Ensuring sustainable FLR in the tropics: lessons learnt from a comparative analysis of forest

rehabilitation across Asia(the Philippines, China, Indonesia & Vietnam)

Prepared for Tree Diversity Day (TDD) at CBD COP 12 PyeongChang, South Korea, 10 October 2014

Ani Adiwinata Nawir, PhD CIFOR - Center for International Forestry Research

(http://www.cifor.org/)

Synthesized* from study conducted by CIFOR and its country partners, funded by the Government of Japan, involving: Takeshi Toma (Project Leader), Unna

Chokkalingam (Coordinator for China and the Philippines), Wil de Jong (Coordinator for Vietnam), & Ani Adiwinata Nawir (Coordinator for Indonesia)

‘Lessons learnt from forest rehabilitation initiatives in Indonesia, the Philippines, Vietnam and China’

* The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter’s alone and do not necessarily represent the views of the other authors of each individual country report and the organisation where the presenter works.

Individual country report can be downloaded from http://www/cifor.cgiar.org

Presentation highlights

1. Setting the context: study aims, working definition, & methodological framework

2. Lessons learned for future initiatives (1): Important socio-political factors for success (the Philippines, China, Indonesia, & Vietnam)

3. Lessons learned for future initiatives (2): Three components in designing & implementing restoration initiatives to ensure local economies are improved

1. Setting the context

Study aims

1. The study aims to draw strategic lessons to increase the chances of success of future rehabilitation by ensuring a long-term sustainability of rehabilitation initiatives along with tangible impacts on local livelihoods

2. By applying a common framework assessment over a four-year period, the study targeted projects with:a. the approaches that have contributed to longer-term

sustainability under different scenarios b. minimal negative impacts, mainly on local community.

Deliberate activities1 aimed at artificial and/or natural regeneration of trees2 on formerly forested grasslands, brushlands, scrublands, or barren areas3 for the purpose of enhancing productivity, livelihood, and/or environmental service benefits4.

Forest Rehabilitation Initiatives (in CIFOR study)

1Deliberate activities could include • Technical interventions: protection, planting, site management, silvicultural practices• New or revised socio-economic arrangements: marketing, financial and economic incentives, infrastructure, access,

education and awareness, authority and responsibility arrangements, distribution of costs and benefits, extension and capacity building

• New or revised institutional arrangements: land tenure, policies, rules and regulations, enforcement, institutions (customary/local and state level), and monitoring

2Artificial and/or natural regeneration of trees - It will include any rehabilitation methods that involve trees – from agroforestry to plantations to assisted natural regeneration.

3Formerly forested grasslands, brushlands, scrublands, or barren areas – The focus will be restricted to initiatives that aim to put trees back on formerly forested lands, and not include the rehabilitation of degraded or secondary forest areas.

4Purpose of enhancing productivity, livelihood, and/or environmental service benefits

Source: CIFOR Rehab Team, 2003. Project proposal 'Review of forest rehabilitation initiatives - Lessons from the past', CIFOR and the Government of Japan, Bogor.

Terminology: Reforestation, Rehabilitation, Restoration

If left untreated, the degraded forest (at B1) may degrade further over time to B2 (e.g. following repeated wildfires).

Ecological restoration seeks to return the forest to position A;

Reclamation takes it C1 to C2 (if site is improved with ploughing or fertilisers) and rehabilitation to F.

REGULATED LOGGING

POORLY REGULATED LOGGING

BIODIVERSITY

STRUCTURE

BIOMASS

PRODUCTION

A

B

C1

C2 D

ECOLOGICALRESTORATION

SIMPLE MONOCULTURE MIXED-SPECIESPLANTATIONS

O

E

F

B1

B2

Forest rehabilitation/reforestation Forest Landscape Restoration

Forest Landscape Restoration (FLR) aims to achieve a landscape containing valuable forests rather than returning forest cover across an entire landscape (WWF in Mansourian, 2005).

