You are here
In Mozambique, Government, Conservationists and Private Sector Come Together to Protect Biodiversity
When it comes to protecting our planet’s biodiversity, we can’t afford to not have a plan – especially where environmental impacts are inevitable.
In conservation, the “last resort” option is an approach known as biodiversity offsets. It involves preserving habitat in one area to compensate for unavoidable environmental damage elsewhere, usually as a result of large projects, such as those involving mining or oil and gas development.
“Offsets are based on the ‘mitigation hierarchy’ approach to environmental damage,” explained World Bank Senior Environmental Specialist Douglas J. Graham. “First try to avoid it, minimize it, or restore any affected areas; if nothing else is feasible, look to biodiversity offsets. Where losses simply cannot be avoided but are deemed acceptable, compensate for the losses by protecting similar habitat somewhere else.”
Graham, along with his colleague George Ledec, World Bank Lead Ecologist, has recently been supporting the Government of Mozambique in thinking through what a “last resort” program would look like given the country’s complex conservation challenges. Mozambique is rich in biodiversity but faces tough development issues, including a poverty rate above 50 percent. Biodiversity offsets present a solution for protecting habitats – including providing badly needed funds for Mozambique’s protected areas, which cover 21 million hectares, or 26 percent of the country’s land area – while tapping into valuable natural resources from the mining and petroleum sectors.
National-level biodiversity offset systems are both complicated and without much precedent: Liberia is another African country where this approach is being tested with support from the World Bank. With funding from PROFOR, Graham and Ledec guided a team in Mozambique to put together a Road Map for Mozambique to show how this could be achieved.
“Mozambique is an incredibly interesting place to be implementing biodiversity offsets,” Graham noted. “First, it has very large mining and oil and gas infrastructure projects. Second, private sector companies are required to protect biodiversity in order to comply with international finance regulations [specifically the International’s Finance Corporation’s 2012 Environmental and Social Performance Standards and the Equator Principles]. And third, the Government is very interested in making this a success. The Ministry of the Environment (MITADER) has even shown their commitment by modifying the decrees regulating environmental impact assessments, requiring that large projects result in no net loss of biodiversity.”
The Road Map notes that, far from being a burden to private companies, this new regulation may actually speed up the approval process for new projects by clarifying procedures, giving companies a way forward to comply with national rules and international standards, for which they are increasingly accountable.
Moreover, Mozambique already has an organization capable of operating the offsets program. The Foundation for the Conservation of Biodiversity (BIOFUND), supported under a separate World Bank project, is primed to make the difficult calculations of how much of one habitat is equal to another; to collect and manage funds from private sector companies; and to protect those “equivalent” habitats in perpetuity. BIOFUND also has the responsibility of classifying habitats based on their level of biodiversity, and mapping critical areas where offsets are not appropriate.
“Some habitats are so rare and so important that they shouldn’t be sacrificed” Graham said. “For example, this appears to be the case with the Swahili coastal forests in northern Mozambique; that ecoregion could be considered a no-go because of its high global biodiversity value and lack of protection.” Biodiversity offsets are never meant to justify development projects that would seriously damage habitats with unique and irreplaceable biodiversity.
Importantly, the initial steps laid out in the Mozambique Road Map are actively taking place, thanks to a proactive MITADER, significant follow-up funding from the Agence Française de Développement (AFD), and World Bank support to BIOFUND.
“This is a great example of a partnership between the government and a willing private sector,” Ledec said. “Very big international companies are involved with investments worth many millions of dollars. They really want to do this, to show to their boards and to the world that they are meeting their commitments. But they can only do this if the money is well used and handled transparently.”
The Mozambique Road Map was produced as a part of the broader PROFOR-supported work on biodiversity offsets, which includes a Global Biodiversity Offsets User Guide to advise the World Bank and other groups on whether, when, and how to prepare and implement offsets. The Mozambique Road Map is available in English and Portuguese.
