Put people first in Forest and
Landscape Restoration: learnings from meeting in Philippines
By
Cathy Watson
It
was a small group of researchers, NGO leaders and government officials that
gathered in the typhoon-battered city of Tacloban in the Philippines February
22-24. But collectively they had thought for many hundreds of years about
forest landscape restoration (FLR).
Attending
the third meeting of FLoRES – the Forest and
Landscape Restoration Standards Taskforce – they planned to unpeel FLR and make
it easier for others to understand.
Organizer Robin Chazdon
said that many parties, from practitioners to governments to funders such as
the World Bank and Global Environment Fund, want standards for FLR. “We’ve had donors say, ‘We
are doling out tonnes of money and do not have a way to allocate it or know
what to expect from projects calling themselves FLR’.”
Like
all in attendance, she holds that FLR needs core principles and that “without
principles, the world risks repeating costly mistakes with business-as-usual
approaches.”
“For this
meeting I am particularly interested in how we can make FLR happen at scale and
provide better guidance for people on the ground,” said the Emeritus professor
from University of Connecticut.
Every other participant brought an
interest from their work too. WeForest’s Victoria
Gutierrez, the other organizer of the event, said, “I’m interested in the
social and economic aspects of FLR. These determine long term success but are
often seen as by-products of ecological restoration. I am frequently in
meetings and they are not spoken about.”
“I’m
interested in indicators,” said PhD student Liz Ota from Brazil. “Having short-term
targets makes FLR easier but does not mean you get a forest in the end.”
“I am interested in how indigenous knowledge
can help select species for FLR,” said Anatolio Polinar from the Philippines’ Department of Environment and
Natural Resources (DENR).
“I’m
interested in capacity development for FLR,” said David Neidel, who runs Yale’s ELTI programme in Asia.
“I’m
interested in community reforestation capacity” said Australian professor
John Herbohn. “Top down models are
insufficiently nuanced about the people part.”
On
Day 1 the 16 participants visited a project funded by the Australian Centre for
International Agricultural Research (ACIAR) that has helped to make FLR part of
the way of life of an upland community on the island of Biliran.
In earlier years the community of Kawayanon
rebuffed outsiders who told them how to use their land. Now it was
welcoming. “We had a lot of problems with the way FLR was introduced,” said Romeo Debalos, president of the Peoples Organization. “But now we are happy.”
Environmentalist
Nestor Gregorio, who leads the ACIAR FLR Project in the Philippines, explained
what had happened. Desperate to reverse deforestation, the DENR had attempted
three programs to plant and grow trees, but “the community was not
brought on board” and the DENR retreated in frustration.
“DENR
invited us in but said this community was difficult and that I was out of my
mind to try,” said Gregorio. “The land was burnt twice a
year. All the common problems of restoration were present.”
He
and his team took a new approach. “We came and spent a year
talking with the community and helping them to build their People’s
Organization — before expecting that they plant a single tree.” This changed everything,
and there was progress all round.
The
community stopped setting fires, and the trees survived for the first time.
Today it has a thriving agroforestry zone, a production zone of Acacia mangium, and a protection
zone of indigenous species in the high forest land.
And
the DENR, which had persisted with the community through thick and thin,
changed its approach too. “We realize that we have to satisfy economic needs
for communities,” said Bonifacio Polinar. “We are delighted to have you
here to improve our survival rates.”
“In a
really poor community like this one, it’s important to get the agroforestry
component up and running,” observed Herbohn. “You have to work with the
community, so they capture the value and not someone else.”
The
Biliran case was food for thought on Day 2. “FLR has to interest
people,” said
Peruvian forester Cesar Sabogal. “We want people to discuss
what we want them to discuss,” said ecologist Rhett Harrison of World
Agroforestry. “But they have their livelihood at the front,”
The conversation then shifted to recommending that
donors invest boldly in FLR. “FLR is a means to an end. It can reduce
vulnerability to natural disasters and bring back vital ecological and social
functions” said Pat Durst, FAO’s Asia forestry advisor for over two
decades.
“A donor
with a broad vision might see that FLR can bring about less irregular migration
and less radicalization,” said another participant.
But
there were also cautions that “FLR is not a tree planting
competition” and that indeed, in some cases, restoration of formerly
forested landscapes may not always need to put tree planting at the absolute
fore.
“It is
very easy for an agency to say that we are going to plant trees,” said Australian
forester Jerry Vanclay. “But that won’t necessarily
protect the catchment or provide a continual supply of clean water. Instead,
you might need to focus on assisted natural regeneration, grazing animals
differently or controlling burning. FLR done well means you go in and
understand the community rather than come in with a predetermined solution.”
The last day of the meeting was
spent looking at six FLR principles. Reviewed by the Global
Partnership on Forest and Landscape Restoration in 2018, they are:
1.
Focus on landscapes not individual sites.
2.
Engage stakeholders, including vulnerable groups, in decisions
on land use, goals, implementation and benefit sharing.
3.
Restore ecological, social and economic functions to generate a
range of ecosystem goods and services
4.
Maintain and do not convert or destroy natural forests or other
natural systems. Aim for conservation, recovery, and sustainable management.
5.
Tailor approaches to local social, cultural, economic and
ecological values and history. Draw on latest science, best practice, and
traditional and indigenous knowledge.
6.
Manage adaptively for long-term resilience. Enhance species and
genetic diversity. Adjust as climate, stakeholder needs, and societal values
change.
If
operationalised and applied to specific contexts, said delegates, these
principles can help ensure success. “What’s the point of funding
the same project five times in 20 years when you can do it once?” said John Herbohn.
“I really
think these principles are critical or FLR can get diluted,” said another
participant. “We need these to get a balance,” said Durst. “Too many people
associated with FLR are stuck on the ‘F’ for forest and not enough on
livelihoods.”
As participants headed back to
Manila for a 3-day international conference on FLR, there was
optimism. “It is about the way the program is designed, introduced,
implemented,” said Nestor Gregorio. “Up to now social aspects
have received scant attention, particularly livelihood. But once the social
landscape is successful, the biophysical will just succeed.”
IUCN’s
Li Jia, who manages its Restoration Opportunities
Assessment Methodology across Asia, said: “Many restoration projects
are very segmented because people think in single disciplines and institutions
are in silos. But now more and more people see the connection between different
parts of landscapes. I’m hopeful.”
“I’m
happy with our conclusions,” said Victoria Gutierrez. “Trees grow on social
landscapes.”
Cathy
Watson is Chief of Programme Development at World Agroforestry (ICRAF), which
invests heavily in restoration. She tweets @CWatsonICRAF
and writes at http://blog.worldagroforestry.org/index.php/author/cathy-watson/ and https://www.theguardian.com/profile/cathy-watson