Carbon, biodiversity, and livelihoods in forest commons: synergies, trade-offs, and implications for REDD+

Abstract

Understanding the relationships and tradeoffs among management outcomes in forest commons has assumed new weight in the context of parallels between the objectives of community forest management and those of reduced emissions for deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) programs to reduce carbon emissions while supporting local livelihoods. We examine the association between biophysical, demographic, institutional and socio-economic variables and three distinct forest management outcomes of interest to both community forestry and REDD+ advocates-carbon storage, biodiversity conservation, and livelihood benefits-in 56 forest commons in Nepal. REDD+ programs aim foremost to increase forest carbon storage and sequestration, but also seek to improve forest biodiversity, and to contribute to local livelihood benefits. The success of REDD+ programs can therefore be defined by improvements in one or more of these dimensions, while satisfying the principle of 'do no harm' in the others. We find that each outcome is associated with a different set of independent variables. This suggests that there is a need for policy-makers to clearly define their desired outcomes and to target their interventions accordingly. Our research points to the complex ways in which different factors relate to forest outcomes and has implications for the large number of cases where REDD+ projects are being implemented in the context of community forestry.

Feasibility of Community Management of Miombo Woodlands for Carbon Project in Southern Highlands of Tanzania

“…The determinants of feasibility of carbon project development include the amount of carbon stock observed, historical business as usual, carbon price, and associated costs [31,48]. Carbon price negotiations are still going on [26,49]. The voluntary carbon market is currently one of the main frameworks within which carbon stock can be sold from CBFM [23,48].…”

“…In this market, the minimum price per ton of carbon is about 5 USD during the last quarter of 2015 (Bayon et al, 2007) [23]. However, offsets that deliver complementary benefits such as biodiversity conservation and poverty reduction are likely to command a premium (Bayon et al, 2007) [26]. Using this minimum price (5 USD/tCO 2 e) from voluntary carbon market, different study sites portrayed different potential in carbon credit sales.…”

“…This has attracted the United Nation program on Reduced Emission from Deforestation and Forest Degradation and the role of conservation, sustainable management, and enhancement of carbon stock (REDD+) to adopt CBFM as an important toolkit [26]. Indeed, this is an important framework for sustainable forest management and climate change mitigation in many developing countries including Tanzania [27].…”

“…If successful, carbon mitigation projects can produce cobenefits by conserving biodiversity, ecosystem services, improving forest governance, and the welfare of forest dependent communities [26,29]. This potential, however, has not been well taped in miombo woodlands of Tanzania and its evidence base was found to be weak and questionable (Behera, 2009;Bowler et al, 2012).…”

“…Rigorous literature review has shown that there is a need for feasibility analysis on carbon project development possibilities in miombo woodlands of Tanzania [2]. This will ensure better-informed policy direction, strategy, and practice which guarantee climate change mitigation and livelihood options [2,26]. The need for feasibility analysis of CBFM for carbon project development in order to support informed judgment and decision making about its merit is important (e.g., [30][31][32]).…”