(Photo: Victor Brott via Sida Swedish Int. Development Cooperation Agency, Flickr CC)
Last Updated : 07-17-2017
The international development community is increasingly demanding better evidence regarding the effectiveness of policies and programs across different sectors, and the forest sector is no exception. Governments and donor agencies explicitly seek to link investment to proven impact. Yet, the evidence base necessary to inform policies and programs in the sector that can successfully enhance the livelihoods of forest-dependent poor populations, foster economic growth, reduce emissions from deforestation and degradation, and conserve forest biodiversity remains weak. There is a particular need to identify robust, yet practical, indicators to track and assess the impacts of forest-related investments.
Any attempt to identify such indicators must grapple with two particular challenges in the forest sector. First, forest-related interventions are usually complex, with forestry policies, programs and projects often including multiple objectives, requiring the integration of socioeconomic and ecological expertise, and entailing processes that unfold over different spatial scales. Second, such interventions often take a long time to show results. For example, the results of investments in thinning, tree stand improvement or natural regeneration under sustainable forest management are unlikely to be evident for 10 to 30 years. These characteristics make attribution of impacts to specific interventions (as opposed to other potential factors) especially difficult within the forest sector.
This Activity will build from the extensive evidence accumulated within the World Bank’s forests portfolio, PROFOR activities and other relevant donor-supported initiatives to address these challenges and develop guidance on the identification and use of proxy indicators for project impacts. In so doing, the Activity seeks to increase understanding among policymakers, practitioners and applied researchers of the potential short-term proxy indicators for longer-term impacts of forest sector investments and how they may be used in practice.
The Activity began by undertaking an inventory of indicators used by key actors in the sector and reviewing available literature on proxy indicators (sometimes referred to as “lead” or “predictive” indicators). An in-depth review of the World Bank portfolio of forest operations under the current Forests Strategy (2002-present) and a relevant subset of the PROFOR portfolio lies at the heart of this Activity. Results will provide the core evidence base for a report on predictive proxy indicators (PPIs) and the conditions in which they are likely to be valid. Through this review, the activity will also analyze potential constraints to the use of indicators in donor-supported forest interventions and suggest ways these constraints might be addressed.
The Working Paper "Understanding Long-Term Impacts in the Forest Sector: Predictive Proxy Indicators" is now available (download at left). The main overall finding is that predictive proxy indicators do appear to exist and can be used in practice. Given the complexity and diversity of the forest sector and novelty of the task, this conclusion was far from a certainty when this research began. The authors identified a range of potential PPIs, several of which have already been used in World Bank forest projects. These PPIs focused primarily at the Project Development Objective (PDO) and Global Environment Objective level, although some intermediate-level indicators were identified.
The report argues that robust PPIs can provide an important ex ante evaluation tool that enables practitioners and researchers to predict future outcomes and longer-term impacts if certain assumptions hold. To help inform the design and implementation of forestry operations and knowledge, we developed a list of top ranking indicators based on an assessment of their predictive potential and their SMART score. These indicators are presented in an indicator menu organized by major objective (that is, relating to poverty, biodiversity, climate, or governance) and including brief notes on how they might be used. The indicator menu is presented as an annex and represents a key product stemming from this analytical work.
This review did not identify any standalone “silver bullet” predictive proxies, but a major contribution is the idea that multiple indicators, considered together, can have strong predictive potential. The report describes a series of seven indicator clusters that form PPIs.
PPIs are already being integrated into new World Bank projects, such as the Argentina Forests and Community Project. This initiative aims to increase access to markets and basic services by small forest producers, including indigenous people and campesinos, in Argentina’s comparatively poor but forest-rich Northern provinces. Activities will focus on helping communities to develop Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) plans and to strengthen their tenure. To assess effectiveness, the project team will collect data on the three indicators under the Sustainable Forest-Related Income PPI. The project will also be assessed using rigorous impact evaluation methods, making it the first forward-looking test case of how well the forestry PPIs perform as predictors of future outcomes.
