Strengthening Scientific Collaboration - CIFOR · Strengthening Scientific Collaboration in...

Strengthening Scientific Collaboration in Forestry Research

CIFOR - CeTSAF Workshop 12-13 December 2006Eden HotelGöttingen, Germany

Workshop ReportJoachim Krug, Fiona Chandler and Christoph Kleinn


Workshop Report

Joachim Krug, Fiona Chandler and Christoph Kleinn

The CIFOR-CeTSAF Workshop was sponsored by GTZ /BEAF and BMZ


Centre forTropical and SubtropicalAgriculture and Forestry

CeTSAFBüsgenweg 1

D-37077 Göttingen, GermanyTel. +49(0)551-393908Fax +49(0)551-394556

[email protected] - www.tropenzentrum.de

List of acronyms: Workshop background Welcome and opening presentations

Thematic presentations and discussions Theme 1: Silviculture of Plantations and Natural Forests, Forest Products Theme 2: Forest Restoration and Management Planning Review of Day 1 Theme 3 and 4: Forest Ecosystem Services, Socio-Economic and Policy Aspects

Working group reports Making markets work for the poor: certification revised (Chair: Markku Kanninen) Enriching production systems with indigenous fruit and medicinal species (Chair: Patricia Shanley) Small-holder tree planting (Chair: Chris Barr) From Science to Action: the use of information in multi-level relations (Chair: Crispen Marunda) Managing Forested Landscapes Group (Chair: Markku Kanninen) Managing Forested Landscapes in Africa (E and S Africa, dry forest management) (Chair: Crispen Marunda) Management of multi-use forested landscapes (Chair: Chris Barr)

Outcomes and the Way Ahead

ANNEX 1: List of Participants ANNEX 2: Presentations

ContentsTable of

iii11

23

345

6

7

8

10

11

11

13

14

1619

Strengthening Scientific

Collaboration in Forestry Research

WorkshopReport

December 2006

iiiBEAF Advisory Service on Agricultural Research for DevelopmentBMZ German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and

DevelopmentCeTSAF Centre for Tropical and Subtropical Agriculture and ForestryCGIAR Consultative Group on International Agricultural ResearchCIFOR Center for International Forestry ResearchFRIM Forest Research Institute of MalawiGTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit

(German Corporation for Technical Cooperation)PPP Public Private PartnershipSTORMA Stability of Rainforest Margins in Indonesia

AcronymsList of



WorkshopReport

December 2006

�

The Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) agreed with GTZ/BEAF to undertake a series of activities to strengthen existing links with BEAF, GTZ and German Forestry Research Institutions. This workshop was organized primarily to share knowledge on the current state of forestry research between CIFOR and German forestry research institutions. The workshop was designed to strengthen existing links and expand CIFOR´s network of partners among German research institutions that are active in forestry research in developing countries. The intention was to facilitate a better understanding of CIFOR’s work among German institutions and German scientists as well as providing CIFOR with opportunities to gain a broader knowledge of, and to work more closely with, German researchers on mutually shared, relevant forestry issues. The workshop also provided the opportunity for GTZ/BEAF to inform both CIFOR and participating German forestry research institutions, in more detail about the procedures, opportunities and requirements of the BEAF funding structures.

The workshop was organized around presentations on thematic topics and plenary discussions as well as small group discussions on areas of mutual interest in further collaboration. The working group reports are summaries of discussions with suggestions for follow up actions and next steps. Submitted presentations and institutional biographies are available upon request from CIFOR.

The workshop was opened by with welcoming remarks from Dr. Winkler (Research Division, International Research Contacts) and Prof. Dr. Finkeley (Dean of the Faculty of Forestry) from Georg-August University Göttingen. The opening comments highlighted the University’s four ‘green’ faculties (forestry, agriculture, biology, geography) the international centres (e.g. CeTSAF, Centre for Nature Conservation) and cooperation (e.g. STORMA) and the activities and research topics of the Faculty of Forestry.

Three keynote presentations were made to help set the scene for the workshop. The first presentation was made by Dr. Wolfgang Kasten (GTZ BEAF Project Manager) explaining the BEAF system and assessment structure and the various funding opportunities available to CGIAR and German research institutions. The presentation raised discussions on how forestry is represented in the BEAF system and helped to clarify some of the assumptions that had been arising due to past evaluations and decisions.

