Lacombe Morgane and Aronson James, 2009. Restoring natural capital in arid and semiarid regions...

8/8/2019 Lacombe Morgane and Aronson James, 2009. Restoring natural capital in arid and semiarid regions combining ecos

1/40

Comit Scientifique Franais de la DsertificationFrench Scientific Committee on Desertification

Issue 7

Restoring Naturalestoring NaturalCapital in Aridapital in Aridand Semiarid Regionsnd Semiarid RegionsRestoring Naturalestoring NaturalCapital in Aridapital in Aridand Semiarid Regionsnd Semiarid Regions

Combining ecosystem health

with human wellbeing


2/40

French Scientific Committee on Desertification

The creation in 1997 of the French Scientific Committee on

Desertification (CSFD) has met two concerns of the Ministries in

charge of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification.

First, CSFD materializes the will to involve the French scientific

community versed in desertification, land degradation, and

development of arid, semi-arid and sub-humid areas, in generating

knowledge as well as guiding and advising the policy makers and

actors associated in this combat. Its other aim is to strengthen the

position of this French community within the international context.In order to meet such expectations, CSFD is meant to be a driving

force regarding analysis and assessment, prediction and monitoring,

information and promotion. Within French delegations, CSFD also

takes part in the various statutory meetings of the organs of the United

Nations Convention to Combat Desertification: Conference of the

Parties (CoP), Committee on Science and Technology (CST),

Committee for the Review of the Implementation of the Convention.

It also participates in meetings of European and international scope.

CSFD includes a score of members and a President, who are appointed

intuitu personaeby the Ministry for Higher Education and Research,

and come from various specialities of the main relevant institutions

and universities. CSFD is managed and hosted by the Agropolis

International Association that gathers, in the French town of

Montpellier and Languedoc-Roussillon region, a large scientific

community specialised in agriculture, food and environment of

tropical and Mediterranean countries. The Committee acts as an

independent advisory organ; it has neither decision-making powers

nor legal status.

Its operating budget is financed by subsidies from the French

Ministries of Foreign and European Affairs and for Ecology and

Sustainable Planning and Development as well as the French

Development Agency. CSFD members participate voluntarily to its

activities, as a contribution from the Ministry for Higher Educationand Research.

More about CSFD:

www.csf-desertification.org

Managing Editor

Marc Bied-CharretonPresident of CSFD

Emeritus Professor at the University of VersaillesSaint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ, France)

Researcher at the Center of Economics and Ethics forEnvironment and Development (C3ED-UMR IRD/UVSQ)

AuthorsMorgane Lacombe

Master student, Center for Evolutionary and FunctionalEcology/National Center for Scientific Research

(CEFE/CNRS, France)[email protected]

James AronsonResearcher at CEFE/CNRS, France

[email protected]

Contributor

Marc Bied-Charreton,President of CSFD

Editing and iconography

Isabelle Amsallem (Agropolis Productions, France)[email protected]

Design and production

Olivier Piau (Agropolis Productions)[email protected]

Photography creditsavid A. Bainbridge (Associate Professor, Alliant International University,

USA), Danile Cavanna (INDIGO picture library of the Institut derecherche pour le dveloppement, IRD, France), Andre Clewell

(Co-coordinator, RNC Alliance), Jordi Cortina (Editor of the journalEcosistemas, Spain), Angela Osborn (Fulfillment and Rights Manager,land Press, USA), Christelle Fontaine (Assistant, CEFE/CNRS, France),Sue Milton (Professor, University of Stellenbosch, University of Cape

Town, South Africa), David Tongway (Honorary Member,Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation[CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems], invited researcher, Australian

National University, Australia), as well as the authors of the picturesshown in this report.

Translated by David ManleyPrinted by Les Petites Affiches(Montpellier, France)

Copyright registration on publication ISSN: 1772-69641,500 copies (also available in French)

CSFD/Agropolis International, June 2009

r reference: Lacombe M., Aronson J., 2009. Restoring Natural Capital ind and Semiarid Regions. Combining ecosystem health with humanllbeing.Les dossiers thmatiques du CSFD. N7. June 2009.FD/Agropolis International, Montpellier, France. 36 pp.

Les dossiers thmatiquesdu CSFD Issue 7

Editing, production and distribution of Les dossiers thmatiques du CSFD are

fully supported by this Committee through the backing of relevant French

Ministries as well as the French Development Agency. Les dossiers thmatiquesdu CSFD may be freely downloaded from the Committee website.

Editing, production and distribution of Les dossiers thmatiques du CSFD are

fully supported by this Committee through the backing of relevant French

Ministries as well as the French Development Agency. Les dossiers thmatiquesdu CSFD may be freely downloaded from the Committee website.


3/40

1

Mankind is now confronted with an issueof worldwide concern, i.e. desertif ication,

which is both a natural phenomenon anda process induced by human activities.

Our planet and natural ecosystems have never been sodegraded by our presence. Long considered as a localproblem, desertification is now a global issue that affectsus a ll, i ncluding scientists, decision-makers, citizensfrom both the South and North. Within this setting, it isurgent to boost the awareness of civil society to convince

it to get involved. People must first be given the elementsnecessary to better understand the desertificationphenomenon and the concerns. Everyone should haveaccess to relevant scientific knowledge in a readilyunderstandable language and format. Within this scope,the French Scientific Committee on Desertification hasdecided to launch a new series entitled 'Les dossiersthmatiques du CSFD', which is designed to providesound scientific information on desertification, itsimplications and stakes. This series is intended forpolicy makers and advisers f rom the North and South,in addition to the general public and scientific journalists

involved in development and the environment. It alsoaims at providing teachers, trainers and trainees withadditional information on various associated fields.Lastly, it endeavours to help disseminate knowledge onthe combat against desertification, land degradation,and poverty to stakeholders such as representativesof professional, nongovernmental, a nd internationalsolidarity organisations.

A dozen reports are devoted to different themes suchas global public good, remote sensing, w ind erosion,agroecology, pastoralism, etc, in order to take stock ofcurrent knowledge on these various subjects. The goal

is also to set out ideological and new concept debates,including controversial issues; to expound widely usedmethodologies and results derived from a number ofprojects; and lastly to supply operational and intellectualreferences, addresses and useful websites.

These reports are to be broadly circulated, especiallywithin the countries most affected by desertification,by e-mail (upon request), through our website, andin print. Your feedback and suggestions will be muchappreciated! Editing, production and distribution of'Les dossiers thmatiques du CSFD'are fully supported

by this Committee thanks to the backing of relevantFrench Ministries and the French Development Agency.The opinions expressed in these reports are endorsed bythe Committee.

Foreword

Marc Bied-CharretonPresident of CSFD

Emeritus Professor of the Universityof Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines

(UVSQ, France)Researcher at C3ED-UMR IRD/UVSQ

(Centre of Economics and Ethics forEnvironment and Development)


4/40

2 Restoring Natural Capital in Arid and Semiarid Regions

Preamble

his CSFD special issue n7 presents majorfeatures of the restoring natural capital(RNC) concept applied to arid and semi-arid regions for the purposes of facilitating

communication, information sharing and discussion.The goal is primarily: (1) to participate in promoting thisapproach to societies and communities most affectedby degradation of the environments and resources theymanage, and (2) to persuade governments and publicand private assistance decision-makers to adopt thisapproach for their projects.

The present special issue is the result of a literature

review of available scientific material concerning natu-ral capital restoration in arid and semiarid regions. Thistopic has been the focus of numerous studies for severaldecades that gave rise to the concepts and definitionspresented here. Most of these were adapted from thebook published by Aronson et al. (2007a), which poolsthe contributions of 71 scientists, managers and journa-lists in the fields of ecology, economics and ecologicaleconomics.

Several sites in arid and semiarid regions throughoutthe world are discussed to illustrate the elementaryconcepts of natural capital restoration through virtual

field visits. These examples are from the book of Clewell& Aronson (2007) that was written to help people invol-ved in activities of this budding ecological restorationprofession.

These areas under harsh climatic conditions have beenand still are to an increasing extentsites of socialconflict for access to natural resources. The conflicts arefurther aggravated by the extreme poverty and marginalliving conditions that prevail, and triggered mainly bypoor management of vital natural capital such as water,

land and plant resources (rangelands, fuelwood, etc.).Even these very basic needs are currently not beingfulfilled. The moment is hence now ripe to design andpromote the adoption of an alternative approach toenvironmental management that is socioeconomicallyfair and ecologically sustainable.

