Tag: COVID-19


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • FTA seminar on 6 Sept 2021 to assess the pandemic’s impacts on ecosystems, forests and agroforestry-based livelihoods

FTA seminar on 6 Sept 2021 to assess the pandemic’s impacts on ecosystems, forests and agroforestry-based livelihoods


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 initiative “COVID-19 Rapid Research Response” reveals range of consequences

In March 2020, the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (FTA) launched a “COVID-19 Rapid Research Response” to better understand and assess the main impacts of COVID-19 and of pandemic response measures across the board, aiming at developing ways to build new resilience to the unprecedented. Detailed results of these studies were presented in a special seminar on the 6th of September.

This first set of FTA studies (some published, others yet to be released) looked at diverse forests, trees and agroforestry sectors and value chains across three continents. They focused on diverse value chains (from shea, to wood fuel), passing by wild animal farms, small community forest enterprises, agroforestry in central America, and on ley landscapes (India, Indonesia Papua …).

Undoubtedly, with all the restrictions being imposed as health measures, COVID-19 disrupted agricultural value chains with obvious negative consequences for farmers. However, during the seminar lead FTA scientists indicated that findings defied a unilateral narrative. Whilst limited mobility reduced trade and created shortages within the value chains, it also induced a lower demand for products (e.g. charcoal) as households shifted habits to adapt to the new conditions. Researchers noted that in the areas where sustainable forestry and agroforestry systems were in place, households had greater opportunities to build resilience.

Still, as the pandemic restrictions extended over time, significant lower incomes have been hard to cope with. Livelihoods of farmers heavily dependent on the shea nut farming value chain, were among those hit hard by the pandemic. Despite former gains, poverty increased, especially among the millions of women who generate income from the shea oil, which is used in cooking, cosmetics and chocolate, reported Andrew Wardell, a principal scientist with the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) and World Agroforestry (ICRAF), an expert on the shea trade.

“Pandemic restrictions on movement caused a reduction in global demand due to delayed shipping,” Wardell said. “Women’s groups recorded increased levels of indebtedness as others ended up abandoning the sector.”

Historically central to all aspects of the shea nut industry, some 16 to 18 million women across sub-Saharan Africa not only tend the trees that can be hundreds of years old, but they gather the nuts, shelling and grinding them into butter before selling them at market.

“During the pandemic, collection areas were burned by charcoal sellers who culled the trees, destroying natural vegetation and eliminating the source of income upon which women depended,” Wardell said. “On the other hand, increasing international demand for shea butter in cosmetics and chocolate led to higher sales, as new markets and value chains for non-timber products emerged,” he added.

—

In Cameroon, the pandemic disrupted businesses reliant on non-timber forest products when movement restrictions cut opportunities to meet new clients through marketing, a situation that drove many business entities to reduce their workforce, said Serge Mandiefe Piabuo, a junior scientist at CIFOR-ICRAF. Unemployment triggered a trend in urban-to-rural migration as life became tougher in cities.

To some extent, these disruptions were mirrored in the Democratic Republic of Congo where the wood fuel value chain was affected, leading to a mixed impact on forest ecosystems, according to researchers studying the charcoal trade around the Yangambi Biosphere Reserve.

The team led by Jolien Schure, a CIFOR-ICRAF associate scientist, found that the charcoal trade was curtailed due to reduced transportation capacity around the Congo River. This led to some sellers abandoning the charcoal trade and increased costs, which were exacerbated by a drop in charcoal production.

The main charcoal clientele, which is based in the city of Kisangani, cut down on cooking, with potential negative nutritional effects, she said. The negative effects on charcoal producers were unfortunately not mitigated by financial support through government subsidies due to the informal nature of the sector.

“In some areas, idle school children who were locked out of school as part of the containment measures joined the charcoal production with ad-hoc production disrupting sustainable practices which include taking note of future tree stocks,” she said.

—-

In the Central American countries of Nicaragua and Costa Rica, vegetable producers were also affected by limits placed on transportation. Local agro-food supply chains were largely disrupted, with reduced market availability leading to higher prices and lower sales. Farmers diversified their produce to meet changing demand, said Adriana Escobedo, a scientist with CIFOR-ICRAF, who researched the impact of the pandemic on agroforestry in the two countries. The study indicated an increased preference of consumers to buy from the local fresh food markets, a critical market opportunity that created an unexpected opportunity for local dealers.

The introduction of face coverings to stop the spread of the virus – particularly single use, disposable masks — added to environmental pollution, according to Lalisa Duguma, CIFOR -ICRAF scientist on Sustainable Landscapes who recently published a review of 327 papers on the effects of Covid 19 pandemic on agroecosystems. The study maps the findings and potential consequences across multiple sectors (e.g. agriculture, forestry, wildlife, fisheries, water resources, etc.) and the related socio-economic services (e.g. food, energy, health, income, etc.)

Often conditions worsened; for example, due to fewer conservation staff, forest ecosystems in various cases were more exposed to illegal exploitation.

“Forest ecosystems were made more vulnerable as many encroachers operated at will due to a reduction in the number of forest guards and rangers, allowing poachers to take advantage, Duguma said.

On the other hand, some natural areas flourished, because of limited human movement with fewer visits to parklands.