Workshopbackground

and opening presentationsWelcome


WorkshopReportDecember 2006

�

It was noted that BEAF were one of a number of funding sources and that efforts would need to be made in diversifying efforts in fund raising in order to adequately address the resource requirements of forestry research.

The second key presentation was made by Dr. Markku Kanninen (Programme Director, CIFOR) providing an overview of CIFOR’s research portfolio, the directions of CIFOR’s research and the challenges the Center is facing. It was noted that CIFOR recognizes a lack of understanding of the possibilities and opportunities in working with German research and development organizations and looks to the workshop to facilitate a greater knowledge for future endeavours. The presentation raised debate on the relative interest and support of forestry by donor agencies and how forestry tends to be underrepresented in the consideration of the development-research community. This is in spite of the continuing degradation of forest resources, un-sustainable utilisation, poor forest governance and the Millennium Development Goals, which indicate that forestry research is needed more than ever.

The final presentation in the session was timely in that Dr. Cornelis van Tuyll (Programme Coordinator, MRC-GTZ Cooperation Programme) spoke about the role of forestry research from the perspective of technical development assistance agencies. The presentation sparked a lively dialogue on the ‘fit’ of research topics into the political arena and priorities including the premise that the image of foresters (and forestry) is too conservative and the sector has not done well in linking forestry to other development issues. It was suggested that some topics – relevant to forestry but not often linked to forest research, such as livelihoods, climate change and water – are missing on the agenda. Furthermore, it will be increasingly important to ensure that research is relevant to the beneficiaries (not just researchers) as it is becoming clear that funding from organizations, such as BMZ, will be for applied rather than basic research. This opens up a new and exciting role for collaboration between centers like CIFOR (applied research) and some of the German research institutions (universities) which undertake more basic research.

The working part of the workshop centred on thematic presentations given by workshop participants followed by a short session for questions of clarification followed by more in-depth plenary discussions. The four themes originally selected (Silviculture of plantations and natural forests, forest products; Forest restoration and management planning; Forest

and discussions

Thematic presentations



WorkshopReport

December 2006

�

ecosystem services, and Socio-economic and policy aspects) were slightly reworked into the following three themes:

1. Silviculture of Plantations and Natural Forests, Forest Products 2. Forest Restoration and Management Planning3. Forest Ecosystem Services, Socio-Economic and Policy Aspects

Theme 1: Silviculture of Plantations and Natural Forests, Forest Products (Chair: Christoph Kleinn):

1. “The Growing Demand for Wood – Challenges for Natural Forest Management and Plantation Forestry” Uwe Muuss, U Göttingen

2. “Plantation Forestry Research in the Tropics” Jobst-Michael Schröder, BFH Hamburg

3. “The Role of Information in Decision-making related to Forests” Christoph Kleinn, U Göttingen

The discussion following the presentations tended to focus on the fit of the sort of research being presented into geographic, funding and development priorities. The issue arose on who actually decides on the fit with arguments being raised both in favour of ‘doing good research and funding will follow’ to the need for more dialogue with development agencies to determine what research (and partners) are wanted. The role of CIFOR as a partner was raised in the discussion with note taken of some of the Centre’s constraints and the advantages that there might be with linking with German institutions. Closer collaboration is welcomed but as pointed out the German forest research system has to structure and organise to create networking opportunities. Limitations of funding require that all organizations look for the ‘best’ partners.

Theme 2: Forest Restoration and Management Planning (Chair: Crispen Marunda):

1. “Do we need Basic Science in Tropical Forestry Research? – Examples from Forest Genetics” Reiner Finkeldey, U Göttingen

2. “Forestry-based Production Systems: Diagnosis and Development” Jürgen Pretzsch, U Dresden

3. “The Research of the Institute of Silviculture Sect. II Tropical Silviculture” Ralph Mitlöhner, U Göttingen

The discussions arising after these presentations mainly focussed on application-orientated questions and clarifications concerning DNA fingerprint methods, related costs and techniques. There was a high degree of interest in regard to the possibilities of source-tracking in combating illegal timber trade and the importance of basic science in tropical forestry research. In ongoing clarifications, the focus of the Institute of Tropical



�

Silviculture in Göttingen was defined as ‘close-to-nature forestry’ with special experience on the rehabilitation of degraded forests, plantations and lands.

Review of Day 1

The second day of the workshop started with a review of the preceeding day to provide a recap and a ‘check in’ with the participants that the workshop was achieving the stated objectives. Two particular points from Day 1 of the workshop that the participants felt required further clarification were the objectives of CIFOR and the input to the research agenda that could be expected from BEAF.

