Download - Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
1/97
The Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) is one of the 15 centres
supported by the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR)
F O R E S T P E R S P E C T I V E S
Bruno Locatelli
Markku Kanninen
Maria Brockhaus
Carol J. Pierce Colfer
Daniel Murdiyarso
Heru Santoso
Facing an uncertain futureHow forests and people can adapt
to climate change
CIFORs Forest Perspectives promote discussion and
debate on key forest issues. Download electronic copies
at www.cifor.cgiar.org/publications.
FACINGANUNCERTAINFUTURE
Locatelli,B.|Kanninen,M.|Brockhaus,M.|Co
lfer,C.J.P.|Murdiyarso,D.|Santoso,H.
Te most prominent international responses to climate change ocus
on mitigation (reducing the accumulation o greenhouse gases) rather
than adaptation (reducing the vulnerability o society and ecosystems).
However, with climate change now inevitable, adaptation is gaining
importance in the policy arena, and is an integral part o ongoing
negotiations towards an international ramework.
Tis report presents the case or adaptation or tropical orests (reducing
the impacts o climate change on orests and their ecosystem services)
and tropical orests or adaptation (using orests to help local people and
society in general to adapt to inevitable changes).
Policies in the orest, climate change and other sectors need to address
these issues and be integrated with each othersuch a cross-sectoral
approach is essential i the benets derived in one area are not to be lost
or counteracted in another. Moreover, the institutions involved in p olicydevelopment and implementation need themselves to be fexible and able
to learn in the context o dynamic human and environmental systems.
And all this needs to be done at all levels rom the local community to
the national government and international institutions.
Te report includes an appendix covering climate scenarios, concepts,
and international policies and unds.
CIFOR
www.cifor.cgiar.org
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
2/97
Bruno Locatelli
Markku Kanninen
Maria Brockhaus
Carol J. Pierce Colfer
Daniel Murdiyarso
Heru Santoso
Facing an uncertain utureHow orests and people can adaptto climate change
Contributors
Peter Cronkleton, Ganga Ram Dahal, Houria Djoudi,
Kristen Evans, Fobissie Kalame, Hermann Kambire,
Rodel Lasco, Moira Moeliono, Raffaele Vignola
FOREST PERSPECTIVES NO. 5
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
3/97
Locatelli, B., Kanninen, M., Brockhaus, M., Coler, C.J.P., Murdiyarso, D. and Santoso, H. 2008
Facing an uncertain uture: How orests and people can adapt to climate change. Forest
Perspectives no. 5. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia.
Photos: Bruno Locatelli
Printed by Drukarnia Poznanska, Poznan
86p.
ISBN 978-979-1412-75-9
Published by
Center or International Forestry Research
Jl. CIFOR, Situ Gede,
Bogor Barat 16115, Indonesia
Tel.: +62 (251) 8622-622; Fax: +62 (251) 8622-100
E-mail: [email protected]
Web site: http://www.cior.cgiar.org
by CIFOR
All rights reserved.
Published in 2008
Center or International Forestry Research (CIFOR)
CIFOR advances human wellbeing, environmental conservation, and equity by conducting
research to inorm policies and practices that aect orests in developing countries.
CIFOR is one o 15 centres within the Consultative Group on International Agricultural
Research (CGIAR). CIFORs headquarters are in Bogor, Indonesia. It also has oces in
Asia, Arica and South America. CIFOR works in over 30 countries worldwide and haslinks with researchers in 50 international, regional and national organisations.
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
4/97
Preace v
Acknowledgements vii
Summary ix
1. Introduction 1
2. Adaptation or tropical orests 3
2.1. Vulnerability o tropical orests to climate change 3
2.2. Dening orest adaptation 7
2.3. Implementing orest adaptation 13
3. Tropical orests or adaptation 21
3.1. Ecosystem services and human wellbeing 21
3.2. Tropical orests or the adaptation o society 26
3.3. Mainstreaming tropical orests into adaptation policies 30
4. Conclusions 43
Appendix: Understanding adaptation 45
A.1. Climate change scenarios in the tropics 45
A.2. Concepts o vulnerability 50
A.3. What is adaptation? 57
A.4. International policies and unds 63
Reerences 69
Contents
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
5/97
iv
Boxes
1. Planning or climate change in the Amazon 12
2. National Policy Learning Group in Nepal 17
3. Shared learning 18
4. Future scenarios: learning together how to plan and prepare orthe uture 19
5. Vulnerability o carbon storage and the links between adaptationand mitigation 25
6. Principles and criteria or assessing the vulnerability o coupledhumanenvironment systems 29
7. Aorestation and reorestation policies and adaptation toclimate change in West Arica 32
8. Mainstreaming orest into adaptation and development policies inThe Philippines 36
9. A policy research ramework on actors, decision making andpolicy networks 39
10. Hydropower, orests and adaptation in Costa Rica: supportingadaptive decision making processes 40
11. The role o science in coordinating and supporting adaptive processesin West Arica 41
12. The ATEAM ramework or assessing vulnerabilities 53
13. Vulnerable countries 54
14. An eight step approach or assessing vulnerabilities 57
15. The Adaptation Policy Framework 61
16. Costs and benets o adaptation 62
17. UNFCCC adaptation unds 65
Figures
1. Components o the exposure and sensitivity o orest ecosystems 4
2. Examples o measures or orest adaptation 10
3. Examples o ecosystem services and their links to human wellbeing 22
4. Ecosystem services and their links to vulnerability to climate change 27
5. Annual anomalies o global land-surace air temperature, 1850
to 2005, relative to the 19611990 mean or CRUTEM3 46
6. Multimodel mean changes in surace air temperatureand precipitation or boreal winter and summer 47
7. The components o vulnerability 53
8. Various conceptualisations o impact and adaptation 55
Tables
1. Examples o adaptation measures or managed orests 11
2. Examples o relevant ecosystem services or vulnerable sectors 28
3. Climate change trends in three continents, according to IPCC 494. Categories o vulnerability actors 52
5. Types o adaptation 59
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
6/97
Preace
Te science o climate change has come a long way since the Earth Summit in
Rio de Janeiro (1992) and the adoption o the Kyoto Protocol (1997). We now
recognise that some degree o climate change is inevitable, and even the best
case scenario is going to have major impacts on global weather patterns and,
consequently, peoples livesespecially the poor. Mitigation o climate changeis no longer enough. We have to adapt to the impending changes as they arise;
or, better still, anticipate those changes by having adaptation strategies in place.
Climate change adaptation is one o the our building blocks o the Bali Action
Plan.
Forests are a vital part o any global eort to address climate change. o date,
however, orests have been mostly considered in the context o mitigation
through reorestation, aorestation, and more recently, avoided deorestation
and orest degradation. Yet with over a billion people dependent (in one way
or another) on orests or their livelihood, orests can also play a crucial role
in adaptation.
Forests provide many millions o people with raw materials in the orm o ood,
uel and materials or shelter. And they provide ecosystem servicessuch as
water regulation, erosion control and carbon storageto billions more. We
need orests to continue providing these raw materials and ecosystem services
into the uture, and in the ace o climate change.
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
7/97
vi
In this report, the authors present the case or a dual agenda to enhance the
role o orests in adaptation: assisting orests to weather the coming storm o
climate change, and managing orests in ways that enable orest-dependent
peoples and society in general to cope with the coming changes. Tey term
these approaches adaptation or orests and orests or adaptation.
Tese approaches pose dicult challenges, requiring new policies and
institutions inside and outside the orestry sector narrowly dened.
But mainstreaming adaptation into orest management strategies, and
mainstreaming orests into adaptation strategies, are objectives that cannot
wait. Both are needed i orests are to meet their potential or increasing
their own and societys resilience to the changes in climate that are already
underway.
Frances Seymour
Director General, CIFOR
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
8/97
Te authors are grateul to their colleagues and peers who reviewed earlier
dras o this report: Ian Burton, Tea Dickinson and Manuel Guariguata.
Tis document has been produced with the nancial assistance o the European
Union (EuropeAid/ENV/2004-81719). Te contents o this document can
under no circumstances be regarded as refecting the position o the EuropeanUnion.
Figure 5 is reproduced rom Figure 3.1, page 242, in renberth et al. (2007)
with permission rom IPCC.
Figure 6 is reproduced rom Figure 10.9, page 767, in Meehl et al. (2007) with
permission rom IPCC.
