odds and ends of rehabilitating (restoring) degraded landscapes
TRANSCRIPT
Odds and ends of rehabilitating (restoring) degraded landscapes
Lalisa A. DugumaWorld Agroforestry Center (ICRAF) &ASB Partnership for Tropical Forest MarginsEmail: [email protected]
2
OutlineSome background The big questions in restoration/
rehabilitation◦ What do we want to achieve?◦ How do we reach at the goal?◦ Why do we do it?◦ Whose voice and choice is crucial?
Case studySummary
3
The rise of the restoration agendaNatural resource depletion (and degradation)
in multiple fronts (e.g. forests, water, land, etc.) is a growing threat.
Close to 60% of the ecosystems services widely used by humans are degraded or being used unsustainably (MEA 2005).
Replenishing the potential of the ecosystem to provide the necessary ecosystem services through restoration/ rehabilitation is gaining promising momentum.
4
Restoration opportunities1.5 billion ha of mosaic restoration – forests and trees combined in other land uses such as agroforestry, smallholder farms and settlement areas.
About 0.5 billion ha of wide scale restoration of closed forest
About 200 million ha of unpopulated remote forests e.g. in boreal areas that could be restored.
5
The Commitments (e.g. Bonn Challenge-FLR) Ethiopia and USA – 15 million ha each DR Congo – 8 million ha Uganda – 2.5 million ha Rwanda – 2 million ha Guatemala – 1.2 million ha Brazil, Colombia, El Salvador, Costa Rica – 1
million ha each Pakistan – 0.38 million ha Initiative 20x20 (Latin America and Caribbean
countries) – 20 million degraded land (inclusive of 11.5 million ha degraded forest)
6
Very promising commitments indeed!!
In implementing such commitments, it is necessary to take into account a number of issues so that the initiative could be successful and sustainable.
7
Restoration vs. RehabilitationRehabilitation - the reparation of ecosystem
processes, productivity and services… but..
- does not necessarily mean a return to pre-existing biotic conditions.
Restoration - the process of assisting the
recovery of an ecosystem that has been degraded, damaged, or destroyed.
- attempts to return an ecosystem to its historic trajectory.
Source: Society for Ecological Restoration International Science & Policy Working Group. 2004. The SER International Primer on Ecological Restoration. www.ser.org &Tucson: Society for Ecological Restoration International.
8
What are we intending to restore/ rehabilitate - Cover or Quality??Cover is more about the form i.e. species
composition, land use configurations, etc. ◦ Do we just want any type of forest where forest was
lost? ◦ Or is the cover guided by the priority functions?
Quality (function) could be influenced by form. Is quality about multiple functions?
What is the landscape we want to have?
History: How did we come to where we are? [What lead to the degradation?]
Context: What is the context within which the restoration or rehabilitation is going to take place?
Risks and drivers of change: What are the risks and drivers of change that we need to take into account?
9
10
Which pathway or trajectory is appropriate?
How do we want to go where we planned to be in restoring or rehabilitating the landscapes?
Each trajectory can have its own distinct practices, investment portfolio, stakeholders, …
A
B
11
From whose perspective? Who makes the decision on
what has to be achieved? Did we capture the voice of all
relevant stakeholders? Whose vision is it? What is the voice of the people
on..◦ Choice of practices◦ Choice of tree species◦ The nature of benefits
generated from the initiatives
Delta Electronics Group
12
The Shinyanga case study, Tanzania
13
The Process
1930 1986
Sustainable agropastoral livelihood system
Ngitili (fodder bank system)
Indigenous Miombo and acacia woodlands
Tse tse fly eradication (clearing of woodlands)
Cash crops expansion
Overstocking
Increasing wood demand
Deforestation for villagization
Ngitili
Onfarm tree conservation
Improved fallows
Rotational woodlots
The reference state The degradation phase The restoration phase
Community empowerment
Long-term investment from NORAD and ICRAF
Insecure tenure rights
ICRAF was the key technical partner from the beginning of the programme
14
The Change
611 ha of managed Ngitili in
1986
378,000 ha Ngitili-based landscape
rehabilitation in 2005
Degraded grazing land
Restored area using Ngitili
The Values (Multiple functions): Social, environmental, livelihood benefits
Carbon sequestration1986 - 611 ha (27,428 t C)2005 - 377,756 ha (17 M t C)
Biodiversity conservation Bird species reemerged : 22-65Mammal species reemerged : 10Plant species in restored Ngitili:152
Economic values (Monela et al. 2005)Per capita economic value : 168 USD /yearRural per capita expenditure : 102 USD /yearOther ES benefits
Hydrological functions: Dam construction and water management (“Water markets”)Soil management: Erosion controlSOM build-up
Social and Intrinsic values- Social
cohesion - ‘Social
security’
REDD+ piloting is already ongoing!!
17
The Values….
Multi-actor processes
18
19
Success factorsMulti-stakeholder engagement and
institutional collaborations that leverage resources and knowledge and improve overall efficiency of the actions
Long-term investments by financing agencies and long-term commitment by actors
Favorable and supportive national and local policy processes
Use of local practices and knowledge in the implementation scheme
Empowerment of the community to own the process
20
SummaryTo achieve the goal of restoration/ rehabilitation in landscapes, it is crucial to articulate: What we want to achieve,
what processes are in it, what resources are required.
How we want to do itWho should be engagedWhy we do it …..
Thank You!