Forest restoration at the landscape level in Nepal

Type Journal Article - Forest landscape restoration for Asia-Pacific forests
Title Forest restoration at the landscape level in Nepal
Author(s)
Volume 1990
Issue 92
Publication (Day/Month/Year) 2016
Page numbers 103
URL http://www.fao.org/3/a-i5412e.pdf#page=113
Abstract
Introduction
Work on forest restoration is not new in the Asia-Pacific region. Classical achievements include the planting of teak in
Java, and the ‘taungya’ system, first introduced in Burma for afforesting swidden areas. A variety of restoration techniques
is available, ranging from natural regeneration to mixed species plantations. The need for restoring forests is increasing
in the Asia-Pacific region considering the extensive areas of degraded forests and lands. In this context, a new approach,
called forest landscape restoration (FLR) is currently being promoted widely. FLR is an innovative approach that integrates
restoration work in the forest with other activities across the landscape for achieving optimum productivity, both in
commercial and ecological terms. However, practitioners are not fully aware of the concept behind the approach. With
a view to strengthening FLR approaches in the region, the FAO Regional Office for Asia-Pacific (FAO RAP) and RECOFTC
– The Center for People and Forests undertook a multicountry study to review the status of forest and land degradation,
restoration approaches commonly used and the policy and institutional environments which can support the introduction
of FLR approaches in the region.
Deforestation and forest degradation
The Asia-Pacific region has experienced heavy deforestation and forest degradation. The region lost about 0.25 million ha
of forest annually during 1990 to 2000, but since then it has reversed and has been increasing at about 1.35 million ha
annually. However, among the megadiverse countries of Southeast Asia the trend has remained negative. This has resulted
in 125 million ha of degraded forest land and 145 million ha of degraded forests in Asia alone (ITTO 2002). The main direct
causes include opening up of forest lands for cash crops, shifting cultivation, fires and unsustainable logging practices. The
underlying causes include undervaluation of forests, poor enforcement of regulations, ineffective land policies and lack of
or unclear tenurial rights. The resulting landscape is a mosaic of land uses, ranging from agriculture to underutilized open
areas, heavily encroached forest patches and intact forests some distance away from human activity. Besides the obvious
loss of timber and biodiversity, there is a reduction in other goods and ecosystem services, including the ability to mitigate
the impacts of climate change. These factors have undermined the livelihoods of people closely dependent on forests and
agriculture.
Forest restoration
The region has seen some important developments in forest restoration. In the second half of the last century, China,
Japan, Republic of Korea (ROK) and Viet Nam initiated massive nationwide restoration programmes, which effectively
doubled or tripled their forest cover. China expanded its forest cover from 8.6 percent in 1949 to 22.1 percent in 2015,
increasing its forest area by over 120 million ha. In the 1970s, almost 80 percent of ROK was denuded. The government
introduced huge restoration programmes – one massive programme included planting 12 billion trees on 4.25 million ha.
In the 1990s, Viet Nam started two large restoration programmes (Greening the Barren Hills Program and the 5 Million
Hectares Reforestation Programme). As a result, forest cover increased from 35.6 percent in 2000 to 47.6 percent in 2015
(FAO 2010a,b).
Most of the restoration of degraded forests and lands relates to the development of plantations of fast-growing species
for timber production. Analysis of the seven countries in the study brings out some pertinent issues. The technical issues
are swamped by institutional, regulatory and policy issues. Most constraints relate to state control of the forest, lack of
devolution, lack of clarity on tenure and lack of participation by communities and the private sector. The successes are
overwhelmingly with the countries which have provided the appropriate policies for people’s participation. These countries
are in the early stages of shifting from timber production with management for multiple products and services, reforming
tenure policies and renewing emphasis on people’s livelihoods and implementation of community forestry.
Forest landscape restoration
Besides all these constraints, the traditional approach is mostly concerned with wood production, with less attention to
ecological and ecosystem services; management rarely includes landscapes beyond the boundaries of the forest reserve.
Based on these concerns, several researchers proposed the FLR approach. This is a planned process to integrate forest
restoration actions with desirable landscape-level objectives, undertaken in a participatory manner by all stakeholders.
It works at restoring a full landscape that includes forests and other lands so that they provide multiple benefits; the
desired landscape objectives are undertaken through the full participation of the people who will have a crucial role in the
management of the restored lands. As FLR brings together social, environmental and economic considerations in restoring
forests within the landscape of other uses, the scientific community is convinced that it holds better prospects for success.
In 2000, the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF) and the World Conservation Union (IUCN) developed a framework and
