Smallholder farmers and their agroecosystems in active volcanic landscapes need to deal with and recover from eruptions. Resilience to extreme shocks may increase with system diversity, enhancing food and income security and ecosystem services provision; however, the longer term effects of volcanic ash are rarely assessed. To test the hypothesis that tree diversity contributes to the social–ecological resilience of coffee-based agroforestry, we quantified (1) the immediate effects of deposition of a 15-cm ash layer on tree survival, (2) the effect of volcanic ash on aboveground C stocks, tree diversity and wood density frequencies, (3) litter layer dynamics, and (4) farming system and income recovery 3 years after. Observations in four land-use systems before and after ash deposition (remnant forest, coffee-based complex and simple agroforestry, annual crops) were complemented by 46 farmer interviews on tree species’ survival, system, and financial recovery. Based on farmer interviews, low-wood-density trees were most affected by volcanic ash deposition. Ash deposition did not, after 3 years and across land-use systems, significantly change tree density, basal area, or C stocks. In contrast, species richness in coffee-based agroforestry increased significantly. Standing litter stocks in agroforestry decreased, but slower decomposition partially compensated for reduced litter input. Farmers stated that diversity and flexibility in coffee-based agroforestry support a system recovery that is faster than that for annual crops, suppressing income fluctuation. Farmer’s adaptive responses to enhance species diversity contributed to the resilience of farms, by retaining basic system structure and functions of agroforestry, and increasing product diversity and income.
Tag: biodiversity
CITES as a tool for sustainable development: Despite progress in tackling international trade in tropical tree species, more needs to be done
Key messages
- Habitat degradation resulting from land use change and the overexploitation and illegal trade of wild species are driving the current biodiversity crisis.
- Launched in 1975, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), now has 183 contracted state parties and the European Union. The Convention lists species at risk from international trade in one of three appendices, depending on the level of threat.
- Tree species listed by CITES numbered only 18 in 1975; by 2013, more than 350 tree species were listed, around 200 of which are used and traded for timber. The CITES Tree Species Programme was launched in 2017 to ensure that trade in timber, bark, extracts and other products from CITES-listed tree species is sustainable, legal and traceable.
- This brief highlights a new Cambridge University Press book: CITES As a Tool for Sustainable Development, with a focus on the governance of tropical timber species.
Diverse values of nature for sustainability
Twenty-five years since foundational publications on valuing ecosystem services for human well-being, addressing the global biodiversity crisis still implies confronting barriers to incorporating nature’s diverse values into decision-making. These barriers include powerful interests supported by current norms and legal rules such as property rights, which determine whose values and which values of nature are acted on. A better understanding of how and why nature is (under)valued is more urgent than ever. Notwithstanding agreements to incorporate nature’s values into actions, including the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) and the UN Sustainable Development Goals, predominant environmental and development policies still prioritize a subset of values, particularly those linked to markets, and ignore other ways people relate to and benefit from nature. Arguably, a ‘values crisis’ underpins the intertwined crises of biodiversity loss and climate change, pandemic emergence and socio-environmental injustices. On the basis of more than 50,000 scientific publications, policy documents and Indigenous and local knowledge sources, the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) assessed knowledge on nature’s diverse values and valuation methods to gain insights into their role in policymaking and fuller integration into decisions. Applying this evidence, combinations of values-centred approaches are proposed to improve valuation and address barriers to uptake, ultimately leveraging transformative changes towards more just (that is, fair treatment of people and nature, including inter- and intragenerational equity) and sustainable futures.
Learning pathway: Course flows & blueprint
This course is a pivotal contribution to FAO’s vision of fostering a Better Environment, particularly focusing on Biodiversity for food and agriculture. Aligned with FAO’s strategic initiatives, the course is fortified by the approval of the FAO Strategy on Mainstreaming Biodiversity Across Agricultural Sectors and the 2021-23 Action Plan, emphasizing the importance of targeted policies and practices for sustainable use, conservation, and restoration of ecosystems.