Profound changes in the behaviour of our societies(from field operators to policymakers) with respectto the natural environment are required before suchan approach can be successfully implemented. Thesechanges will be difficult and not sufficient to fulfillcommunities basic needs if they are not combined with

efforts geared towards restoring the already substanti-ally degraded natural capital, which in turn is known tolead to the deterioration of human and social capital. Itis thus recommended that social capital restoration alsobe promoted to ensure that natural capital restorationprojects will succeed.

Facilitation of information flow, sharing and communi-cation on the concepts (especially scientific) underlyingthe RNC approach is essential. Responses to furtherquestions covered in this special issue, e.g. who shouldprovide investment for restoring natural and socialcapital, or how to provide long-term ecological moni-

toring and follow-up, are provided in previous CSFDspecial issues. Social demand for the restoration of de-graded ecosystems is generally low despite the ongoingenvironmental degradation and biodiversity loss, sopreserving genetic resources should be a key priority toensure that ecological restoration projects will come tofruition.

douard Le FlochFormer researcher, CEFE/CNRS

Former CSFD member

T


5/40

3

Table of Contents

4

Restoring natural capital: an ecologicaland socioeconomic imperative

8

What is natural capital?

14

What does restoring natural capital involve?

18

Socioeconomic benefits of restoring naturalcapital in arid regions

24

Do arid regions warrant RNC investment?

28

Prospects: towards a sustainable relationshipbetween humankind and the environment?

30

For further information...

35-36

Glossary - List of acronyms and abbreviations

Table of Contents


6/40


Restoring natural capital:an ecologicaland socioeconomicimperative

umanitys ecological footprint iscurrently much greater than the Earthscarrying capacity. This means that thenatural resource consumption rate, the

environmental degradation rate and the extent ofpollution emission due to the frantic tapping of theseresources are higher than the renewal and absorptionrate ofecosystems. Humanity, for the first time in itshistory, is devouring these reserves, which in turn isgiving rise to tightly linked ecological and humanitariancrises worldwide.

An ecological crisis arising from an economic systemThe ecological crisis mainly involves loss of bio-diversity, shrinkage of natural areas and degradationof ecosystem functionality on local, regional andglobal scales (MEA, 2003). The new environmentalconditions created by this crisis have especially led toglobal warming and a reduction in readily accessibledrinking water (Vitousek et al., 1997; Wackernagel etal., 2002).

It is currently acknowledged that humansvia theeconomic, social and cultural systems and structures

to which they belongare accountable for thisdegradation (Makhlouf, 1995), despite the directimpacts on humankind, including the worsening ofconflicts for resource access and the loss of naturalgoods and services (e.g. wood supplies, carbonsequestration, etc.). These goods and services providedby ecosystems are nevertheless essential for societiessurvival and development. The ways we utilize anddistribute natural resources therefore have to bereshaped.

In the current demographic and economic setting,

preservation of natural resources alone is not enoughto fulfil humans fundamental needs for goods andservices. Global natural capital is actually already

too low to continue sustaining most economic systemsin developed countries. Ecological restoration ofdegraded ecosystems is necessary. However, it will befutile if such initiatives are not combined with settingup sustainable resource exploitation systems and ifour consumption habits are not thoroughly modified(Aronson et al., 2007a). Experience has shown thatrestoration projects are bound to fail if they are notfocused also on rectifying the ways resources areutilized, i.e. the renewed resources will be overtappedand again degraded since the initial causes still persist(Makhlouf, 1995).

In arid and semiarid regions, land degradationdue to overuse is often the result of the insecuresocioeconomic conditions that prevailmeeting thebasic food needs of humans and livestock herds is aprime concern.

The humanitarian crisis: biosphere degradation deals

a heavy blow to the poorest people

Natural goods and services are currently exploited anddistributed at the expense of the poorest populationgroups (MEA, 2005). The resulting unfair distribution

of profits further accelerates massive ecosystemdegradation. The poorest people are often obliged touse highly environmentally destructive practices to

H


7/40

5

procure sufficient resources to meet their vital needs.The resulting depletion of natural resources quicklyamplifies the insecurity of these populations. Indegraded environments in developing countries, usersof the already rare resources cannot risk implementingmore sustainable exploitation methods when they arecompeting directly for increasingly scarce resources.

This vicious circle is partially fuelled by economicglobalization and by the fact that resources have tobe accessed from ever more remote areas. The richestpopulations are no longer interested in resourceexploitation methods and their potential impacts on

the environment. However, this situation could becorrected if:

Methods are developed for economic assessmentof the costs and benefits of an alternative approachto natural resource exploitation, conservation anddistribution.

Users (individuals or groups) are made accountable forthe resource, while being provided with the technicaland financial means necessary to implement sustai-nable resource management methods.

Resources are fairly redistributed so that the user will

get a return-on-investment. Consumer resource accountability and awareness areboosted worldwide.

A gigantic log being cut upwith a chainsaw near the San-Pdro

logging harbour, Cte dIvoire.P. Haeringer IRD

The ecological footprint: the environmentalimpact of our lifestyles

The ecological footprint concept was developed in the early1990s by William Rees and Mathis Wackernagel (1994) at theUniversity of British Columbia.

The ecological footprint calculation can be used to estimate thenatural capital demand required by a given human populationto maintain its lifestyle. The calculation method is based on areinterpretation of the carrying capacity concept while also

taking the economic set ting into account.

The carrying capacity refers to the maximum number ofindividuals of a species that a given habitat can support over anindefinite period, e.g. the size of a human population living in anisolated region. However, different regions inhabited by humanscannot be taken as independent units since, via commercialtrade, their economies have become globalized. The questionof the quantity of individuals that a given region can sustain istherefore no longer relevant for human populations. Instead, thequestion should be: What is the land and/or sea area requiredto sustain a flow of resources to fulfil a populations consumptionneeds in a given region? This estimated land and/or sea area

(regardless of where it is located) is the populations ecologicalfootprint. It is a physical measurement of the natural capitaldemand of a given population.

The World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) is now promoting thismeasurement by offering anyone interested, in addition to otherfeatures, a tool to calculate their personal ecological footprintonline (http://footprint.wwf.org.uk) while also suggesting waysto reduce it.

This ecological footprint concept is a good way to boost publicawareness on the environmental impact of our lifestyles and on

how precarious our situation is on Earth. For instance, in termsof its global ecological footprint, humanity was using 1.2 timesthe Earths biocapacity in 2001 (WWF, 2004)!

The Focus

Restoring natural capital: an ecological and socioeconomic imperative


8/40

Restoring Natural Capital in Arid and Semiarid Regions6

An extensive rangeland with a brown vertisoldeveloped on calcareous shale. Erosion is due to

overgrazing. New Caledonia.B. Bonzon IRD


9/40

The restoration of natural capital (RNC) is thusa key strategy for dealing with these two crises. Thisnew approach is geared towards meeting ecologicalrestoration objectives while enhancing the wellbeingof human populations from a socioeconomic

standpoint. RNC thus bridges the gap between theimperatives of: (1) biodiversity conservation andecosystem health protection, (2) short-term localproduction, (3) economic development on nationaland international scales, and (4) Sustainable localeconomic development.

Restoring natural capital: a focused response

Ecologists, nature conservationists and economists allhave different viewpoints on ecological restoration andsustainable development goals. It is essential to come

to a consensus on the definition and interpretation ofthese key terms so as to be able to effectively informcommunities and their representatives on the objectivesand impacts of current and future policies.

Economic growth nowadays takes precedent over thepreservation of natural ecosystems (de Groot, 1992),i.e. increasing production (or the size of the economy)leading to increased consumption (Daly and Farley,2004). This political option is based mainly on the fact

that biodiversity conservation, poverty alleviation andeconomic development are generally considered to haveindependent and often conflictual interests. RNCaswe will see throughout this special issueaims to poolthese a priori different interests. It meshes ecologicalrestoration and sustainable development so as to tap therespective benefits of both approaches.

Around 40% of all emerged land on Earth is under threatof desertification and acute poverty generally prevailsin these areas (Requier-Desjardins and Caron, 2005). An approach aimed at restoring ecosystems as well as

the living standards of local people in arid and semiaridregions is therefore necessary. The concepts concerningnatural capital and its restoration are outlined in thefollowing chapters.

Desertification and its impact on humans

The United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (1994)defines the desertification process as land desertification inarid, semiarid and dry subhumid areas resulting from severalfactors, including climatic variations and human activities.