—-

In India and Indonesia, household farming income was hard hit, particularly in urban areas where the second wave of the virus was extremely disruptive. Villages proved more resilient, mainly aided by the immediate availability of food from trees, according to Karl Hughes, an impact evaluation specialist at ICRAF.

In West Papua New Guinea, where the pandemic disrupted the food value chain by up to 50 percent, many dealers in agriculture products were left seeking financial bailouts to sustain their businesses, reported Mulia Nurhasan, food and nutrition scientist at CIFOR.

—-

In Peru, researchers were informed of lower harvests from coffee and potato farmers, mainly due to climate change, although they also confronted pandemic-related distribution challenges due to high costs and scarcity of transportation. Lower incomes forced many of them to sell assets, with long-term negative effects. Scientists also found that the vast majority of the farmers consulted planned to incorporate new food crops for household consumption.

—

The Vietnamese wildlife industry also faced significant disruptions due to lack of visitors and reduced revenues. Some wildlife park owners had to sell their operations due to financial losses, according to Pham Thu Thuy, a senior CIFOR-ICRAF scientist. Diversification was key for those businesses that survived, she added.

All presentations from the event and published articles are available here below.

Studies

 

Presentations

  1. A Perfect Storm? Impacts of insecurity and COVID-19 on shea supply chains in Burkina Faso
    Dr. D. Andrew Wardell, Aicha Tapsoba, Mathurin Zida and Marlene Elias
  2. Effect of COVID-19 on rural community enterprises: Case of community forest enterprises in Cameroon
    Piabuo SM, Tsafack S, Minang PA, Foundjem-Tita D, Guimke G, Duguma L
  3. Study on impact of COVID-19 on woodfuel value chains in the DRC
    Jolien Schure , Lwanga Kasereka-Muvatsi, Paolo O Cerutti and Phosiso Sola
  4. Market opportunities and impacts of COVID19 on short supply chains of agroforestry products in Nicaragua and Costa Rica
    Adriana Escobedo, M.Sc. /MBA
  5. The COVID-19 Pandemic and Agroecosystems Resilience: Insights based on a review
    Lalisa A. Duguma, Meine van Noordwijk, Peter A. Minang and Kennedy Muthee
  6. Can restoration of the commons foster resilience? Comparing COVID-19 induced livelihood impacts and coping strategies among villages targeted and not targeted by a largescale common land restoration program in three Indian states
    Hughes K
  7. Impact of Covid-19 on food value chains in West Papua Province, Indonesia
    Mulia Nurhasan, Ferdinandus Hurulean, Desy Leo Ariesta, Agus Muhamad Maulana, Muhammad Hariyadi Setiawan, Charlie Danny Heatubun, Heru Komarudin and Amy Ickowitz
  8. Effects of health crises and quarantine on coffee and potato farmers in Peru: short and medium trend dynamics through a panel data base
    Ricardo Vargas & Valentina Robiglio
  9. Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on agri-food value chains: Fractures, responses and opportunities for building back better
    Dietmar Stoian, Paswel Marenya, Jason Donovan & Gabija Pamerneckyte
  10. COVID impacts on wildlife farms in Vietnam
    Pham Thu Thuy , Tang Thi Kim Hong, Nguyen Thi Kieu Nuong, Dang Hai Phuong, Hoang Tuan Long, Tran Ngoc My Hoa, Nguyen Thi Thuy Anh, Nguyen Thi Van Anh
  11. FTA Rapid Research Response on Covid 19 – Vincent Gitz, Director FTA

 

This article was written by Edwin Okoth.

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.

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • FTA Highlight No. 6 – Wild Meat

FTA Highlight No. 6 – Wild Meat


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

Millions of people worldwide depend, to varying degrees, on non-wood forest products such as wild meat, including more than 150 million in the Global South.

For many rural people wild meat is the most accessible and most consumed source of protein. Urban dwellers also consume wild meat, but choose wild meat for reasons other than nutrition, including a desire to connect to a rural past or to culture.

The sale of wild meat also contributes to livelihoods for increasing numbers of hunters.

Download the FTA Highlight No.6! [PDF]

Evidence is increasing that this is depleting the populations of many forest animals. Coupled with habitat loss and deforestation, overhunting can result in the extinction of species.

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 Wild Meat.

Globally, there is evidence of the risks of overhunting. The global, local or functional extinction of populations or species of larger animals —known as defaunation — can change the long-term dynamics of ecosystems.

Campaigns around the bushmeat “crisis” emerged in the early 1990s. Those initiatives gave way to efforts to develop alternative livelihoods to replace the demand for wild meat and looked for biological and policy responses to prevent wildlife declines and promote human well-being.

The Bushmeat Research Initiative (BRI) was established in 2011 under CGIAR’s FTA Program. It has three main objectives: strengthening the evidence base for effective interventions; identifying gaps in knowledge and areas where further work is required; and recommending policy changes to address the overexploitation of wild meat.

The Bushmeat Research Initiative (BRI) has produced studies in Africa, Latin America and Asia, and a global assessment.

BRI’s work has generated a better understanding of the importance of Indigenous Peoples in protecting biodiversity.

The BRI-CIFOR team, with its partners, created the global WILDMEAT database, a powerful evidence base for policy makers, practitioners, researchers and civil society.

The association between wild meat and disease has stimulated research on wild meat and human health in general, and Ebola virus disease outbreaks.