Dr. Markku Kanninen (Programme Director, CIFOR) made opening remarks on what CIFOR was looking for and stated that even though joint project proposal development is sometimes difficult, further networking activities between CIFOR and German forestry research institutions should be explored (e.g. joint publishing, integration of students, influencing donors). Dr. Kanninen stated explicitly that CIFOR is looking for motivated partners who could, for example, mobilise students (whose formal supervision should be done by a university) and post-docs. The integration of students from developing countries lies in line with current CIFOR policies as a means to attract and work with relevant partners and to generate more influence and impact with the research results. Generally, CIFOR’s focus is in the tropics to influence development agendas and market chains with five key topic areas: Poverty reduction and sustainable forest management; clean water & forests; climate change; globalisation and markets, and the improvement of forest research capacity in development countries.

Continuing with the review of Day 1, Dr. Wolfgang Kasten (GTZ BEAF Project Manager) and Dr. Marlene Diekmann (GTZ BEAF Senior Advisor) expanded on the presentation given the day before with more focus and clarification on BEAF’s funding priorities and processes. Dr. Kasten highlighted other funding opportunities open to CGAIR-German partnerships other than the once a year call for large research proposals e.g. CIM integrated experts and young professionals; small grants for workshops, publications & research; three-year post-doc positions and applications for German interns to work with CGIAR centers. Many of these opportunities are not restricted to particular calls and are available year-round. Dr. Kasten especially emphasised PPP opportunities that could be exploited and offered active BEAF support by linking applicants with other donors ‘like a broker between donors and centres’.

Dr. Kasten and Dr. Diekmann advised that for the large grants for CGIAR centers BEAF focuses on five priority areas for their support that have been promoted by the CGIAR Science Council. Dr. Kasten went on to explain the composition of the Competence Team (a selection of renowned scientists



WorkshopReport

December 2006

�

from the German research community for the evaluation of applications) and a brief update of guidelines.

The representatives from GTZ/BEAF noted that in the past there was a perceived lack of focus among the German research community and encouraged improved organisation in this regard. Moreover, and in regard of past applications for large grants, a more precise definition of partnerships (and the respective inputs) as well as the accurate description of those inputs (e.g. in a logframe explaining which partner is responsible for what activities etc.) was emphasised. Additionally an orientation towards more ‘sexy’ topics which are of high and actual political interest (e.g. climate change) was recommended.

The resulting discussion on this information from BEAF was centred on the areas of research where the German research community is best placed to contribute. The suggestion that this might be predominantly in the field of technical methods was controversially discussed and the question arose if the German research community did in fact, provide technical experts which are not recognised by outsiders. The question of what to do with knowledge on technical methods was directed towards the existing cooperation opportunities with CIFOR.

The consideration of to what extent the research orientation of the German research community does fit into the global environmental agenda was opened further. It was discussed if rather long-termed silvicultural research did conflict with actual funding opportunities and the group recommended to each other to think about short-term niches in that consideration. Furthermore, the opportunity to cooperate with existing and on-going projects was highlighted.

In overall summary of these discussions it was agreed that CIFOR was looking for ‘leading forestry research topics’ and ‘excellent ideas’. With this encouraging statement, the review was closed in favour of further thematic presentations.

Theme 3 and 4: Forest Ecosystem Services, Socio-Economic and Policy Aspects (Chair: Chris Barr):

1. “Support of the Forest Certification Process in Malaysia in special Consideration on the Demands of the Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg” Michael Köhl, BFH Hamburg

2. “Forest Devolution and Poverty alleviation” Thomas Sikor, HU Berlin3. “Trees Hugged and Logged: The Delicate Economics of Property Rights

in Forests” Timo Goeschl, U Heidelberg4. “Forest Ecosystem Services and their Economic Value” Roland

Olschewski, U Göttingen5. “Governance Arrangements” Heiner Schanz, U Freiburg



�

The five final presentations were followed by further clarifications and spirited discussions. The use of DNA fingerprint methods in favour of certification purposes was debated and techniques further explained. It was stated, that the DNA fingerprint methods could certainly be useful for certification purposes – but it must be considered, that as certification relates to management and fingerprinting only to the origin of material, fingerprints for verification of certificates would still have to be relied on.