Acknowledgements
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
9/97
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
10/97
Te most prominent international responses to climate change ocus on
mitigation (reducing the accumulation o greenhouse gases) rather than
adaptation (reducing the vulnerability o societies and ecosystems). However,
with some degree o climate change now recognised as inevitable, adaptation
is gaining importance in the policy arena. Moreover, it is one o the ourbuilding blocks o the 2-year Bali Action Planongoing negotiations towards
an international ramework to replace the Kyoto Protocol in 2012.
Tis report presents the case or adaptation or orests (reducing the impacts
o climate change on orests and their ecosystem services) and orests or
adaptation (using orests to help local people and society in general to adapt to
inevitable changes). Linking adaptation and tropical orests are a new rontier:
adaptation is a new arena or tropical oresters, and tropical orests are a new
arena or adaptation specialists. ropical orest management now needs to be
adapted in a way that will smooth the transition through climate change. Te
goal may be to maintain important ecosystems or specieswhere adaptation
measures will aim at resisting the eects o climate change. Alternatively, the
goal may be to maintain the ecosystem services provided by the orestwhere
adaptation measures will aim at helping the orest to evolve so that it does
the same job in the new climate. Te huge diversity o tropical orests and
local situations means that a vast array o adaptation measures is required,
Summary
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
11/97
x
rom which the most appropriate ones can be selected or each situation.
Moreover, because the extent o uture climate change is unknown, more than
one measure is advisable in each case and implementation must be fexible to
the changing situation.
Policies in the orest, climate change and other sectors need to address these
issues and be integrated with each othersuch a cross-sectoral approach is
essential i the benets derived in one area are not to be lost or counteracted
in another. o date, tropical orests have been given a minor role in adaptation
strategies, even in most o the National Adaptation Programmes o Action.
Moreover, the institutions involved in policy development and implementation
themselves need to change, to be in a position to enorce the new policies, and
to become fexible and able to learn in the context o dynamic human and
environmental systems. And all this needs to be done at all levels rom the local
community to the national government and the international community
again the emphasis is on integration, without which actions at dierent scales
risk cancelling each other out.
Te report looks at the two aspects in turnadaptation or tropical orests,
and tropical orests or adaptationand includes an appendix on climate
scenarios, concepts, and international policies and unds.
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
12/97
In 2007, the Fourth Assessment Report o the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) presented incontrovertible evidence that the global
climate is changing because o human activities. Since the rst IPCC report
published in 1990, scientic knowledge has been growing and policy responses
have been implemented at international, national and local levels. In the most
prominent international responses to climate change, the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC; established in 1992)and the Kyoto Protocol (1997), the ocus is put on mitigationreducing
the accumulation o greenhouse gases in the atmosphererather than on
adaptationreducing the vulnerability o society and ecosystems to climate
change.
However, adaptation is gaining importance in the climate change policy
arena, as actors realise that climate change cannot be totally avoided and
mitigation policies will take time beore being eective (because o the inertia
o economic, atmosphere and climate systems). In December 2007, the United
Nations Conerence on Climate Change (Bali) ended with the adoption o the
Bali Action Plan, a 2-year plan or negotiating a new climate treaty. Adaptation
is one o the our building blocks o the negotiation. Te outcomes o the
negotiation will shape a uture international ramework supporting adaptation
activities in developing countries.
Te role o tropical orests in mitigating climate change, through carbon
storage, has been recognised and incorporated in international agreements andpolicy instruments. Te contribution o tropical aorestation and reorestation
Introduction1
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
13/97
2 | Facing an uncertain future
activities is already acknowledged in the Clean Development Mechanism
(CDM) o the Kyoto Protocol, many carbon markets reward tropical orestry
activities, and the inclusion o avoided tropical deorestation in a uture
international agreement is being discussed. While tropical orests are an
important component o mitigation science and policy, their role in adaptationis rapidly gaining signicance. Linking adaptation and tropical orests is a
new rontier or science and policy: adaptation is a new rontier or tropical
oresters, and tropical orests are a new rontier or adaptation specialists.
Te links between adaptation and tropical orests are two old. First, as tropical
orests are vulnerable to climate change, those managing or conserving them
will have to adapt their management to uture conditions. People living in
orests are highly dependent on orest goods and services, and are vulnerable
to orest changes both socially and economically. Even i local stakeholders
know more in some ways about their orests than anyone else does, the
unprecedented rates o climate change may jeopardise their capacity to adapt
to new conditions. Capacity building and scientic knowledge are needed to
understand the vulnerability o orests and local people, and to design and
implement adaptation measures.
Second, tropical orests deliver ecosystem services that are vital or people
beyond the orest worldwide. As these ecosystem services contribute toreducing the vulnerability o society to climate change, the conservation or
management o tropical orests should be included in adaptation policies. Te
institutional links between tropical orests and other sectors should be created
or reinorced by using an intersectoral approach to adaptation.
Tis report aims to demonstrate that: (1) tropical orests need to adapt or
be adapted, because they are vulnerable to climate change; and (2) tropical
orests are needed oradaptation, because they can help to decrease humanvulnerability to climate change. First, we argue that adaptation measures
should be dened and implemented or reducing the vulnerability o orests
to climate change (Chapter 2). Ten, we argue that orests should be included
in adaptation policy or their contribution to reducing societal vulnerability
(Chapter 3). At the end o the report, an appendix presents general inormation
about climate change, the concepts o vulnerability and adaptation, and the
international policies and unds related to adaptation.
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
14/97
3
ropical orests are vulnerable to climate change and adaptation is needed to
reduce their vulnerability. In this chapter, the vulnerability o tropical orests is
introduced in section 2.1, possible adaptation options are presented in section
2.2, and the implementation o orest adaptation is discussed in section 2.3.
2.1 Vulnerability o tropical orests to climate change
Te Fourth Assessment Report o the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (Parry et al. 2007) indicates that i global average temperature
increases by more than 1.52.5, there are projected to be major changes
in local climates, in terms o mean and range o temperature, precipitation
(rainall) and extreme events (see Appendix). Te changes in climate andcarbon dioxide concentration will aect the structure and unction o
ecosystems, species ecological interactions, and species geographical ranges,
with consequences or biodiversity (Malcolm et al. 2006) and ecosystem
services. Many ecosystems, including tropical orests, are likely to be aected
this century by an unprecedented combination o climate change, associated
disturbances (e.g., fooding, drought, wildre, insects), and other global change
drivers (e.g., land use change, pollution, overexploitation o resources).
Adaptation or tropical orests2
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
15/97
4 | Facing an uncertain future
Te eects o a changing climate on ecological systems have already been
observed at various levels o ecological organisation rom organisms to
ecosystems. Observations include changes in structure and unctioning,
carbon and nitrogen cycling, species distributions, population size, timing
o reproduction or migration, and length o growing season (Corlett andLarankie 1998; Gitayet al. 2002; Root et al. 2003; Clark 2007). Tese studies
suggest that global change may be a current and uture conservation threat,
and emphasise the need or considering climate change in conservation,
management or restoration o tropical orests. Additional threats will emerge
as the climate continues to change, especially as it interacts with other stresses
such as habitat ragmentation (McCarty 2001; Brooket al. 2008).
Potential impacts
Te potential impacts o climate change on tropical orests are a unction o
exposure and sensitivity (see denitions o these concepts in Appendix, Figure
7). ropical orests are exposed to dierent actors o climate change and
variability, as well as other drivers such as land use change or pollution that
exacerbate the impacts o climate change (see Figure 1). Sensitivity reers to the
degree to which a system will respond to a change in climate, either positively
or negatively. Among the parameters o sensitivity are changes in disturbance
regimes that are aected by climate and land use practices (Murdiyarso andLebel 2007). For example, El Nio-induced droughts have increased the
incidence o re in humid tropical orests (Barlow and Peres 2004).
Figure 1. Components o the exposure and sensitivity o orest
ecosystems (ater Johnston and Williamson 2007).
