tomas Munita for Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR).
Photo by Tomas Munita for Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR).

FROM GLOBAL PLEDGES TO NATIONAL ACTION

In addition to a continued mandate, the new decision also requests the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI) to ‘develop a gender action plan in order to support the implementation of gender-related decisions and mandates under the UNFCCC process’.

While the development of a gender action plan under the UNFCCC was not a given, it follows the trajectory of the other Rio conventions, which already have such plans in place. The priority areas for the action plan still needs to be defined, but this decision invites Parties, observers and other stakeholders to provide inputs to the formulation of the action plan.

A collaboratively developed, comprehensive Gender Action Plan (GAP) could prove useful for coordinating the efforts of various bodies and stakeholders, channeling funding towards specific actions outlined under the GAP, and for developing salient indicators for evaluating the gender-responsiveness of various climate policies.

However, it is important to note that the content of the GAP is to be defined over the coming year. So given the urgency of beginning the implementation of the Paris Agreement, the immediate priority in terms of gender equality in climate policy is still to ensure that all Parties to the Agreement take substantial actions on the national level towards safeguarding women’s rights and enhancing the gender-responsiveness of the climate policies and actions as outlined in the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs).

This is particularly important given the fact that out of 188 INDCs submitted to the UNFCCC Secretariat prior to COP21, only 63 submissions included specific references to women or gender. A closer look shows that these references are often very general and superficial, mostly just outlining women as ‘vulnerable populations’.

It is also noteworthy that all of the 63 INDCs mentioning ‘women’ or ‘gender’ came from developing countries. Despite high-flying rhetoric, there seems to be a tendency among donor countries to view gender-responsive climate policy mostly as a priority for developing countries.

Concerns are being raised over whether donor commitments to gender equality and women’s empowerment actually translate into concrete funding. A recent OECD DAC report estimated that investments in women’s economic empowerment remained unchanged in the period from 2007-2012, and represented only two percent of total bilateral aid. This is a significant concern, especially as many commitments in developing countries’ INDCs remain conditional on the availability of funding.

During a discussion forum on gender held at the 2016 Global Landscapes Forum, panelist Lorena Aguilar, Senior Advisor of the Gender Programme at the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), stated that 21 countries have developed specific climate change and gender action plans (ccGAP). Yet, she warned, a lack of funds is hindering many governments from implementing these plans.

To enhance the implementation of gender-responsive climate policies, it is thus crucial that the operating entities of the Financial Mechanism – including the Green Climate Fund and the Global Environment Facility – are held accountable vis-à-vis the gender policies that both entities now have in place.

It is reassuring that the COP22 decision requests financial entities to provide information on the ‘integration of gender consideration in all aspects of their work’. However, it contains no references to the allocation for financial resources towards the implementation of gender-responsive climate action. Issues around financial responsibilities, targets and accountabilities thus remain largely unresolved.

At the same GLF forum, Eleanor Blomstrom, Co-Director of the Women’s Environment and Development Organization (WEDO), stressed the need to improve gender-responsive tracking and monitoring of finance for enhancing – and enforcing – the implementation of gender-responsive climate policies at the national level.

Ugwono Pauline plants Gnetum (okok) in the village of Minwoho, Lekié, Center Region, Cameroon.   Photo by Ollivier Girard for Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR).
Photo by Ollivier Girard/CIFOR

CONNECTING POLICY FRAMEWORKS TO LOCAL REALITIES

While it is important to monitor what policies are in place and to track their implementation, it is arguably even more important to understand the impact of these policies on the lives of local women and men. Policy processes removed from local realities are less likely to yield transformative results on the ground.

CIFOR’s research shows that climate change vulnerability tends to be highly contextual and depends on various socioeconomic, cultural and environmental variables. Despite this, gender is still primarily tackled as a men-versus-women dichotomy in climate change studies, according to a recent CIFOR paper.

One of the key hopes of CIFOR gender experts at COP22 was thus to contribute to a more nuanced picture of gender and climate change. Understanding that the vulnerabilities and adaptive capacities of women and men are structured by various societal power relations – and not just by virtue of their sex – can help enhance the responsiveness of climate policies. In order to ensure everyone’s voice is heard, it is vital that such ‘intersectional’ thinking is translated into implementation processes and impact assessment tools and instruments.

This requires that the voices of local people be accounted for in policy processes, particularly when it comes to adaptation, says Houria Djoudi, a scientist at CIFOR who was a panelist at the GLF event. Women in impacted communities are not sitting around waiting for international agreements to come in place – they use various strategies to adapt to climate change every day. However, rural women often lack a voice in national policy processes. As a result, many locally grounded, potentially up-scalable adaptation and mitigation initiatives risk going unnoticed, or replaced by top-down, inflexible programmatic responses with little local ownership.

It is therefore good to see the new decision taken in Morocco encourage Parties to recognize the value of grassroots women’s participation in gender-responsive climate action at all levels.

However, much remains to be done to move beyond lip-service towards meaningfully integrating local-level action in national climate policy and action, and to ensure that adequate capacities and resources are in place at the national and sub-national levels to support and scale up successful initiatives.

For more information on this topic, please contact Markus Ihalainen at m.ihalainen@cgiar.org.
This research forms part of the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry.

Back to top

Sign up to our monthly newsletter

Connect with us