Clarifications and questions on ‘Forest Devolution and Poverty alleviation’ related to the conclusion that devolution of utilisation rights can widen the gap between poor and rich. It was agreed that poor stakeholders would perhaps need credits to make use of devoluted land or forest rights and it was considered if pro-poor arrangements may help. In this context, the challenging question: ‘Do we talk about benefit from forests or from forest-destruction?’ was raised, and recognised that intervention can create opportunities but that it is essential to value the effects of measures taken for action. In this line, the importance to provide results and guidelines for decision makers (e.g. by distribution of publication) was emphasised again.

The topics of the different working groups evolved after discussions and were aimed at trying to explore possible collaborative ventures (e.g. joint presentations under another fore, incorporation of PhD and other students, scientist exchange, joint publications, joint proposals). In the following section, the working group reports are written as provided by the working group rapporteurs.

Making markets work for the poor: certification revised (Chair: Markku Kanninen)

Topic: Rehabilitation of degraded forest sites / protection of natural resources by means of utilisation

Participants:Markku Kanninen, Reiner Finkledey, Joachim Krug, Wolfgang Kasten, Roland Olschewski, Andreas Bürkert, J-M. Schröder

Action to be taken:A two page concept note will be prepared by CIFOR and later circulated

reportsWorking group



WorkshopReport

December 2006

�

to interested partners and if interest is sustained will be elaborated to a full proposal (subject to internal feedback within CIFOR necessary). Could be marketed to BEAF or other donor organisations e.g. EC.

Enriching production systems with indigenous fruit and medicinal species (Chair: Patricia Shanley)

Topics: • Forest production systems under change • Integrating indigenous fruit species into agro-forestry systems

Participants: Jens Gebauer, Jürgen Pretzsch, Patricia Shanley

Summary of discussion:Invisibility of locally valuable species: Fruit and medicinal species valuable to local livelihoods are often invisible to research and policy agendas, marginalized like the people who use them. The livelihood value (health, nutrition, cultural significance) of such species can be high, but is often undocumented.

Wild stands: In Africa and Amazonia, some critical species are not undergoing domestication but continue to be collected from wild stands.

Use and Trade: Use and trade of indigenous fruit and medicinal species is growing in many regions of Asia, Africa and Amazonia. Increased demand, alongside increased land use change, signals a need to identify sources and potential management options. Rapid urbanization is catalyzing an increased flux of products between forests and cities. Socioeconomic necessities as well as cultural preferences for forest goods stimulate rising trade in urban centers.

Vulnerable species: Some key native species are vulnerable to land use change and declining in abundance, thus contributing to loss of genetic resources and ecotypes. For example, some wild stands of fruit species in dry forests of Africa are subject to increasing grazing from livestock, exhibiting little to no regeneration. In Amazonia, the most widely used fruit and medicinal tree species are extracted for timber, and demonstrate poor regeneration post logging.

Non-native focus: Reforestation schemes and enrichment plantings often focus on non-native species; subsidies and policies often support introduced species.

Production systems respond to land use change and economic and ecological opportunities and constraints in different ways. Peri-urban areas



�

may intensify production based on market demand. Local innovations may provide clues that may be replicated elsewhere.

Methods: Analyse case studies of existing production systems in changing conditions. Accomplish this through an interaction between researchers and producers in the co-production of knowledge. Use a systems modelling approach to demonstrate current and potential future scenarios. Link knowledge to action through innovative extension that shares knowledge through existing networks.

Support: The topic reflects GTZ interest in underutilized species and forested landscapes. However the approach the group envisioned in addressing indigenous species was considered to be insufficiently broad for a landscape level focus or to meet the genetic requirements potentially implied by the underutilized species priority.

Considering that indigenous species might play a complementary role in another group’s discussion, Reducing Risks and Optimizing Outputs for Community Forestry, participants briefly joined that group.

Action to be taken:Final small group discussion resulted in a plan to consider developing a concept note for small projects under the GTZ guidelines.

Jürgen Pretzsch will follow-up by drafting a concept note and sending it to the other team members. He is considering the Mekong region as a geographical focus as this would link well with CIFOR’s current work in that region. African dry forests and the Brazilian Amazon are other regions where group members have current work and contacts.

Small-holder tree planting (Chair: Chris Barr)

Topic: Integrating small-holder tree-planting into land, water, and forest management in SE Asia

Participants: Thomas Sikor, Ralph Mitlöhner, Marlene Diekmann, Chris Barr (later joined by Jens Gebaner, Jurgen Pretsch, and Patricia Shanley)

Summary of Discussion:Tree planting schemes are now being promoted through major policy initiatives and capital investments. These are aimed at both: a) supplying wood for industrial uses; and b) providing environmental services.



