INVESTING IN TREES AND LANDSCAPE ... - PROFOR

need to be developed. Progress in landscape action and effects need to be tracked and assessed
by the key actors, so that lessons learned can be reflected in evolving action plans. This process
can benefit businesses and investors, as it establishes clarity about what sorts of investments and
practices will be acceptable where, establishes policies and land use plans, and thus allows investors
to proceed with confidence.
Diverse institutional mechanisms have been used in Africa for area-based planning across
agriculture-forestry-environment-rural development sectors. These mechanisms range from national
platforms for sustainable land management to roundtables for sustainable commodity production
to watershed management and district development committees. Agricultural carbon programs and
new initiatives for climate adaptation, resilience, and mitigation planning—such as those of NAMA,
NAPA, and REDD+—are providing motivation for cross-sector planning and policy alignment.
Landscape forums can be influential in scaling up successful investments in landscape restoration by
drawing in a broader set of businesses and land managers. They can promote new ideas and models,
provide vision and leadership, engage external catalysts, and provide incentives and accountability.
The groups can jointly find the “space” for such successes to grow, not only physically in the landscape
but also through fiscal policy and finance, supportive policy, institutional capacity, political leadership,
cultural adaptation, partnerships, and learning and innovation systems (Linn et al. 2010).
Engagement of Private Sector Investors and Businesses
in Landscape Restoration Planning
While the broad process for multistakeholder landscape forums is fairly clear, and elements of the
approach are widely practiced in one form or another, implementation is challenging. In particular,
it is common for private companies and investors to resist active participation in such forums.
Firms are reluctant to share proprietary information, and senior executives with decision-making
authority cannot financially afford to participate in time-consuming collaborative processes. Farmer
and community organization representatives also face challenges in effective participation, because
of the costs of time away from work and the power and knowledge imbalances that limit their ability
to represent and negotiate interests effectively. Thus, public sector and civil society often dominate
such forums, weakening their effectiveness.
However, institutional mechanisms to address these challenges are emerging. Private businesses
have come to recognize the benefits of precompetitive collaboration among actors across the
supply chain. In a number of places in Africa, such efforts have helped develop dynamic market
hubs, through provision of basic market infrastructure, streamlined regulatory frameworks, and
complementary public sector investments that can create financial value and growth opportunities,
enhancing the overall business environment. Meanwhile, modern firms are beginning to explore
and write new rules about information sharing that can energize these processes. Companies
whose activities have a large “footprint” on local ecosystems are consulting more widely before
making decisions on siting and procurement. Some are playing a visible public role in promoting
public-private partnerships for sustainable development, participating in multistakeholder visioning
processes, and offering their expertise and collaboration in addressing challenges of landscape
conservation and restoration, particularly around watershed management. The six cases described
in this report illustrate the diverse roles that have been played by private actors—both land managers
and companies—and by institutional mechanisms for collaboration.
Chapter 2. WHERE DO PRIVATE MARKET INCENTIVES CONVERGE WITH LANDSCAPE RESTORATION GOALS?
69