Unpredictable climatic conditions (recurrent drought andirregular rainfall), combined with the need to immediately fulfillocal peoples food and energy needs (using practices that areill-adapted for utilizing natural resources), generally leads tosevere environmental degradation. This phenomenon includesdestruction of the plant cover (grazing areas converted to cropland), a reduction in soil fertility, ecosystem modification andan increase in conflicts to control natural resource management(Requier-Desjardins, 2007; Requier-Desjardins and Caron,2005).

Increased population growth and insecurity also lead to heavy

unsustainable exploitation of natural goods and services. Thepressures placed on ecosystems disrupt the balance betweenthe demand and the production of these goods and services,thus forging conditions that are conducive to desertification.

However, the causes and processes responsible fordesertification are variable. They depend on the worldwide(global warming), regional (geographical and political area)and local (landuse practices and management) settings.International directives, regional policies and local initiativesare thus required to combat desertification. These three scales(global, regional and local) are tightly interdependent (MEA,2005). It is also crucial that initiatives implemented to solvelocal problems be tailored specifically to local peoples demand(needs, objectives, values).

Focus

7Restoring natural capital: an ecological and socioeconomic imperative


10/40


What is natural capital?

he natural capital concept was shaped inthe late 1970s (Jurdant et al., 1977) and thenfurther developed by Costanza and Daly

(1992), and others. This concept is essentialin promoting environmental issues to ensure that theywill be taken into consideration in economic decision-making processes. The natural capital term also reflectsthe limiting role of natural resources and ecosystemsin peoples and nations socioeconomic development(Ekins et al., 2003). We will first explain the differenttypes of existing capital so as to fully clarify the termnatural capital.

Different types of capital

There are five types of capital (MEA, 2005):1. Financial capital: money and its substitutes.2. Manufactured capital: buildings, roads, and other

human-produced, fixed assets.3. Human capital: individual or collective efforts and

intellectual skills.4. Social capital:institutions, social relationships, social

networks, shared cultural beliefs and traditions.5. Natural capital: an economic metaphor representing

the stock of natural resources from which goodsand services upon which human societies dependare derived. There are four types of natural capital:

(a) renewable natural capital (living species,ecosystems), (b) nonrenewable natural capital(petroleum, coal, diamonds), (c) replenishablenatural capital (the atmosphere, drinking water,fertile soils) and (d) cultivated natural capital (cropsand forest plantations).

Natural capital (as defined by Daly and Farley, 2004)thus includes all sustainable ecosystems and ecologicallandscapes from which humans cull services andproducts (goods) that enhance their wellbeing withoutproduction cost. It should be noted that all cultivated

natural capital and manufactured capital stock derivesfrom renewable, replenishable or nonrenewable naturalcapital.

Renewable natural capital is the structure andcomposition of natural ecosystems which, throughtheir functioning, yield a flow of natural goods andservices to benefit humans. Replenishable naturalcapital corresponds to stocks of nonliving resourcesthat are constantly recycled via interactions with l ivingresources over long periods. Final ly, cult ivated naturalcapital represents agroecological production systemsthat are more or less self-sustaining, depending onhow they are managed.

For several decades now, the rate of natural capital

utilization (degradation) has been greater than itsrenewal rate. Processing this capital into manufacturedgoods is gradually (but to an increasing extent)destroying natural resource stocks and ensuing goodsand services.

Loss of natural capital can also lead to a concomitantdecrease in social and human capital (Aronson et al.,2007a). This is especially true in arid and semiaridareas where the steady reduction in natural servicesresulting from desertification fosters outmigrationand loss of affected peoples self-esteem, in addition

to political conflicts (Requier-Desjardins and Caron,2005).

T


11/40

9What is natural capital?

The interdependence of these dif ferent ty pes of capitalshould be put forward in desertification controlefforts and RNC in general. The degradation of landand quality of life are indeed linked (MEA, 2005), asis their restoration. This interdependence must becontemplated in order to overcome the preconceptionsthat prevail concerning these processes, which arestumbling blocks to finding solutions to environmentaland socioeconomic problems.

Nature conservation versus economic growth?

Nature conservation and restoring ecosystem healthare conventionally viewed as being incompatible withor even contradictory to economic development goals.The following table underlines the contradictions thatmay arise with a too narrow vision of ecology andeconomy. This table also highlights the benefits of anapproach that combines ecological restoration andsustainable development. It is now necessary to reviewthe ideological differences between the economicgrowth and sustainable economic developmentconcepts in order to understand the natural capitalrestoration setting overall. These differences are

discussed in the following chapters.

Restoring natural capital: bridging the disciplinary andideological divide between the natural and social sciences

Source: Aronson et al., 2007b.

Topics/Viewpoints

Extremeenviron-

mentalism

Neo-classical

economics

Contri-butions

of RNC tobridge theeconomy/ecologydivide

People

We are toonumerous andconsuming toomuch (for thewellbeing of other

species).

Makingchoicesbased onindividual

interests.

Reconcilingindividualand collectiveneeds andthose of current

and futuregenerations.

Vision of theeconomicfuture

Deeply pessimistic,unless radicalchanges havetaken place.

Optimistic,linear,deterministic.

Steady-stateeconomicsthat recognizeecological limitsto growth.

Humans partof Nature

Belonging toNature.

Humansoutsideof naturalecosystems.

Humansand Natureconstitute socio-ecosystems.

Determiningthe value of

natural goodsand services

Intrinsic value of

all living entities.

Utility value,determined

by marketprices.

Multi-valuedbecausethe material

economydepends onecosystemhealth.

Conductingstandards andstandards ofconduct

All living speciesmerit respect andattention.

Cost-effectiveness,personal andutility interest.

Biosphererespected onthe basis ofsustainablesocioeconomicwellbeing.

Capitalsubstitution

No substitutionpossible for naturalcapital.

Completesubstitutionpossiblebetweennatural and

manufacturedcapital.

Partialsubstitution,natural andmanufactured

capital arecomplementary.

Wooded savanna withtermite mounds, Cameroon.

F. Anthony IRD


12/40

Elastic model: relationship betweennatural capital and growth

Step 1

The production function has four factors: natural, technical,human and social. The income level W (represented by )depends on the pooled quantity of the four capitals. In thisgraphic representation, the W level is attached by elasticsat the tip of the four capital stock pillars, thus illustrating the

production function W= f (N,T,H,S).

Step 2

There are many known examples where growth is based onnatural capital consumption. In Africa, for instance, the croppingmethods used deplete the soils of their fertility and are generallynot tailored to meeting the needs of the growing population.Natural capital thus gradually declines, along with crop yields,until a specific threshold S is reached beyond which soil fertility,and especially yields, collapse.

Step 3

The soil becomes sterile beyond the S threshold. Farmers thenfall into the unskilled labourer category and are obliged to seekother work. The value of his/her human capital thus declines, i.e.the farmer can no longer make effective use of his/her knowledgeand experience (know-how, adapted sowing methods, etc.)this negative externality reduces the natural capital to a levelthat is insufficient for the farmers human capital, leading to aconcomitant reduction in income.

Conclusion

This representation highlights the fact that investment should bepromoted before the S threshold is reached, so as to halt naturalcapital depletion and stall progress towards the thresholdthe social cost-effectiveness of such investment will be verysubstantial. These threshold phenomena induce nonlinearities inthe growth process, which are clearly hard to model.

Source: Girault and Loyer, 2006.

Focus


K technical

K socialK natural

K humanW: per-capitaincome level

K technical

K socialK natural

K human

SThreshold

effect

K technical

K socialNatural Kcollapse

Human K losslinked with

Outmigration,shantytownsS

Thresholdeffect

K socialK natural

K human

Invest in naturalcapital

Preservenatural capitaland alleviate

poverty

K: capital


13/40


Natural capital:

a sustainable development limiting factor

We have seen earlier that human populations dependon goods tapped from ecosystems (wood, etc.), as wellas natural services required for their survival and thestability of their societies. These services are derived from

the natural capital stock. Most of these services are freeand nonproprietary, i.e. an individuals consumption of aservice does not reduce the capacity of other individualsconsumption of this service (e.g. through an increase inprice or a reduction in access). Reference is sometimesmade to global public goods (Requier-Desjardins andCaron, 2005). This public goods concept underlinesthe fact that the consumption of one good does notlimit the consumption of others, and that the qualityof the service does not decline as a function of thenumber of users (i.e. nonrivalry). In practice, because ofthese different features, there are no economic signals

concerning the reduction in ecosystem services (Farleyand Daly, 2006). They have no current economic marketvalue(cf. above figure).