Exposure Sensitivity
Climate change and variabilityIncrease in temperature
Changes in precipitationChanges in seasonal patternsHurricanes and stormsIncrease in CO
2levels
Sea level riseOther driversLand use changeLandscape ragmentationResource exploitationPollution
Changes in disturbance regimese.g., res, pests and disease
Changes in tree level processese.g., productivity
Changes in species distributionChanges in site conditions
e.g., soil conditionChanges in stand structure
e.g., density, height
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
16/97
Adaptation for tropical forests | 5
Tropical rainforests. Studies o changes in tropical orest regions since the last
glacial maximum show the sensitivity o species composition and ecology to
climate changes (Hughen et al. 2004). Several studies have predicted impacts o
climate change on tropical rainorests. In the humid tropics o north Queensland
(Australia), signicant shis in the extent and distribution o tropical orestsare likely, because several orest types are highly sensitive to a 1 warming and
most types are sensitive to changes in precipitation (Hilbert et al. 2001). Te
decline in rainall in the Amazon Basin predicted by some climate models,
and the intensication o the Indian monsoon will have large-scale eects on
availability o water or tropical orests (Bazzaz 1998). For the Amazon, several
studies predict a die back o the orest and large-scale substitution by savannah
(Cox et al. 2004; Nepstad et al. 2008). Te sensitivity o tropical rainorests to
climate is increased by interactions with ongoing extensive ragmentation. In
the Amazon, the interactions between agricultural expansion, orest res and
climate change could accelerate the degradation process (Nepstad et al. 2008).
However, some impacts o climate change on tropical rainorests remain
uncertain (Granger Morgan et al. 2001; Wright 2005).
Tropical cloud forests. ropical cloud orests are an important subset o
tropical rainorests rom a climate change perspective. Even small-scale shis
in temperature and precipitation are expected to have serious consequences
or tropical orests on high mountains; indeed, changes in climate have alreadycaused species extinctions (Pounds et al. 1999). ropical cloud orests are
especially sensitive because they are in areas with steep gradients and highly
specic climatic conditions (Foster 2002). Atmospheric warming is raising the
altitude o cloud cover that provides tropical cloud orest species with moisture
via prolonged immersion in clouds (Pounds et al. 1999). Te habitat or these
species will shi up the mountains as they ollow the retreating cloud base,
orcing them into smaller and smaller areas (Hansen et al. 2003). Te extreme
sensitivity o the microclimates o tropical cloud orests to climate changemakes a good case or using these habitats as a listening post or detecting
climate change (Loope and Giambelluca 1998). In the highland rainorests o
Monteverde, Costa Rica, the liing o the cloud base associated with increased
ocean temperatures has been linked to the disappearance o 20 species o rog
(Pounds et al. 1999). In East Maui, Hawaii, the steep microclimatic gradients
in montane tropical orests combined with increases in interannual variability
in precipitation and hurricanes are expected to produce a situation where
endemic biota will likely be displaced by non-native plants and animals (Loope
and Giambelluca 1998; Hansen et al. 2003).
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
17/97
6 | Facing an uncertain future
Tropical dry forests. Ecosystems in semi-arid areas are very sensitive to changes
in rainall, which can aect vegetation productivity and plant survival (Hulme
2005). Studies conducted in anzania and Costa Rica show that tropical dry
orests may be particularly sensitive to lie zone1 shis under climate change
(Mwakiwamba and Mwakasonda 2001; Enquist 2002). ropical dry orestsare likely to be aected most by drought and re. A slight decrease in annual
precipitation is expected to make tropical dry orests subject to greater risk
rom orest res in the immediate uture. Prolonging the dry seasons would
enhance desiccation, making the orest system more exposed and sensitive to
res. However, increased re occurrence can eventually lead to a decrease o
res due to the reduction o uelbeds over time (Goldammer and Price 1998;
Hansen et al. 2003). According to Miles et al. (2006), Latin American tropical
dry orests will be more aected than those in Arica or Asia.
Mangroves. Mangroves have also been identied as among the orest types
most threatened by climate change. Te principal threat to mangroves comes
rom sea level rise and the associated changes in sediment dynamics, erosion
and salinity. Sea level rise is expected to take place at about twice the rate at
which sediment build-up (necessary or the mangroves survival) will occur
and so cause the sinking o many deltas. Furthermore, erosion will reduce the
size o mangroves: cli erosion on the seaward edge that undercuts mangrove
roots, sheet erosion across the swamp surace, and loss o tidal creek banks(Hansen et al. 2003). Mangroves may be aected by other atmospheric changes
as well, including temperature, carbon dioxide rise, and storms. Drying out o
mangroves would be highly damaging, or example, droughts in Senegal and
Gambia have aected mangroves (Dudley 1998).
Forest adaptive capacity
Te adaptive capacity o orests remains uncertain (Julius and West 2008).ropical orests are more complex ecosystems than agricultural ones, which
probably gives them greater resilience to small changes in their environment.
ropical orests are generally able to withstand some levels o climatic stress,
especially intact orests (Malhi et al. 2008). However, many scientists are
concerned that the adaptive capacity o orests will not be sucient to adapt to
unprecedented rates o climate change (Gitayet al. 2002).
1 In this context, lie zones may be considered as the biological and geographical specics
o the habitat in which an organism lives. Under climate change, these are prone to move; orexample, a habitat o specic vegetation may be hundreds o kilometres away aer a 2 raise in
global mean temperature.
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
18/97
Adaptation for tropical forests | 7
We need a better understanding o the actors that enhance or limit the adaptive
capacity o orests (Julius and West 2008), including the role o the landscape
around a orest plot, as landscape connectivity may acilitate ecosystem
adaptation and the adaptive capacity can be reduced by stresses outside the
orest.
Species can adapt to climate change through phenotypic plasticity
(acclimatisation), adaptive evolution, or migration to suitable sites (Markham
1996; Bawa and Dayanandan 1998). Without these options, species will decline
and ultimately become extinct (Noss 2001). Evidence rom coupled climate
and vegetation models suggests that global warming may require migration
rates much aster than those observed during postglacial times and hence
has the potential to reduce biodiversity by selecting or highly mobile and
opportunistic species (Malcolm et al. 2002; Pearson 2006).
It has been reported that species richness and diversity in a orest ecosystem can
contribute to resistance and resilience, the most compelling explanation being
the redundancy provided by multispecies membership in critical unctional
groups (Walker 1992, 1995; Peterson et al. 1998). Diversity o unctional
groups, in addition to diversity o species within groups, also appears to
promote ecological resistance (Noss 2001).
2.2. Defning orest adaptation
The need or exible and diversifed approaches
As tropical orests are vulnerable to climate change, current management
or conservation practices should integrate climate change threats and aim
at reducing vulnerabilities. Dening technical adaptation measures or
orest is not straightorward, because adaptation measures depend on avariety o contextual actors (e.g., orest types, management goals, climatic
threats, and non-climatic pressures). In addition, even though modelling has
been used to study the vulnerability o tropical orests to climate change,
the uncertainties inherent to ecosystem models and climate scenarios may
hinder their use by orest managers or policy makers (Millar et al. 2007). For
instance, uture trends in precipitation are still unclear at local and regional
scales, especially or the tropics. In many situations, models that cannot help
determine uture impacts will help envision possible directions o change. In
terms o orest vulnerabilities, the main gap in our knowledge relates to the
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
19/97
8 | Facing an uncertain future
processes explaining the adaptive capacity o species: phenotypic plasticity,
adaptive evolution, and migration (Noss 2001; Midgleyet al. 2007).
Te uncertainties about uture climate and orest vulnerability mean that we
need fexible and diverse approaches. Depending on the local context, theseapproaches should combine various measures selected rom an adaptation
toolbox (Millar et al. 2007). Te selection o measures depends on the
uncertainties associated with the uture o climate and orests. Where some
dimensions o the uture are reliably known, the choice can be specically
targeted to the projected uture scenario. However, in most cases, the high
degree o uncertainty will justiy the selection a portolio o measures to
reduce the risk associated with choosing one inadequate measure.
Te selection o adaptation measures also depends on the variables that the
society considers o interest. For instance, depending on whether adaptation
aims at conserving some high-value species or conserving hydrological
ecosystem services, adaptation measures should be selected or either
conserving the key species or acilitating the transition o the ecosystem
towards another state in which vegetation structure allows the supply o
hydrological ecosystem services. Tere may be many synergies between
dierent goals, but sometimes there need to be tradeos. Aer dening the
predicted likely eects o climate change and desired end state, decisionmakers should select measures and evaluate them, taking into consideration
the uncertainties. Te implementation o the measures should then be
associated with monitoring and learning to enable ongoing and ex post
evaluations and fexibility in management to the lessons learnt (Spittlehouse
and Stewart 2003; Millar et al. 2007).
