Focused on forest management and governance, this book examines two decades of experience with Adaptive Collaborative Management (ACM), assessing both its uses and improvements needed to address global environmental issues.
The volume argues that the activation and the empowerment of local peoples are critical to addressing current environmental challenges and that this must be enhanced by linking and extending such stewardship to global and national policymakers and actors on a broader scale. This can be achieved by employing ACM’s participatory approach, characterized by conscious efforts among stakeholders to communicate, collaborate, negotiate and seek out opportunities to learn collectively about the impacts of their action. The case studies presented here reflect decades of experience working with forest communities in three Indonesian Islands and four African countries. Researchers and practitioners who participated in CIFOR’s early ACM work had the rare opportunity to return to their research sites decades later to see what has happened. These authors reflect critically on their own experience and local site conditions to glean insights that guide us in more effectively addressing climate change and other forest-related challenges. They showcase how global and regional actors will have to work more closely with smallholders, Indigenous Peoples and local communities, recognizing the key local roles in forest stewardship.
This book will be of great interest to students, scholars and practitioners working in the fields of conservation, forest management, community development, natural resource management and development studies more broadly.
Many tropical forestlands are experiencing changes in land-tenure regimes, but how these changes may affect deforestation rates remains ambiguous. Here, we use Brazil’s land-tenure and deforestation data and quasi-experimental methods to analyze how six land-tenure regimes (undesignated/untitled, private, strictly-protected and sustainable-use protected areas, indigenous, and quilombola lands) affect deforestation across 49 spatiotemporal scales. We find that undesignated/untitled public regimes with poorly defined tenure rights increase deforestation relative to any alternative regime in most contexts. The privatization of these undesignated/untitled lands often reduces this deforestation, particularly when private regimes are subject to strict environmental regulations such as the Forest Code in Amazonia. However, private regimes decrease deforestation less effectively and less reliably than alternative well-defined regimes, and directly privatizing either conservation regimes or indigenous lands would most likely increase deforestation. This study informs the ongoing political debate around land privatization/protection in tropical landscapes and can be used to envisage policy aligned with sustainable development goals.
Zero-deforestation supply chain policies that leverage the market power of commodity buyers to change agricultural producer behavior can reduce forest clearing in regions with rapid commodity expansion and weak forest governance. Yet leakage—when deforestation is pushed to other regions—may dilute the global effectiveness of regionally successful policies. Here we show that domestic leakage offsets 43-50% of the avoided deforestation induced by existing and proposed zero-deforestation supply chain policies in Brazil’s soy sector. However, cross-border leakage is insignificant (<3%) because soybean production is displaced to existing U.S. farmland. Eliminating deforestation from the supply chains of all firms exporting Brazilian soy to the EU or China from 2011-2016 could have reduced net global deforestation by 2% and Brazilian deforestation by 9%. Thus, if major tropical commodity importers (e.g., the EU) require traders to eliminate deforestation from their supply chains, it could help bend the curve on global forest loss.
Tropical deforestation continues at alarming rates with profound impacts on ecosystems, climate, and livelihoods, prompting renewed commitments to halt its continuation. Although it is well established that agriculture is a dominant driver of deforestation, rates and mechanisms remain disputed and often lack a clear evidence base. We synthesize the best available pantropical evidence to provide clarity on how agriculture drives deforestation. Although most (90 to 99%) deforestation across the tropics 2011 to 2015 was driven by agriculture, only 45 to 65% of deforested land became productive agriculture within a few years. Therefore, ending deforestation likely requires combining measures to create deforestation-free supply chains with landscape governance interventions. We highlight key remaining evidence gaps including deforestation trends, commodity-specific land-use dynamics, and data from tropical dry forests and forests across Africa.
Transformative governance is key to addressing the global environmental crisis. We explore how transformative governance of complex biodiversity–climate–society interactions can be achieved, drawing on the first joint report between the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services to reflect on the current opportunities, barriers, and challenges for transformative governance. We identify principles for transformative governance under a biodiversity–climate–society nexus frame using four case studies: forest ecosystems, marine ecosystems, urban environments, and the Arctic. The principles are focused on creating conditions to build multifunctional interventions, integration, and innovation across scales; coalitions of support; equitable approaches; and positive social tipping dynamics. We posit that building on such transformative governance principles is not only possible but essential to effectively keep climate change within the desired 1.5 degrees Celsius global mean temperature increase, halt the ongoing accelerated decline of global biodiversity, and promote human well-being.