Summary of research undertaken by the BRI and partners to investigate the potential drivers associated with Ebola outbreaks

Africa’s urban population is expected to more than triple over 40 years, which will have a strong impact on the animal populations that provide wild meat.

Wild meat network of a typical family in the Colombian Amazon, illustrating the variety of scenarios in wild meat exchanges

CIFOR via the BRI was a member of the Sustainable Wildlife Management (SWM) programme.

Research led by BRI found that a crucial element is providing local people with alternative sources of animal protein.

The BRI-CIFOR team, with its country partners, carried out a project in 10 Baka villages in Cameroon. Baka Pygmy hunters participated in mapping their hunting territories.

Understanding the complex dynamics of wild meat use in the COVID-19 world will require increased collaboration between environmental and resource entities and the ecological and conservation sciences.

Download the publication to find out how future initiatives can build on FTA results and work in way that ensures a balance between humans and native fauna species, social inclusiveness, respect for traditional knowledge, cross-sector approaches, and capacity building.

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Q+A: Building just societies and resilient landscapes alongside rural women

Q+A: Building just societies and resilient landscapes alongside rural women


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

Article originally posted on Forest News.

Gender equality key to sustainable resource management, says Markus Ihalainen

Rural women play an essential role in using and managing natural resources in forest and tree-based landscapes across the world — at least they should.

When women are able to participate in decision-making and equitably share resources and benefits, policies and projects in the forest sector often see increased buy-in and improved outcomes; while initiatives that ignore gender difference or exclude women tend to reinforce or even exacerbate existing inequalities, according to a 2017 brief from the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR).

Even so, the forestry sector has historically given limited attention to gender dynamics, said Markus Ihalainen, senior research officer at CIFOR. Although changes are occurring, much work remains to adequately address the social structures and power relations that produce or reinforce inequalities.

While gender equality is a human right and a fundamental condition for achieving sustainable development goals, women remain at a disadvantage, often wielding less power than men.

Decision-making, accessing benefits from forest and tree resources and the capacity to respond effectively to changes such as deforestation or degradation in forest and tree-based landscapes are some areas where rights may be curtailed, he said during an interview to mark the International Day of Rural Women on Thursday.

–> Read also How is the CGIAR supporting rural women?

“A crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic has made things more difficult for everyone, for example, but we also know that such challenges are often compounded by inequalities that may disproportionately increase vulnerabilities or decrease the adaptive capacities of certain groups,” explained Ihalainen, who has been involved in gender research with CIFOR since 2014.

To address these challenges, Ihalainen and other researchers in the forestry sector try to understand how roles, rights and responsibilities are divided between local men and women, particularly with regard to land use.

Policies that emerge from research recommendations should measure how benefits are shared, while also accounting for various other gender-related risks, he said.

Rural women’s contributions to development and conservation need to be supported by fair remuneration for their work and access to resources; they should be recognized as critical stakeholders in sustainable natural resource governance.

Ihalainen shared additional insights about his work in FTA:

Q: What makes this field interesting for you?

A: I think there are a number of things that make the research on gender and environment interesting. First, for anyone who wants to see a more equal world, it’s pretty hard to ignore the pervasiveness of gender inequality virtually across the globe. In rural areas, we see rapid transformations shaped by political, socioeconomic and environmental changes – especially climate change. Our work shows that, if left unchecked, many of these trends risk reinforcing or even exacerbating gender inequality.

The forestry sector in particular has historically given limited attention to gender, but I think this is slowly starting to change. People are increasingly interested in understanding what they can do to enhance equality through their work. Being a part of and able to support this process by providing relevant evidence and recommendations is a great motivating factor for me.

Q: Do you encounter challenges studying rural women as a male researcher?

A: I think understanding these things is just as important for men as for women.

It’s not really about studying rural women per se, but about understanding how different social structures and power relations at different levels produce or reinforce inequalities; these inequalities often disproportionately affect rural women. We are all part of those structures whether we want to be or not. We all shape social structures through our actions or lack thereof.

I think that one of the most important contributions of feminist theory has been its critique of so-called scientific objectivity – the idea that the researcher is just a neutral observer of reality. Our ideas are not void of our biases; they are influenced by our background and social status, and most people, I hope, who have done field research in a cross-cultural setting could think of a time when they felt the research situation was influenced by the social dynamic between the respondent and the researcher. As a white male working on gender research mainly in Africa, this definitely goes for me too, so I’ve really learned the importance of working with a socially diverse team. A diverse research team is important not just to overcome the sometimes difficult power dynamics in interviews, but also because of the richness that different perspectives bring to the analysis.

Q: In your opinion, what are the top issues facing rural women today?

A: Many of the broader trends that are shaping or compounding challenges faced by rural women are issues that affect us all, but the distribution of outcomes is shaped by many intersecting power dynamics, including gender. The COVID-19 pandemic is an example of this. For instance, studies are suggesting that as a consequence of the pandemic, many rural women are taking on a disproportionate share of care work. Mobility restrictions and value chain disruptions may disproportionately affect many female-dominated occupations, including marketing and casual agribusiness labor.

Additionally, female farmers often have unequal access to information technology when compared with their male counterparts. This can make it harder for women to connect with other value chain actors, particularly when physical mobility is restricted.