Categories o adaptation measures or orestsVarious authors have proposed adaptation measures or orests (e.g., Noss
2001; Spittlehouse and Stewart 2003; Hansen et al. 2003; Millar et al. 2007;
Fischlin et al. 2007; Guariguata et al. 2008; Ogden and Innes 2008). Most
measures have been dened or temperate or boreal orests, but can be
extrapolated to tropical orests even though some may be dicult to apply
there (because they are generally less intensively managed and host a higher
diversity o trees than boreal and temperate areas).
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
20/97
Adaptation for tropical forests | 9
Following Smithers and Smit (1997), we distinguish between two broad
categories o adaptation measures or orests, depending on their intended
outcomes or eects. Te rst category is adaptation measures aimed at
buering a system rom perturbations, by increasing its resistance and
resilience to change. Resistance is the ability o a system to resist externalperturbations (Bodin and Wiman 2007), while resilience is the ability o a
system to absorb disturbance and reorganize while undergoing change so as
to still retain essentially the same unction, structure, identity, and eedbacks
(Walker et al. 2004). According to Millar et al. (2007), buering measures that
try to conserve orests in their current or past state are not a panacea and may
be eective only over a short term. With increasing changes in environmental
conditions, such eorts may eventually ail. Because o these risks and their
associated costs, such measures should be applied preerentially to high-value
orests (e.g., those hosting high priority endangered species or providing
important goods or local communities) or to orests with low sensitivity to
climate change (Millar et al. 2007). Tese measures are also relevant or short-
term management objectives, or example, a orest plantation close to harvest.
In the second category, the objective is to acilitate a shi or an evolution o the
system towards a new state that meets altered conditions (Smithers and Smit
1997). In contrast to the rst category, the objective is not to resist changes, but
to ease and manage natural adaptation processes (Millar et al. 2007). However,as in the rst category, the resilience o the ecosystem is key in this process,
not necessarily to keep the ecosystem in the same state aer a disturbance, but
to help it evolve in a way that maintains its unction, structure and identity
(desired by the manager or the society), such as storing a similar amount o
carbon, regulating water quality or producing goods or local communities.
Examples o adaptation measures or orestsSome measures or increasing orest resistance and resilience (see Figure 2, le)
ocus on preventing perturbations, such as re (managing uel, suppressing or
controlling res), preventing the entry o or removing invasive species, and
controlling insects and diseases (applying phytosanitary treatments). Another
option or buering systems rom perturbations is to actively manage the
ecosystem aer a perturbation; or instance, avouring the establishment o
prioritised species in a restoration plan.
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
21/97
10 | Facing an uncertain future
Rather than suppressing re and carrying out prescribed burning, Barlow andPeres (2004) propose two strategies or re control in humid tropical orests:
reducing orest fammability (e.g., orest management should avoidincreasing
understorey uel load and reducing understorey humidity) and preventing re
rom reaching fammable orests (e.g., with rebreaks, education, legislation
and nancial incentives).
Measures to buer orests rom perturbations may be very costly and beyond
the economic means o most tropical countries (Barlow and Peres 2004).
Moreover, some measures may have negative environmental impacts (e.g.,
herbicides) or not be sustainable. Fire control may be counterproductive in
the long term when climate is changing (Hulme 2005).
o acilitate a shi or evolution o the ecosystem (see Figure 2, right), one
measure is to enhance landscape connectivity and reduce ragmentation.
Connectivity between habitats increases the ability o species to migrate.
Corridors established in the direction o the climate gradient could help
species to adapt to climate change (Noss 2001). Another measure consistso dening high priority areas or conservation under scenarios o climate
Figure 2. Examples o measures or orest adaptation.
Institutional measures or orest adaptation
Increasing awareness Reducing socioeconomic pressures on orestsCreating knowledge
Managing at large scale Building partnerships
Technical measures or orest adaptation
Measures or buering
systems rom perturbations
Preventing re (rebreak, re
suppression, etc.)Managing invasive species, insectsand diseases (removal o invasive,herbicides, prevention o migrationo invasive species, phytosanitarytreatments)Managing post-disturbance phases(revegetation, restoration)
Measures or acilitating shits andevolution towards new states
Enhancing landscape connectivity
(corridors, buers, etc.)Conserving biodiversity hotspotsand ecosystems acrossenvironmental gradientsConserving or enhancing geneticdiversity in natural orestsModiying orest plantationmanagement (species and genotypeselection, species mixes, thinningand harvest, age structure, etc.)Maintaining natural disturbanceregimesAssisting migration
Measures orboth objectives
Reducing otherpressures
Complementarymeasures
MonitoringConservationex situ
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
22/97
Adaptation for tropical forests | 11
change. Because o the uncertainties about the vulnerabilities o dierent
orests, a good strategy is to conserve a large spectrum o orestsor instance,
ecosystems across environmental gradients or biodiversity hotspotsor their
value and their possible higher resilience (Noss 2001). Landscape connectivity
also plays a role in genetic diversity.
As genetic diversity is a key element or understanding ecosystem adaptive
capacity, some authors propose measures or maintaining or enhancing
it in managed orests (see able 1 rom Guariguata et al. 2008). For orest
plantations, the array o technical measures is wide, as these ecosystems are
generally intensively managed and the management can be modied to adapt
to climate change. For instance, the selection o species and genotypes can be
adapted to uture climates, while a mix o species and uneven age structure can
increase resistance or resilience, or harvesting can be anticipated or reducing
risks (Guariguata et al. 2008).
Table 1. Examples o adaptation measures or managed orests (ater
Guariguata et al. 2008)
Forest management
type
Adaptation measures
Measures or acilitating adaptive
capacity
Other sylvicultural measures
Natural orestmanagement based on
selective logging
Maximise juvenile andreproductive population sizes
Maintain interpopulation
movement o pollen and/or
seeds (by minimising harvesting
impacts on orest structure
and by maximising landscape
connectivity)
Maximise genetic variation o
planted seedlings when enriching
logging gapsUse o translocated material in
enrichment planting
Intensiy liana removalMinimise levels o slash
through reduced impact
logging
Widen buer strips/rebreaks
Tree plantation Plant a range o genotypes and
let nature take its course
Implement appropriate species
selection (particularly in
transitional zones)
Use seed sources adapted to
expected uture conditions
Use stable genotypes that tend
to perorm acceptably in a range
o environments
Plant mixtures o species
and implement appropriate
species selection
Widen buer strips/rebreaks
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
23/97
12 | Facing an uncertain future
Some authors argue that natural disturbance regimes (e.g., res) should be
maintained because several re suppression programmes have caused the
decline o endangered plant species (Noss 2001; Hansen et al. 2003). However,
it is also recognised that res set by human agency are a threat or many
ecosystems, especially in the tropics. A right balance must be ound betweensuppressing re, letting natural res burn, and using prescribed burning or
reducing the risk o high-intensity res. Te assisted migration o plant species
to areas where climate is projected to become suitable is also a controversial
measure,2 because o the potential risk that human-aided translocation o
species introduces invasive species (Mueller and Hellmann 2008).3
Some adaptation measures can contribute to both buering the system rom
perturbations and acilitating shis (see Figure 2, centre); or instance, reducing
other pressures such as habitat destruction, ragmentation and degradation
(Noss 2001; Hansen et al. 2003; Malhi et al. 2008). As a threat, climate change
is adding to other stresses, some o which are currently more pressing than the
climate. I these other threats are not addressed, adaptation may be irrelevant
or may look like a purely academic question (Markham 1996). Reducing other
threats will also increase ecosystem resilience and acilitate shis (see Box 1).
2 Populations o plants (including trees) may migrate hundreds or thousands o metres a year
through seed dispersal.3 ranslocated species may behave as invasives in their new habitat.
Box 1. Planning or climate change in the Amazon
The possibility that climate change could enhance drought in the Amazon
is a major concern. Malhi et al. (2008) propose several key elements o a
development, conservation and adaptation plan to increase the resilience
o the Amazon socioecological system: (1) keeping deorestation below
a threshold; (2) controlling re use through education and regulation; (3)
maintaining broad corridors or species migration; (4) conserving river
corridors as humid reugia and or migration; (5) keeping the core northwest
Amazon largely intact.
Malhi et al. (2008) discuss the governance and nancial issues associated
with this plan, as well as the roles o protected areas, indigenous people,
smallholders and agroindustries, and governments.