Author : The World Bank , PROFOR 
Last Updated : 09-15-2017
World Bank Africa Region
In many African countries, native forests are under pressure from rapidly-spreading roads, dams and other infrastructure, as well as the allocation of large forest areas to mining, commercial agriculture, and other non-forest uses. Biodiversity offsets are one of the tools available to address such pressures. Offsets can be used to strengthen protected areas of similar or greater conservation value than the area lost to specific projects. The driving impetus for such offset schemes is usually biodiversity protection, although the associated conservation areas provide additional ecosystem services such as soil and water conservation, flood mitigation, and habitat for sustainably exploitable fisheries. In an era of often flat -- and sometimes declining -- governmental support for forest conservation in general and protected areas in particular, biodiversity offsets provide an underutilized opportunity to mobilize substantial new funding from public infrastructure accounts as well as the private sector.
Biodiversity offsets are not a panacea, nor are they always the best tool available for achieving forest conservation. As part of the “mitigation hierarchy” underpinning the World Bank’s Safeguard Policies and the IFC’s Performance Standards, offsets are considered a last resort, after efforts to avoid, minimize, and restore any significant damage to forests or other natural habitats. Nonetheless, given that many infrastructure, extractive, and other large-scale projects have an inherently large footprint, a biodiversity offset scheme may be warranted (and required by some funding entities).
A key challenge is systematizing and scaling-up biodiversity offsets through a national or other aggregated offset approach in order to overcome limitation like: (i) the high transaction costs often borne by each separate project; (ii) sub-optimal selection of conservation offset areas due to uncoordinated, ad-hoc approaches; and (iii) insufficient participation and ownership by governmental authorities in arrangements negotiated primarily between large private firms and conservation NGOs. The cumulative impacts of multiple (including smaller-scale) projects could also be more effectively addressed through an aggregate offset approach.
Under this activity, the team produced a Biodiversity Offsets User Guide containing key information about biodiversity offsets that practitioners should know about, with references provided where readers could obtain further information. Three case studies of reasonably successful biodiversity offsets were added to the User Guide as annexes. The case studies involved two private sector mining projects (in Liberia and Madagascar) and one World Bank-supported hydropower project (in Cameroon). These case studies are intended to show readers how the concepts explained in the User Guide can realistically be applied to achieve positive results on the ground.
In addition, in response to a strong expression of interest from the Government of Mozambique, this activity also provided legal technical assistance for incorporating biodiversity offsets into the Government’s official Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process. Two reports were produced: (i) An analysis of Mozambican environmental legislation with respect to the use of biodiversity offsets; and (ii) a draft revision of the actual EIA regulations.
Finally, two pilot Country Roadmaps were completed to assess the potential for large-scale biodiversity offset systems in Liberia and Mozambique. The Roadmaps are intended as preliminary country examinations of legal and regulatory frameworks, national policies, land use plans, financial structures, and other relevant information.
The research team found that multiple detailed publications already exist about the details and controversies of biodiversity offsets, but that a concise reference with practical advice on how actually to do them was still lacking. This is the void that the Biodiversity Offsets User Guide seeks to fill.
The Liberia Biodiversity Offsets Roadmap emphasizes industrial-scale mining. Since adequate funding for Liberia’s protected areas remains a challenge, biodiversity offsets offer the potential for improved financial sustainability. The Liberia Roadmap outlines a series of steps for scaling-up biodiversity offsets in Liberia; among the most important is the establishment of a national Conservation Trust Fund to enable the reliable and transparent transfer of funds from extractive firms to priority Protected Areas. The new Liberia Forest Sector (REDD+) Project, approved in April 2016 with support from the World Bank and Government of Norway, provides a vehicle for moving forward the Roadmap’s key recommendations.