WorkshopReport

December 2006

�

Large-scale tree-planting initiatives have the potential to drive significant land-use changes. They often involve the use of exotic fast-growing tree species, with little assessment of the appropriateness of these in the areas where they are being planted.

Tree-planting schemes can provide potentially significant opportunities and risks for small-holders. On the one hand, they can offer new sources of income for rural households, particularly if there is strong demand for industrial wood within local markets. On the other hand, small-holders can face considerable risks associated with limited access to information, poor site-species matching, uncertain land tenure, limited access to markets, inequitable pricing, etc.

There is considerable scope for reducing risks to small-holders by strengthening the institutional arrangements associated with small-holder tree-planting initiatives, including land tenure systems, access to markets and credit, and company-community partnerships.

Tree-planting initiatives of various sorts have been promoted recently in China, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, and Indonesia. Comparative research on the implications of these initiatives for rural small-holders across the region would be useful.

It would be useful to compare how such initiatives are financed in different countries, and specifically what approaches and institutional structures have been used to provide credit for small-holders.

Research on this topic could link to GTZ projects in the Mekong region. In general, GTZ finds it difficult to link research projects to development projects.

KfW has had a program to provide savings books for tree-planting in Vietnam. An assessment of this (and related issues) would be useful for Vietnam’s emerging extension system. A central research question could be: Why did regreening happen in the Red River Delta?

In Vietnam and elsewhere, the use of exotics has accelerated the process of landscape change. Little effort has apparently been made to assess the potential of local tree species. Small-holders often have limited knowledge of how to manage exotic tree species.

Note: This group was joined by a second group consisting of Jens Gebaner, Jurgen Pretsch, and Patricia Shanley. With input from the second group, the discussion focused on the potential benefits of utilizing indigenous fruit trees in small-holder tree-planting initiatives.



�0

The use of indigenous fruit trees could potentially reduce risk for small-holders by diversifying production systems with indigenous knowledge. Research questions might include:• What components of such systems are sustainable/non-sustainable?• What are the risks or vulnerabilities of such systems?• How do such systems function in a changing socio-economic and

biophysical environment?

Action to be taken:Thomas Sikor and Chris Barr agreed to follow up by drafting a concept note/proposal for comparative research on the implications of tree-planting for rural small-holders in Vietnam and China.

From Science to Action: the use of information in multi-level relations (Chair: Crispen Marunda)

Working Group members:Crispen Marunda (Chair), Michael Köhl (Rapporteur), Christoph Kleinn, Heiner Schanz, Benno Pokorny, Cornelis van Tuyll, Timo Goeschl

The problem:• “knowledge is power” (Francis Bacon)• Inventory work: no sufficient follow up on who is using data and how• Problems:

– “Black-box” effect of information– Researchers feel not responsible for what is happening with their

information– What is the consequence of not using the information

• Different kind of information/ expectation on different levels, in different countries, by different actors

• Information drives institutions => do we want to change institutions?

What is needed• Toolbox of methods including expertise from psychology, social

sciences, information and communication sciences, …• What is specific in forestry?• Long-term effects• Uncertainties, risks• Complexity• Mainly no binary (wrong/ correct) but conditional answers (if…then)

Action to be taken:The group members agreed that we develop the ideas further through email exchanges. The main issue were:• How do we use existing forest scientific information to improve the

management of forest resource for development and conservation



WorkshopReport

December 2006

��

• Converting forest science information to knowledge and wisdom• Convergence between technical and social forestry

Managing Forested Landscapes Group (Chair: Markku Kanninen)

Research questions:• Linkage between governmental strategies and landscape potential• Value – ecological/biodiversity etc. of the landscape and its elements• Interaction between the landscape elements• Spatially explicit scenario modelling of landscape dynamics and its

impact landscape functions [ecosystem services]• How to define landscape and land-use changes? – fragmentation,

scale, definitions etc.• “Rent-seeking” – integration of different rationalities in decision-

making and politics• Restoration/vulnerability/adaptation to population pressure and climate

change• Gradient of landscape functions from urban to rural

Next steps:• Refining & clustering of the research topics, sub-topics etc.• International workshop including scientists and practitioners• Reviews on selected topics• Cases studies (practitioners)• Output -> proceedings (book)• As a “pre-meeting” of the Biodiversity COP – May 2008 in Germany