Source: D. Lamb. 2005. ITTO Technical Series 23.

Sources: Adopted from Guariguata, 2011, and the forest and land use transition curve is adopted from CGIAR Research Program 6 Proposal Document, 2011

Rehabilitation; reforestation; restoration/Forest Landscape Restoration (FLR) can be implemented at different conditions along forest and land use transition

Plotting to the Forest and Land Use Transition Curve

Methodological framework for implementing the study

Forest rehabilitation projects included in the study

Research stages Number of projects in countries studied

China Indonesia the Philippines Vietnam

Phase 1(Preliminary database)

National level review (focus on

tropical-subtropical region)

At least 150 projects identified

More than 1000s At least 304projects identified

Phase 2 (Database 1)

Focus on Guangdong

Province

54 46 42

Case studies (Database 2)

22 10 12 15

2. Lessons learned for future initiatives (1):

Important socio-political factors for success(the Philippines, China, Indonesia, & Vietnam)

Basic information

Years of experiences in implementing forest rehabilitation

About 60 years (started from pre-World War II)

Degraded forests Up to 59% or 9.3 million ha of non-forested, with grass or shrub cover, or under cultivation

Causes of degraded forests

Heavy logging (legal & illegal), upland migration & agricultural expansion over the last century

Planted area under rehabilitation program

1,547,657 ha (since 1972)

Blue circle: case study regions

2 (1). Forest rehabilitation initiatives in the Philippines (Chokkalingam, et al., 2006a)

Key lessons learned: important socio-political factors for success

• Forest rehabilitation program should be supported by policy framework for halting the deforestation: Supported by logging ban in several provinces, cancellation of many

timber licenses, shift in logging from the old growth to residual forests in the early 90’s

• Key to sustaining rehabilitation efforts: community involvement/participation – participatory approach, clear strategies for forest production, income generation, & financial viability

• Long term management & funding plans are keys.

The most promising approach: enabling local communities and farmers under Community Based Forest Management (CBFM) adopted in 1995 as the

national strategy for sustainably managing the forest lands.

Outcomes: most plantations established by the DENR were achieved through CBFM

• The approach addresses: local livelihood pressures and inequitable access to resources as the underlying degradation causes, and

• Lead to better livelihood options, community empowerment, long-term maintenance and productive use of the land for multiple benefits.

Durian (Durio zibethinus) is one of fruit trees important to reforestation site managed by People Organization (PO) under CBFM

Basic information

Years of experiences in implementing forest rehabilitation

About 60 years

Degraded forest land(no official term)

64.2 million ha (1998)

Causes of degraded forests

Political movements, cultural revolution, frequently changing & insecure tenure, high wood demand, rapid population growth and pressure on forest lands for cultivation and fuelwood, forest fires, pests, & acid rain

Planted area under rehabilitation program

About 68 million ha (since 1978)

2 (2). China (Chokkalingam, et al., 2006b)

Climatic zones include: cold temperate zone, temperate zone, warm temperate zone, & tropical zone.

Forest landscape rehabilitation project in Zhong shan city (from 1998)

Guangdong: forest degradation closely driven by political & sociocultural changes

Three major forest degradation episodes (but reforestation continued):

(1) ‘Great Leap Forward’ & Iron-and-Steel Making’ campaigns (1958-1961)

(2) ‘Great Cultural Revolution’ (1966-1976)

(3) ‘Tenure Right Change’ (1981-1983)

Forest rehabilitation and management potentially contribute to improve regional development and help alleviate poverty as well as restoring environmental services over the long-term, following three main conditions:

1. Local people obtain long-term secure rights over the land and resources,

2. Development initiatives should be participatory and arise from local needs and conditions, and

3. Favourable policy incentives in line with technical, marketing and credit supports.

Key lessons learned: important socio-political factors for success

Basic information

Years of experiences in implementing forest rehabilitation

About 50 years

Degraded forests 54.6 million ha (2006)

