community driven forest landscape restoration in the east khasi
TRANSCRIPT
Community driven Forest landscape restoration in the East Khasi Hills, Meghalaya, India
Victoria GutierrezAWPF 26th February 2016, Clark, Philippines
To restore degraded forest landscapes back to healthy and
productive ecosystems that work for both people and the
environment
China
BhutanNepal
Bangladesh
Meghalaya Burma
2
Project area ~ 27,000 ha
Along Umiam river watershed, Elevation 150-1961 m Subtropical mixed cloud forestAnnual precipitation up to 11.8 m
High biodiversity
Communities use non-timber forest products from 137 plant
speciesCFI. 2012. Socio-economic baseline survey for Khasi Hills Community REDD Project area. CFI, CA, USA.
Sacred forests, cultural heritage and islands of biodiversity
Umiam Watershed in the East Khasi Hills District of Meghalaya, Northeast India
3
Fast deforestation and forest degradation -
forest loss of 4% per year
39% of forest lands in project site are degraded
Drivers of deforestation:
Privatisation of community forests often result in clearance for agriculture
Uncontrolled fires
Population growth
Commercial markets are placing pressure on forests for timber, limestone, coal and other minerals
East Khasi Hills people• Indigenous governments (Himas) & democratic
village councils (Dorbars)• Forests under the stewardship of the Himas and
managed by Dorbar• Project involves ~ 5,000 households (~30,000 forest
dependent people), 90% of households live below poverty line
In 2011 REDD Project initiated on the request of local communities to slow down and halt the loss of forestsIn 2013 Plan Vivo carbon certificationIn 2014 WeForest formed partnership with MawphlangWelfare Society (The Federation)
62 Youth volunteers13 Community facilitators18 Lower working committees
meet 4 times yr to represent their villages at council meetings
Project Goals
• Restore the natural forest cover and protect the Umiam Watershed (500 -1000 ha/yr)
• Enhance socio-economic conditions of lowest-income families by assisting the development of micro-finance groups and entrepreneurial initiatives, with particular emphasis on women
• Monitor and improve the hydrological function of the Umiam watershed implementing soil conservation measures
Assisted natural regeneration, Low density enrichment planting, transplanting and coppice regeneration social fencing to improve forest structure and composition
Youth volunteers monitor
over 47 permanent plots to document forest growth
Base line data• Mapping of the Block
• Tree Species (present)
• Tree species taken up for monitoring
• Identify area for enrichment planting in May- June, 2015
• Select/set-up area for laying permanent ( 20m x 20m) plots
• Set up permanent photo spot for time series
• Tree species planted & existing
Self-help group members are trained in accounting, book keeping and microfinance before given grants that initiate a revolving fund system
68 Microfinance groups receiving
grants for small enterprise development ($50 to $100)
705 individuals
76% women
77 Home-based nurseries
Tree nursery training
14
Training in sustainable farming
Training in animal husbandry
Socio-economic indicators: 1. Annual increase in capital assets of total balance
of group (target increase 5%)2. Cash sale from NTFP livelihood activities3. Training and capacity building sessions with
youth clubs4. People’s perceptions of impact (household survey
& interviews)
56 Villages - Micro-Projects (drinking water ponds, community forests boundary pillars, forest fencing, etc) Range $300 to $50014 Contracts with micro-watershed management committees
Tree adoption programme to involve schools in tree planting and care
Challenges and opportunities:Scaling-up process –revisiting capacity and scaleDevelop NTFP products & markets for financial sustainabilityBuild technical capacity for forest and water monitoringIntegrate research to study forest-water
Download policy brief: www.weforest.org
Forest-Water ResearchTo what extent can reforestation in this region increase dry season flow? Under what conditions?What is the impact on soil hydraulic properties affecting groundwater recharge?