During December 2020, a crowdsourcing campaign to understand what has been driving tropical forest loss during the past decade was undertaken. For 2 weeks, 58 participants from several countries reviewed almost 115 K unique locations in the tropics, identifying drivers of forest loss (derived from the Global Forest Watch map) between 2008 and 2019. Previous studies have produced global maps of drivers of forest loss, but the current campaign increased the resolution and the sample size across the tropics to provide a more accurate mapping of crucial factors leading to forest loss. The data were collected using the Geo-Wiki platform (www.geo-wiki.org) where the participants were asked to select the predominant and secondary forest loss drivers amongst a list of potential factors indicating evidence of visible human impact such as roads, trails, or buildings. The data described here are openly available and can be employed to produce updated maps of tropical drivers of forest loss, which in turn can be used to support policy makers in their decision-making and inform the public.
Natural climate solutions (NCS)—actions to conserve, restore, and modify natural and modified ecosystems to increase carbon storage or avoid greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions—are increasingly regarded as important pathways for climate change mitigation, while contributing to our global conservation efforts, overall planetary resilience, and sustainable development goals. Recently, projections posit that terrestrial-based NCS can potentially capture or avoid the emission of at least 11 Gt (gigatons) of carbon dioxide equivalent a year, or roughly encompassing one third of the emissions reductions needed to meet the Paris Climate Agreement goals by 2030. NCS interventions also purport to provide co-benefits such as improved productivity and livelihoods from sustainable natural resource management, protection of locally and culturally important natural areas, and downstream climate adaptation benefits. Attention on implementing NCS to address climate change across global and national agendas has grown—however, clear understanding of which types of NCS interventions have undergone substantial study versus those that require additional evidence is still lacking. This study aims to conduct a systematic map to collate and describe the current state, distribution, and methods used for evidence on the links between NCS interventions and climate change mitigation outcomes within tropical and sub-tropical terrestrial ecosystems. Results of this study can be used to inform program and policy design and highlight critical knowledge gaps where future evaluation, research, and syntheses are needed.
The restoration of degraded lands has received increased attention in recent years and many commitments have been made as part of global and regional restoration initiatives. Well-informed policy decisions that support land restoration, require spatially explicit information on restoration potentials to guide the design and implementation of restoration interventions in the context of limited resources. This study assessed ecosystems indicators of land degradation using a systematic approach that combines field surveys and remote sensing data into a set of multi-criteria analyses to map restoration potentials in the semi-arid areas. The indicators considered were soil organic carbon, erosion prevalence, enhanced vegetation index, Normalized differences water index and the Net Primary productivity. Three classes of restoration potential were established: (1) areas not in need of immediate restoration due low degradation status, (2) areas with high potential for restoration with moderate efforts required and (3) areas in critical need of restoration and require high level of efforts. Of the total area of the study site estimated at 88,344 km2, 59,146.12 km2, or 66.94% of the theoretically recoverable area, was considered suitable for restoration, of which 38% required moderate efforts while 28% require less efforts. The recoverable areas suitable for restoration could be restored through tree planting, soil and water conservation practices, farmers managed natural regeneration, and integrated soil fertility management. These results can help to spatially identify suitable multifunctional restoration and regeneration hotspots as an efficient way to prioritize restoration interventions in the context of limited resources.