Causes of degraded forests Directly affecting forest rehabilitation: forest encroachment, forest fires, & inappropriate land managementIndirectly affecting forest rehabilitation: over logging (16.6 m ha) & illegal logging (up to 40-59 million ha)

Planted area under rehabilitation program

Estimated roughly at 9.6 million ha (most likely under estimated due to no formal record of target achieved)

2 (3). Indonesia (Nawir, et al., 2007)

Rehabilitation initiatives should be integrated with local regional development following five important aspects:

1. Better links with poverty alleviation strategies (community development programmes)

2. Involving local stakeholders actively: developed based on local needs/ecological problems (stimulating community participation),

3. Addressing the underlying causes of deforestation: multiple benefits have resulted from improved ecological conditions that have subsequently generated economic & social benefits

4. Setting-up re-investment mechanisms: clear engagement with markets (ecotourism, timber)

5. Clear responsibility sharing among stakeholders involved.

Key lessons learned: important socio-political factors for success

Upstream forests: honey trees (Boan:Tetramales nudiflora)

Downstream area: City of Sumbawa

Sumbawa island

Case study: conserving upstream forests as part of the watersheds as the Forest Management Unit (32,776 Ha) in Eastern Indonesia

Main watersheds

(1) Managing protected forest while enhancing livelihoods

(4) Rehabilitating degraded area while enhancing livelihoods

District capital city:Sumbawa Besar

(3) Illegal logging in state-own company rehabilitated forests

(2) Forest encroachment

Problems & threats

A landscape-platform of a certain ecological function that allows:

Conservation, rehabilitation and economic and sociocultural activities can be complementarily implemented in addressing ecological problems, as well socioeconomic and tenurial conflicts under an integrated management

Interaction between key stakeholders, including local communities, to collaborate in managing the resources and resolve conflicts participatively

FMU (i.e. KPH) fits as the basis for Forest Landscape Restoration

2 (4). Vietnam (de Jong, W. et al., 2006)Basic information

Years of experiences in forest rehabilitation

About 50 years

Degraded forests About 8.9 million of unused land area (including 6.7 million of hilly land) (2003)

Causes of degraded forests

Land conversion for farm land (especially in the highlands), devastation by war, forest fires, fuelwood & timber over-harvesting (state), illegal logging by individuals & units, poor management capacity of the forestry sector, and a deficient institutional and legal frameworks

Planted area under rehabilitation program

Between 1.4 to 1.7 million ha (until 2005) Two basic topographies: the coastal plains of the Red River delta and the Mekong delta are connected by a strip of coastal plain along the remainder of the country .

• The national environmental policy and legislation have been highly conducive

• Policies and legislation have been dynamically adjusted to reflect new opportunities & needs; three major policy area include:

Forest management, e.g. Forest Protection & Development Law 1991, 2004

Land policies; beneficiary policies: e.g. the Land Law 1993, 1998, 2003

Tax, investment, credits: e.g. Master plan for the development of the paper industry by the year 2010

• The Land Law: the land is managed by the state but can be allocated to individuals and communities under comprehensive rights to exchange, transfer or inherit land use rights (challenges: communities hesitant due to strict conditions applied)

Key lessons learned: Vietnam has had a net-negative deforestation since mid 1990s; partly due to forest rehabilitation programs

(3) Favourable conditions: creating the right incentives

3. Second lessons learned for future initiatives:Three components in designing & implementing restoration

initiatives to ensure local economies are improved

Sustainable initiative & practice

(1) Addressing direct and underlying causes of ecological

system & function

Multiple socioeconomic benefits for local

stakeholders involved (tangible & intangible)

Improvements in ecological conditions

(2) Socioeconomically feasible technical interventions

Clear land status & full access for a community to manage the areas

Engaging with markets (Tangible & intangible benefits)

3 (1) Framework to identify the causes of deforestation & degraded land condition

The direct & underlying causes: continuing disturbance threatens for sustainable practices

