Forests, Trees and Agroforestry

Anja Gassner, a.gassner@cgiar.org

Long term socio ecological research sites for CRP6

-opportunities & challenges

Follows key recommendation from the 2009 Stripe social science review commissioned by the CGIAR Science Council

Builds on the CGIAR’s comparative advantage to conduct long-term, comparative research

Generates data about the drivers and impacts of land use change, as well as approaches to threats and benefits for environmental resilience and the poor

Integrates research and impact pathways to exploit potential synergies across all CRP6 components

Crosscuttingtheme

Component Lead Center: CIFOR/ICRAF

Component Coordinator: Anja Gassner/Manuel Guariguata

Sentinel landscape

Issue bound

geographically bound

Oil palm value chain: volumes of traded CPO and anticipated growth in production in both Indonesia and Malaysia (and other countries emerging in SSA – Cameroon, Nigeria, Liberia etc)

Shea nuts/cacao - recent restructuring of local and regional trade patterns associated with new technological opportunities of substituting cocoa butter with cocoa butter equivalents in the world’s chocolate industry

Migration patterns/population pressure Andes –West Amazon?

Issue bound Sentinel landscape

Main Purpose• Cross regional comparison• Integrating Biophysical & Social data• Long-term presence• Opportunity to test landscape hypothesis

based on good understanding of landscape variation

• Co-locating research activities (share resources)– Between Components– With Partners– With other CRP’s

Why should you be interested?

60% of ICRAF’s work - 6.5 month of your working timeWill be related to research questions framed under the CGIAR Research Program 6Forests, Trees and Agroforestry

Why should you be interested?

A budget of 3.7 Million to be spend on: Baseline data Partnership connections Overall coordination Access to datasets Intelligent data management and data mining

Cross regional Comparison

Vage

n T,

unp

ublis

hed

data

20

12

“Greening” and “browning” in the Sahel 1982:2006

The opportunity for your work

Design projects based on an prior information about spatial and temporal variance within a landscape• Which communities have improved their

livelihood more than others?• What are degradation hotspots in the

landscapes?• Can I compare my community to communities

in other regions?

Opportunity for ICRAF/CRP6

• Opportunity to test our hypothesis about the reciprocal relationship between tree cover and livelihoods across 6 landscapes

• Opportunity to develop and test practical methods to integrate socioeconomic and biophysical data

Theoretical Content of ModelLowHigh

Confirmatory Analysis Exploratory Analysis

Structural Equation Modeling

PCA, CCA, NMS

Discriminant AnalysisCausal search Methods

Agent based Modeling

Regression Trees

Multiple Regression

CRP6 Baseline’s

Moving from exploratory to confirmatory methods!

The challenge for ICRAF/CRP6

• Selection of a set of comparable landscapes for cross- regional comparisons

• Integrating Biophysical & Social data• Long-term presence/ creating a panel data set• Integrating action research with long term

monitoring

Cross regional ComparisonStep 1: The monitoring framework is to be constructed from environmental

problems that are formulated as hypotheses or assumptions Step 2 To verify these hypotheses and assumptions, relatively simple

indicators or the more complex landscape functions are selected Step 3: The data set to be analysed depends on the assessment methods

applied.Step 4: The choice of adequate areas and representative test sites is

essential for optimised monitoring programmes Step 5: The results are interpreted to verify hypotheses, to construct

metadata and to propose measures supporting a sustainable landscape development.

A Conceptual Framework for Integrated FunctionalLandscape Monitoring, Syrbe, Hierold, Bastian, Röder 2010

What are CRP6 ingredients?

Objective: Enhancing the management and use of forests, agroforestry and tree genetic resources across the landscape from forests to farms.Conceptual framework: forest and land use transition curve

Conceptual framework

SL1 SL2 SL3 SL4 SL5 SL6

Tenure, rights and access regimes

Regulatory frameworks affecting women participation

Ethnic diversity and social equity

Types of management approaches and land-uses

Level of market development and schemesFunctional diversity Drivers of changeMultiple actors at different scales

• Existing data for baseline and historical; e.g. long-term human welfare, demographic and human health data, as well as time series biophysical data

• Scientists from "X" CRP6 components interested co-locating research in this site.

• Potential for optimized outcomes for livelihood and environmental benefits within the landscape and transferability beyond the landscape.

• Existence of a network of reliable partners on the ground that we can add value too.

• Relative political stability and accessibilityWhere all other criteria are equal preference will be given to

sites that coincide with research areas of other CRPs !