Land degradation negatively impacts water, food, and nutrition security and is leading to increased competition for resources. While landscape restoration has the potential to restore ecosystem function, understanding the drivers of degradation is critical for prioritizing and tracking interventions. We sampled 300–1000 m2 plots using the Land Degradation Surveillance Framework across Nyagatare and Kayonza districts in Rwanda to assess key soil and land health indicators, including soil organic carbon (SOC), erosion prevalence, vegetation structure and infiltration capacity, and their interactions. SOC content decreased with increasing sand content across both sites and sampling depths and was lowest in croplands and grasslands compared to shrublands and woodlands. Stable carbon isotope values (δ13C) ranged from −15.35 ‰ to −21.34 ‰, indicating a wide range of historic and current plant communities with both C3 and C4 photosynthetic pathways. Field-saturated hydraulic conductivity (Kfs) was modeled, with a median of 76 mm h−1 in Kayonza and 62 mm h−1 in Nyagatare, respectively. Topsoil OC had a positive effect on Kfs, whereas pH, sand, and erosion had negative effects. Soil erosion was highest in plots classified as woodland and shrubland. Maps of soil erosion and SOC at 30 m resolution were produced with high accuracy and showed strong variability across the study landscapes. These data demonstrate the importance of assessing multiple biophysical properties in order to assess land degradation, including the spatial patterns of soil and land health indicators across the landscape. By understanding the dynamics of land degradation and interactions between biophysical indicators, we can better prioritize interventions that result in multiple benefits as well as assess the impacts of restoration options.
Climate policy has thus far focused solely on carbon stocks and sequestration to evaluate the potential of forests to mitigate global warming. These factors are used to assess the impacts of different drivers of deforestation and forest degradation as well as alternative forest management. However, when forest cover, structure and composition change, shifts in biophysical processes (the water and energy balances) may enhance or diminish the climate effects of carbon released from forest aboveground biomass. The net climate impact of carbon effects and biophysical effects determines outcomes for forest and agricultural species as well as the humans who depend on them. Evaluating the net impact is complicated by the disparate spatio-temporal scales at which they operate. Here we review the biophysical mechanisms by which forests influence climate and synthesize recent work on the biophysical climate forcing of forests across latitudes. We then combine published data on the biophysical effects of deforestation on climate by latitude with a new analysis of the climate impact of the CO2 in forest aboveground biomass by latitude to quantitatively assess how these processes combine to shape local and global climate. We find that tropical deforestation leads to strong net global warming as a result of both CO2 and biophysical effects. From the tropics to a point between 30°N and 40°N, biophysical cooling by standing forests is both local and global, adding to the global cooling effect of CO2 sequestered by forests. In the mid-latitudes up to 50°N, deforestation leads to modest net global warming as warming from released forest carbon outweighs a small opposing biophysical cooling. Beyond 50°N large scale deforestation leads to a net global cooling due to the dominance of biophysical processes (particularly increased albedo) over warming from CO2 released. Locally at all latitudes, forest biophysical impacts far outweigh CO2 effects, promoting local climate stability by reducing extreme temperatures in all seasons and times of day. The importance of forests for both global climate change mitigation and local adaptation by human and non-human species is not adequately captured by current carbon-centric metrics, particularly in the context of future climate warming.
Forest restoration is being scaled-up globally to deliver critical ecosystem services and biodiversity benefits, yet we lack rigorous comparison of co-benefit delivery across different restoration approaches. In a global synthesis, we use 25,950 matched data pairs from 264 studies in 53 countries to assess how delivery of climate, soil, water, and wood production services as well as biodiversity compares across a range of tree plantations and native forests. Carbon storage, water provisioning, and especially soil erosion control and biodiversity benefits are all delivered better by native forests, with compositionally simpler, younger plantations in drier regions performing particularly poorly. However, plantations exhibit an advantage in wood production. These results underscore important trade-offs among environmental and production goals that policymakers must navigate in meeting forest restoration commitments.
Forest carbon projects can deliver multiple benefits to society. Within Southeast Asia, 58% of forests threatened by loss could be protected as financially viable carbon projects, which would avoid 835 MtCO2e of emissions per year from deforestation, support dietary needs for an equivalent of 323,739 people annually from pollinator-dependent agriculture, retain 78% of the volume of nitrogen pollutants in watersheds yearly and safeguard 25 Mha of Key Biodiversity Areas.