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
24/97
Adaptation for tropical forests | 13
Other measures are complementary to those listed above. For instance,
monitoring is vital to allow ongoing adjustments in adaptation strategies
(Fischlin et al. 2007). At a dierent level, conservation ex situ has been cited
as an adaptation measure by some authors. Even though it does not reer to
the adaptation o the ecosystem itsel, it may help conserve genetic diversitythreatened with extinction. Collections could allow reintroduction o species
in the uture (Hansen et al. 2003).
In parallel to technical measures, institutional measures must be developed,
such as increasing awareness within the orest communities and the orest
sector about adaptation to climate change (Spittlehouse 2005; see also
section 2.3).
2.3. Implementing orest adaptation
Building on the local
Te complexities and uncertainties related to orests and climate change
adaptation are magnied by enormous geographical and human variation.
Tere are powerul orces and traditions that discourage attention to local
variationsuch attention is typically seen as too complex, too dicult, too
costly and impractical. Yet the importance, indeed the necessity, to attend tolocal variation has become increasingly obvious (e.g., Agrawal 2008). It is now
time to bite the bullet and make the institutional changes needed to allow us
to build on the local, rather than trying to make broad-scale plans that will
inevitably ail in most localities.
o successully address climate change adaptation in any o the worlds
populated orests, a number o institutional changes will be needed. Macqueen
and Vermeulen (2006), or instance, point to the need or increasing localownership and access to orest resources; developing local monitoring and
analysis o climate change impacts, and building institutional responsibility
or adaptation strategies, among others. Agrawal (2008) emphasises the
importance o assessing and strengthening local institutions, developing locally
appropriate solutions and linking actors at various scales. Most undamentally,
managers at all levels will need to use any existing mechanisms that allow
people in particular settings to adapt their own systems more eectively as
their conditions change.
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
25/97
14 | Facing an uncertain future
Learning rom previous experiences
Implementing orest adaptation should not start rom scratch, but be built on
experiences o building adaptive and collaborative management, recognising
the need or links and mutual support among levels.
Researchers in various contexts have been experimenting, since the 1990s,
with approaches that emphasise adaptation and collaboration. A large body
o literature is relevant or implementing orest adaptation at local scales
or example, CIFORs ACM (Adaptive Collaborative Management) series
(see below), Bucket al. (2001), ompkins and Adger (2004), Armitage et al.
(2008). Tese approaches were developed partly because, in the late 1990s,
the researchers had a growing sense that the processes involved in improving
sustainability and human wellbeing needed to be studied and improved, rather
than simply documenting the obvious ailures in those realms. Tis concern is
even more pressing now than it was at that time.
The Adaptive Collaborative Management approach
Te ACM approach, as a good example, is built on three prongs, all o which
will be crucial in adapting to climate change. Tese three prongs build on
the ollowing observations (each ollowed by the kinds o actions needed to
address them):
Te need to understand the views o the many stakeholders typically1.
interested in orests and their management. ools have been developed
to identiy the relevant people and to ashion orums in which they can
communicate more eectively with each other, as they deal with change.
Te need to have better mechanisms or learning rom experience.2.
Researchers have worked with groups o people to successully analyse,
plan, monitor and alter coursecrucial abilities as the climate changes.
Te need to address the inequitable distribution o power in todays orests3.
(and into the uture). Action researchers have worked with marginalised
and dominant groups, women and men at various scales, to level the playing
eld, in an attempt to address the needs o those who currently have crucial
(and probably growing) needs, but little voice in the management o local
orests and other decisions aecting their wellbeing.
ypically, trained local acilitators have played central roles. Such acilitators use
participatory action research to work with local community groups (and morerecently, with local governments) to strengthen local analytical capabilities
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
26/97
Adaptation for tropical forests | 15
and adaptive capacity, as well as a variety o other skills, such as collective
action, negotiation, networking and confict management. In other cases,
researchers and acilitators have worked with broader scale actors, such as the
timber industry, conservation projects, regional and national governments,
to strengthen support or the local actions and expand the impacts o localeorts. Dierent approaches are described in Coler (2005), CIFOR (2008)
and Pund et al. (2008).
Monitoring is likely to be critical in global eorts to address climate change
adaptation. Early work by Prabhu and his associates (e.g., Prabhu and Coler
1996; Prabhu et al. 1998) demonstrated the possibility and practicality o
developing and adapting sets o criteria and indicators (C&I) or monitoring
orest management and human wellbeing in specic local contexts. Such
monitoring is central to the capacity to adapt to change while moving towards
a shared vision o a desirable uture. Such tools have proven useul at all levels,
rom communities to international processes, though their suitability in any
context needs assessment and, i deemed useul, adaptation to local conditions.
Examples o community-level testing o C&I and participatory monitoring are
given in McDougall (2002), Hartanto et al. (2003), Guijt (2007) and Evans and
Guariguata (2008).
Understanding diverse situations
Mechanisms that maintain links and eedback rom diverse local contexts to
key decision makers are vital to ensure the continuing relevance and positive
eects o policy interventions. One option, used in the Landscape Mosaics
project (Pund et al. 2008), is to select villages associated with orests o
dierent quality and remoteness, to maximise the understanding o possible
ecological and socioeconomic determinants. Another option could be to select
communities along a likely climate change trajectory, or example, along ahumidity gradient where drier or wetter conditions are likely to expand. For
example, the intention could be to learn how the existing human systems are
adapted to climate variability in the driest areas and share such understanding
with people in places likely to ace similar drier conditions in the uture. Still
another option is to examine the systems o dierent ethnic groups (e.g.,
Dounias and Coler 2008), which oen have totally dierent human systems
even within the same ecological niche, or describe and work with dierent
management and goals across gender lines (Shea et al. 2005).
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
27/97
16 | Facing an uncertain future
Another approach involves linking particular communities with district-level
government actors, as was done in Jambi, Sumatra, Indonesia (Komarudin
et al. 2008) or underway in Landscape Mosaics sites in Guinea, anzania,
Cameroon, Lao PDR, Indonesia and Madagascar (Pund et al. 2008). Te
use o multistakeholder orums can serve a similar unction o maximisingcommunication and collaboration among levels and actors (e.g., Yuliani et al.
2008a, b).
Tese models build on the ACM approach described above, conducting
participatory action research at both community and district government
levels. Shared concerns are then identied between the two levels, and
collaboration is encouraged as both villagers and ocials struggle with
addressing the shared goals.
Linking local and national scales
Te need or linking local and national scales has justied the development
o learning mechanisms that oster exchanges o inormation between the
dierent scales. An example is the National Policy Learning Group approach,
used in Indonesia and Nepal or bringing together government and non-
government actors who are genuinely committed to addressing national
problems (see Box 2). o date, ACM acilitators have played leadership roles
in these groups, inculcating a systematic learning approach within the groups.
Climate change issues are perect problems or such groups to address,
which should ideally maintain close links with the community level (whether
through shared trials, requent eld trips, direct community involvement, or
other mechanisms).
Another broad-scale approach is shared learning workshops (see Box 3).
Tese bring together individuals rom all levels and various settings to share
what has worked in their respective localities. Such workshops have been
quite successul in providing a mechanism or districts in Indonesia (newly
empowered aer the 2001 decentralisation law) to learn rom each others
successes and ailures. Another approach or developing scenarios o the
uture with stakeholders is described in Box 4. Tese approaches can also
contribute to climate change adaptation.
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
28/97
Adaptation for tropical forests | 17
Box 2. National Policy Learning Group in Nepal
(by Ganga Ram Dahal)
In order to establish linkage between policy research and implementation,
the National Policy Learning Group (NPLG) Nepal was initiated in 2005
as an outcome o CIFOR-led action research on Adaptive Collaborative
Management (ACM). Although it is a loose network o multiple stakeholders
representing government, NGOs and civil society groups, there has already
been impact on the ground in terms o transorming research ndings into
action. One example is the ormulation o government policy to give more
authority to the local community in the development o enterprises based
on non-timber orest products (NTFPs). This policy was ormulated on the
basis o the ndings and recommendation o policy research undertaken
in Nepal. Organising a periodic meeting o the network members provides
space or shared learning on the one hand, and creates an environment or
synergy on common agendas (e.g., pro-poor policy development, climate
change and environmental issues) on the other. Other signicant issues o
common interest in the orestry sector in Nepal include community orestry,
transborder illegal timber transportation, tenure reorm, and equity, all o
which are regularly discussed by this group.
Rights and Resources Initiative (another action research in Nepal, 20062008)
used this network to increase members participation in research and their
use o research ndings in practice. The research has been looking at the
impacts o orest tenure reorm on livelihoods, income, orest condition and
equity (known by the acronym, LIFE).