This diagram represents a simple model of the currenteconomic system, while highlighting the economicdivide between developed and developing countries.Information concerning environmental changes and

their impacts on our societies is not mainstreamedinto the system. The RNC approach fosters this flowof information between developed and developingcountries and relative to the predominant globaleconomic system.

The aim of the predominant economic system is tomaximise individual consumption via economicgrowth. This growth involves a physical increase inthe rate at which the economy transforms naturalresources into monetary value (manufactured capital)and waste. Waste emission (or pollution) is not

accounted for in production costs, so it is currentlymore cost-effective to invest in natural capitaldepletion than restoration.

Theeconomy

Informationdivide

'Too much'consumption

High wasteloads

CO2 accumulation'Rat race'

Socialdesintegration

'Too little'consumption

PovertyMalnutrition

DiseaseDepencyLoss of

self-esteem

Changes in:energy flowsmaterial flowswater qualityand quantity

land use

Changes in:energy flowsmaterial flowswater qualityand quantity

land use

RNC

Transitional phasesProcesses

Information flow

Developed countries Developing countriesIncreasingpolarizationand tension

The current economic systemSource: Aronson et al., 2007b; Blignaut et al., 2007.

Outco

me Ou

tcome

Environme

nta

limpacts E

nvi

ronm

enta

lim

pac

ts

Cons

eque

nces

Consequences


14/40


Contrary to economic growth, economic developmentinvolves an increase in peoples wellbeing and qualityof life for a given level (constant rate) of naturalresource transformation. For sustainable economicdevelopment:

The rate of natural capital transformation intomanufactured capital should not exceed its renewalrate.

The quantity of waste emitted should not exceed thenatural absorption capacity of the biosphere (Daly,1990).

The sustainable development concept fosters thefulfilment of humans basic needs while preservingnatural services that are essential for life on Earth(Kates et al., 2001). This concept incorporates thefact that our economy is limited by the functioningcapacity of ecosystems within the biosphere. This doesnot mean, however, that peoples quality of life shouldbe relinquished in favour of nature conservation. Tothe contrary, sustainable local economic development

is correlated with the enhancement of local andneighbouring peoples well being.

To restore and improve relationships between humansand the natural environment, it is important to:

dissociate economic growth (increase in the size ofthe economy) and economic development (increasein quality of life for a constant size of the economy)concepts;

take the functional limits of global ecosystems intoaccount.

Manufactured capital is no longer the limiting factorfor the economyit is natural capital. By economicreasoning, investment should be focused on thelimiting factor (Aronson et al., 2006a; Costanza andDaly, 1992) so, in societys best interest, there shouldbe heavy investment in restoring natural capital.Different methods for economic valuation of naturalcapital and associated goods and services have beendeveloped to promote this investment. These arecovered in the chapter on the socioeconomic benefitsof restoring natural capital in arid regions (page18) but, as a prelude, the concepts underlying the

implementation of natural capital restoration in aridregions are described in the next chapter.

The global public goods conceptbased on economic precepts

A global public good (GPG) is, for economists, a good that canbe consumed by anyoneits consumption by one person will notbe detrimental to that of other people (e.g. the air we breathe).GPGs can be supplied by the private sector or by States, e.g.crown forests are public goods which are managed by the Statesthat own them.

Biodiversity, i.e. some outstanding forests and sites, may alsobelong to private stakeholders who thus contribute to theproduction of pubic goods. GPGs are goods whose products andcosts extend beyond geopolitical boundaries and generations.

Source: Requier-Desjardins and Caron, 2005.

Focus

Agriculture in Tunisia. Sorting dates

harvested in southern Tunisia.V. Simonneaux IRD


15/40


On the outskirts of a village, a small-scale factory for

making bricks from a mixture of clay, straw and water.The bricks are sun dried. Sikasso region, Mali.

M. Dukhan IRD


16/40


What does restoringnatural capital involve?

estoring natural capital is a novel ma-nagement approach based on the inter-dependence between human wellbeing

and ecosystem health. Restoring goods andservices associated with arid and semiarid environ-ments is essential in combating desertification.

Restoring natural capital: ecosystem health

and human wellbeing in arid and semiarid environments

Restoring natural capital (RNC) concerns all activitiesthat involve an increase or investment in natural capitalstock with the aim of boosting the flow of natural goodsand services, while also enhancing human wellbeing

(Aronson et al., 2006). Like restoration ecology, RNC isgeared to improving ecosystem health and resilience(Clewell and Aronson, 2006, 2007), and addressingpeoples socioeconomic expectations.

RCN may include (but is not limited to):

restoration of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems; sustainable ecological improvement of land subjected

to cultivation or any other management practice; promotion of sustainable biological resource use; setting up or enhancing socioeconomic activities and

habits that incorporate environmental considerations

and sustainable natural capital management.

As already discussed, ecological restoration is aimedat recovering the productivity and enhancing thebiodiversity, stability and resilience of degradedecosystems. This can be done by restoring ecosystemfunctions (i.e. all goods and services).

It is hard to pinpoint exactly how these functionsaffect the stability of human societies prior to theirdegradation. However, the extent of this impactcould be determined by clarifying the effects after

social degradation has occurred. In arid and semiaridenvironments, Le Hourou (1995) listed eight ecologicalconsequences of desertification:

1. Reduction in organic matter production and litterincorporation, leading to a reduction in the productivityand fertility of soils and ecosystems.

2. Formation of a soil cap: a crust that forms on thesurface of bare soils under the impact of rainfall and which hampers water and seed penetration in thesoil.

3. Formation of a biological crust of algae, lichen or mosswhose effects resemble those of soil caps.

4. Dry mechanical erosion due to sliding of particlesdown slopes via gravity. This is the result of constant

ploughing on steep slopes.5. Wind erosion.6. Wind deposition: the formation of sand or clay dunes

following wind erosion.7. Water erosion.8. Anthropogenic salination: a phenomenon resulting

from ill-adapted irrigation, leading to soil sterilisation.

Restoring these functions is a complex process.Conceptual working frameworks or models are availableto gain insight into the phenomenon and facilitatecommunication between different RNC stakeholders.

For instance, the TTRP model developed by Tongwayand Ludwig (2007a and b) has proven useful in solvingenvironmental problems in Australia.

R


17/40

15

Preparation of a field using thezatechnique inYatenga province, Burkina Faso. The traditionalzasoil preparation technique involves digging

small pits to recover small amounts of runoffwater. Millet or sorghum seeds sown in these

pits are more likely to germinate under irregularrainfall conditions.

E. Hien IRD

What does restoring natural capital involve?

TTRP model used to assess grasslandecosystem functioning in semiarid regions

Tongway and Ludwig designed a conceptual framework to facilitatethe restoration of grassland landscape functions in semiarid areas.This so-called the trigger-transfer-reserve-pulse (TTRP) model is basedon two main features of semiarid regions: (i) high spatiotemporalheterogeneity in resource availability, and (ii) low unpredictablerainfall conditions.

Through a series of simple steps, the TTRP model highlights certainprocesses involved in natural capital formation. It helps to identifythe most suitable level at which restoration could take place.A trigger event like rainfall initiates the water transfer process: lossand reserve storage. If the water reserve is sufficient, plant growth,accompanied by livestock production and microbial mineralisation,is initiated . Many biological, chemical and physical processesare then set in motion, such as organic matter formation, nitrogenfixation, carbon sequestration, microbial and macrofauna activitiesand soil nutrient transformation.

These processes promote an increase in natural capital, and its

transformation and recycling . The formation of soil pores andgalleries by macrofauna, for instance, boosts water infiltrationand supply, while enhancing root and microbial respiration.

Other biophysical processes such as the formation of vegetationpatches reduce moisture loss and promote its storage after a trigger

event .

Source: Tongway and Ludwig, 2007a and b.

FocusTrigger

e.g. rainfall

Loss

Pulsee.g. plantgrowth

Transfer

Reserve

. Flow, storage, salinisation. Seed germination and plant growth,mineralisation. Outflow to rivers, erosion. Grazing, burning, harvesting. Replenishing the seed bank,

Organic matter cycling. Physical obstruction, absorption

event

event

event

process

process

Diagram adaptedfrom Tongway and Ludwig, 2007a.