There is increasing global interest in employing nature-based solutions, such as reforestation and wetland restoration, to help reduce water risks to economies and society, including water pollution, floods, droughts and water scarcity, that are likely to become worse under future climates. Africa is exposed to many such water risks. Nature-based solutions for adaptation should be designed to benefit biodiversity and can also provide multiple co-benefits, such as carbon sequestration. A systematic review of over 10 000 publications revealed 150 containing 492 quantitative case studies related to the effectiveness of nature-based solutions for downstream water quantity and water quality (including sediment load) in Africa. The solutions assessed included landscape-scale interventions and patterns (forests and natural wetlands) and site-specific interventions (constructed wetlands and urban interventions e.g. soakaways). Consistent evidence was found that nature-based solutions can improve water quality. In contrast, evidence of their effectiveness for improving downstream water resource quantity was inconsistent, with most case studies showing a decline in water yield where forests (particularly plantations of non-native species) and wetlands are present. The evidence further suggests that restoration of forests and floodplain wetlands can reduce flood risk, and their conservation can prevent future increases in risk; in contrast, this is not the case for headwater wetlands. Potential trade-offs identified include nature-based solutions reducing flood risk and pollution, whilst decreasing downstream water resource quantity. The evidence provides a scientific underpinning for policy and planning for nature-based solutions to water-related risks in Africa, though implementation will require local knowledge.
To the Editor — World and industry leaders at the 26th United Nations Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26), held in Glasgow in November 2021, asserted in their declaration on forest and land use a commitment to “halt and reverse forest loss and land degradation by 2030”. Nothing less than decisive and coordinated global action is required as we near an apocalyptic future of environmental degradation, species extinction and catastrophic climate change. With the recent acceleration in newly created global commitments and successes, such as the achievement of Aichi Target 11 in 2021, we should nonetheless pause and reflect about the implications of such top-down pledges to conserve forests for Indigenous peoples worldwide.
Understanding where people depend the most on natural resources for their basic human needs is crucial for planning conservation and development interventions. For some people, nature is a direct source of food, clean water, and energy through subsistence uses. However, a high direct dependency on nature for basic needs makes people particularly sensitive to changes in climate, land cover, and land tenure. Based on more than 5 million household interviews conducted in 85 tropical countries, we identified where people highly depend on nature for their basic needs. Our results show that 1.2 billion people, or 30% of the population across tropical countries, are highly dependent on nature. In places where people highly depend on nature for their basic needs, nature-based strategies that protect, restore or sustainably manage ecosystems must be carefully designed to promote inclusive human development alongside environmental benefits.
The UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration offers immense potential to return hundreds of millions of hectares of degraded tropical landscapes to functioning ecosystems. Well-designed restoration can tackle multiple Sustainable Development Goals, driving synergistic benefits for biodiversity, ecosystem services, agricultural and timber production, and local livelihoods at large spatial scales. To deliver on this potential, restoration efforts must recognise and reduce trade-offs among objectives, and minimize competition with food production and conservation of native ecosystems. Restoration initiatives also need to confront core environmental challenges of climate change and inappropriate planting in savanna biomes, be robustly funded over the long term, and address issues of poor governance, inadequate land tenure, and socio-cultural disparities in benefits and costs. Tackling these issues using the landscape approach is vital to realising the potential for restoration to break the cycle of land degradation and poverty, and deliver on its core environmental and social promises.
1. Abandonment of agricultural land is widespread in many parts of the world, leading to shrub and tree encroachment. The increase of flammable plant biomass, that is, fuel load, increases the risk and intensity of wildfires. Fuel reduction by herbivores is a promising management strategy to avoid fuel build-up and mitigate wildfires. However, their effectiveness in mitigating wildfire damage may depend on a range of factors, including herbivore type, population density and feeding patterns.
2. Here, we review the evidence on whether management with herbivores can reduce fuel load and mitigate wildfires, and if so, how to identify suitable management that can achieve fire mitigation objectives while providing other ecosystem services. We systematically reviewed studies that investigated links between herbivores, fire hazard, fire frequency and fire damage.
3. We found that, in general, herbivores reduce fuel load most effectively when they are mixed feeders, when grazing and browsing herbivores are combined and when herbivore food preferences match the local vegetation. In some cases, the combination of herbivory with other management strategies, such as mechanical clearing, is necessary to reduce wildfire damage.
