Total Economics of Sustainable Land Management

Jonathan DaviesGlobal Drylands Programme

The Silent Menace• Twelve million hectares of land where 20

million tons of grain could have been grown disappear every year due to pressure from human activities (UNCCD, 2011).

• Rising land value leading to speculation and accumulation of land.

• Following the 2008 food crisis between 15 and 20 million hectares of farmland in developing countries had changed hands.

• 50 million people may be displaced within the next 10 years as a result of desertification.

• Land degradation and drought generate global losses of at least 42 billion US dollars per year.

Economic valuation as a decision-making tool

What is the real cost of land degradation?

Lower food production

Drought

Water deficitReduced

water qualityLoss of biodiversity

Flood

Conflict

Climate Change

Health problems

What scale matters?

E-SLM: rain-fed agroforestryin Sudan

• Direct values: Improved soil fertility, improved soil moisture, mulching

• Indirect values: reduced run-off, higher water tables, reduced dust storms

• Use “choice experiment” to examine willingness to pay for access to safe water

• Will people invest the effort in agroforestry?• What information do they need to understand

that it is worth while?

Communal rangeland rehabilitation in Jordan

• Improvements in livestock productivity • Conservation of biodiversity: marketable and non-

marketable values • Improved water infiltration:– Restored hydrological cycle – Higher water table – Revival of riparian vegetation – Longer seasonal water flows– Reduced flash flooding– Lower siltation of dams

Restoring communal forests in Mali

• Reduced travel for fuel wood• Non timber forest products with direct

marketing value• Biodiversity restoration • Improvements in hydrological cycles

Modelling scenarios using remote sensing

• Develop land use / land cover maps• Identify river basins • Local level validation of maps• Model outcomes of land use change (change in

vegetation, change in water flows)• Choice experiment – what is the value for example of

better access to water? Of reduced risk exposure? Of improved water cycles?

• How representative are the sites? Is the analysis applicable to a larger scale?

Goal: data at the right level to make the right decisions

• What looks best in a given location is not always best at the national scale

• Decide on land use objectives: best returns on investment; gross productivity; reduced risk etc.

• Gross productivity is not only food – you have to consider everything of importance – if you don’t valuate it, you are likely to lose it

Thank you

Jonathan.davies@iucn.org