process for promoting FLR approaches that are socially and ecologically appropriate and defined FLR as “a planned process
that aims to regain ecological integrity and enhance human well-being in deforested or degraded forest landscapes.” It
was also pointed out that the FLR approach can play an important role in supporting various international agreements such
as the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the
Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism and the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD).
Synthesis
3
This has led to the formation of the Global Partnership on Forest and Landscape Restoration (GPFLR), a partnership to
catalyze support for FLR. Based on this, several pledges were made by governments, such as the Bonn Challenge, to restore
150 million ha of deforested and degraded lands, and Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation leaders pledged to boost their
forest area by 20 million ha by 2020. FAO launched its ‘Forest and Landscape Restoration Mechanism’ in 2014 to support
implementation at the national level.
Based on the review of the status of restoration work in the seven countries in the region, and the understanding of the
FLR approaches, FAO RAP and RECOFTC proposed the setting up of a facility to support the FLR mechanism in the region.
The review further examined the specific issues relating to FLR:
• What is FLR? A landscape can contain a mosaic of land uses from natural forests, secondary forests and timber
plantations to agricultural and degraded lands. Depending on the stakeholders, restoration efforts vary. Individual
farmers may seek economic gains, whereas government agencies may pursue ecological and environmental
benefits. Restoration has to therefore meet the needs of the various stakeholders in terms of land use, species
suitability and people’s needs. FLR attempts to bring a balance between conservation and production issues by first
paying attention to the causes of forest loss and degradation, engaging stakeholders in removing conflict over landuse
planning and sharing of benefits, and negotiating trade-offs that are acceptable to all, including biodiversity
conservation and a range of other benefits.
• How much restoration? FLR attempts to address both conservation and production issues at a landscape level.
Restoration for biodiversity conservation pays attention to connectivities between forest patches, buffer areas for
small forest fragments and the overall viability of the remaining species. Hydrological and soil protection are also
considered at the landscape level. Restoration takes up the socio-economic concerns of participants. This depends
on individual farmers, communities and the private sector, and how their specific needs can be met. While there is
no easy answer to how much area can be restored, this is influenced by the local setting.
• Where to restore? This is addressed on the basis of what is the best way to conserve biodiversity, sites which are
vulnerable to soil erosion, locations best suited for commercial tree plantations and so forth. The ideal sites for
restoration are where multiple benefits can be attained, with low opportunity costs.
• What restoration approach? A variety of restoration approaches are possible; they range from secondary forest
regrowth, monoculture plantations and mixed species plantations to ecological restoration among others. Each
has different commercial and conservation potential; the choice is based on what fits an individual’s needs and is
determined by species-site fitness, highest benefits gained and diversification of incomes. The requirement is to
ensure all result in the best overall outcomes.
• Planning FLR. With appropriate planning, ad hoc decisions by individual landowners can be minimized. The views
of secondary stakeholders are also considered, which include downstream water users, urban populations and state
agencies among others. In order to avoid conflict, it is necessary to find a solution that meets various objectives
through negotiations. Considering the many stakeholders, a consultative planning process should be adopted.
Through such an approach, the benefits of the wider community can be considered against the needs of the
individual landowners, and an implementation plan can be presented to reach collective agreements.
The FLR approach has to contend with a number of issues, such as policies and laws, stakeholders, particularly the local
communities, and restoring the functionality of the landscape from the perspectives of ecological integrity and human
well-being. The precursors for implementing FLR approaches exist in some of the countries that were reviewed. Examples
include policies that influence forest and land classification to target areas for restoration, national programmes on
restoration, establishing restoration funds, transparent and participatory master plans for restoration, focus on people’s
involvement in forest and land restoration, and community-based forestry programmes. Overall, there is a strong need
for countries to formulate supportive policies and legal frameworks for implementing FLR approaches. Minimally, these
would have to cover governance issues, property, tenure and access rights, strengthening capacity of public institutions,
engaging the private sector and markets, and decentralizing control and decision-making to local bodies. Considering FLR
approaches are still evolving, additional research and sharing of experiences on good practices are vital.

Related studies

»