Action to be taken:• CIFOR: 1st draft + circulation of all interested partners (January 2007)• Decide on the workshop + establish the organizing committee (March

2007)• Communication working group on analyzing people (Joachim Krug -

March 2007)

Managing Forested Landscapes in Africa (East and South Africa, dry forest management) (Chair: Crispen Marunda)

Topics: Improving the productivity of forested landscapes in dry areasImproving the livelihood of people that depend on those landscapes

Participants: Crispen Marunda, Wolfgang Kasten, Benno Pokorny, Fiona Chandler, Ralph Mitlöhner, Joachim Krug



��

Summary of Discussion:It was generally agreed that we a proposal should be developed for the dry forest areas of Africa, perhaps linking up with the current dry forest activities. Whilst the current activities are focusing on the marketing of NTFPs, we may want to look at the production systems by improving productivity (through plantations) and/or optimizing productivity in natural forest.

Focal areas of activity could be:• Improving productivity of forests through optimal utilization of natural

resource, and tree planting (optimal site-species matching)• People-centred forest resource management (co-management of forest

resources, products (forest based enterprises), benefit sharing, close-to-nature forestry –learning and using local knowledge

• Small-scale plantations for wood and ntfp (gums, fruits, timber, rubber, herb gardens)

• Climate change and coping strategies in the dry forest of Africa

Action to be taken:A) Technical approaches: Technical approaches to improve the productivity of dry-zone forested landscapes are well known within the experience of the Georg-August Universität in Göttingen (competitive advantage). These comprise the productivity improvement (optimisation of management, genetic improvements, plantations, matching species to sites, bio-monitoring, rehabilitation, bio-fuel etc.) as well as aspects of environmental services and user rights (tenure, activities for whom and by whom etc.). Low productivity, urgent problems of deforestation and desertification, poverty, access to resources need to be considered.

Responsibility: Technical approached on dry-zone forest management => Ralph Mitlöhner (“competitive advantage” U Göttingen)

B) Socio-cultural approaches: Considering the experience of decades of development aid, the increasing pressure on forest resources and the multiple-layered interest, needs and demands involved in resource utilisation, the working group identified the need of approaches beyond technical measures: To go further than “considering” or “integrating” or “participating with” the needs of involved stakeholder, is was recommended to first “analyse” the basic interest and motivations of stakeholder for the development or management of forested landscapes. (“Service provider for local stakeholders”?).Responsibility: The “Analysing Network – Group” (Benno Pokorny and Joachim Krug) was created and confirmed to deliver input until March 07 (resp.: Joachim Krug).



WorkshopReport

December 2006

��

Management of multi-use forested landscapes (Chair: Chris Barr)

Topic:Management of multi-use forested landscapes

Participants: Reiner Finkeldey, Jobst-Michael Schröder, Timo Goeschl, Patricia Shanley, Chris Barr

Summary of Discussion:The discussion initially focused on the issue of connectivity among fragments of forest within a landscape. Are biological fragments connected? Do these contain one or more populations? Are there corridors between fragments? Are these efficient? Will they connect populations?

A second topic raised was restoration of natural forest pockets within a landscape. This may include rehabilitation of degraded sites. It could also include rehabilitation of poor plantations, to the extent that plantations are part of the landscape. Jobst-Michael Schröder gave examples of plantation rehabilitation from Brasil.

The question was posed – how to achieve land conservation efficiently? Timo Goeschl stated that this is particularly relevant in the case of Brasil. He argued that tradable development rights work better with more land, but this also implies a more heterogeneous set of land-uses. How to determine what should be included or not? How to support a set of incentives that supports connectivity among forest fragments within a landscape?

Within such landscapes, the perceptions and adaptation strategies of local communities will be key. At what point and in what ways does landscape change become a problem for local communities?

In some contexts, local people can be seen as agents of connectivity, shaping locally-defined mosaics. What are the socio-economic drivers of landscape change and/or of connectivity within any given landscape? Spatial distribution and specific properties of fragmentation need to be taken into account.



��

As recognised by all participants, the workshop provided a constructive opportunity not only for better understanding between CIFOR and the German research community but in terms of direct outputs in the propositions made by the working groups. As agreed in the plenum, the different working group outputs are to be prepared and forwarded to interested partners and elaborated further if interest warrants.