In Mozambique, existing Conservation Areas (CAs) cover about 26% of the country’s land area, and encompass most types of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. However, most are seriously underfunded. The Mozambique Biodiversity Offsets Roadmap (also available in Portuguese) proposes using Mozambique’s BioFund to transfer biodiversity offsets funding from infrastructure and extractive industry projects to selected CAs that are ecologically similar to the project-affected areas. Implementation has begun of the Roadmap’s recommendations, through the Government’s recently revised Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations.
Author : World Bank Africa Region
Last Updated : 02-28-2017
Authors: Forest Trends' Michael Richards and Steve Panfil with key inputs by Nigel Pitman, Steven Price, Natasha Calderwood and Julie Fischer.
Partners: Forest Trends and CCBA, with Rainforest Alliance and Fauna & Flora International (FFI).
Sponsors: PROFOR, Morgan Stanley, USAID-TransLinks, GEF-UNDP, Rockfeller Foundation and NORAD provided financial support.
Are land-based carbon projects good for local people?
Many rural communities are keen to embark on carbon projects as a way of generating income, jobs, and other social benefits. Offset buyers are also attracted to the idea of reducing emissions and simultaneously helping local people. Others are wary that these projects may do more harm than good. However, until recently, there was no clear methodological guidance for carbon project developers to track social and biodiversity impacts. The combination of robust standards for assessing the social performance of projects, and the use of credible methods of social impact assessment could help ensure positive outcomes for local people.
The emphasis in the early years of the carbon markets has been mainly on assuring the integrity of project emission reductions; co-benefits have received much less attention. But the balance is changing, and there are justifiable concerns that co-benefits must, like carbon, be real, ‘additional’ and, as far as possible, measurable. This is partly necessary for market confidence as offset buyers increasingly seek evidence that they are getting what they pay for, including co-benefits. On ethical or equity grounds, carbon projects must at the very least ‘do no harm’ (See related IIED conclusions on REDD+ in the miombo drylands.)
A cost-effective and credible impact assessment toolbox would help carbon project developers meet the verification requirements of the Climate, Community & Biodiversity (CCB) Standards and contribute to building more robust, sustainable projects.
In response to such issues, Forest Trends has formed an alliance with three other NGOs – the Climate, Community and Biodiversity Alliance (CCBA), Rainforest Alliance, and Fauna & Flora International (FFI) – to produce a user-friendly Manual for project proponents on how to conduct cost-effective and credible social impact assessment. Support for this project comes from PROFOR, Morgan Stanley, NORAD, GEF-UNDP, and USAID-Translinks.
The manual is intended for carbon offset project designers and implementers who are not specialists in monitoring and evaluation (M&E).
The Manual was field-tested in 2010 in Brazil, Guatemala and Peru.
Forest Trends released a first version of its manual in June 2010, proceeded to test it in the field (see case studies listed on this page) and solicited feedback. A second version, which integrated biodiversity concerns as well, was released in the fall of 2011 in three parts: a core guidance document and two toolkits (for social and bioversity impact assessments).
Guidance to project developers has been provided by regional training workshops held in Peru (June 2010), Tanzania (October 2010), Kenya (August 2011 with GEF-UNDP funding) and DRC (September 2011 with USAID-Translinks funding). This has resulted in training of approximately 80 terrestrial carbon project developers and other REDD+ stakeholders from about 10 countries. These workshops involved hands-on training using ‘real’ REDD+ projects as case studies over a period of 3-4 days.
In Tanzania, the Tropical Forest Conservation Group (TFCG) REDD project in Lindi District has undertaken a large scale SIA exercise in 2011 following their participation in the SIA Training workshop in Zanzibar in October 2010.
Experience during field testing and further training in social impact assessment shows that the benefits of using the ‘theory of change’ approach to impact assessment go well beyond the generation of a credible social monitoring plan which can meet the CCB or other multiple benefit standards. These wider benefits include: strategic project design necessary for achieving social and biodiversity objectives (clear objectives are essential for identifying monitoring indicators); participation of project stakeholders; promotion of adaptive project management; and the ease of understanding and explaining the results to a range of stakeholders.