Examples of processes involved


18/40


Ecological restoration of ecosystem functions inarid and semiarid environments should be focusedmainly on restoring water flows, soil fertilityand plant cover. Restoration projects associated

with desertification control generally involve thereintroduction of plants that are resistant to highsalinity, drought and heavy grazing. Several large-scale initiatives have failed, however, because themanagers overlooked problems associated withsoils and water flows. These managers also often do

not take the socioeconomic conditions at the siteinto sufficient account (e.g. green barrier projectsimplemented in Algeria in the 1970s, Mainguet andDumay, 2006). Ecological restoration is a complexprocess that requires the involvement of manypeople often with very different views concerningrestored ecosystems and sometimes conflictinginterests (SER, 2002). Each restoration project shouldtherefore be designed and planned according tothe local setting. It is absolutely essential that localpeople participate in and support RNC projects toensure their success. Boosting public awareness on

the benefits of restoration will help promote suchlocal involvement (SER, 2002).

When setting up RNC projects, it is importantto stress the mutual benefits of this restorationfor humans and the environment, beginning bydefining and communicating concepts pertainingto natural goods and services.

Ecosystem goods and services in aridand semiarid regions

Human populations living in arid and semiaridregions are especially dependent on ecosystemgoods and services to fulfil their basic needs.Inhabitants get most of their income by tappingnatural resources, with very little coming fromthe sale of manufactured products. These peopleare thus highly dependent on natural capital andaffected by climate change (Requier-Desjardins,2007). For instance, cereal, livestock, milk, fuelwoodand construction material production depends onplant productivity, which in turn is dependent on

water supplies.

Ecosystem services can be ranked in four generalcategories: ecological process regulation services,goods production services, dwelling/subsistenceprovision services and cultural information orbenefit services.

The following table, from the Millenium Ecosystem Assessment desertification synthesis report (MEA,2005), provides a list of key natural services in aridand semiarid regions.

The degradation and depletion of natural goodsand services has a clear socioeconomic costfor human populationsdeterioration of theirliving conditions. To increase these services, it isnecessary to financially evaluate: (1) the impact oftheir degradation, and (2) the costs and benefitsassociated with projects implemented for sustainableecosystem restoration (Requier-Desjardins, 2007;Requier-Desjardins, Bied-Charreton M., 2006).This can be done by measuring the quantity andquality of ecosystem goods and services. Note that

the expression measuring natural capital stock isused in this respect to facilitate discussion betweenecologists and economists. Background conceptsconcerning the f inancial valuation of natural capitalare discussed in the following chapter.

Key dryland ecosystem services

Source: MEA, 2005.

Provisioningservices

Regulatingservices

Cultural services

Provisions derived

from biologicalproductivity: food,fiber, forage,fuelwood, andbiochemicals

fresh water

Water purification

and regulation Pollination and

seed dispersal

Climate regulation(local throughvegetation coverand globalthrough carbonsequestration)

Recreation and

tourism Cultural identity

and diversity

Cultural landscapesand heritage values

Indigenousknowledge systems

Spiritual, aestheticand inspirationalservices

Supporting services

Soil development (conservation, formation)

Primary production Nutrient cycling


19/40

Restoring natural capitalin tiger bush areas in Australia

A project was carried out from 1996 to 2007 to restore naturalcapital in semiarid regions of New South Wales, Australia. Themain aim was to restore a steady-state productive ecosystemso as to ensure the economic viability of local farms (livestockfarming). This required the restoration of grassland functionsjointly according to ecological and economic principles.

A natural tiger bush landscape prevails in this region. Thistype of ecosystem is also found in West Africa and Mexicoand landscape consists of bands of vegetation, where strips ofwoody or grassy zones are separated by bare soil. In this unique

landscape structure, resources (especially water) are optimallydistributed, so they can be highly productive.

This banded landscape is degraded by livestock trampling andovergrazing, especially close to artificially supplied wateringpoints where herds traverse and graze daily. Tiger bush functionalprocesses thus gradually stall, which then hampers water storagein the soil and promotes environmental desertification. Finally,these rangelands become very unproductive and colonized bylow feed value ephemeral plant species that suddenly spring upafter occasional rains.

The two following photographs illustrate a functional tiger bushlandscape where the natural capital is formed and stored, aswell as a degraded landscape in which the natural capital hasbeen lost through soil erosion and plant mortality.

This photo shows a landscape in which much less water is stored in thesoil over time. Desertification is under way and all of the trees will ultimatelydisappear. Grassland areas are dominated by ephemeral species with alow feed value that grow quickly after a rainfall. The ecosystem is completelydysfunctional and the natural capital is eventually lost (through plant mortalityor soil erosion).

Source: Ecological Restoration, by Andre F. Clewell and James Aronson. Copyright 2007 by theauthors. Reproduced with the permission of Island Press, Washington, DC, USA.

A landscape with mulga felled by chaining in strips along contours to

enhance resource capture and repair damaged country.Source: Ecological Restoration, by Andre F. Clewell and James Aronson. Copyright 2007 by theauthors. Reproduced with the permission of Island Press, Washington, DC, USA.

A natural capital restoration project was developed in agreementwith herd owners with the aim of stopping the desertification processunder way. It was based on the TTRP model described in the boxon page 15. The project had to be readily applicable, inexpensiveand compatible with farmers practices. The project coordinatorsthus decided to rehabilitate the basic functions of this ecosystem ina test zone modeled on the ecological and hydrological processesprevailing in the non-degraded zone. The dominant plant in thewoody band, i.e. mulga (Acacia aneura), was used to recover the

physical structure of the ecosystem in a test zone. Mulga brancheswere piled in bands across the landscape contours in an attempt tocapture materials leached by rainfall and blown by the wind. Thisled to artificial recovery of the woody band. A new perennial plantpopulation began growing on the accumulated captured material.These plants, which were partially protected by the spiny mulgaplant structure, were subsequently able to survive despite the usualgrazing pressure.

Ten years later, the density of the plant cover and the soil propertieswere recovered in the test zone. This success in reestablishingthe plant cover also meant that the seed pool in the soil was notlimited.

Herders sometimes chopped mulga branches in order to reducecompetition for soil nutrients between this species and those grazedby livestock. The herders could thus easily tailor their feed storagemethods by grazing their livestock on chopped mulga branches indegraded areas. This technique also enhanced pasture production.

This study highlighted that a slight modification in managementpractices can sometimes be efficient. Simply laying mulga branchesin bands across landscape contours was found to be effective incapturing resources and reversing the desertification process. Thiswas economically beneficial for herders while preserving/increasing

biodiversity.

Source: Tongway and Ludwig, 2007a and b.

Example

17What does restoring natural capital involve?


20/40


Socioeconomic benefitsof restoring natural capitalin arid regions

he economic, social and environmental cost ofdesertification is very hard to evaluate and few

studies have focused on this topic (Requier-Desjardins, 2007). The socioeconomic aspects

of natural capital restoration in areas affected bydesertification are thus generally outlined here, whilegiving examples illustrating RNC methods that may beapplied within the specific framework of desertificationcontrol.

Monetary assessment of natural capital

and its restoration

Two types of approach can be adopted to determinethe economic soundness of degraded ecosystemrestoration projects prior to their implementation:(1) assessment of the degradation cost, and (2)assessment of the restoration costs and benefits.

CSFD issue n5 (Requier-Desjardins, 2007) reviewsdifferent desertif ication macroeconomic cost valuationmethods that have been applied to assess situations in Africa. For instance, to valuate the reduction in cropproductivity in monetary terms, a cost assessment wasconducted in Mali on applying commercial fertilizersto replace lost soil nutrients. This method is only

relevant if the natural capital can be replaced by amanufactured substitute, which of course has itslimits.

Another method outlined in the Millenium EcosystemAssessment (MEA, 2003) consists of valuating the costof desertification as a function of divisions of rural areaaccording to their main economic uses (agriculture,forestry, etc.). This basically involves determining thecost of a loss of natural services in terms of food andfuelwood procurement. These assessment methods arerelatively inaccurate because they are based on highly

variable reference prices and very simple models, butthey are still useful in providing relatively convincingarguments in favour of natural capital restoration.

Approaches resembling those implemented in theMillenium Ecosystem Assessment are used to anincreasing extent for assessing ecosystem servicesfrom an economic vantage point within the frameworkof local RNC projects.