The changed political context in Nepal has urther increased the signicance
o NPLG. The network is now engaged in providing some valid inputs to the
government on the orestry sector reorm process and orest-related policy
ormulation. The politically unbiased, democratic and inclusive nature o the
orum helps to infuence the policy process in Nepal. The network includes the
Federation o Community Forestry Users Nepal (FECOFUN), Nepal Foresters
Association, and some NGOs and bilateral organisations.
Recently, NPLG Nepal has been linked with the global Forest Governance
Learning Group (FGLG), which may urther strengthen its role and eectiveness
in transorming policy into practice.
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
29/97
18 | Facing an uncertain future
All o these approaches are useul and needed. But another important change is
in orderand it is a tall order: the standard operating procedures in governmentorest bureaucracies will need to change. Genuine, meaningul attention to local
human and ecological variation will require two dicult but key changes. First,
the knowledge and potential contribution o rural dwellers will have to be
more widely recognised and allowed to infuence ocial decision making. Tis
means changing ocials attitudes and strengthening eedback mechanisms
within bureaucracies.
Second, greater fexibility and reedom to ail will be needed, particularlyor eld personnel. Genuine capacity to adapt policies as needed requires
the ability to experiment locally; and the greatest learning oen comes rom
ailures. Bureaucratic norms need to change to encourage experimentation
and to accept occasional ailure, in pursuit o desired goals.
Box 3. Shared learning(by Moira Moeliono)
Between 2005 and 2007, CIFOR and PILI (Green Network: A Bridge or
Sustainability, an Indonesian NGO)organised seven workshops with a ocus
on collaborative management o natural resources in protected areas inIndonesia. These workshops adopted the principle o levelling the playing
eld, where every participant was to be teacher and student. The activity
itsel built on similar learning approaches described as action learning,
participatory action research, participatory learning and action, and social
learning. The goal o these workshops evolved rom being a channel or policy
inormation to learning or policy change. We tried to use shared learning
to develop, utilise and share inormation and knowledge. More importantly,
shared learning was meant to encourage learning in and among groups to
oster social change.
The inormal settings, the variety o methods used, the ocus on experience,
and learning arising rom participants experience all made these workshops
very popular. A network was developed through which learning continued
and collaborative eorts emerged.
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
30/97
Adaptation for tropical forests | 19
Box 4. Future scenarios: learning together how to plan and prepare
or the uture(by Kristen Evans and Peter Cronkleton)
In Bolivia, recent decentralisation and orest devolution reorms have provided
communities with opportunities to gain title to their orests and access more
resources or community development, through local budgeting and planning
processes. However, in the heavily orested area o Pando, local people
both communities and local government ocialshad little experience with
participatory planning methods and were oten at odds over how to manage
these new opportunities together. Communities thought that local ocials
were arrogant and corrupt; local ocials were rustrated at the inability o
the communities to present practical requests and negotiate reasonably.
CIFOR researchers involved in the BMZ Poverty and Decentralization research
project suggested that they experiment with uture scenarios as a method
or planning and preparing or the uture. Future scenarios are workshop-
based activities where people with diverse interests can come together to
anticipate, envision and plan or the uture. The methods stimulate refection
and dialogue among stakeholdersessential elements o participatory
planning and productive collaborationand they create interest in continued
involvement in planning processes (Evans et al. 2008). The methods can also
help participants think about an ideal uture, articulate hopes and desires,
share them in a group setting, and arrive at a consensus about a common
vision (Wollenberg et al. 1999; Evans et al. 2006). In Pando, uture scenarios
workshops were rst carried out in the communities, acilitated by CIFOR
researchers. Community members developed a vision o an ideal uture or
their community and presented it to the local government. Although initially
sceptical, by the second presentation, the mayor saw that the methods
could serve as a mechanism or planning or the uture in a way that was air,
transparent and inclusive. He requested that the methods be used in all o
the communities and then at the municipal level as the ormal participatory
planning process. Local leaders were also trained as acilitators. The resultwas a more productive, air, transparent and democratic municipal planning
process, where community members and local ocials learned how to plan
and prepare or the uture together.
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
31/97
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
32/97
Tropical orests or adaptation3
ropical orests provide essential services at dierent scales, rom local
communities to the world, and can contribute to reducing the vulnerability
o society to climate change. Tus, they need to be included in adaptation
policies. Te role o ecosystem services or human wellbeing is introduced in
section 3.1 and the contribution o tropical orests to the adaptation o society
to climate change is detailed in section 3.2. Te insertion o orest in adaptation
policies is discussed in section 3.3.
3.1. Ecosystem services and human wellbeing
The concept o ecosystem services
Te Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2003) denes ecosystem services
as the benets people obtain rom ecosystems. Tree types o ecosystem
services directly contribute to human wellbeing: provisioning services (also
called ecosystem goods), such as ood and uel wood; regulating services,
such as regulation o water, climate or erosion; and cultural services, such as
recreational, spiritual or religious services. In addition to these three types,
supporting services represent a ourth type o service and include the services
that are necessary or the production o other services; or example, primary
production, nutrient cycling and soil ormation (see Figure 3).
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
33/97
22 | Facing an uncertain uture
ropical orests cover less than 10% o the worlds land area, but are very
important providers o ecosystem services at various scales, rom local (e.g.,
non-timber orest products, pollination and scenic beauty) to regional (e.g.,
hydrological services) and global (e.g., carbon sequestration). Te biological
richness o tropical orests (5090% o Earths terrestrial species) contributes
to the supply o many ecosystem services (WRI et al. 1992).
ropical orests produce diverse goods or local people, as documented in
Asia (Kusters and Belcher 2004), Arica (Sunderland and Ndoye 2004) and
Latin America (Alexiades and Shanley 2005). Wood is currently an important
economic orest commodity or many tropical countries. Fuel wood is also
important, especially in developing countries where it meets about 15% o
energy demandand more than 90% in 13 countries (Shvidenko et al. 2005).
Non-wood orest products are extremely diverse, rom odder or animals and
ood or people to medicines and cosmetics. Te livelihoods o 250 million to
one billion people depend on these products (Byron and Arnold 1999). Edible
Ecosystem Services Constituents of Wellbeing
Supporting
services
Services
necessary or
the production
o all other
ecosystem
services
Soil
ormation
Nutrient
cyclingPrimary
production
Provision o
habitat
Provisioning servicesProducts obtained rom
ecosystems
Food
Fuel wood
Fibre
Biochemicals
Genetic resources
SecurityPersonal saety
Secure resource
access
Security rom
disasters
Basic material for
lifeAdequate livelihoods
Sucient nutritious
ood
Shelter
Access to goods
HealthStrength
Feeling well
Access to clean air
and water
Good socialrelations
Social cohesion
Mutual respect
Ability to help others
Regulating servicesBenets obtained rom
regulation o ecosystem
processes
Climate regulation
Disease regulation
Water regulation
Water purication
Cultural servicesNonmaterial benets
obtained rom ecosystems:
Spiritual and religious
Recreation and
ecotourism
Aesthetic
Inspirational
Educational
Sense o place
Cultural heritage
Freedom ofchoice and
action
Figure 3. Examples o ecosystem services and their links to human
wellbeing (ater Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2003).
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
34/97
Tropical orests or adaptation | 23
orest products are o utmost importance in developing countries; or example,
bushmeat and sh, which are major sources o protein or local people (Nasi
et al. 2008). ropical orests also produce traditional medicines, widely used
locally in developing countries and or the development o modern medicines
(Shvidenko et al. 2005).
Many regulating services are provided by tropical orests. ropical orests play
an important role in regulating the global climate as they store a large amount
o carbon, around 212 Gigatonnes in the vegetation (i.e., 45% o the carbon
stored in the worlds vegetation) and 216 Gt in the soils down to a depth o one
metre (i.e., 11% o the carbon in the worlds soils) (Watson et al. 2000).
Other regulating services are local or regional, such as the purication o
water, the mitigation o foods and drought, detoxication and decomposition
o wastes, generation and renewal o soil, pollination o crops and natural
vegetation, control o agricultural pests, dispersal o seeds, and moderation
o temperature extremes and the orce o winds and waves (Daily 1997). O
particular importance in a context o climate change is the role o orest or
regulating water volumes and quality. Even i orests are not a panacea or all
water-related problems (such as drought in dry areas or large-scale fooding),
their contribution to the conservation o basefow, the reduction o stormfow,
the preservation o water quality, and the reduction o sediment load hasbeen demonstrated in many places (Chomitz and Kumari 1996; Calder 2002;
Bruijnzeel 2004; Bonell and Bruijnzeel 2005; FAO and CIFOR 2005).