Rates of tree cover loss in key biodiversity areas within Indigenous Peoples’ lands
Indigenous Peoples’ lands (IPL) cover at least 38 million km2 (28.1%) of the global terrestrial surface. These lands can be important for biodiversity conservation. Around 20.7% of IPL intersect areas protected by government (PAs). Many sites of importance for biodiversity within IPL could make a substantial but hitherto unquantified contribution to Global site-based conservation targets. Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) represent the largest global network of systematically identified sites of high importance for biodiversity. We assessed the effectiveness of IPL in slowing biodiversity loss, both within and outside PAs, by quantifying tree cover loss in KBAs at international and national levels and comparing it with losses at equivalent sites outside mapped IPL. Based on a matched sample of 1-km2 cells in KBAs inside and outside of mapped IPL, tree cover loss in KBAs outside of PAs was lower inside IPLs when compared to outside mapped IPLs. By contrast, tree cover loss in KBAs inside of PAs was lower outside mapped IPLs than inside IPLs (although the difference was far smaller). However, national rates of tree cover loss in KBAs varied greatly in relation to their IPL and PA status. In half of the 44 countries we examined individually, there was no significant difference in the rate of tree cover loss in KBAs inside and outside mapped IPL. The reasons for this inter country variation could help understand the importance of IPL in meeting the CBD’s ambition of conserving 30% of land by 2030. Critical to this will be coordinated action by governments to strengthen and enforce Indigenous Peoples’ rights, secure their collective systems of tenure and governance, and recognize their aspirations for their lands and futures.
Key Biodiversity Areas are proving useful for spatial planning if the criteria are applied correctly
Key Biodiversity Area (KBAs) are sites of significance for the global persistence of biodiversity, identified nationally using criteria and thresholds developed through extensive consultation and testing (IUCN, 2016). KBAs currently cover 8.01% of the terrestrial and 2.49% of the marine surface of the earth, but Farooq et al. (2023) predicted that comprehensive application of the criteria would lead to a blanket coverage of KBAs across the world. Their analysis employed rasterised terrestrial species’ range data from the IUCN Red List of Threatened species for 64,110 species to identify grid cells that could potentially qualify as KBAs based on the occurrence of one or more species, using the thresholds under KBA criterion A1 (threatened species), and B1 (geographically restricted species). Unfortunately, their analysis has several shortcomings that mean that their conclusion is not warranted.
Generating capacity, commitment, and consensus to support Trees on Farms for Biodiversity
For the success of the post-2020 global biodiversity framework, it will no longer be sufficient to seek to limit biodiversity loss through agriculture. Instead, agriculture must become an integral element of sustainable landscapes a force for conserving biodiversity and providing vital ecosystem services to local populations and securing livelihoods.
Trees on Farms (TonF) play a critical role in contributing to biodiversity conservation in agricultural landscapes through in-situ conservation, by connecting fragmented wild habitats and providing stepping-stones between protected area networks and conserving soil biodiversity and agrobiodiversity. TonF are one of the key nature-based solutions to the conservation and food production challenges we face as they also play a critical role in achieving sustainable, biodiversity friendly agricultural landscapes.
Mainstreaming biodiversity and livelihood through Trees on Farms and agroforestry in Indonesia
For the success of the post-2020 global biodiversity framework, it will no longer be sufficient to seek to limit biodiversity loss through agriculture. Instead, agriculture must become an integral element of sustainable landscapes a force for conserving biodiversity and providing vital ecosystem services to local populations and securing livelihoods.
Trees on Farms (TonF) play a critical role in contributing to biodiversity conservation in agricultural landscapes through in-situ conservation, by connecting fragmented wild habitats and providing stepping-stones between protected area networks and conserving soil biodiversity and agrobiodiversity. TonF are one of the key nature-based solutions to the conservation and food production challenges we face as they also play a critical role in achieving sustainable, biodiversity friendly agricultural landscapes.
Realizing the potential of Trees on Farms for biodiversity and livelihoods
For the success of the post-2020 global biodiversity framework, it will no longer be sufficient to seek to limit biodiversity loss through agriculture. Instead, agriculture must become an integral element of sustainable landscapes a force for conserving biodiversity and providing vital ecosystem services to local populations and securing livelihoods.
Trees on Farms (TonF) play a critical role in contributing to biodiversity conservation in agricultural landscapes through in-situ conservation, by connecting fragmented wild habitats and providing stepping-stones between protected area networks and conserving soil biodiversity and agrobiodiversity. TonF are one of the key nature-based solutions to the conservation and food production challenges we face as they also play a critical role in achieving sustainable, biodiversity friendly agricultural landscapes.
From the Woods to Action: TonF now at the forefront in Uganda’s restoration agenda
For the success of the post-2020 global biodiversity framework, it will no longer be sufficient to seek to limit biodiversity loss through agriculture. Instead, agriculture must become an integral element of sustainable landscapes a force for conserving biodiversity and providing vital ecosystem services to local populations and securing livelihoods.
Trees on Farms (TonF) play a critical role in contributing to biodiversity conservation in agricultural landscapes through in-situ conservation, by connecting fragmented wild habitats and providing stepping-stones between protected area networks and conserving soil biodiversity and agrobiodiversity. TonF are one of the key nature-based solutions to the conservation and food production challenges we face as they also play a critical role in achieving sustainable, biodiversity friendly agricultural landscapes.