Climate change is of course another pressing issue. As a result of longstanding efforts by researchers and advocacy groups, there is finally a relatively common recognition of the fact that gender dynamics and inequalities influence how rural women and men experience and cope with climate change — though there is still a long way to go in terms of making sure that recognition leads to effective action on the ground.

So there are definitely many challenges facing rural women that require urgent action, such as enhancing rural women’s access to resources and markets or improving their job security and extending social protection. But those challenges are also symptoms of fundamentally unequal social structures.

Because of various inequalities, many rural women are more exposed to negative impacts of events in general, including the COVID-19 pandemic, climate change and other threats. While there is an urgent need to address those impacts, we must not lose sight of the broader structures and systems that keep rural women in a position where they remain more vulnerable. Otherwise any new arrangements are like a band-aid solution – no matter whether they are related to restoration, renewables or any strategy – they will end up reproducing the same inequalities.

As we’re rethinking our production systems and values in order for society to stay within Kate Raworth’s doughnut — a set of social and planetary boundaries for humanity to thrive in the 21st century —  we really need to make sure gender equality is at the core of these efforts.

Q: What inspires you about the rural women that you have encountered during your research?

A: There are so many women I have met who show incredible resilience and innovation — often under dire circumstances. So although it is really important to highlight the structures that shape the challenging circumstances rural women face, the way in which media often frames rural women as passive victims does not do them justice. In other words, a focus on marginalization, tends to perpetuate a framing of women as passive — rather than as active authors of their own destinies. They should be supported through the creation of structures and supporting processes that enhance their abilities to exert their agency and challenge the structures that limit that space. However, taking steps to recognize women’s agency must go beyond human interest stories and translate into real and meaningful engagement with rural women and their aspirations.

Q: How can rural women contribute to the transition to a resilient, low-carbon society?

A: I think it’s important to recognize the contributions of rural women and men in managing natural resources. For instance, a study led by the Rights and Resources Initiative found that Indigenous peoples manage nearly 300 billion metric tons of carbon stored above and below ground on their lands. Other studies by CIFOR and others have demonstrated that gender-inclusive resource user groups often perform better in terms of governance and conservation outcomes.

However, it’s equally important to recognize that although the rural poor in low-income countries are not to blame for the climate emergency the world is facing, they are often the ones facing the gravest impacts and, as mentioned earlier, those impacts are often differentiated by gender and other social factors. That’s why we emphasize the need for a just transition, with gender equality as a core objective.

A just transition requires ensuring that rural women have options and means to cope with the impacts of climate change, as well as making sure they have the rights, resources and necessary support to effectively participate in a low-carbon society in ways that contribute to their empowerment and well-being.

Q: What messages do you hope people take from the International Day of Rural Women?

A: This day was established to recognize the role that rural women play in enhancing rural development. Yet despite their crucial role in agricultural production and in ensuring household food security, gender inequalities — often influenced by intersecting socioeconomic factors — continue to disproportionately disempower rural women. While there have been numerous global commitments and agendas to enhancing gender equality, progress has been slow. The imminent transition towards more resilient, low-carbon societies and production systems also provides an opportunity to take a leap in terms of gender equality, but that requires equity and justice to be at the core of our strategies. There is a lot of data and evidence to draw on; now we need action!

Q: What projects are you particularly excited about and where can we learn more?

A: There are a number of projects that I think are really interesting. Pending COVID-restrictions, we are starting field work in Ghana to study the gender dynamics across different palm oil production systems. I am also working on charcoal value chains in a number of African countries, it’s been really interesting to learn that women are actually participating a lot more than what the conventional wisdom dictates. We are also wrapping up a longitudinal analysis of women’s agricultural labor force participation in Indonesia. A lot of interesting findings coming out – stay tuned for the paper coming out soon. Finally, in partnership with EnGen Collaborative and a number of organizations in the GLF gender constituency, we are currently developing an online learning module on gender-responsive forest and landscape restoration. This feels very timely in these teleworking times, but we think this will be a really useful and engaging tool for different restoration stakeholders to enhance their capacities on gender mainstreaming even in the post-COVID world.

–> Read also Where are the women? A review and conceptual framework for addressing gender equity in charcoal value chains in Sub-Saharan Africa
–> Read also The Gender Equality in Research Scale: A tool for monitoring and encouraging progress on gender integration in research for and in development
By Daniela Silva. This research is part of 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 Bioversity International, CATIE, CIRAD, INBAR, ICRAF and TBI. FTA’s work is supported by the CGIAR Trust Fund.

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • What can be the role of Forests, trees, agroforestry during the COVID-19 food security crisis?

What can be the role of Forests, trees, agroforestry during the COVID-19 food security crisis?


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

Invaluable, but often overlooked, ecosystems produce micronutrient-rich foods

The Covid 19 pandemic is threatening food systems and global food security. According to the World Food Programme (WFP), which says the number of people facing crisis hunger is expected to almost double this year to 265 million.

Already, more than 820 million people do not get enough food to eat, and another 135 million people face acute hunger or starvation. Add to that, the economic destabilization caused by COVID-19, and another 130 million people are at risk of starvation by the end of 2020, says WFP.

The rapidity with which a health crisis transforms in a hunger crisis shows how fragile are our food systems to shocks of any nature. With this dire warning in mind, on June 3, the CGIAR Forests, Trees and Agroforestry Research Program (FTA) and partners will host a session in 2 parts at the Global Landscapes Forum (GLF), a three-day online conference where delegates will discuss the potential for sustainable food security in both the short and the long term through related research.