4. Synthesis and Applications. We conclude that herbivores have the capacity to mitigate wildfire damage, and we provide guidance for grazing management for wildfire mitigation strategies. As areas undergoing land abandonment are particularly prone to wildfires, the maintenance or promotion of grazing by domestic or wild herbivores is a promising tool to reduce wildfire risk in a cost-effective way, while also providing other ecosystem services. Relevant land-use policies, including fire suppression policies, agricultural and forest(ry) policies could incentivise the use of herbivores for better wildfire prevention.
Forests play a key role in humanity’s current challenge to mitigate climate change thanks to their capacity to sequester carbon. Preserving and expanding forest cover is considered essential to enhance this carbon sink. However, changing the forest cover can further affect the climate system through biophysical effects. One such effect that is seldom studied is how afforestation can alter the cloud regime, which can potentially have repercussions on the hydrological cycle, the surface radiation budget and on planetary albedo itself. Here we provide a global scale assessment of this effect derived from satellite remote sensing observations. We show that for 67% of sampled areas across the world, afforestation would increase low level cloud cover, which should have a cooling effect on the planet. We further reveal a dependency of this effect on forest type, notably in Europe where needleleaf forests generate more clouds than broadleaf forests.
The global impacts of biodiversity loss and climate change are interlinked, but the feedbacks between them are rarely assessed. Areas with greater tree diversity tend to be more productive, providing a greater carbon sink, and biodiversity loss could reduce these natural carbon sinks. Here, we quantify how tree and shrub species richness could affect biomass production on biome, national and regional scales. We find that GHG mitigation could help maintain tree diversity and thereby avoid a 9–39% reduction in terrestrial primary productivity across different biomes, which could otherwise occur over the next 50 years. Countries that will incur the greatest economic damages from climate change stand to benefit the most from conservation of tree diversity and primary productivity, which contribute to climate change mitigation. Our results emphasize an opportunity for a triple win for climate, biodiversity and society, and highlight that these co-benefits should be the focus of reforestation programmes.
Terrestrial ecosystems remove about 30 per cent of the carbon dioxide (CO2) emitted by human activities each year1, yet the persistence of this carbon sink depends partly on how plant biomass and soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks respond to future increases in atmospheric CO2 (refs. 2,3). Although plant biomass often increases in elevated CO2 (eCO2) experiments4,5,6, SOC has been observed to increase, remain unchanged or even decline7. The mechanisms that drive this variation across experiments remain poorly understood, creating uncertainty in climate projections8,9. Here we synthesized data from 108 eCO2 experiments and found that the effect of eCO2 on SOC stocks is best explained by a negative relationship with plant biomass: when plant biomass is strongly stimulated by eCO2, SOC storage declines; conversely, when biomass is weakly stimulated, SOC storage increases. This trade-off appears to be related to plant nutrient acquisition, in which plants increase their biomass by mining the soil for nutrients, which decreases SOC storage. We found that, overall, SOC stocks increase with eCO2 in grasslands (8 ± 2 per cent) but not in forests (0 ± 2 per cent), even though plant biomass in grasslands increase less (9 ± 3 per cent) than in forests (23 ± 2 per cent). Ecosystem models do not reproduce this trade-off, which implies that projections of SOC may need to be revised.
To counter increasing CO2 emissions and plant biodiversity loss, ecological restoration has been proposed as a means to sequester carbon as well as to increase species diversity in tropical landscapes. Here we examine how natural regeneration is associated with changing plant diversity and carbon stocks in the Atlantic Forest of southern Brazil. Aboveground carbon stocks and plant species diversity (using taxonomic, functional, phylogenetic and conservation metrics) were estimated in areas undergoing natural regeneration, ranging in age from seven to >80 years. Aboveground carbon, diversity and conservation metrics increase rapidly and concomitantly over time during forest natural regeneration, but even with carbon increase over time, we found the maximum taxonomic and phylogenetic diversity possible for the region. These results show the importance of considering regeneration as an alternative to increase carbon stocks, diversity, and species conservation in carbon-focused restoration plans. Our results showed co-benefits between carbon stocks, diversity, and conservation. Diversity (taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic) increases along with carbon stocks, but functional evenness does not. Age of the areas also influences co-benefits, as they increase over time. Thus, we demonstrate that ecological restoration not only sequesters carbon and has benefits with respect to climate change but is also responsible for increasing biodiversity and conservation. This mutualism between different benefits of natural regeneration attends to a variety of international concerns.