Keys to better participation of local stakeholders include the quality of the ‘focal issue working group’ facilitators (so the latter need to be more carefully selected and trained); some prior training or exposure for community participants; the use of a ‘practice activity’ to develop good practice consultation skills; and various issues around the more effective participation of local stakeholders, especially women.
Based partly on the costs in the three case studies, the authors estimate that the cost of generating a credible social monitoring plan using their approach will be in the range $25,000-35,000 depending on various factors.
Author : Authors: Forest Trends' Michael Richards and Steve Panfil with key inputs by
Nigel Pitman, Steven Price, Natasha Calderwood and Julie Fischer.
Partners: Forest Trends  and CCBA , with Rainforest Alliance and
Fauna & Flora International  (FFI).
Sponsors: PROFOR, Morgan Stanley, USAID-TransLinks, GEF-UNDP, Rockfeller
Foundation and NORAD provided financial support.
Last Updated : 02-24-2017
The International Consortium for Combating Wildlife Crime (ICCWC) -- a partnership of the World bank, the World Customs Organization, INTERPOL, the UN Office on Drugs and Crime and the CITES Secretariat.
Although international trade in stolen timber and other forest products, including wildlife, is recognized as an important component of the global forest law enforcement and governance challenge, relatively little attention has been devoted to developing the capacity to intervene effectively to counter illegal international supply chains, to prosecute criminal enterprises and individuals, and to thereby deter the illegal trade.
Controlled Delivery (CD) is the technique of allowing illicit or suspect consignments to pass out of, through or into the territory of one or more countries, with the knowledge and under the supervision of competent authorities, with a view to identifying persons involved in the commission of offenses. This technique is routinely used by law enforcement agencies in many sectors to identify persons connected with criminal activities related to the smuggling of contraband and to gather evidence against them. Apart from seizures of the contraband, the technique may also be used to bring the syndicates involved in timber and wildlife smuggling to justice.
However few developing countries' Forestry, Customs and related law enforcement agencies are prepared to engage in such operations in relation to forest products, mostly due to lack of confidence, lack of capacity and poor cooperation with colleagues from other agencies/countries. Smugglers benefit from this situation.
The project objective is to reduce international trade and trafficking in illicitly obtained forest products, especially but not only timber, by developing and mobilizing a collaborative network of Customs and forest law enforcement agencies and officials. By equipping this community of practice with knowledge of the controlled delivery technique and by building relationships, communications channels and confidence in the integrity and intention of members of the community of practice, the project will help to establish the credibility of Customs enforcement and increase smugglers' perceptions of the risk of detection and apprehension.
A manual on controlled deliveries, developed by INTERPOL, the CITES Secretariat and the WCO (World Customs Organization) , will be used as the basic training material for this activity. Distribution of the Controlled Deliveries Manual has been limited to Customs and law enforcement agencies via WCO and INTERPOL restricted access networks. This will be the first face-to-face training program based on the manual and the first ever to focus on forest-related contraband.
This activity is ongoing.
A workshop bringing together 50 participants from 18 African and Asian countries (officials from the police, Customs or judiciary) and experts from the World Bank, the World Customs Organization (WCO), INTERPOL, the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) was held in Shanghai, China on December 7-8, 2011. The workshop covered forest and wildlife crime and law enforcement in China, global wildlife and timber smuggling routes, wildlife and timber methods of detection, controlled delivery techniques (including financial aspects), prosecution, as well as group activities aimed at building a network of practitioners. A followup report will monitor participants' future collaboration and possible conduct of controlled delivery operations.
Author : The International Consortium for Combating Wildlife Crime (ICCWC) -- a
partnership of the World bank, the World Customs Organization, INTERPOL, the
UN Office on Drugs and Crime and the CITES Secretariat.
