5 years ago

Forest Restoration in Landscapes

Forest Restoration in Landscapes

60 K. Brown 1.2.

60 K. Brown 1.2. Identifying Stakeholders The need for trade-offs arises because different stakeholder groups have different expectations or needs from a landscape. To understand trade-offs when dealing with a restoration programme in a landscape, the first step is to identify all the stakeholders. Often stakeholders are characterised by their degree of influence and importance. 89 The results of such an analysis can be categorised into primary stakeholders, secondary stakeholders, and external stakeholders. Primary stakeholders have little influence on the outcomes but they have the most to lose from management decisions. A primary stakeholder could be a farmer, a fisher, or a forest-dweller. Secondary stakeholders are often managers or decision makers, and they are the ones charged with implementing the decision, although the outcomes do not impact directly on them. External stakeholders are those who can significantly influence the outcome even if they are located far away, typically international nongovernmental organisations (NGOs). Many more complex stakeholder categories have been suggested, but these three capture the main groupings. Depending on the objectives of the trade-off process, stakeholder analysis can be critical in identifying who to include and perhaps how to engage them. 1.3. Brokering a Satisfactory Outcome The next requirement in an equitable trade-off process is to allow genuine discussion on tradeoffs between different stakeholders. There is usually a need for someone to help facilitate this process, ideally a person without a stake (perhaps a trusted outsider) who can act as an “honest broker.” 90 The role of the broker is to encourage an open discussion and to help facilitate a process whereby different stakeholders feel that they are gaining something from the process, even if that may mean also agreeing to some sacrifices. For instance, shifting cultivators may need to modify their approach to farming, 89 Brown, 2004. 90 Franks, 2004. but in return they may gain legitimate access to nontimber forest products located in the landscape. Frequently, conservation or development organisations like to consider themselves as “neutral brokers,” yet the reality is that they also have a position and an interest. Conservation organisations are stakeholders just like any other, with a particular vision that will sometimes be in competition with other legitimate economic and social “visions,” and conservationists are therefore unlikely to get everything that they want. 91 “Valid processes require much more time, patience and sensitivity to local cultures than most outside experts are prepared to allocate. Neutral facilitation and explicit recognition of the trade-offs between the interests of different stakeholders are important ingredients of success.” 92 1.4. The Concept of Multifunctionality When negotiating trade-offs in attempting to restore forest functions in a landscape, the concept of “multifunctionality” is important. If one stakeholder group, for instance biologists, is the only one deciding on the restoration outcomes of a given landscape, it may be that an ideal landscape for that group is one containing pristine habitat for all identified species in the given area.On the other hand,if the single stakeholder is a plantation company, it may be that its vision for the main function to restore in the landscape is that of productive monoculture plantations bringing in money from pulp and paper. For a poor local family, the main function it may be interested in restoring might be fuelwood.Applying the concept of multifunctionality can help to allow these different functions to coexist, meeting a wider range of different stakeholder groups’ interests. 1.5. Types of Trade-Offs 93 Restoring a landscape intentionally to meet a range of functions requires negotiating tradeoffs. There are different types of trade-offs: 91 Aldrich et al, 2003. 92 Sayer et al, 2003. 93 Brown, 2004.

• Trade-offs between different interest priorities, as per the example above • Trade-offs between short and long-term horizons • Trade-offs between different spatial scales, notably sites and landscapes • Trade-offs between different sections of society and biodiversity conservation, typically farmers or plantation owners and conservation NGOs • Trade-offs between different aspects of biodiversity, as it may not always be possible to restore a landscape to secure all species in a landscape; decisions on which species will take priority will require trade-offs • Trade-offs between different social groups— traditionally more influential groups may have taken decisions, but primary stakeholders are those whose livelihoods are directly affected; in a truly representative process, trade-offs will need to happen across social groups and scales. • Trade-offs among economic priorities, social welfare, and conservation. The skills needed to assess and evaluate such trade-offs and support negotiations about them are often lacking amongst conservation organisations, although they are more likely to exist within aid or development bodies. Developing negotiating skills is one of the key priorities in developing the capacity to work at landscape level (see “Negotiations and Conflict Management”). 2. Example: An Hypothetical Example for Negotiating the Restoration of a Landscape There are as yet few examples where a truly negotiated discussion and trade-offs led to a restored landscape. A theoretical process to achieve this was presented at a workshop in Madagascar. 94 Possible steps to reach a negotiated outcome for a restored landscape are as follows: Each stakeholder group describes the landscape as it was 50 years ago, the steps that 94 Taken from a presentation by Tom Erdmann given at a workshop on Forest Landscape Restoration in Madagascar in March 2003. 8. Addressing Trade-Offs in Forest Landscape Restoration 61 turned it into the current landscape and the main drivers of the changes. A facilitated discussion takes place to negotiate the general state of the landscape and its possible future state(s) (characteristics, products, and services it could offer, etc.). Each group develops a precise and detailed vision for the landscape 10 years from the present, identifying the most important characteristics (i.e.,the nonnegotiables),categorising the possibly negotiable characteristics and the definitely negotiable characteristics. The visions of different groups are then placed side by side, and a negotiation process begins that will culminate in a common vision for the future, restored landscape, that is acceptable to all. Such a process most certainly takes a significant amount of time. It requires clear identification and representation of stakeholders, a genuine neutral broker (or group of brokers), and different tools and processes to allow each stakeholder group to understand the implications of different decisions. 3. Outline of Tools Some of the tools available to allow the negotiation of trade-offs are as follows: 3.1. Focus Groups Working in small groups builds confidence, especially amongst stakeholders who may be reluctant to air their views in large meetings or are not used to public speaking. It enables specific stakeholders to rehearse and deliberate in a safe structured environment, prior to larger meetings or workshops. 3.2. Surveys Surveys can be valuable in generating baseline data and information to build believable scenarios or visions of the future and to illustrate management options. They are a means to learn about and approach different stakeholders. A particularly useful contribution is to feed back information generated from surveys to stakeholders as part of a social learning and triangulation process.

Forest Landscape Restoration - IUCN
[en]+[zh]Study on Forest Landscape Restoration - ITTO
Landscape management /Restoration ecology
People Restoring America's Forests: - Society of American Foresters
Rehabilitation and Restoration Of Degraded Forests (PDF) - IUCN
Landscape Ecology in a Restoration Context - ctahr
Restoring Southwestern Forests – A 21st Century Challenge
RESTORE Act , Gulf Restoration and Landscape Conservation ...
A System to Restore Northwestern Forests - Joint Fire Science ...
Restoration of Watershed Forests - PennFuture
Rehabilitation and Restoration Of Degraded Forests (PDF) - IUCN
Th R l f U b F t i The Role of Urban Forests in Biodiversity Restoration
Investing in Trees and Landscape Restoration: Overview - PROFOR
Forest Restoration and Biodiversity Conservation in a Changing ...
Protecting and restoring Blue Gum High Forest - Department of ...
The threats of invasive plants in forest restoration - total raffinage ...
Towards global guidelines for restoring the resilience of forest ...
Building forest landscapes resilient to global changes in drylands ...
rainforest restoration - Ministry of Environment and Forests
Groundcover Restoration in Forests of the Southeastern United States
Using Native Plant Species in Forest Restoration ... - Rainforestation
Crown Land: Indicators and Statistics - Ministry of Forests
Session E01 Funding for Habitat Purchase and Restoration
Forest landscapes are extensive - ICP Forests
REDD+ in dryland forests - IIED - International Institute for ...
Managing forests and fire in landscapes historically associated with ...
2010 Vermont Forest Resources Plan - Vermont Department of ...