The workshop had a catalyst function and at the end it will be the responsibility of the participants to pursue the ideas developed at the workshop with CIFOR (and others). As a direct result of the workshop a series of initiatives have begun:

Together with a CIFOR senior scientist (Dr. Manuel Guariguata) a proposal is being prepared to hold an international expert meeting in Göttingen on “quantifying environmental services on the landscape scale”. BEAF is among the donors that are being approached for sponsorship. That expert workshop, tentatively envisaged for December 2007 or early 2008, is to identify research specific research topics and form research consortia to elaborate proposals.

A partnership between the CIFOR regional office in Harare together with FRIM (the Forest Research Institute of Malawi), and CeTSAF (Centre for Tropical and Subtropical Agriculture and Forestry, Göttingen), to prepare a proposal for a “small research project” that could be submitted to BEAF. The goal of this work would be to develop techniques to monitor the long-term sustainability of resource utilization.

The working group that looked at “Managing Forested Landscapes in Africa (E and S Africa, dry forest management)“ agreed on elaborating further inputs in special consideration of climate change and coping strategies in the dry forest of Africa. Along that line, Benno Pokorny and Joachim Krug agreed to deliver input until March 2007 for “analysing the basic interest and motivations of stakeholder for the development and management of multi-use forested landscapes” (Analysing Network).

Ideas for collaborative research that arose from the workshop included: 1. “Rehabilitation of degraded forest sites/protection of natural resources

by means of utilisation“, a two-page concept note is to be prepared by CIFOR (Markku Kanninen);

2. “Forest production systems under change: Integrating indigenous fruit species into agro-forestry systems” discussed between Patricia Shanley and Jürgen Pretzsch (University of Dresden). Dr. Pretzsch indicated he would develop a concept note for this topic. Geographic focus for such

and the Way AheadOutcomes



WorkshopReport

December 2006

��

a topic would be the Mekong region (a link between U of Dresden and CIFOR’s current work in that region), African dry forests and the Brazilian Amazon (where working group members have current work and contacts).

3. A proposal for the management of dry forest areas of Africa, perhaps linking up with the current dry forest activities, looking at the production systems by improving productivity (through plantations) and/or optimizing productivity in natural forest (Crispen Marunda). Crispen has also further exchanged emails on the placement of German students in the regional office (University of Freiburg - Benno Pokorny) and developing a small grants project in Malawi on co-management of forests (with Christoph Kleinn).

4. “Integrating small-holder tree-planting into land, water, and forest management in SE Asia”. Thomas Sikor and Chris Barr agreed to follow up by drafting a concept note / proposal for comparative research on the implications of tree-planting for rural small-holders in Vietnam and China.

5. “Analysis of the factors that affect the decision making process in forest and natural resources management and related policy formulation“. The analysis of the factors influencing decisions based on scientific information, such as the one generated by research projects, by permanent observation plots or from forest inventories, is selected as an interdisciplinary research topic. The extent of that role is little researched and it is believed that analysing the decision making process in forest and natural resources management and related policy formulation may help in many cases to better prepare and implement measures of sustainable management. One of the outcomes would certainly be the design of a “recommended methodology” how to research into this topic. At the CIFOR-CeTSAF meeting, some first contacts were made between interested parties. From CIFOR, interest in principle was expressed by Markku Kanninen and by Chris Barr and Patricia Shanley. On the German side interest is from Christoph Kleinn (Göttingen) and from Freiburg (Benno Pokorny and Heiner Schanz). Further elaboration is planned with CIFOR.

6. “Forested Landscape Management”. In the light of a full BEAF proposal to be developed, the working group decided to refine and cluster the research topics and to prepare an international workshop including scientists and practitioners. CIFOR will prepare the 1st draft for circulation to all interested partners (January 2007, Markku Kanninen) and decide on the workshop and establish the organizing committee (March 2007). The Analysing Network Group will communicate input for “analysing the basic interest and motivations of stakeholder for the development and management of multi-use forested landscape” (March 2007, Joachim Krug).