Natural conditions

Resulting from human

activities

Direct causes

Market & policy failuresGovernance weaknesses

Socioeconomic & political causes

Concession holders, investors in estate crops, slash-and-burn farmers, smallholders, mining & oil companies

Agents

Underlying causes

Logging and forest encroachment (Indonesia, Philippines, China) Expansion of frontier agriculture (including agroforestry & fruit

trees) (Philippines), estate crops expansion (Indonesia), agriculture activities in the highlands (Vietnam)

Other land-based subsistence uses: extensive fuelwood collection (due to the increase in fuel prices), & grazing

Fires (less sustainable rehabilitation initiatives in fire-affected area compared to logged-over area) (Indonesia)

A generalized rehabilitation approach used has been ineffective – failed to address the direct and indirect causes of deforestation (often as continuing disturbances)

Cases of continuing disturbances

Technical intervention is very expensive

3 (2) It is crucial to ensure the feasibility & cost-effectiveness of rehabilitation practices from socioeconomic & technical perspectives

Feasibility: technical intervention is feasible taking into account: social, transaction & opportunity costs

Cost-effectiveness: there is an optimum level of adoption by local stakeholders, especially community

An exit strategy: reinvestment mechanisms as part of the project’s financial plan to ensure funding sustainability

The Philippines:Ranging from: low cost/ha & low area reforested (local government unit) to high costs/ha & high area reforested (foreign loans)

China: Cost/ha high (max RMB 37,600/ha) - except for gov. initiated projectslimited funding had not constrained projects meeting targets (possibly due to free labor mobilization - currently, policy was abandoned)

Indonesia: cost per ha varied depending funding sources Government: USD 43 - 7,320; Donors: USD 366 – 15,221; Private & state-owned companies: USD 115 – 8,500

Vietnam: Cost-effectiveness perceived to be low - inadequate valuation of costs and benefits as the basis to set the budget and payments

Strong state-budget, shift towards private & donor-based funding Funding sustainability – big challenge

3 (3) Designing the right economic & social incentives tailored to local needs, so:

livelihood benefits can be generated to ensure long-term community commitment beyond the project time

EnablingIncentives

(e.g. land tenure and resource security, market development, credit facilities)

Framework to develop incentives

Direct incentives

(e.g. seedlings, cost-sharing arrangements)

Sectoral

(e.g. harvesting restriction, trade tariffs)

Macro-economic

(e.g. polices on interest rates, income taxes)

Indirect incentives

Variable incentives

Type of incentives Conditions to be considered for application1. Subsidies provided

to a communityPhysical assistance & creating employment opportunities: For areas isolated from economic activities (or remote areas)Monetary assistance: aims at creating revolving funds (contract agreements may be necessary - penalty or sanction if subsidies were used for non-rehabilitation activities.

2. Tax exemption With the aim of encouraging private companies to participate in rehabilitation projects

3. Credit schemes Needs cooperative or business management unit with good capacity

4. Defined and secured market for timber production

Market for timber production: where tree harvesting is allowedMarket for NTFPs/environmental services: on state forestland where tree harvesting is not allowed

5. Net revenue sharing agreement

Essential for all rehabilitation initiatives involving shared investments (tangible & intangible contributions) in any form from other parties, such as a community & village government

A framework for strengthening policy and economic incentives for community tree-growing schemes (Case of Indonesia)

Acknowledgment for contribution made by local partners:

1. The Philippines: Antonio P. Carandang, Rodel D. Lasco, Juam M. Pulhin (College of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of the Philippines Los Baños); & Rose Jane L. Peras (Forest Management Bureau, Department of Environment & Natural Resources, Philippines)

2. China: Zhou Zaizhi (Research Institute of Tropical Forestry, Guangzhou) & Wang Chunfeng (State Forestry Administration, Beijing)

3. Indonesia: Murniati & Lukas Rumboko (FORDA -Forestry Research and Development Agency, Ministry of Forestry)

4. Vietnam: Do Dinh Sam & Trieu Van Hung (Forest Science Institute of Vietnam)