Last Updated : 02-24-2017
Technical Assistance for the Development of the National Timber Yield Tables for Mahogany (Swietenia macrophylla) Standing Volume & Export Grade Sawn wood
Mahogany (Swietenia macrophylla) is the single most valuable tropical timber species in international trade. It is also one of the most important tropical species subject to selective harvesting.
Over-harvesting and illegal logging of this species led to its listing in Appendix II of the CITES Convention. Market studies show that the largest proportion of mahogany is exported to the United States, France, Canada, England, Dominican Republic and other European countries. Despite conservation, supervision and control efforts the impact of mahogany overharvesting and illegal logging has contributed to the species' rapid commercial extinction in many areas of its natural distribution.
The use of inaccurate conversion factors for calculating export grade sawn wood yields from standing timber estimates is frequently used to “launder” illegally harvested mahogany. The resulting projection of export grade sawn wood overstates the volumes actually produced from legally harvested trees of both species. These inflated figures help to justify additional CITES export permits which are used to facilitate the export of timber of illegal origin.
The same fate also applies to Spanish cedar (Cedrela Odorata) also included in CITES Appendix III. In some countries, Spanish cedar trade has skyrocketed in the last three years. If harvesting trends and the extent of illegal logging continue at the same pace, Spanish Cedar will follow mahogany's detrimental patterns.
Accurate conversion factors for standing timber and export grade sawn wood are crucial for the effective implementation of the CITES convention.
Guatemala’s CONAP and INAB, government agencies for protected areas and forest administration respectively; and Peru’s OSINFOR, forest control and supervision government agency, have requested technical assistance from Intercooperation and PROFOR's FLEG team at the World Bank to develop their national yield tables.
Technical assistance activities related to the development of national tables are expected to take place in Guatemala City and in selected forest concessions of Peten, Guatemala targeting relevant staff from CONAP, INAB and forest concessionaires. Desktop work will allow field data input, calibration of the model, definition of product classifications and development of the timber yield tables and statistical calculation.
In Peru, support and technical assistance to the Veduria Forestal Comunitaria activities will relate to monitoring, over sightings and obtaining lessons learned from at least two cases within forest industry-indigenous community timber commercial contracts, to prevent illegal logging and unsound social practices impacting local communities of Pucallpa, Atalaya and Contamana.
This activity has supported the following progress in Guatemala:
- Field work (identification, selection and data collection) in five (5) mahogany production units: La Union, Chosquitan, Rio Chanchin, Carmelita and Afisap totaling about 18,000 hectares in El Peten, Guatemala.
- Field work was followed by extensive data processing, regression analysis and development of volumetric conversion factors. Based on this analysis, total average volume of export grade sawn wood including branches for mahogany in Guatemala is approximately 3.328 m3 per tree.
- CONAP (Guatemala's CITES authority) has fully incorporated the newly developed national yield table in its country report.
- Development of a simple data processing software known as the VERITAS Timber Volume Calculator which can determine in real time the expected sawn wood volume of a given tree in all export timber grades -- with potential application for other timber species.
In Peru, assistance for Verduria Forestal Communitaria Activities resulted in monitoring of logging contracts and technical assistance to 33 indigenous communities in Contamana and Atalaya provinces. The team reviewed and provided training on issues such as forest management plans, permits, contracts, operations, volume calculation, payments, etc and also assisted communities facing forest land tenure problems (resulting from logging forest concessions overlapping with community land).
Monitoring the implementation of 11 logging contracts revealed a consistent pattern of inequality and lack of transparency in contract terms and conditions that had significant impacts on community livelihoods and the environmental conditions of their natural resources. For example:
- Logging industry focus was on selective and overexploitation of only two or three species of high commercial value
- In several cases, logging took place without permits
- Jobs were mostly given to outsiders
- Benefits to the communities were accrued in actual timber (20 to 30% of extracted volume), often resold to the logging industry at discounted prices
- Logging industry used permits, obtained on behalf of the indigenous communities, to launder illegally harvested timber, making communities liable for those illegal activities
Material collected from these experiences will serve as baseline information for the development of guiding principles and criteria for monitoring logging contracts in Peru and beyond.