Forests, trees and agroforestry provide critical contributions to Food Security and Nutrition (FSN). All of these contributions are even more important in times of crisis.

Forests, trees and agroforestry provide nutrition dense foods such as fruits and nuts. They contribute to livelihoods and to the diversification of production and sources of income thus also increasing the resilience of households. They provide ecosystem services -water regulation, soil fertility and conservation, pollination, temperature regulation- that support farming systems and contribute to their adaptation to climate change. They are an essential component of sustainable and resilient food systems, contributing to the four dimensions of food security and nutrition both for the forest-dependent communities and globally.

The first part of the session will present some of the multiple ways that forests, trees and agroforestry contribute to Food Security and Nutrition, based on the most recent research results of FTA and its partners.  The second part of the session will delve into the potential of forests, trees and agroforestry in increasing the resilience of food systems and stability of Food Security and Nutrition.

Participants will reflect on some of the specific strengths of farming systems, value chains and livelihoods that integrate trees in their systems amid crisis, including the current COVID-19 pandemic.

The whole session will feature a mix of short presentations, videos, interventions from actors on the ground, panel discussions and questions and answers with the audience. We look forward in having you join our session!

Please note that FTA has been offering free tickets for the GLF Bonn 2020 event to anyone wanting to share their story on how trees have been fundamental in times of crises (draughts, famines, covid-19, etc.) for their livelihoods. If you wish to participate – contact us at CGIARFORESTSANDTREES [at] CGIAR [dot] ORG

Full concept note available here

Full panel here

See also the agenda in the Conference Platform (need to register to access it)

Session 01 [14h00-15h30] – Session 02 [15h45-17h15]

Knowledge products

Session 1

Priority Food Tree and Crop Food Composition Database: http://www.worldagroforestry.org/products/nutrition/index.php/home 

Publications

Dawson, I.K., McMullin, S., Kindt, R., Muchugi, A., Hendre, P., B Lillesø, JP., Jamnadass, R. (2019). Integrating perennial new and orphan crops into climate-smart African agricultural systems to support nutrition. The CSA Papers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92798-5_10

Fungo, R., Muyonga, J., Kabahenda, M., Kaaya, A., Okia, C. A., Donn, P., et al. (2016). Contribution of forest foods to dietary intake and their association with household food insecurity: a cross-sectional study in women from rural Cameroon. Public Health Nutr. 19, 3185–3196. doi: 10.1017/S1368980016001324

Golden, C. D., Fernald, L. C. H., Brashares, J. S., Rasolofoniaina, B. J. R., and Kremen, C. (2011). Benefits of wildlife consumption to child nutrition in a biodiversity hotspot. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 108, 19653–19656. doi:10.1073/pnas.1112586108

HLPE. 2017. Sustainable forestry for food security and nutrition. A report by the High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition of the Committee on World Food Security, Rome. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i7395e.pdf

Ian K.Dawson, Andrew Barnes, Ramni Jamnadass, Eric Danquah, Rita H. Mumm, Steve Hoad, Fiona Burnett, Iago Hale, Kai Mausch, Prasad Hendre, Wayne Powell, Cesar Revoredo-Giha. (2019). Breeders’ views on the production of new and orphan crops in Africa: a survey of constraints and opportunities. ICRAF Working Paper No. 296. World Agroforestry. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5716/WP19007.PDF

Ickowitz, A., Powell, B., Salim, M. A., and Sunderland, T. C. H. (2014). Dietary quality and tree cover in Africa. Glob. Environ. Change 24, 287–294. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.12.001

Jamnadass, J., Place, F., Torquebiau, E., Malézieux, E., Iiyama, M., Sileshi, GW., Kehlenbeck, K., E. Masters, E., McMullin, S., Dawson, I.K. (2013). Agroforestry for food and nutritional security. Unasylva 241, Vol. 64, 2013/2 http://www.fao.org/3/i3482e/i3482e00.htm

Jamnadass, R., McMullin, S., Iiyama, M., Dawson, I.K. et al. (2015). Understanding the Roles of Forests and Tree-based Systems in Food Provision. In Vira, B., Wildburger, C., Mansourian, S. (eds.). (2015). Forests, Trees and Landscapes for Food Security and Nutrition. A Global Assessment Report. IUFRO World Series Volume 33. Vienna. 172 p. ISBN 978-3-902762-40-5, ISSN 1016-3263 http://www.cifor.org/publications/pdf_files/Books/BIUFRO1502.pdf

Lo, M., Narulita, S., Ickowitz, A. 2019. The relationship between forests and freshwater fish consumption in rural Nigeria. PLoS ONE, 14 (6): 0218038. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0218038.

McMullin, S., Njogu, K., Wekesa, B. et al. (2019). Developing fruit tree portfolios that link agriculture more effectively with nutrition and health: a new approach for providing year-round micronutrients to smallholder farmers. Food Security. 11, 1355–1372 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-019-00970-7

Powell, B., Ickowitz, A., McMullin, S., Jamnadass, R., Padoch, C., Pinedo-Vasquez, M., Sunderland, T. (2013). The role of forests, trees and wild biodiversity for improved nutrition-sensitivity of food and agriculture systems. Expert Background Paper for ICN+ FAO, Rome, Conference paper for Joint FAO/WHO International Conference on Nutrition 21 Years later (ICN+21).