Natural capital is still not easy to quantify from amonetary standpoint. Many natural services do nothave a price, in a figurative sense, since they are

essential for life on Earth, or in a literal sense, sincethey have no economic market value. For reasons thatwe have already discussed, including nonexclusivenessand nonrivalry, monetary valuation of most naturalcapital and its restoration is incompatible withconventional economic theories. However, humanshave always placed a value on some aspects of nature,including natural services. These nonmonetaryvalues could thus be entrenched in economic marketlaws (Rees et al., 2007), for instance through thecreation of a fictive market (contingent valuation),or by taking the economic cost of pollution into

account (internalization of externalities)(Requier-Desjardins, 2007).

T


21/40

19Socioeconomic benefits of restoring natural capital in arid regions

Restoring social capital:

an essential complement to RCN

To ensure that ecological aspects will be accounted for ineconomic planning and decision making, i.e. applyingeconomic principles where nature counts (Aronson et al.,2007a), new indicators should be developed to highlightthe interdependency between ecosystem health andpeoples quality of life (de Groot, 1992).

According to the RNC approach, social capital isconsidered to increase concomitantly with naturalcapital. The aim is to convince local people to acceptmodifications in natural resource managementmethods. RNC should preferentially address localdemand rather than being a response to nationaldirectives.

Measuring the wellbeing of human populations isoften erroneously equated with calculating the grossdomestic product (GDP). Although GDP is an excellent

indicator of the size of a national economy, it iscompletely irrelevant as a quality of life or wellbeingindicator (Prescott-Allen, 2001).

Ecosystem degradation is giving rise to ever moreserious socioeconomic issues (MEA, 2005), while therelationship between the quality of environmentalgoods and services and the quality of life of humanpopulations is increasingly evident. Novel systems forcalculating peoples wellbeing based on economic,social and ecological features have been developed.The environmental quality index (de Groot, 1992), aswell as the wellbeing index (WI), are new indicators thatdemonstrate how peoples quality of life declines withecosystem quality. In this setting, people recognize

that their wellbeing and the future development of theirsocieties are closely dependent on proper ecosystemfunctioning (Prescott-Allen, 2001).

Millet crop fields in Niger.P. Blanchon IRD

Economics and ecosystems: calculating the GDP

GDP is probably the most important economic indicator usedby finance ministries worldwide. It represents the total revenue

(pay, salary, interest) generated via the production of goods andservices in one year. Although it is widely interpreted as beinga quality of life indicator, GDP is actually a narrow concept thatsimply represents a measurement of the total economic activityover a given period. GDP has been substantially criticized byenvironmental analysts and theorists because it just measuresthe good but not the bad aspects associated with production,which means that it does not indicate whether the economy isevolving in a sustainable way (Source: de Groot, 1992, quotedfrom Hamilton, 1990).

Only a few economic indicators are used to measure GDP. These

indicators are mainly used to measure manufactured goods andservices, whereas natural goods and services are not takeninto consideration. Even worse, an increase in quality of life asdetermined by such indicators often occurs to the detriment ofnatural goods and services. Environmental degradation shouldthus be taken into account in national accounting systems, e.g.through GDP deductions. There is not yet any internationalconsensus on this topic despite the work of many specialists(UN, World Bank) over the last two decades.

Source: de Groot, 1992; Marais et al., 2007;

Requier-Desjardins, 2007.

Focus


22/40

Quantifying the economic valueof natural capital in South Africa

This monetary assessment of the future benefits of a natural capitalrestoration project was carried out in Bushbuck Ridge (BBR) District,Limpopo Province (South Africa), in 2007. The aim was to determinethe economic advantages of a participatory natural capitalconservation and restoration project relative to a conventionalsubsistence farming system. BBR encompasses 235,000 ha,including 184,000 ha of communal land. The 500 000 communitymembers use this land for picking and livestock farming (no croppingor dwellings). Sadly, this communal land is famous for being part ofthe former homelands, i.e. reserves for Black African people underthe former apartheid regime. Most of the environmental degradationoccurred during that period, when isolated inhabitants were forcedto tap natural resources in a nonsustainable way to fulfil their dailyneeds. The stable democracy that replaced the apartheid regimehas prevailed since 1994, but most of the people living in this heavily

degraded environment are still poor.

In Limpopo province, most of the environmental degradation is locatedaround rivers (here Klein Letaba River). Such degradation affects theavailable water quantity and quality, soil fertility and biodiversity.

Source: Ecological Restoration, by Andre F. Clewell and James Aronson. Copyright 2007 by theauthors. Reproduced with the permission of Island Press, Washington, DC, USA.

A restoration project aimed at enhancing the quality of life in thecommunal area was proposed. The project coordinators suggestedthat this BBR communal area be incorporated in the adjacentprotected Rooibos Bushveld zone of Kruger National Park (KNP).The climatic conditions in these two zones are identical. Moreover,they had the same types of vegetation and animal communitiesbefore being totally decimated in the BBR area. KNP is a WorldConservation Union (IUCN) Category II protected area wherelivestock grazing and resource harvesting are not authorized. Incontrast, tourism is a highly lucrative activity in the area.

The proposed natural capital restoration project involved mergingthe BBR communal area with KNP as an IUCN Category VIprotected area. Sustainable picking would be authorized, butnot livestock grazing. This project is a priorisupported by localinhabitants. An assessment of the potential economic value (underthe proposed restoration conditions) and actual value of directlyused natural goods and services from the communal area was

carried out on the basis: (1) of the value of the natural capital stockpresent, (2) of the direct-use value of goods (products derivedfrom sales) and services (tourism), and (3) the indirect-use valueof actual environmental goods and services (nutrient recycling inthe soil, carbon sequestration) and potential environmental goodsand services (or existence value). Only aspect 2 is discussedbelow (for further information on aspects 1 and 3, see Blignautand Loxton, 2007).

The value of each resource is estimated according to its harvestrate multiplied by its market sale value. The total potential harvestrate for the entire communal area (if merged with KNP) is restricted

by clearcut sustainability conditions. This rate cannot surpass thebiomass production rate. The total annual biomass productionrate in KNP was estimated to be 3%edible fruits account forhalf of this production. The annual potential harvest rate for theBBR zone is thus estimated to range from 0.5 to 1% if the zoneis incorporated in the park. The 1% rate is attributed to mostproducts (mainly regularly consumed products and timber), whilethe 0.5% rate concerns products with more limited marketingoptions (manufactured and medicinal products).

Example

20

Natural capital BBR

(Actual)

BBR

(Potential)

Difference

Millions US$ US$/ha Millions US$ US$/ha US$/ha

Fuelwood 5.7 31.2 3.5 18.9 -12

Timber 2.7 14.7 4.4 24.0 9

By-products 0.25 1.3 51.2 278.2 277

Medication 4.8 25.6 47.1 255.4 229

Fruit and vegetables 9.3 50.4 1.5 8.2 -42

Thatch 7.0 38.0 0.61 3.2 -35

Livestock 9.4 50.9 0 0 -51

Wild animals 0 0 4.3 23.4 23.4

Total 39.15 212.1 112.61 611.3 398.4

Currency values are from the 2002/2003 period.

Restoring Natural Capital in Arid and Semiarid Regions


23/40

21

The actual economic value of direct-use harvested resources isestimated to be US$212.1/ha. Income mainly comes from thesale of livestock, fruit and vegetables, thatch and fuelwood.The potential economic value of direct-use harvested resourcesis estimated to be US$611.3/ha. The highest proportion ofrevenue comes from the sale of high added value medicinal andmanufactured products. Note that these economic values areestimates. An alternative scenario, where the potential estimatedvalues are divided by 2, is thus also proposed. This gives aneconomic return rate of US$305.65/ha, to which the tourismpotential of the communal area after its potential merger withKNP can be added. The economic value of tourism in the RooibosBushveld zone is estimated at US$98/ha, whereas it is currentlynil in the BBR communal area.

The estimates showed that the actual economic value of the BBRzone is US$212.1/ha, whereas its absolute minimum potential

economic value is US$305.65/ha. This value is underestimatedsince it does not take the added tourism value or aspects 1 and 3of the previously discussed assessment into account. When all ofthese aspects are considered, the total estimated economic valueis US$837.48/ha (and US$491.32/ha for a minimum alternativescenario).

This study revealed that the type of use proposed for the BBRcommunal area has a higher potential economic value than itsactual value. The study was based on the assumption that the zonecould be merged with KNP, without any change of owners andwith an authorization for a sustainable natural resource harvestingrate. BBR inhabitants favoured incorporation of the area into thepark, so the findings of this monetary assessment could eventuallybe of use when the project is actually launched

Source: Blignaut and Loxton, 2007.