For many local communities, tropical orests have a spiritual and religious
value, and ecosystem changes can aect cultural identity and social stability
(De Groot and Ramakrishnan 2005; Ramakrishnan 2007). Other services,
such as aesthetic, recreation and heritage, are enjoyed by local people, visitors
and people or whom the ecosystem has a symbolic importance.
Ecosystems and human wellbeing
Ecosystem services infuence all the components o wellbeing presented in
Figure 3 (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005). Ecosystem services
increase the security o people living in the vicinityor example, through the
protective role played by regulating services against natural disasters. Ecosystem
services are directly linked to incomes, ood security and water availability that
are basic materials or lie (Levyet al. 2005). Human health is also linked to
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
35/97
24 | Facing an uncertain uture
orests, as many case studies and syntheses have shown (e.g., Coler et al. 2006;
Coler 2008). Social relations also depend on ecosystems, through the ability
to realise aesthetic and recreational activities and express cultural values i they
are linked to some habitats or species (Levyet al. 2005). Ecosystem services
are also linked to reedomthe ability to decide on the kind o lie to lead. Forexample, the degradation o hydrological services or uel wood resources can
increase the time spent by local communities in collecting sources o energy
and water, resulting in less time or education, employment or leisure (Levyet
al. 2005).
Many valuation studies have tried to give an economic value to ecosystem
services, even when they have no market price, using a wide array o methods
(e.g., Costanza et al. 1997; Ludwig 2000; Farber et al. 2002; National Research
Council 2004; Norton and Noonan 2007; Nijkamp et al. 2008). Economic
valuations have been undertaken in order to show the links between ecosystems
and human welare, to identiy important ecosystems, and to guide decision
making regarding ecosystem conservation (Bingham et al. 1995; Pritchard et
al. 2000). Tese studies have shown the high value o ecosystem services at
dierent scales (e.g., Costanza et al. 1997; Pattanayak 2004).
Vulnerability o ecosystem servicesEcosystem services are threatened by various human-induced pressures
other than climate change, such as land use change, landscape ragmentation,
degradation o habitats, overextraction o resources, pollution, nitrogen
deposition and invasive species. Climate change will exacerbate these pressures
over the coming decades (Fischlin et al. 2007). Current climate change trends
will impact species and ecosystems and result in declining ecosystem services
(Leemans and Eickhout 2004). Te loss o ecosystem services will reduce
human wellbeing at all scales.
Increasing degradation o ecosystems is a major concern or sustainable
development (Mler 2008), and this concern will be more pressing in the
uture as human demands on ecosystem services are increasing (Millennium
Ecosystem Assessment 2005). Te links between orests and the alleviation
o poverty should be emphasised in development programmes (Angelsen and
Wunder 2003; Innes and Hickey 2006). Tere is an urgent need to include
ecosystem services in planning and prioritisation or meeting dierent
conservation objectives and ocusing on human wellbeing (Egoh et al.
2007). All institutional levels are aected by the loss o ecosystem services,
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
36/97
Tropical orests or adaptation | 25
Box 5. Vulnerability o carbon storage and the links between
adaptation and mitigation
The vulnerability o ecosystems to climate change brings important consequences
or the climate system, as ecosystem changes may release carbon into the
atmosphere (ampliying global warming) or remove carbon rom the atmosphere
(reducing global warming). This vegetationclimate eedback has been studiedwidely; however, many uncertainties remain (Canadell et al. 2004). At a global
scale, increasing atmospheric CO2
concentration, combined with longer growing
seasons at high latitudes, could cause an increase in ecosystem productivity, thus
an increase in carbon removal rom the atmosphere. However, the magnitude o
this eect remains uncertain, as nutrient availability may become limiting, and
CO2
has secondary eects on ecosystem water balance and species composition
(Fischlin et al. 2007). In the tropics, ecosystems are currently a net source o
greenhouse gases because o deorestation. Cramer et al. (2004) used climate and
deorestation scenarios and estimated that the impacts o climate change and
deorestation would add between 29 and 129 ppm o CO2 to the atmosphere by2100, deorestation being responsible or the major part o these emissions. For
the tropics, some models show that the Amazon orest could collapse (Cox et al.
2004) or that some tropical orest areas could become a source o carbon resulting
rom a combination o changes in climate and CO2, especially because o drought
stress (Berthelot et al. 2002).
International discussions are underway to include avoided tropical deorestation
under the international climate regime. Reducing emissions rom deorestation
and orest degradation (REDD) in developing countries is an important measure
or climate change mitigation. However, the potential o a REDD mechanism
could be counteracted by the impacts o climate change on orests (Fischlin et al.
2007). This justies exploring options that promote synergies between adaptation
and mitigation (Nabuurs et al. 2007). In addition, REDD activities could aect the
vulnerability o society at a local or regional scale. The conservation o ecosystem
services can be benecial or adaptation, but badly designed REDD activities could
also deprive local people o their main sources o livelihood. Thus, the impacts o
mitigation on adaptation are o major signicance. It appears thereore necessary
to promote synergies between mitigation and adaptation in orestry management
and in the sectors that depend on orest ecosystem services (Murdiyarso et al.2005; Klein et al. 2007; Ravindranath 2007).
rom households, through local communities and local rms, to national
and international organisations (Hein et al. 2006). Because o the role o
ecosystems in the regulation o the global climate, international organisations
are increasingly looking or solutions to reduce deorestation and orest
degradation (see Box 5).
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
37/97
26 | Facing an uncertain uture
3.2. Tropical orests or the adaptation o society
Ecosystem services and societal vulnerability to climate
change
In the conceptual ramework or understanding the links between ecosystemservices and human wellbeing (Figure 3), many components o wellbeing
can also be interpreted as dimensions o vulnerability to climate change.
For instance, personal saety and security is clearly related to the human
vulnerability to disasters. Adequate livelihoods and good health may also
determine the sensitivity and adaptive capacity o a population acing a
climate-related threat.
Some criteria oen used in quantitative studies o social vulnerability are relatedto income or wealth, education, health, social capital and networks, saety nets,
or access to water (e.g., Cutter et al. 2003; Sullivan and Meigh 2005; Eakin and
Bojrquez-apia 2008). Tese criteria o sensitivity or adaptive capacity o
households, communities or countries are clearly linked to ecosystem services
(Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2003, 2005).
In addition to these similarities between vulnerability indicators and
constituents o wellbeing, we propose to link ecosystem services and
vulnerability to climate change (see Figure 4), using the components o
vulnerability dened by the IPCC: exposure, sensitivity and adaptive
capacity (see Appendix, Figure 7 or denitions). Ecosystem services may
contribute to reducing exposure, sensitivity or vulnerability o coupled
humanenvironmental systems in various ways.
Te exposure o a system to climate change can be reduced by mitigation
policies, in which the ecosystem service o carbon sequestration has a role
to play (see Box 5). However, local practices o carbon sequestration will nothave a measurable impact on the exposure o the locality to climate change,
as carbon sequestration activities should be conducted at a global scale to
have impacts on mitigation. Local or regional ecosystem services are more
relevant or adaptation. Supporting services contribute to the adaptive
capacity o an ecosystem, because nutrient cycling and primary production
are important components o the unctioning, resistance and resilience o
the ecosystem. Regulating services can decrease the sensitivity o a coupled
humanenvironment system; or example, the water regulation services
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
38/97
Tropical orests or adaptation | 27
provided by a orest determine the response o a watershed to rainall events.
Te vulnerability o the social system is also linked to provisioning and
cultural services, as nutrition, access to goods, health and social cohesion
contribute to sensitivity and adaptive capacity.
All sectors described as vulnerable to climate change by the IPCC (Parryet al.2007) benet rom diverse ecosystem services (see able 2). Te vulnerability
o these sectors depends on the vulnerability o the ecosystems they rely on.
However, most vulnerability assessments use a sectoral approach, which
overlooks the links between sectors and with ecosystems. We argue that, i
ecosystem services are relevant or a given sector, the vulnerability assessment
should deal with the vulnerabilities o both natural and human systems at
the same time and consider the links between them. wo examples o such
approaches are given below and an application is shown in Box 6.