Powell, B., S. Thilsted, A. Ickowitz, C.Termote, T.Sunderland, and A. Herforth  2015. “Improving diets with wild and cultivated biodiversity from across the landscape” Food Security 7(3): 535-554.

Rasmussen, L. V., Fagan, M. E., Ickowitz, A., Wood, S. L. R., Kennedy, G., Powell, B., et al. (in press). Forest pattern, not just amount, influences dietary quality in five African countries. Global Food Security. doi: 10.1016/j.gfs.2019.100331

Rasolofoson, R. A., Hanauer, M. M., Pappinen, A., Fisher, B., and Ricketts, T. H. (2018). Impacts of forests on children’s diet in rural areas across 27 developing countries. Sci. Adv. 4:eaat2853. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aat2853

Rosenstock, T., Dawson, I.K., Aynekulu, E., Chomba, S., Degrande, A., Fornace, K., Jamnadass, R., Kimaro, A., Kindt,R., Lamanna, C., Malesu, M., Mausch, K., McMullin, S., Murage, P., Naomi, N., Njenga, M., Nyoka, I., Paez Valencia, A.M., Sola, P., Shepherd, K. and Steward,P. (2019), A Planetary Health Perspective on Agroforestry in Sub-Saharan Africa, One Earth, 1(3), 330-344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2019.10.017

Rowland, D., Ickowitz, A., Powell, B., Nasi, R., and Sunderland, T. C. H. (2017). Forest foods and healthy diets: quantifying the contributions. Environm. Conserv. 44, 101–114. doi: 10.1017/S0376892916000151

Tata, C.Y., Ickowitz, A., Powell, B., Colecraft, E.K. 2019. Dietary intake, forest foods, and anemia in Southwest Cameroon. PLoS ONE, 14 (4): e0215281. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215281

Vira, B., Wildburger, C. & Mansourian, S. (eds). 2015. Forests, trees and landscapes for food security and nutrition. IUFRO World Series, 33. https://www.iufro.org/download/file/18901/5690/ws33_pdf/

 

Session 2

Publications

Amy Quandt, Henry Neufeldt & J. Terrence McCabe (2019) Building livelihood resilience: what role does agroforestry play?, Climate and Development, 11:6, 485-500, DOI: 10.1080/17565529.2018.1447903

Dawson, I.K.; Powell, W.; Hendre, P.; Bančič, J.; Hickey, J.M.; Kindt, R.; Hoad, S.; Hale, I.; Jamnadass, R. (2019) The role of genetics in mainstreaming the production of new and orphan crops to diversify food systems and support human nutrition New Phytologist 224: 37-54 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.15895

De Leeuw, J.; Njenga, M.; Wagner, B.; Iiyama, M. (2014) Treesilience: an assessment of the resilience provided by trees in the drylands of Eastern Africa. ICRAF

Duguma L, Watson C, Nzyoka J, Okia C, Fungo B. 2019. The Migration-Environment Nexus: The Situation in Northwest Uganda.World Agroforestry: Nairobi.

Duguma, L.; Duba, D.; Muthee, K.; Minang ,P.; Bah, A.; Nzyoka, J.; Malanding, J. (2020) Ecosystem-Based Adaptation Through the Lens of Community Preferences ICRAF.

FAO and CIFOR. 2019. FAO Framework Methodology for Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments of Forests and Forest Dependent People. Rome. http://www.fao.org/3/ca7064en/CA7064EN.pdf

FAO. 2016. Climate change and food security: Risks and responses. FAO, Rome. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i5188e.pdf

FAO. 2017. Addressing Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries in National Adaptation Plans – Supplementary Guidelines, by K. Karttunen, J. Wolf, C. Garcia and A. Meybeck. FAO, Rome. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i6714e.pdf

Fauzan, A.U.; Purnomo, H. (2012) Uncovering the complexity: An essay on the benefits of the value chain approach to global crisis studies-a case study from Jepara, Indonesia in Suter, C.and Herkenrath, M.. World Society in the Global Economic Crisis: Volume 2011: 149-169)

Gitz, V. & Meybeck, A. 2012. Risks, vulnerabilities and resilience in a context of climate change. In A. Meybeck, J. Lankoski, S. Redfern, N. Azzu & V. Gitz, eds. Building resilience for adaptation to climate change in the agriculture sector, pp. 19–36. Proceedings of a Joint FAO/OECD Workshop, 23–24 April 2012. Rome, FAO.

Havyarimana, D.; Muthuri, C.; Muriuki, J.; Mburu, D. (2019) Constraints encountered by nursery operators in establishing agroforestry tree nurseries in Burundi Agroforestry Systems 93: 1361-1375 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-018-0246-2

HLPE. 2017. Sustainable forestry for food security and nutrition. A report by the High-Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition of the Committee on World Food Security, Rome. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i7395e.pdf

Ian K. Dawson, Andrew Barnes, Ramni Jamnadass, Eric Danquah, Rita H. Mumm, Steve Hoad, Fiona Burnett, Iago Hale, Kai Mausch, Prasad Hendre, Wayne Powell, Cesar Revoredo-Giha. 2019. Breeders’ views on the production of new and orphan crops in Africa: a survey of constraints and opportunities. ICRAF Working Paper No. 296. World Agroforestry. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5716/WP19007.PDF

Kiros Meles Hadgu, Badege Bishaw, Miyuki Iiyama,  Emiru Birhane, Aklilu Negussie, Caryn M. Davis, and Bryan Bernart, Editors. Climate-Smart Agriculture: Enhancing Resilient Agricultural Systems, Landscapes, and Livelihoods in Ethiopia and Beyond. 2019. World Agroforestry (ICRAF), Nairobi, Kenya.