Additional results and products will be shared on this page when they become available. You can also follow us on twitter (twitter.com/forestideas) or subscribe to our mailing list for regular updates.
Author : Intercooperation Andean Office , CONAP , INAB , Veduria Forestal
Last Updated : 02-24-2017
Wildlife Conservation Society, World Bank East Asia and Pacific Region, Netherlands-Mongolia Trust Fund for Environmental Reform
With support primarily from the Netherlands-Mongolian (NEMO) Trust Fund for Environmental Reform and the World Bank’s Forest Law Enforcement and Governance (FLEG) trust fund, the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) had been providing technical assistance focused on detecting and taking actions against illegal wildlife trade in Mongolia. The objective of subsequent technical assistance funded by the FLEG Trust Fund (later part of PROFOR) was to assess the gaps in current laws and regulations which hinder or prevent effective wildlife trade law enforcement, and strengthen local capacity to protect species such as the grey wolf, red fox, marmot, brown bear and Eurasian badger.
The project produced a number of results including:
--Reorganization of the Multi-Agency wildlife trade crime unit which conducts joint inspections in Ulaanbaatar markets on wildlife trade and its parts and products.
--Increased public awareness of the risks of illegal wildlife trading. A ‘Special Call’ placed in 6 national newspapers as well as additional TV coverage and debate resonated with the public.
--Increased media awareness. Recommendations to the media concerning advertisements of wildlife parts and products were followed by a large decline in wildlife advertising in Zar Medee and Shuurhai Zar newspapers.
--Facilitated amendments to the Hunting Law.
--Developed extensive Guidelines for Wildlife Law Enforcement.
Author : Wildlife Conservation Society, World Bank East Asia and Pacific Region,
Netherlands-Mongolia Trust Fund for Environmental Reform
Last Updated : 02-24-2017
What is the composition and size of the global market for payments for ecosystem services (PES)?
In an effort to answer this question, PROFOR supported an endeavor to devise a matrix which maps the size, environmental and community impacts, participants and shapers, and market trends for PES in the forestry and other sectors.
The findings are broad in scope and complex. A few examples of trends uncovered during this process are:
- While most PES markets are growing at approximately 10 to 20 percent a year, the carbon markets are skyrocketing at 200 to 700 percent a year. The Voluntary Carbon market, where the lion’s share of the land use and land use change and forestry project take place, is growing at a faster rate than the regulated carbon market.
- The participants and experts surveyed believe existing markets have the potential to address in a significant way the global environmental issues of biodiversity loss, water pollution and climate change – but may not be living up to their potential. One major stumbling block continues to be transparent information and capacity.
- To achieve the sustainable management of ecosystem services, PES schemes must be designed and implemented carefully, intelligently, and adaptively.
- An important aspect across all of these markets will be to ensure that the communities and small scale producers are able to actively participate and benefit from ecosystem service markets. This will mean developing instruments to provide support, such as aggregation services to communities, shaping regulation to engage local small-scale providers, and clarifying tenure and user rights associated with these new opportunities.
Author : Ecosystem Marketplace , Forest Trends , PROFOR
Last Updated : 02-24-2017
The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) has some limited ability to assist range states (countries where species occur) to tackle illegal trade.
The Role of CITES in Combating Illegal Logging, published in 2006, reviews the relevant provisions of the Convention and examines experiences of how CITES has been used to address the problem of illegal logging for several CITES-listed tree species. The study authored by TRAFFIC, a joint program run by WWF and IUCN, benefited from PROFOR and World Bank financial support.