Figure 4. Ecosystem services and their links to vulnerability to
climate change. See also Figure 3.
Vulnerability o a coupled humanenvironment system
Ecosystem
Services
Components of Vulnerability to Climate Change
(Exposure, Sensitivity, Adaptive Capacity)
Regulating servicesClimate regulation
Supporting services
Provisioning services
Cultural services
Regulating servicesDisease regulation
Water regulation
Water purication
Ecosystem Society
Exposure
(climate change)
Adaptive capacity
o the ecosystem (e.g.,
ability o the ecosystem
to conserve its integrity
in a changing climate)
Ecological sensitivity
(e.g., eects o climate
change on fooding
or the emergence o
diseases)
Societal
sensitivity(e.g., eects
o fooding or
diseases on
society)
Adaptive
capacity o
the society
(e.g., capacityto prevent
damages
rom fooding
or diseases)
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
39/97
28 | Facing an uncertain uture
Table 2. Examples o relevant ecosystem services or vulnerable sectors
Ecosystem services Vulnerable sectors
Freshwater
resources
Ecosystems
Food, fbre
and orest
products
Coastal
systems and
lowlying
areas
Industry,
settlement
and
society
Health
Provisioning
Food x x x
Wood, uel wood,
other bres
x x
Biochemicals and
genetic resources
x x x
Regulating
Moderation o foods,
landslides, soil erosion,
orce o wave and wind
x x x x x x
Water purication,
decomposition o
wastes, control o
diseases
x x x x x
Moderation o drought
and temperature
extremes
x x x x x
Pollination o crops and
natural ecosystems,
control o agricultural
pests, dispersal o
seeds
x x x
Regulation o global
climatex x x x x x
Cultural x x
According to IPCC (Parry et al. 2007).
Ecosystems outside the orests providing services.
Energy, transportation, tourism, insurance, etc.
Assessing vulnerability o coupled natural and human systems
Te AEAM project (Advanced errestrial Ecosystem Analysis and Modelling,
http://www.pik-potsdam.de/ateam) developed an approach to assess where
people or sectors may be vulnerable to the loss o ecosystem services, as a
consequence o climate and land use change. Tis approach highlights that the
societal vulnerability to global change also results rom impacts on ecosystems
and the services they provide (Metzger et al. 2005, 2006).
Te Research and Assessment Systems or Sustainability Program (http://
sust.harvard.edu) developed a vulnerability ramework or the assessment ocoupled humanenvironment systems (urner et al. 2003). Some essential
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
40/97
Tropical orests or adaptation | 29
Box 6. Principles and criteria or assessing the vulnerability o coupled human
environment systems
Vulnerability assessments provide critical inormation or policy makers who need to
prioritise adaptation eorts (Luers et al. 2003). Participative multicriteria assessments areeective in terms o policy impacts as they enable policy makers and local stakeholders to
be engaged in the denition and valuation o criteria (Mendoza and Prabhu 2005).
A general ramework was developed by the TroFCCA project (Tropical Forest and Climate
Change Adaptation, CIFORCATIE, http://www.cior.cgiar.org/trocca) and is currently applied
to diverse ecosystem services in various contexts, such as non-timber orest products
(NTFPs) in West Arica and orest hydrological services in Central America. This ramework is
voluntarily broad, as it must serve as a guide or discussion during its application in specic
cases (see gure).
The conceptual ramework is inspired by the works o Turner et al. (2003) and Metzger et
al. 2005), and emphasises the role o ecosystem services or society. Three main principles
are dened (see circles in the gure). The rst principle (P1) deals with the vulnerability o
ecosystem services to climate change or variability and other threats. It can be described by
criteria related to exposure and sensitivity to climate change or variability, and ecosystemadaptive capacity as a unction o current degradation or other pressures.
The second principle (P2) deals with the human system and its vulnerability to the loss
o ecosystem services. The sensitivity o the system (e.g., dependence on NTFPs or clean
water) and its adaptive capacity (e.g., availability o substitutes or the lost services) can
be used as criteria or P2. External drivers o changes, such as macroeconomic policies or
energy prices, must also be taken into account in characterising this principle.
The third principle (P3) considers the adaptive capacity o the system as a whole. It reers
to the capacity o the human systems to reduce the loss o ecosystem services. Criteria can
reer to the capacity o removing practices that increase pressures on ecosystems and thecapacity to implement orest adaptation.
Vulnerability of a coupled humanenvironment
system to the loss of ecosystem services
SocietyEcosystem
Other Drivers of ChangeClimate Change
Adapt. capacity Adapt. capacityAdaptive Capacity
Management
Ecosystem ServicesSensitivity Sensitivity
P1 P2
P3
Exposure
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
41/97
30 | Facing an uncertain uture
elements considered in the ramework are the linkages between human and
biophysical vulnerability, and the complex dynamics o humanenvironment
systems.
As vulnerability assessment should consider the vulnerability o sectors jointlywith the vulnerability o ecosystems they depend on, adaptation policies should
do the same. Te adaptation measures should not be limited to technical
and socioeconomic actions within the sector, but be broadened to consider
ecosystem management as an adaptation option. For example, a hydropower
plant or a drinking water acility acing problems o siltation or water quality
could participate in upstream orest management, instead o investing in
technical ltration or treatment solutions. Te adaptation policy responses
linking orests with other sectors are discussed in the next section.
3.3. Mainstreaming tropical orests into adaptationpolicies
Adaptation policies are needed to acilitate the adaptation o tropical orests
and enhance the role o orests or the adaptation o society. Te mainstreaming
o tropical orests in adaptation policies should ollow these two objectives:
rst, promoting adaptation or tropical orests, by encouraging the adaptivemanagement o orest; and second, promoting tropical orests or adaptation,
by linking orests with the sectors that benet rom orest ecosystem services.
The need or mainstreaming orest adaptation into policies
As highlighted in previous sections, technical and societal adaptation is
needed to reduce the vulnerability o humanenvironment systems to
climate change. Even with the well documented need or adaptation o
orests and people to climate change, there is still a lack o adaptation policy
processes at the national level. Hesitation in the design o adaptation policies
and programmes is oen linked to a lack o inormation, uncertainties
about the exact direction o climate change and a cascade o unknowns.
It is also related to political preerences or short-term economic gains, and
perceived tradeos between the dierent sectors. Treats like climate change
and variability have been insuciently incorporated into national strategies
(Mortimore and Manvell 2006).
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Future
42/97
Tropical orests or adaptation | 31
Tere is a strong argument that governancewith its structures, mechanisms
and institutionsis a key determinant o adaptive capacity (Adger et
al. 2004; Brooks et al. 2005), as it sets the rame in which adaptation is
happening or where adaptation is needed. In this context, revised national
development policies and governance structures should enable adaptationat multiple scales. Tereore, we need to mainstream adaptation into
national development policies, programmes and interventions to reduce
the vulnerability o ecological and social systems (Huq et al. 2003; DFID
2006; UNFCCC 2007; see Appendix or a discussion o pros and cons o
mainstreaming adaptation into development).
Place o orests in adaptation policies
Te need or mainstreaming orests into adaptation policies becomes
even more obvious when reviewing the national communications and
action plans or adaptation prepared under the UNFCCC (see Appendix
or an introduction to national communications and adaptation plans
under the UNFCCC), in which the role o orests or adaptation and the
importance o adaptation or orests to reduce vulnerability have not been
well refected (UNFCCC 2008). Forests play a secondary role (i any at all)
in adaptation policies (Kalame et al. in press), despite their importance or
livelihoods and their interlinkages with other sectors. In most cases, orestsand orestry are not a priority in the National Adaptation Programmes o
Action (NAPAs). However, there are examples o adaptation strategies that
do include orestry, such as reduction o climate change hazards through
coastal aorestation in Bangladesh, orest re prevention in Samoa,
catchment conservation with reorestation in Haiti, and several examples
in West Arica (see Box 7).
In the NAPAs and national communications submitted to the UNFCCC, theidentied adaptation needs in the orest sector are related to technical (e.g.,
inormation systems or orest inventories) and societal adaptation (e.g.,
capacity building or community and state bodies). Proposed activities are
oen related to market-based improvementsor example, the development
o non-timber orest products (NFPs)and to the review or setting up o new
orest management and conservation plans. Most national communications
and action plans or adaptation identiy the lack o human and nancial
capacity as a constraint to successul adaptation.
-
7/31/2019 Locatelli 2008 Facing an Uncertain Fu