5 sites in Latin America

5 sites in South East Asia

1 site in Central Asia

6 sites in Africa

2 issue bound landscapes

Landscape ecology research design principles

a) Variations across landscapes If too many factors differ it is not possible to

attribute any cause and effect relationships PSEUDOREPLICATION

b) Variation within landscapes Geopolitical boundaries across the same agro-

ecosystem Institutional boundaries (in/outside protected areas Before and after studies (before after logging

moratorium)

Challenge 2Integrating Biophysical & Social data

SL1 SL2 SL3 SL4 SL5 SL6

Research Design

Meta goals – driven by overall CRP6 research hypothesis

SL1 Local & regionalRelevantquestions

SL2 Local & regionalRelevantquestions

SL3 Local & regionalRelevantquestions

SL4 Local & regionalRelevantquestions

SL5 Local & regionalRelevantquestions

SL6 Local & regionalRelevantquestions

Integrating Biophysical & Social dataConceptual Frameworks developed for integrating social science into the long-term ecological research (LTER) sites:

“Mitigation of pressures on biodiversity through modification of their underlying socioeconomicdrivers is thought to be the most effective and durable option to reduce the rate of biodiversity loss”

Drivers-pressures-states-impacts-responses (DPSIR) approach

New tech-nology

F. Support for technological innovation

E.New value chain opportunities

Institutions, identity,

pride

Drivers

B1. Incentive structure through policy change (tax, subsidy etc)

A2. LU rights (e.g. community forest mngmnt)

B2. PES and conditional ES incentives

Response/ feedback options

Biodiversity, Watershed functions, GHG emissions,

Landscape beauty

Actors/ agents

Land use/coverchanges

Conse-quences &functions

Livelihoods, provisioning & profitability

A1. Land use policies, spatial development planning, roads A. Rights-based approaches

B. Economic incentives

Modified from: Van Noordwijk, M., B. Lusiana, G. Villamor, H. Purnomo, and S. Dewi. 2011. Feedback loops added to four conceptual models linking land change with driving forces and actors. Ecology and Society 16(1): r1. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss1/resp1/

C. Suasion and institutional support

Clim

ate

chan

ge

G

GG

G

G

G

G = Potential gender specificity of analysis & targeting of interventions

G

D.Demo-graphicchange

Integrative Science for Society and the Environment (ISSE)

An integrated conceptual framework for long-term social–ecological research, Collins et al., 2011

An integrated conceptual framework for long-term social–ecological research, Collins et al., 2011

Separating the drivers into press and pulse events

Human appropriation of netprimary production” (HANPP) is a measure of socioecological material flows. (Haberl et al., 2001, Haberl et al., 2007a)

Socioeconomic biodiversity pressures and drivers

• Social metabolism can be quantified in terms of energetic and material flows per time period, usually a year.

• Different sociometabolic regimes have substantially different metabolic profiles

• The higher the metabolic rate the higher the impact upon the environment.

Rese

arch

in H

uman

Eco

logy

Bose

rup

revi

site

d in

four

com

para

tive

case

stud

ies

Mar

ina

Fisc

her-

Kow

alsk

i et a

l., 2

011

Challenge 3Integrating action research with long term monitoring

Lantapan watershed : The strong presence of ICRAF in this site is an advantage—it can facilitate both formal and informal knowledge-sharing sessions and or advocacy work to reach out to policy.

Sumbaja watershed : RUPES Project provides support to local communities to gain access to the Indonesian Government’s Community Forestry Program

Lake Victoria Basin: PRESA, therefore, directed its efforts into already ongoing processes by initiating the formation of a stakeholders’ consortium with the objective of making a case for publicly-funded payments for environmental services.

SE TOU –landscape: Participatory modeling to influence stakeholders take on Integrated conservation and development project (ICDP) strategies

Tri-National de la Sangha –Historical trend analysis and scenario visioning to achiev the best outcomes for both conservation and development.

Lower Mekong: …. The intended outcome is to foster learning amongst conservation organisations and government departments, to better recognise and critically appraise the trade-offs that exist between conservation and development in forested landscapes, […] to learn from the current intervention experiences

AfricaSoils Sentinel Site based on the Land Degradation Surveillance

Frameworka spatially stratified,

hierarchical, randomized

sampling framework

Sentinel site (100 km2)

16 Clusters (1 km2)

10 Plots (1000 m2)

4 Sub-Plots (100 m2)

Test the empirical value of a ‘forest transition’

conceptualization as spatial representation

Step 2 ?

Step 1Characterize local variation in conditions of tree cover, forest quality, livelihood options and environmental consequences

Interpret (model) the temporal trajectory of components of the sentinel

landscape and their aggregate effectsStep 3

What to do with the model?

…..

Step 4BAllow scenario testing inSmall “action sites” , minimising the spill over to the larger landscape

Step 4A

After 5-7 years revisit the sites and test the model predictions validate, refute or improve model(repeat steps 3 & 4)

We have a model of the drivers and pressures

Purpose of June Workshop

To remind the component teams of the advantage of co-locating research and to get a consensus on candidate landscapes and types of baseline data to be collected.

To invite potential Partners to present CRP6 as the new CGIAR program that is willing to collocate research and funding to existing initiatives.

Outcome of June Workshop

Selection of Sentinel Landscapes for CRP6 Identification of potential partnerships

After the June Workshop

Selection of a few Sentinel Landscapes as pilots Identification of sites teams that will be responsible for

data compilation (with support from ICRAF-RMG, ICRAF-GIU) and data collection

Development of a set of research hypothesis “meta goal” that will guide the sampling frame for the baselines

Decide on a minimum set of baseline data to be taken at each site

Decide on methodological harmonization for data collection