Libert Amico, A.; Ituarte-Lima, C.; Elmqvist, T. (2019) Learning from social–ecological crisis for legal resilience building: multi-scale dynamics in the coffee rust epidemic Sustainability Science: 1-17 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-019-00703-x

Locatelli, B., Kanninen, M., Brockhaus, M., Colfer, C.J.P., Murdiyarso, D. and Santoso, H. 2008 Facing an uncertain future: How forests and people can adapt to climate change. Forest Perspectives  no. 5. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia. https://www.cifor.org/publications/pdf_files/media/CIFOR_adaptation.pdf

Ndegwa G, Sola, P., Iiyama M, Okeyo I, Njenga M, Siko I., Muriuki, J.2020. Charcoal value chains in Kenya: a 20-year synthesis. Working Paper number 307. World Agroforestry, Nairobi, Kenya. DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.5716/WP20026.PDF

Sayer, J.A.; Endamana, D.; Ruiz Perez, M.; Boedhihartono, A.K.; Nzooh, Z.; Eyebe, A.; Awono, A. (2012) Global financial crisis impacts forest conservation in Cameroon International Forestry Review 14: 90-98 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1505/146554812799973172

Sinclair, F., Wezel, A., Mbow, C., Chomba, S., Robiglio, V., and Harrison, R. 2019. “The Contribution of Agroecological Approaches to Realizing Climate-Resilient Agriculture.” Rotterdam and Washington, DC. https://cdn.gca.org/assets/2019-09/TheContributionsOfAgroecologicalApproaches.pdf

Sinclair, F.; Rosenstock, T.S.; Gitz, V.; Wollenberg, L (2017) Agroforestry to diversify farms and enhance resilience. In Dinesh D, Campbell B, Bonilla-Findji O, Richards M (eds). 10 best bet innovations for adaptation in agriculture: A supplement to the UNFCCC NAP Technical Guidelines: 14-19)

Van Noordwijk M, Hoang MH, Neufeldt H, Öborn I, Yatich T, eds. 2011. How trees and people can co-adapt to climate change: reducing vulnerability through multifunctional agroforestry landscapes. Nairobi: World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF). http://apps.worldagroforestry.org/sea/Publications/files/book/BK0149-11.pdf

Van Vliet, N.; Fa, J.E.; Nasi, R. (2015) Managing hunting under uncertainty: from one-off ecological indicators to resilience approaches in assessing the sustainability of bushmeat hunting. Ecology and Society 20: 7, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-07669-200307

Vira, B., Wildburger, C. & Mansourian, S. (eds). 2015. Forests, trees and landscapes for food security and nutrition. IUFRO World Series, 33. https://www.iufro.org/download/file/18901/5690/ws33_pdf/

Vogt, N.D.; Pinedo-Vasquez, M.; Brondizio, E.S.; Rabelo, F.G.; Fernandes, K.; Almeida, O.T.; Riveiro, S.; Deadman, P.J.; Yue, Dou (2016 ) Local ecological knowledge and incremental adaptation to changing flood patterns in the Amazon delta; Sustainability Science 11: 611-623 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-015-0352-2

 

Further reading

https://forestsnews.cifor.org/59674/agricultural-intensification-has-fed-the-world-but-are-we-healthier?fnl=en

https://forestsnews.cifor.org/60872/superfood-from-cameroon-forest-scores-best-for-womens-health?fnl=en

https://forestsnews.cifor.org/53111/what-do-forests-have-to-do-with-food?fnl=en

https://forestsnews.cifor.org/58192/expansion-of-oil-palm-plantations-into-forests-appears-to-be-changing-local-diets-in-indonesia?fnl=en

https://forestsnews.cifor.org/52266/wild-nourishment?fnl=en

https://forestsnews.cifor.org/51201/forests-farming-and-food?fnl=en

https://www.foreststreesagroforestry.org/news-article/priority-food-tree-and-crop-food-composition-database/

http://www.worldagroforestry.org/blog/2019/11/29/year-round-micronutrients-ten-species-fruit-trees-are-better-just-few

http://www.worldagroforestry.org/news/using-agroforestry-address-seasonal-food-and-nutrient-gaps-communities-case-study-kenya

http://blog.worldagroforestry.org/index.php/2015/08/04/first-fruit-tree-portfolios-established-in-kenya-in-a-novel-approach-to-improve-year-round-nutrition/

https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2017/11/23/improving-the-plants-that-africans-eat-and-breeders-neglect

https://blog.worldagroforestry.org/index.php/2019/05/17/eradicating-hunger-through-the-african-orphan-crops-consortium/

 

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • COVID-19-led ban on wild meat could take protein off the table for millions of forest dwellers

COVID-19-led ban on wild meat could take protein off the table for millions of forest dwellers


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Young man hunting in the forest, Yangambi, DRC. Photo by Axel Fassio/CIFOR
Posted by

FTA communications

Originally posted on Forest News

Lack of access to wild meat could result in hunger and malnutrition for local and Indigenous communities

Conservationists have greeted China’s recent clampdown on wild animal hunting and consumption with enthusiasm.

