It is often difficult to compile and synthesise evidence across multiple studies to inform policy and practice because different outcomes have been measured in different ways or datasets and models have not been fully or consistently reported. In the case of peatlands, a critical terrestrial carbon store, this lack of consistency hampers the evidence-based decisions in policy and practice that are needed to support effective restoration and conservation. This study adapted methods pioneered in the medical community to reach consensus over peatland outcomes that could be consistently measured and reported to improve the synthesis of data and reduce research waste. Here we report on a methodological framework for identifying, evaluating and prioritising the outcomes that should be measured. We discuss the subsequent steps to standardise methods for measuring and reporting outcomes in peatland research and monitoring. The framework was used to identify and prioritise sets of key variables (known as core domain sets) for UK blanket and raised bogs, and for tropical peat swamps. Peatland experts took part in a structured elicitation and prioritisation process, comprising two workshops and questionnaires, that focused on climate (32 and 18 unique outcomes for UK and tropical peats, respectively), hydrology (26 UK and 16 tropical outcomes), biodiversity (8 UK and 22 tropical outcomes) and fire-related outcomes (13, for tropical peatlands only). Future research is needed to tackle the challenges of standardising methods for data collection, management, analysis, reporting and re-use, and to extend the approach to other types of peatland. The process reported here is a first step towards creating datasets that can be synthesised to inform evidence-based policy and practice, and contribute towards the conservation, restoration and sustainable management of this globally significant carbon store.
Tag: conservation
Partnerships, capacity building and entrepreneurship for a sustainable future in the Yangambi landscape
The Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) and its partners are working in the Yangambi landscape to advance forestry research, local development, and conservation, and knowledge. Our objective is to support entrepreneurship, innovation, research, and good management of natural resources leading to the transformation of the Yangambi landscape into a place where forests contribute to the sustainable well-being of local communities.
Using Scenario Building and Participatory Mapping to Negotiate Conservation-Development Trade-Offs in Northern Ghana
In multifunctional landscapes, expanding economic activities jeopardise the integrity of biodiverse ecosystems, generating conservation-development trade-offs that require multi-stakeholder dialogue and tools to negotiate conflicting objectives. Despite the rich literature on participatory mapping and other tools to reveal different stakeholder perspectives, there is limited evidence on the application of such tools in landscape-scale negotiations. This paper addresses this gap by analysing a participatory mapping process in Ghana’s Western Wildlife Corridor, where a community-based landscape governance system called the community resource management area (CREMA) exists. Data from three participatory mapping workshops and focus group discussions with community and institutional actors reveal that increasing demand for food and natural resources and climate change impacts are drivers of landscape degradation, resulting in declining faunal and floral biodiversity and reduced ecosystem services. Meanwhile, community actors prioritise the expansion of farming land, while institutional actors prioritise forest conservation. However, scenario building and participatory mapping helped communicate each other’s aims and reach a negotiated consensus. Finally, power relations, cultural and traditional rules, and differences in knowledge affected deliberations and decision-making. We conclude that scenario building and participatory mapping can contribute to an inclusive landscape approach, provided that well-functioning multi-stakeholder platforms are in place and facilitators adequately navigate power imbalances and recognise different kinds and degrees of knowledge.
What happens after conservation payments stop? Key findings from REDD+ in Brazil
Key messages
- We assess the impacts of a REDD+ project that paid smallholders to reduce deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon, during and after payments.
- We find that payments were effective at reducing deforestation, but only while they were ongoing.
- After payments had ended, deforestation resumed, but not at a rate that eliminated previous forest conservation outcomes.
- Deforestation reductions required payments, but the environmental gains lasted.
In multifunctional landscapes, expanding economic activities jeopardise the integrity of biodiverse ecosystems, generating conservation-development trade-offs that require multi-stakeholder dialogue and tools to negotiate conflicting objectives. Despite the rich literature on participatory mapping and other tools to reveal different stakeholder perspectives, there is limited evidence on the application of such tools in landscape-scale negotiations. This paper addresses this gap by analysing a participatory mapping process in Ghana’s Western Wildlife Corridor, where a community-based landscape governance system called the community resource management area (CREMA) exists. Data from three participatory mapping workshops and focus group discussions with community and institutional actors reveal that increasing demand for food and natural resources and climate change impacts are drivers of landscape degradation, resulting in declining faunal and floral biodiversity and reduced ecosystem services. Meanwhile, community actors prioritise the expansion of farming land, while institutional actors prioritise forest conservation. However, scenario building and participatory mapping helped communicate each other’s aims and reach a negotiated consensus. Finally, power relations, cultural and traditional rules, and differences in knowledge affected deliberations and decision-making. We conclude that scenario building and participatory mapping can contribute to an inclusive landscape approach, provided that well-functioning multi-stakeholder platforms are in place and facilitators adequately navigate power imbalances and recognise different kinds and degrees of knowledge.
In multifunctional landscapes, expanding economic activities jeopardise the integrity of biodiverse ecosystems, generating conservation-development trade-offs that require multi-stakeholder dialogue and tools to negotiate conflicting objectives. Despite the rich literature on participatory mapping and other tools to reveal different stakeholder perspectives, there is limited evidence on the application of such tools in landscape-scale negotiations. This paper addresses this gap by analysing a participatory mapping process in Ghana’s Western Wildlife Corridor, where a community-based landscape governance system called the community resource management area (CREMA) exists. Data from three participatory mapping workshops and focus group discussions with community and institutional actors reveal that increasing demand for food and natural resources and climate change impacts are drivers of landscape degradation, resulting in declining faunal and floral biodiversity and reduced ecosystem services. Meanwhile, community actors prioritise the expansion of farming land, while institutional actors prioritise forest conservation. However, scenario building and participatory mapping helped communicate each other’s aims and reach a negotiated consensus. Finally, power relations, cultural and traditional rules, and differences in knowledge affected deliberations and decision-making. We conclude that scenario building and participatory mapping can contribute to an inclusive landscape approach, provided that well-functioning multi-stakeholder platforms are in place and facilitators adequately navigate power imbalances and recognise different kinds and degrees of knowledge.