��

Name Institute / Organisation AddressDr. Paul [email protected]

Georg-August Universität Göttingen, Research Office / International Relations

Goßlerstr. 9. 37073 GöttingenGermany

Prof. Dr. Reiner [email protected]

Georg-August Universität Göttingen, Dean of the Faculty of Forest Science and Forest Ecology

Büsgenweg 537077 GöttingenGermany

Prof. Dr. Christoph [email protected]

Georg-August Universität Göttingen, Centre for Tropical and Subtropical Agriculture and Forestry (CeTSAF)


Dr. Uwe [email protected]

Prof. Dr. Ralph Mitlö[email protected]

Georg-August Universität Göttingen, Faculty of Forest Science and Forest Ecology, Institute of Silviculture / Tropical Silviculture

Dr. Joachim [email protected]

ANNEX 1 List of Participants



WorkshopReport

December 2006

��

Name Institute / Organisation AddressDr. Roland Olschewski [email protected]

Georg-August Universität Göttingen, Faculty of Forest Science and Forest Ecology, Institute of Forest Economy, Department of Environmental Economy


Prof. Dr. Andreas Bü[email protected]

Universität Kassel-Witzenhausen, Centre for International Rural Development

Steinstr. 19 37213 WitzenhausenGermany

Dr. Jens [email protected] Prof. Dr. Heiner [email protected]

University of Freiburg, Institute of Silviculture

Tennenbacherstr. 4 79106 Freiburg i. Br.Germany

Dr. Benno [email protected] Prof. Dr. Jürgen [email protected]

University of Dresden-Tharandt, Institute of International Forestry and Forest Products

Pienner Str. 7 01737 TharandtGermany

Prof. Dr. Michael Kö[email protected]

University Hamburg, Institute of World Forestry

Leuschnerstrasse 91 21031 HamburgGermanyDr. Jobst-Micheal

Schrö[email protected] Dr. Thomas [email protected]

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Institute for Economic and Social Science: Post-socialist Land Relations

Philippstr. 13, Haus 12, 10115 Berlin

Prof. Dr. Timo [email protected]

University of Heidelberg, Alfred-Weber-Institute, Chair of Environmental Economics

D-69115 Heidelberg, Germany



��

Name Institute / Organisation AddressDr. Wolfgang [email protected]

GTZ BEAF Project Manager

Dag-Hammarskjöld-Weg 1-5 65760 EschbornGermany

Dr. Marlene [email protected]

GTZ BEAF Senior Advisor

Dr. Cornelis van [email protected]

MRC-GTZ Programme Coordinator

MRC SecretariatPO Box 3802Vientiane CapitalLAO PDR

Dr. Markku [email protected]

Director, Environmental Services and Sustainable Forest Management Programme, CIFOR

CIFOR Bogor, Indonesia

Dr. Patricia [email protected]

Senior Scientist, Forests and Livelihoods Programme, CIFOR

Dr. Chris [email protected]

Senior Scientist, Forests Governance Programme, CIFOR

Ms. Fiona [email protected]

Coordinator Programme Development, CIFOR

Dr. Crispen [email protected]

Regional Coordinator, Southern Africa, CIFOR



WorkshopReport

December 2006

��

The following presentations were made at the workshop. Copies of the powerpoint presentations are available upon request from the authors or CIFOR.• Wolfgang Kasten: The Advisory Service on Agricultural Research for

Development a German Government’s contribution to Agricultural Research for Development

• Markku Kanninen: CIFOR – Research that matters• Cornelis van Tuyll: Need for Forestry Research out of a Development

Organisation point of view• Uwe Muuss: The growing demand for wood – challenges for natural

forest management and plantation forestry• Jobst-Michael Schröder: Plantation Forestry Research in the Tropics• Christoph Kleinn: The role of information in forest management

decision making• Reiner Finkeldey: Do we need basic sciences in tropical forestry

research? – Examples from forest genetics• Jürgen Pretzsch: Forestry based production systems: Diagnosis and

development• Ralph Mitlöhner: The Research of the Institute of Silviculture Sect. II

Tropical Silviculture• Michael Köhl: Support of the forest certification process in Malaysia in

special consideration of the demands of the Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg

• Thomas Sikor: Why may devolution not benefit the rural poor?• Timo Göschl: Trees Hugged and Logged: The Delicate Economics of

Property Rights in Forests• Roland Olschewski: Forest Ecosystem Services and their Economic

Value• Heiner Schanz: Governance Arrangements

ANNEX 2Presentations



Workshop ReportJoachim Krug, Fiona Chandler and Christoph Kleinn

Strengthening Scientific Collaboration - CIFOR · Strengthening Scientific Collaboration in...

Documents

Transcript of Strengthening Scientific Collaboration - CIFOR · Strengthening Scientific Collaboration in...