View
1
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Sustainable Forest Use and Conservation
for Rural Livelihoods
Fonda Lewis
OverviewOverviewECOSYSTEM SERVICES
FOREST ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
Livelihoods and
dependency
on forest resources
Forest condition
/ degradation and
ecosystem functioning
Opportunities
Recommendations
Conservation
/ Development
Tradeoffs
Threats and Challenges
State of Natural ForestsState of Natural Forests� Approximately 520 000 ha natural forest in South Africa
� 4.61 million ha of natural vegetation in SA is degraded, mainly
indigenous forests, woodlands and grasslands
� Forest ecosystems being degraded or lost at an alarming rate• Reduction of approximately 6% of total forest area recorded from 1944 to 1996
• Substantial loss of small forest patches
� Deforestation is significant form of
degradation in several districts of Limpopo,
KwaZulu-Natal and E. Cape
• Results from clearing of trees for cultivation, settlement or the use of wood
and non-wood forest products
• Deforestation of closed forests is a threat to some forest types and increasing
in some areas
• Degradation is a threat from unsustainable harvesting e.g. of poles, medicinal
plants or other NTFP, overgrazing, poor burning, etc. (Source SOE 2005)
Example:
� Gxalingenwa and KwaYili Forests in southern Drakensberg region
of KwaZulu-Natal
• Proclaimed conservation areas - surrounded by rural communities with
high poverty rates
• Forest type is rare afromontane mistbelt forest
o 1 485ha at Gxalingenwa
o 628ha at KwaYili
• Over the past 10 – 15 years
o 10% decline in forest area at
Gxalingenwa
o 30% decline at KwaYili
o Extensive harvesting of building
poles (yellow wood), medicinal
plants, hunting and clearing
• Threatening biodiversity and future
ecosystem functioning of forests
o Also threatening livelihoods
Environmental ServicesEnvironmental Services� The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) distinguishes 4 classes of
ecosystem services important for human well-being:
a) Provisioning – products such as food, raw materials, etc.
b) Regulating – benefits from regulation such as local climate control, water
release and regulation, and disease control, etc.
c) Supporting – services for production of other services such as soil formation
and nutrient cycling, habitat provision, etc.
d) Cultural – non-material benefits such as aesthetics, spiritual enrichment
and recreation activities, etc.� Ecosystem services allow us to see
direct and indirect ways in which we
depend on the natural environment
� Human well-being and most economic
activity depends on a healthy
environment for access to these
services
Forests and LivelihoodsForests and Livelihoods
� Forests widely recognised for the goods they
provide for sustaining rural livelihoods
(provisioning services)
• Timber
• Fuelwood
• Non-timber forest products
• Fodder for livestock
� Substantial evidence illustrating dependency and
use value of these forest resources for rural
livelihoods
• To meet direct household survival needs in terms
of foods, building materials firewood etc
• To sell surpluses to generate small cash income
for household to purchase other necessities
However …….
� Less recognised that forests also provide range of
other crucial ecosystem services• Regulating - regulation of the water cycle and climate
• Support - soil formation, nutrient recycling, and erosion
control
• Cultural - spiritual sites, cultural practices, sporting
activities
In addition to the widely recognised• Provisioning - fuelwood, timber, foods, medicinal plants
….. All are essential for rural livelihoods
� Forest ecosystems do not only include the trees• Include associated habitats such as grassland /wetland -
collectively form a functioning forest ecosystem
• Collectively provide services that support livelihoods
Forest Ecosystem ServicesForest Ecosystem Services
ThreatsThreats� Forest degradation and loss of biodiversity threatens
ecosystem functioning and delivery of ecosystem services
for local livelihoods as well as for wider society
• Species richness required to provide multiple ecosystem
functions
• Species diversity affects ability of systems to provide
threshold levels of ecosystem functions
� Conflict between the maximisation of certain ecosystems
functions - trade offs being made to enhance particular
functions at the expense of others
• Maximising productivity functions (harvesting) may be
negatively related to maintenance of stress (resilience)
o May be impossible to maximize both functions jointly
• Resilience particularly important during stress events e.g.