The government made the move based on scientific theories that COVID-19 was transmitted from a pangolin or a bat to humans in a market in the city of Wuhan.

A similar response to the capture and consumption of wild meat occurred during the Ebola outbreak, which originated in an animal-human interaction and raged in West Africa from 2014 to 2016. At that time, conservationists suggested the disease was good for wildlife because people would not be eating wild animals as a result.

The transmission of disease between animals and people is nothing new. Animals have been the vector of more than 60 percent of infectious diseases, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which also states that three of every four new or emerging infectious diseases are zoonotic.

In the Middle Ages, plague, which is caused by the bacteria Yersinia pestis, found in small mammals and their fleas, led to pandemics. Known as the “Black Death,” in the 14th century it caused more than 50 million deaths in Europe. The Spanish flu virus, which is thought to have originated in pigs, led to the 1918-1919 pandemic, killing an estimated 40 million people worldwide.

Read also –> On the Chinese government’s decision prohibiting some trade and consumption of wild animals

Diseases often jump from animals to humans, but become much more serious and have the potential to create pandemics when human-to-human transmission occurs.

How does this happen? The current focus is on wild fauna, but remember, as in the case of the Spanish flu, some of the deadliest diseases have been transmitted to humans not by wildlife, but by domestic livestock. For example, poultry sparked avian influenza and rodents led to the plague and cause hantaviruses.

First, transmission occurs when humans create contacts with wild fauna in places where none previously existed. In other words, humans “go” to the site of virus reservoirs.

Read also –> The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2

Research into Ebola by a multidisciplinary team coordinated by the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Spain’s University of Malaga and Britain’s Manchester Metropolitan University, into how wild animals, humans and natural landscapes interact, demonstrates that in large measure the problem is linked to deforestation and habitat degradation, which leads to environmental oscillations that enable the jump of diseases from animals to humans.

Read also –> No conservation silver lining to Ebola

In a more recent study, the team showed that when bats in African rainforests are unsettled by humans, contact increases with people, likely influencing the spread of Ebola or other diseases carried by bats.

Second, transmission occurs when humans bring the reservoirs to their favored environments. For example, live animal markets or even pet trade sites — think psittacosis, also known as parrot fever.

The  global wildlife trade – whether legal or illegal – valued at billions of dollars, is also to blame for the spread of pathogens and infectious diseases resulting from the legal or illegal transport of animals or from selling them alive in markets in appalling conditions.

Read also –> The harvest of wildlife for bushmeat and traditional medicine in East, South and Southeast Asia

These two mechanisms of disease transmission from animals to humans are quite universal, even in the case of the current Coronavirus pandemic.

However, the solution to the problem must be more nuanced than an outright global ban.

If China’s example of outlawing hunting of wild animals is taken up by other countries, this could mean that millions of people – often the poorest rural and Indigenous communities – will not be allowed to access – through hunting or gathering wild animals – the only source of animal protein available to them.

Where no other protein is available, eating wild meat is a necessity, but it should be banned where there are alternatives and where profiteering from wildlife is the motive. Many urban consumers consider wild meat a luxury item, while others might buy it because they have migrated from rural areas to cities and they want to continue eating the food they traditionally consumed.

In very simple terms: nations should forbid the sale of live animals, close markets selling live animals, stop wildlife trafficking and stem the trade of wild animals from forests to cities.

Read also –> Recent loss of closed forests is associated with Ebola virus disease outbreaks

By doing this, we help conserve wildlife in their habitats and enable communities to use this resource. Research shows that city dwellers do not rely on wild meat as the only source of animal protein, since other affordable sources of meat are available.

The interrelationship between wild meat consumption, food security and poverty alleviation must be explored simultaneously when making decisions without relying on an outdated colonial discourse of conservation that favors wildlife over people.

Rural and Indigenous communities who harvest wild meat sustainably as a source of dietary protein already face growing competition from deforestation, biodiversity loss, legal and illegal trade. We should not add to these increased risks of malnutrition or hunger.

Read also –> Importance of Indigenous Peoples’ lands for the conservation of Intact Forest Landscapes

Many tropical forests face “empty forest” syndrome – they are forests in good standing, but they are depleted of large animals because of overhunting, disease, the impact of climate change, deforestation and forest degradation.

To address unsustainable exploitation amid growing concerns about animal-human disease transmission, sound and locally-tailored policies must be developed and implemented.

CIFOR and the partners of the Sustainable Wildlife Management Programme — which includes the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization, the French Agricultural Centre for International Development (CIRAD) and the Wildlife Conservation Society — with support from the European Commission, are contributing to this effort through research-action, open consultations, working with communities to learn how to best protect the livelihoods and traditions of subsistence forest and rural dwellers and the landscapes they depend upon.

By Robert Nasi and John E. Fa

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.

 

Access all FTA publications on bushmeat here.

Latest post


Back to top

Sign up to our monthly newsletter

Connect with us