It provides examples of species from each of the Convention's three appendices:
- Alerce Fitzroya cupressoides (Appendix I—species imminently threatened with biological extinction),
- Agarwood Aquilaria malaccensis (Appendix II—species not currently threatened but may become so if trade is not regulated),
- Big-leaf Mahogany Swietenia macrophylla (listed in Appendix III from November 1995; included in Appendix II effective 15 November 2003), and Ramin Gonystylus spp. (Appendix III—species listed by an individual State in an effort to enlist international cooperation to control trade from their country).
Chen Hin Keong, TRAFFIC
Last Updated : 02-24-2017
A Review of Conceptual Understandings and Practical Experiences
While many international agreements, governments, private sector companies and civil society organizations have committed to implement both an ecosystem approach and sustainable forest management (SFM), there is a general lack of clarity on how these two concepts relate to each other. As a result, delegates to international fora on forest and forest-related issues have many different interpretations as to whether and how an ecosystem approach and SFM relate to each other.
In response to challenges arising from this definitional problem, recommendations were made to take necessary actions to clarify the conceptual basis of the ecosystem approach in relation to sustainable forest management at both the sixth Conference of the Parties (COP-6) to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), and Resolution 3/4 of the United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF). Based on the request made by the CBD and UNFF, the objective of this study was to evaluate the link between the concepts of an ecosystem approach and SFM and, using case studies, to review the differences and similarities in the application of these approaches with a view to improve the conservation of biological diversity and sustainable use.
Specifically, the study sought to:
- Outline the historical evolution and key operational features of the ecosystem approach and of contemporary SFM concepts.
- Review practical experiences in the application of SFM and the Ecosystem Approach.
- Explore how spatial and temporal perspectives inherent in the ecosystem approach and SFM can contribute to how we understand and address the economic, environmental and social trade-offs involved in land-use policy and practice.
- Suggest key policy and institutional interventions for operationalizing these concepts, and optimizing synergies between them, in contemporary resource management and planning.
Forests in Landscapes, published in 2005, is the culmination of this work on the relationship between the Ecosystem Approach and Sustainable Forest Managment. It reviews changes that have occurred in forest management in recent decades. Recent innovations in Sustainable Forest Management and Ecosystem Approaches are resulting in forests increasingly being managed as part of the broader social-ecological systems in which they exist. Case studies from Europe, Canada, the United States, Russia, Australia, the Congo and Central America provide a wealth of international examples of innovative practices. The book also examines the political ecology and economics of forest management, and reviews the information needs and the use and misuse of criteria and indicators to achieve broad societal goals for forests.
The study was based on a discussion paper (Ecosystem Approaches and Sustainable Forest Management) prepared by IUCN, PROFOR and the World Bank for the 4th session of the UNFF, and a workshop organized by IUCN, PROFOR and the World Bank between 12 and 14 May 2004 which brought together experts from various countries in the Swiss Jura. Participants discussed and brainstormed on the relationship between the EsA and SFM concepts and assess how these two concepts can help operationalize the growing consensus that 21st century forest management should address broader, multi-stakeholder, multi-scale and multiple function objectives. Based on discussions from the workshop, a set of regional and thematic case studies on this subject were commissioned, and terms of references for the contributing authors were finalized.
The key findings from the initial draft of the report were distilled into a special issue of the joint IUCN/WWF Arborvitae newsletter, entitled Changing Realities: Ecosystem Approaches and Sustainable Forest Management. This 12-page communications piece offered a summary of the key findings of the study to date, reviewing and clarifying the relationship between EsA and SFM. In addition, a workshop on Ecosystem Approaches and Sustainable Forest Management was held at the World Conservation Congress in November 2004.
An important conclusion from the case studies is that many of the issues that the EsA principles highlight are already being addressed on the ground. The real value of EsA therefore is not as a competing concept to SFM, but as a set of general guidelines that help enrich the debate and provide a broad conceptual framework for resource management.
Author : Jeffrey Sayer and Stewart Maginnis
Last Updated : 02-24-2017