Socioeconomic benefits of restoring natural capital in arid regions

Flower of the Proteaceae family.South Africa

C. Lvque IRD


24/40

How does environmental degradation affect humanpopulations? And how can natural capital restorationlead to an improvement in social wellbeing? Restoringdegraded ecosystems in poor countries can onlybenefit from local support if the initiative providesclear answers to these questions (Aronson et al., 2006b;

Aronson et al., 1993).

The interdependency between the quality of life andecosystem quality is gradually being put forward onnational and international levels through studies likethat presented in the box on page 23 (case study inTunisia), and the development of new wellbeing indices.On the local level, target RNC projects can help toeffectively reestablish healthy respectful relationshipsbetween humans and their environment.

Calculation of the wellbeing index:

an example in Mali

The wellbeing index (WI) of Prescott-Allen incorporates twocomponents: an index of the wellbeing of human populationssensu stricto(the human wellbeing index; HWI) and an index ofecosystem wellbeing (the ecosystem wellbeing index; EWI).

The HWI is calculated on the basis of a set of data groupedaccording to four themes: community, equity, health, and know-how.

The EWI is calculated on the basis of a set of data groupedaccording to five themes: air, land, natural resource use, speciesand genes, and water.

The WI structure for Mali is illustrated below. The WI is located atthe interface of the dark brown zone (bad) and the light brownzone (poor). On the vertical axis in this figure, the communitycircle (c) raises the HWI level. This is due to the fact that therehas been a stable democracy with well established freedomof speech since the 1990s. The human rights data are positiveoverall, but this trend should be moderated in the light of theoccasional violent clashes between communities and policebrutality (even torture). Figures concerning other dimensions arerather low and drag the HWI downward. This is due to the poorsanitary conditions, acute malnutrition, very high infant mortalityand low scolarization rates.

On the horizontal axis, the quality of life in Mali is impeded bythe poor soils and water quality (on the far left in this figure).Indeed, the rivers and groundwater are highly polluted and 40%of the cultivated land is moderately to highly degraded.

Source: Prescott-Allen, 2001.

Focus


w .s spsp .aa44421

c

.h

.r

100

100

80

80

60

60

40

20

4020

Bad

Bad

Poor

Poor

Medium

Medium

Fair

Fair

Good

Good

Ecosystem wellbeing

Humanwellbeing

0

Wellbeing structure in Mali

Black circles represent human dimensions.c = community, e = equity, h = health and population,

k = knowledge, r = richness.

White circles represent ecosystem dimensions.a = air, s = soil, u = resource use,

sp = species and genes, w = water.

One dimension is positioned behind anotherone (knowledge behind richness).

The Malian HWI excludes equity and its EWI excludesresource use since both of these dimensions would

artificially boost these two indices.


25/40

23Socioeconomic benefits of restoring natural capital in arid regions

Degradation of the environmentand human wellbeing in Tunisia

A case study carried out in Tunisia revealed how environmentaldegradation can lead to a decline in national human wellbeing,thus indicating that this loss should be included in environmentaldegradation cost assessments. The loss of national humanwellbeing is expressed here in three forms, with each type ofloss then being calculated according to a certain number ofindicators:

1. loss of a healthy living environment (via early death,serious health problems, poor hygiene and lack of a cleanenvironment, etc.);

2. economic loss (reduction in farmland productivity, loss oftourism income, etc.);

3. loss of environmental opportunity (loss of recreational functions

of a lake, beach, forest, etc.).

The measurement of these different losses is included in thedegradation cost assessment. The aim of this type of study is tohighlight the interdependency between the ecosystem health ina country and the quality of life of its inhabitants. On a nationalscale, the aim is to foster the drawing up and implementationof government legislation and directives that will promotesustainable resource use, and restoration where necessary.

Source: Sarraf et al., 2004.

Example

A sellers stand in a market,Mdenine, Tunisia.

V. Simonneaux IRD


26/40


Do arid regions warrantRNC investment?

estoring the natural capital of a site hinges ona delicate balance between many ecologicaland socioeconomic factors. The prime goal

should be to maximize the socioeconomicand environmental benefits within the framework ofsustainable development. Some RNC areas requirefurther attention, especially in developing methodsto evaluate the success of restoration projects andclarifying the potential funding mechanisms for theseprojects.

Evaluating the success of restoration projects

According to the Society for Ecological RestorationInternational (SER, 2002), the restoration objectives

and strategy to be adopted will closely depend on thetype of degradation, the governments attitude, localpeoples expectations and the biophysical constraintsat the degraded site.

The success of a restoration project depends on how well targeted the project objectives are in addressingthe socioeconomic expectations of local people.Just assessing the ecological success of the projectis therefore not enough to determine whether therestoration achievements will be sustainable in the longrun. The success of a restoration project also depends onits economic and social development potential (Cairns,

2000; Geist and Galatowitsch, 1999; Higgs, 1997).

Assessing the long-term success of restoration projectsis important for: (1) improving ongoing projects, and(2) assisting in setting up future projects (Atkinson,1994). Clearly demonstrating that the initial objectivesof a restoration project have been fulfilled can also beuseful in clinching the support of investors and localpeople with respect to setting up new projects (Hobbsand Harris, 2001).

RNC project managers are, however, often hampered by

the uncertain and unpredictable aspect of restorationprocesses implemented (due to the nature of ecologicalprocesses), and by the need to promote the often

intangible benefits of restoration. This makes it hard tojustify investment in RNC projects and to assess theirshort-term success.

Multicriteria assessment techniques are graduallybeing developed to provide RNC investment assistanceand substantiation. In multicriteria analysis methods,the best available strategy is selected to achieve a set of

predefined objectives. The RNC motives and benefitsshould thus be clearly delineated at the beginning ofprojects.

Multicriteria analysis is a three-step process, including(Rees et al., 2007):

1. working with the different stakeholders to define: (a)the project or programme targets, (b) the differentsuccess criteria, and (c) the importance (weights) ofthe different evaluation criteria;

2. deciding on the different strategies required toachieve the objectives, evaluating how each strategy

addresses the preset success criteria, and selecting thebest strategies;

3. classifying the different options and facilitatingimplementation of the final strategy.

Note that external factors, such as changes in the valuesexpressed by the community, new information orpolitical pressure, can have a positive or negative impacton the evolution of an RNC project (Younget al., 2007).

In parallel, baseline restoration project costs aregenerally high, while the benefits increase later

(Aronson et al., 2007a; Holl and Howarth, 2000; Requier-Desjardins, 2007). Local restoration initiatives shouldthus be combined with public and private investment.

R


27/40

25Do arid regions warrant RNC investment?

Restoration funding

Restoration funding mechanisms generally fall intotwo categories, i.e. mechanisms based on the impacterpays concept and those based on the beneficiar y paysconcept. The costs are sometimes shared betweenthe two categories. The ultimate decision is politicaland depends on the different expectations of each

community involved and the prevailing economicpowers.

The recovery capacity of a degraded ecosystem dependson the type, extent and frequency of the impacts to

which it has been subjected (SER, 2002). In arid andsemiarid environments, the soilborne seed availability,soil structure and fertility and water flows can be highlyaffected.

Under extreme temperature, grazing and low humidityconditions, etc., it takes a very long time for plantsto germinate and develop, even when there are

no disturbances. There is very little chance that adegraded ecosystem will be able to recover withouthuman intervention, even if grazing and all other typesof disturbance have been curbed (Bainbridge, 2007).

Even the most costly restoration activities are quitenecessary. Land degradation in arid and semiaridenvironments is a problem that is not limited topoor countries but, as discussed earlier, poor livingconditions can substantially spur the process.Desertification has an ecological and economic impactin many countries, including the richest ones. It is

therefore essential to set up information systems anddraw up legislation in both developing and developedcountries to sidestep this type of extreme situation.

Desertification caused by overgrazing in Chihuahua, Mexico.With this ex tent of environmental degradation, very few goods ca nbe produced unless restoration measures are implemented.

Source: A Guide for Desert and Dryland Restoration, by DavidBainbridge. Copyright 2007 by the author. Reproduced with the

permission of Island Press, Washington, DC, USA.

Hiring job seekers from local communities is one aim of the Working forWoodland programme in Limpopo province, South Africa.

People are actively recruited and trained to perform specialized duties such asconstructing fences to protect restoration project sites, implementing erosion

control and soil enrichment measures, removing invasive species,collecting and sowing seeds of indigenous plants, and propagating

selected tree species for planting.