Scientists, corporations, mystics, and movie stars have convinced policymakers around the world that a massive campaign to plant trees
should be an essential element of global climate policy. Public dialogue
has emphasized potential benefits of tree planting while downplaying
pitfalls and limitations that are well established by social and ecological
research. We argue that if natural climate solutions are to succeed while
economies decarbonize (Griscom et al. 2017), policymakers must recognize and avoid the expense, risk, and damage that poorly designed and hastily implemented tree plantings impose on ecosystems and people.
We propose that people-centered climate policies should be developed
that support the social, economic, and political conditions that are compatible with the conservation of Earth’s diversity of terrestrial ecosystems. Such a shift in focus, away from tree planting and toward people and ecosystems, must be rooted in the understanding that natural climate solutions can only be effective if they respond to the needs of the rural and indigenous people who manage ecosystems for their livelihoods.
To motivate this shift in focus, we highlight ten pitfalls and misperceptions that arise when large-scale tree planting campaigns fail to acknowledge the social and ecological complexities of the landscapes they aim to transform. We then describe more ecologically effective and socially just strategies to improve climate mitigation efforts.
Planting trees has long been a major forest improvement and management activity globally. Forest plantations take years, even decades to mature and establish. Yet most national and international projects to support plantations are of relatively short duration, which presents a major challenge to near-term accountability as well as assessment of longer-term social and ecological impacts. Here, we address this challenge by identifying and empirically validating a set of predictive proxy indicators (PPIs)—measures on key variables taken during program implementation that are predictive of longer-term impacts—for community-oriented tree-planting efforts in northern India. Using process-tracing and qualitative comparative analysis, we find that clusters of PPIs explained vegetation growth trajectories and other outcomes over more than a decade in 23 randomly selected public forest plantations in Kangra district, Himachal Pradesh. PPIs relating to property rights and local livelihood benefits, community-led monitoring and enforcement, and seedling survival rate, together, were associated with successful long-term forest plantation outcomes, including more tree cover and socio-economic benefits for local communities. The causal pathways identified in this study suggest that measuring and comparing indicator values in specific spatial and temporal contexts can help to assess the likelihood and directionality of the long-term social and ecological impacts of forest plantations. In addition to the empirical contribution it makes, this study also demonstrates a novel approach to understanding long-term impacts of public forest plantations relevant to country contexts around the world.
Nature-based solutions (NbS) can address climate change, biodiversity loss, human well-being and their interactions in an integrated way. A major barrier to achieving this is the lack of comprehensiveness in current carbon accounting which has focused on flows rather than stocks of carbon and led to perverse outcomes. We propose a new comprehensive approach to carbon accounting based on the whole carbon cycle, covering both stocks and flows, and linking changes due to human activities with responses in the biosphere and atmosphere. We identify enhancements to accounting, namely; inclusion of all carbon reservoirs, changes in their condition and stability, disaggregated flows, and coverage of all land areas. This comprehensive approach recognises that both carbon stocks (as storage) and carbon flows (as sequestration) contribute to the ecosystem service of global climate regulation. In contrast, current ecosystem services measurement and accounting commonly use only carbon sequestration measured as net flows, while greenhouse gas inventories use flows from sources to sinks. This flow-based accounting has incentivised planting and maintaining young forests with high carbon uptake rates, resulting, perversely, in failing to reveal the greater mitigation benefit from protecting larger, more stable and resilient carbon stocks in natural forests. We demonstrate the benefits of carbon storage and sequestration for climate mitigation, in theory as ecosystem services within an ecosystem accounting framework, and in practice using field data that reveals differences in results between accounting for stocks or flows. Our proposed holistic and comprehensive carbon accounting makes transparent the benefits, trade-offs and shortcomings of NbS actions for climate mitigation and sustainability outcomes. Adopting this approach is imperative for revision of ecosystem accounting systems under the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting and contributing to evidence-based decision-making for international conventions on climate (UNFCCC), biodiversity (CBD) and sustainability (SDGs).