In multifunctional landscapes, expanding economic activities jeopardise the integrity of biodiverse ecosystems, generating conservation-development trade-offs that require multi-stakeholder dialogue and tools to negotiate conflicting objectives. Despite the rich literature on participatory mapping and other tools to reveal different stakeholder perspectives, there is limited evidence on the application of such tools in landscape-scale negotiations. This paper addresses this gap by analysing a participatory mapping process in Ghana’s Western Wildlife Corridor, where a community-based landscape governance system called the community resource management area (CREMA) exists. Data from three participatory mapping workshops and focus group discussions with community and institutional actors reveal that increasing demand for food and natural resources and climate change impacts are drivers of landscape degradation, resulting in declining faunal and floral biodiversity and reduced ecosystem services. Meanwhile, community actors prioritise the expansion of farming land, while institutional actors prioritise forest conservation. However, scenario building and participatory mapping helped communicate each other’s aims and reach a negotiated consensus. Finally, power relations, cultural and traditional rules, and differences in knowledge affected deliberations and decision-making. We conclude that scenario building and participatory mapping can contribute to an inclusive landscape approach, provided that well-functioning multi-stakeholder platforms are in place and facilitators adequately navigate power imbalances and recognise different kinds and degrees of knowledge.
In multifunctional landscapes, expanding economic activities jeopardise the integrity of biodiverse ecosystems, generating conservation-development trade-offs that require multi-stakeholder dialogue and tools to negotiate conflicting objectives. Despite the rich literature on participatory mapping and other tools to reveal different stakeholder perspectives, there is limited evidence on the application of such tools in landscape-scale negotiations. This paper addresses this gap by analysing a participatory mapping process in Ghana’s Western Wildlife Corridor, where a community-based landscape governance system called the community resource management area (CREMA) exists. Data from three participatory mapping workshops and focus group discussions with community and institutional actors reveal that increasing demand for food and natural resources and climate change impacts are drivers of landscape degradation, resulting in declining faunal and floral biodiversity and reduced ecosystem services. Meanwhile, community actors prioritise the expansion of farming land, while institutional actors prioritise forest conservation. However, scenario building and participatory mapping helped communicate each other’s aims and reach a negotiated consensus. Finally, power relations, cultural and traditional rules, and differences in knowledge affected deliberations and decision-making. We conclude that scenario building and participatory mapping can contribute to an inclusive landscape approach, provided that well-functioning multi-stakeholder platforms are in place and facilitators adequately navigate power imbalances and recognise different kinds and degrees of knowledge.
In multifunctional landscapes, expanding economic activities jeopardise the integrity of biodiverse ecosystems, generating conservation-development trade-offs that require multi-stakeholder dialogue and tools to negotiate conflicting objectives. Despite the rich literature on participatory mapping and other tools to reveal different stakeholder perspectives, there is limited evidence on the application of such tools in landscape-scale negotiations. This paper addresses this gap by analysing a participatory mapping process in Ghana’s Western Wildlife Corridor, where a community-based landscape governance system called the community resource management area (CREMA) exists. Data from three participatory mapping workshops and focus group discussions with community and institutional actors reveal that increasing demand for food and natural resources and climate change impacts are drivers of landscape degradation, resulting in declining faunal and floral biodiversity and reduced ecosystem services. Meanwhile, community actors prioritise the expansion of farming land, while institutional actors prioritise forest conservation. However, scenario building and participatory mapping helped communicate each other’s aims and reach a negotiated consensus. Finally, power relations, cultural and traditional rules, and differences in knowledge affected deliberations and decision-making. We conclude that scenario building and participatory mapping can contribute to an inclusive landscape approach, provided that well-functioning multi-stakeholder platforms are in place and facilitators adequately navigate power imbalances and recognise different kinds and degrees of knowledge.
In multifunctional landscapes, expanding economic activities jeopardise the integrity of biodiverse ecosystems, generating conservation-development trade-offs that require multi-stakeholder dialogue and tools to negotiate conflicting objectives. Despite the rich literature on participatory mapping and other tools to reveal different stakeholder perspectives, there is limited evidence on the application of such tools in landscape-scale negotiations. This paper addresses this gap by analysing a participatory mapping process in Ghana’s Western Wildlife Corridor, where a community-based landscape governance system called the community resource management area (CREMA) exists. Data from three participatory mapping workshops and focus group discussions with community and institutional actors reveal that increasing demand for food and natural resources and climate change impacts are drivers of landscape degradation, resulting in declining faunal and floral biodiversity and reduced ecosystem services. Meanwhile, community actors prioritise the expansion of farming land, while institutional actors prioritise forest conservation. However, scenario building and participatory mapping helped communicate each other’s aims and reach a negotiated consensus. Finally, power relations, cultural and traditional rules, and differences in knowledge affected deliberations and decision-making. We conclude that scenario building and participatory mapping can contribute to an inclusive landscape approach, provided that well-functioning multi-stakeholder platforms are in place and facilitators adequately navigate power imbalances and recognise different kinds and degrees of knowledge.