droughts, floods, fires - weak resilience negatively affects
recovery and ability to continue to yield services
� Short term benefits (harvesting of timber and non-timber forest products,
clearing for settlement and agriculture) traded off against medium to
long term benefits (stress tolerance, water regulation, nutrient cycling ,
biodiversity conservation, climate regulation)
• Meeting immediate livelihood resource needs at the cost of ecosystem
functioning
• Risk for overall well-being in long tem
� Importance of supplying forest goods (provisioning services) is
widely recognized - particularly in the context of alleviating poverty
and supporting the livelihoods of rural poor
• But importance and dependence on the full range of forest services
is not as well known or understood
� Need for rural development promotes
high market value for provisioning
services to the detriment of equally
important but less obvious regulating,
supporting and cultural services
� Example 1
• Overharvesting of understory trees and saplings for building poles
(maximising provisioning) = Thinning and degradation of understory
• Compromising soil stability and increasing risk of soil erosion and breakdown
of nutrient cycling (compromising supporting services)
• Weakening of water cycling services and ability to regulate water releases
(compromising regulating services)
• Increased run off and sedimentation and decreased downstream water
quality for local households and wider society
• Increased risk of flooding and landslides during high rainfall events increasing
vulnerability of local households
� Example 2
• Overharvesting of high demand medicinal plants results in local extinctions
and loss of biodiversity
• Reduced stress tolerance of forest ecosystem system and risk of collapse
• Reduced ability to maintain multiple ecosystem functions at threshold levels
Meeting immediate livelihood resource needs at cost of long term
ecosystem functioning - Risk for overall well-being of local rural
households as well as wider society
ChallengesChallenges� Challenge to provide access to forest resources to support rural
livelihoods without compromising the ecological integrity of forests
• Communities at KwaYili and Gxalingenwa Forests support forest conservation
but openly admit they cannot support conservation if it means reduction in
the use of forest resources -will negatively affect their livelihoods
� Investment in maintaining ecosystem functioning seen as a luxury
• Substantial evidence of importance of provisioning (resource use)
• Importance of regulating, supporting and cultural services poorly visible and
critical role taken for granted
� Lack of awareness and recognition of contribution of full range of
ecosystem services to sustaining livelihoods and poverty alleviation
• No buy in to fact that maximising benefits from provisioning services alone
will not sustain livelihoods in long term
� Can’t address forest conservation in isolation from livelihoods and
poverty alleviation
• But what is the role of forests in meeting livelihood needs of the poor?
o Forests can only be part of the solution
• Needs to find a balance and alternatives
� Conservation cannot be secured through law enforcement and
implementation of policy and regulations alone
• Government has de jure authority
• Communities have de facto authority – not formalised or officially recognised
� Scarcity of information and data on sustainable use levels to inform
harvesting and quotas
• Need to provide access - but what is sustainable?
• Scarcity of information upon which to base harvesting levels and quotas
• Lack of on site monitoring of impacts and consequences of current harvesting
levels
Sustainable use and conservation of natural forests is a multifaceted process
– not achievable by 1 group / department on its own
Opportunities for ActionOpportunities for Action(1) Incentives -
� Market based instruments
• Payment for Ecosystem services (payment for water/catchment management;
payment for carbon)
� Job creation and poverty alleviation
• Working for Water
• Public works programme for forest rehabilitation to restore forest functions
(2) Rewards - for good stewardship
� Conservation status for community forests and certification to create niche
tourism markets etc
(3) Alternatives - increase opportunity:decrease dependency
� Alternative supplies (e.g. renewable energy sources, building materials)
� Alternative livelihood strategies (e.g. non-resource based entrepreneurship)
(4) Enhance custodianship, guardianship and caretaker role
of local communities
� PFM / Co-Management / Community Forestry Agreements
• Empowerment and devolution of management and ownership
(5) Education, awareness and information sharing
� Insights into benefits from entire range of ecosystem services (not
just goods) can contribute to improved management
RecommendationsRecommendations� Management is collective responsibility with many different roles
and responsibilities – need to include forest conservation in all
facets of development and planning• Co-operative governance (Regulators, Conservationists, Users, Community,
Private Sector, Government, NGO, Academics etc.)
� Already a lot of policy and regulation but very few success stories• Need to develop understanding of what contributes to success and failure
• Adapt approach to conservation and sustainable use accordingly
• Look to examples outside forests e.g. Stewardship for biodiversity
� Research indicates potential for harvesting forest resources without
compromising ecosystem services but shortage of data on
sustainable yields and methods• Need applied research to inform adaptive management
• Need on site monitoring and evaluation
RecommendationsRecommendations� Manage forest ecosystems in their entirety
• Not only forest “contents” but also maintain ecological functioning to sustain
ecosystem services
• Understand trade offs that are being made and evaluate consequences and
costs before deciding
• Identify what ecosystem services are most relevant to specific forests and
communities
o Have condition of ecosystem services assessed
o Assess distributional impacts (e.g. livelihoods approach)
o Identify management requirements
o Identify incentives and catalysts
RecommendationsRecommendations� Need policies and regulations reflecting true value of biodiversity
and natural ecosystems
• To help secure conservation and delivery of ecosystem goods and services in
transparent and socially equitable way
� Facilitate establishment of new markets that support and reward
conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services
• Need appropriate institutional infrastructure, incentives, financing and
governance
• In past State considered largely responsible for managing ecosystems
• Now evident that markets can also play part –without public money
ConclusionsConclusions� Forest ecosystem services are not a luxury – they are a necessity
for local livelihoods as well as for the well-being of wider society
� Forest conservation is all about securing service delivery!
� Trends in the extent and condition of our natural forests are
evidence that trade offs are currently being made
• Short term access and resource use to provide critical support for local
livelihoods
• Against medium to long term ecosystem functioning which provides
critical services for local households as well as wider society
ERROR: stackunderflow
OFFENDING COMMAND: ~
STACK:
Recommended