Source: Ecological Restoration, by Andre F. Clewell and James Aronson.Copyright 2007 by the authors. Reproduced with the permission of Island

Press, Washington, DC, USA.


28/40


Participative and adaptive restorationmanagement for communal areas in South Africa

Inhabitants of communal areas in South Africa are highlydependent on natural resources. For instance, land degradationcan lead to a sharp decrease in the size of livestock herdsand fuelwood, medicinal plant and timber availability. InPikoli village (Peddie District), the density of two Acaria karoopreferred fuelwood varieties was reported to decrease linearlywith distance from the village. Hence, women, who have the roleof collecting wood, must walk long distances and find it difficultto find sufficient quantities. Moreover, inhabitants of Macubeni(Eastern Cape) can no longer find enough medicinal plants to

treat their livestock.

These examples generally illustrate how food (and water)availability in South African rural communal areas is decliningto an increasing extent due to environmental degradation. Thisdegradation of communal land is also associated with largerscale socioeconomic problems such as high outmigration andloss of self-esteem, local identity and traditional ecologicalknow-how. These different combined negative effects upsetsocial cohesion and prompt local institutions to lose interest andgovernments to reduce their support.

Natural capital restoration of these areas has been proposedas a means to reduce social issues associated with landdegradation. However, local inhabitants insecure situationhampers the development of individual initiatives. The communityand governmental (and potentially nongovernmental) institutionsshould thus codevelop a restoration strategy.

Local communities should first realise that the scarcity of naturalresources is due to: (1) overtapping of resources by local people,(2) the reduced capacity of the government to provide technicalassistance, and (3) climate change. Moreover, the restorationstrategy should be focused on (1) the capacity of ecosystemsto supply goods and services (resources, productivity), and

(2) their resilience with respect to climate change.

A 10-step method was developed for participative and adaptiverestoration management for communal areas in South Africa, butthe underlying concepts are widely applicable.

1. Conceptualize an integrated model of the ecological andsocioeconomic system to be restored.

2. Combine formal (remote sensing) and informal (conventional)sources of knowledge and information.

3. Identify different project stakeholders and mainstream theminto the decision-making process.

4. Agree on a clear and shared vision of the restored system.5. Agree on a clear and shared vision of future restoration

benefits (often indirect and long term).

6. Identify the role of key individuals responsible for setting upand monitoring the project.

7. Foster flexibility and diversity of opinion between projectcoordinators in order to increase the resilience of the projectand reduce its vulnerability.

8. Develop national governmental or municipal facilitation andprofessional training systems.

9. Develop professional skills for simultaneously handlingeconomic, sociopolitical and ecological processes involved.

10. Accept the uncertainties and benefits associated withadaptive management (learning by doing).

The two following examples show how rural communities and

other institutions could combine forces to restore natural capital.

At Macubeni (Eastern Cape), local communities have recentlymobilized themselves around a vision of sustainable naturalresource use and ecosystem restoration. They expressed theirvision as follows: A better life for all, by managing our naturaland manmade resources sustainably, in order to improveour livelihoods, health, education, and economy, while stillmaintaining our traditional culture and values, so that there willbe a brighter future for the people of Macubeni. A steeringcommittee was formed to oversee the development of a long-termland use plan. Local people are currently setting up a project to

restore the severely degraded watershed around the Macubenidam. This project benefited from the assistance of severalmunicipalities and local government departments concernedwith agricultural, environmental, health, and economic issues.In conjunction, a university research programme is involved infund-raising, facilitation, technical support and developmentassistance.

On the Wild Coast (Eastern Cape), community action has led tothe formation of a community tourism organization, a community-based conservation plan, and a partnership with the privatesector. In collaboration with a communal association (NqabarhaDevelopment Trust), inhabitants set up three institutions: a forest

management committee, a craft production committee, and amedicinal plant users group that falls under the umbrella of theTrust. They have developed a land management plan, formulatedregulations to strengthen the participative management laws, anddeveloped strategies for income generation, fund-raising andfield training. They also established a vegetable and medicinalplant nursery and a craft workshop. In addition, plans areunderway to develop certain tourism opportunities with privateinvestors. The local municipality, Rhodes University, the nationalgovernment and the German agency for technical cooperation(GTZ), support their work.

Source: Fabricius and Cundill, 2007.

Example


29/40

27Do arid regions warrant RNC investment?

RNC projects generally require joint public (through

national taxes and duties) and private funding. Privatepartners are identified according to the local projectbeneficiaries. Various types of project participation arepossible, such as participation in field managementactivities or equipment funding/sponsoring.

Heavy grazing pressure can quickly lead to the disappearance of al lvegetation cover. When looking at this bare rock landscape, it is hardto imagine that trees, bushes, flowers and grasses were previouslygrowing on the same site. This area was laid bare within just a few

years. South-western USA.

Source: A Guide for Desert and Dryland Restoration, by DavidBainbridge. Copyright 2007 by the author. Reproduced with thepermission of Island Press, Washington, DC, USA.

Funding is not the only factor limiting the

implementation of RNC projects. Restoration activitiesare still uncommon and few people have the know-ledge and experience necessary to perceive what arestored ecosystem could be like. Indeed, it is hardfor most people to imagine how a degraded areacould appear after restoration. Mainstreaming localstakeholders into accountability and empowermentaspects of RNC projects is an effective way to promoterestoration and modify human behaviours with respectto Nature (Leigh, 2005).

Closeup photos of a highly degraded site in Argentina (Sierras deCordoba), just before (1997, left photo) and after (2006, right photo)the launching of a restoration project.

D. Renison

A large lake where steamboats used to operateis now a source of toxic dust and a costly

environmental issue in California (USA).

Source:A Guide for Desert and DrylandRestoration, by David Bainbridge. Copyright

2007 by the author. Reproduced with thepermission of Island Press, Washington, DC, USA.


30/40


31/40

29Prospects: towards a sustainable relationship between humankind and the environment?

natural capital, while also improving management of water and natural resources and ecosystems overall.There have not yet been enough cost-benefit analysesfocused on resource management, agriculture andlivestock farming enhancement or water managementimprovement initiatives in arid and semiarid countries,and most of the ones that have been conducted werefocused solely on agricultural and livestock farmingissues. Some projects to combat desertification havethus been analysed in recent years (Reij and Steeds,2003; Hien et al., 2004; Requier-Desjardins and Bied-

Charreton, 2006). The findings of these projects arevery interesting but not yet widely acknowledged. Ahighly positive investment return rate (10-30%) hasbeen noted, sometimes with a lag time of several yearsbefore this rate is reached. We should gain furtherinsight into these issues in 2008 through ongoinginitiatives funded by the World Bank (TerrAfricainitiative), the French Development Agency (AFD)and the French Global Environment Facility (FGEF).These initiatives are associated with an internationalnetwork on the costs of inaction that was set uprecently following an international workshop on the

costs of inaction and investment opportunities in arid,semiarid and subhumid dry areas held in Rome (Italy)in December 2006 (Requier-Desjardins, 2007).

Peoples wellbeing oriented arguments: Herepoliticians are more concerned because the negativeeffects of resource and ecosystem degradation aremore immediately obvious: decreased yields andrevenue, increased poverty, social destabilization andoutmigration. However, the remedies and initiatives torectify this income loss problem are not very clearcut;national and international public investment in ruralareas has been declining for 20 years. With respect to

official development assistance (ODA), the proportionof investment in land management (includingagriculture and livestock production) dropped in20 years from around 20% to 5% in 2006 ($5 billionout of $100 billion in global ODA). Some specialistseven wonder whether it would be better to targetassistance to urban areas or other sectors rather thanto rural areas. Outmigration, especially internationaloutmigration, has been an ongoing trend for a longtimeit is an embarrassing situation without any clearsolution for the moment. Governments and publicdevelopment assistance decision makers are already

aware of the importance of preserving human capitalby supporting education and health, and of socialcapital by supporting civil society and recognizing

the quality of village organizations which, in manycountries, have become legal associations authorizedto enter into contractual liability actions.

Global environment oriented arguments: Theseare based on the concept that ecosystems provideservices and that healthy local environmentscontribute to th

Lacombe Morgane and Aronson James, 2009. Restoring natural capital in arid and semiarid regions...

Documents

Transcript of Lacombe Morgane and Aronson James, 2009. Restoring natural capital in arid and semiarid regions...