James Reed

Integrated landscape approaches to managing social and environmental issues in the tropics: learning from the past to guide the future.

Poverty, food insecurity, climate change and biodiversity loss continue to persist as the primary environmental and social challenges faced by the global community. As such, there is a growing acknowledgement that conventional sectorial approaches to addressing often inter-connected social, environmental, economic and political challenges are proving insufficient. An alternative is to focus on integrated solutions at landscape scales or landscape approaches. The appeal of landscape approaches has resulted in the production of a significant body of literature in recent decades, yet confusion over terminology, application and utility persists. Focusing on the tropics, we systematically reviewed the literature to: (i) disentangle the historical development and theory behind the framework of the landscape approach and how it has progressed into its current iteration, (ii) establish lessons learned from previous land management strategies, (iii) determine the barriers that currently restrict implementation of the landscape approach and (iv) provide recommendations for how the landscape approach can contribute towards the fulfilment of the goals of international policy processes. This review suggests that, despite some barriers to implementation, a landscape approach has considerable potential to meet social and environmental objectives at local scales while aiding national commitments to addressing ongoing global challenges.

What are ‘Integrated Landscape Approaches’ and how effectively have they been implemented in the tropics: a systematic map protocol

BackgroundThere is an increasing acceptance that sectorial approaches to land management are no longer sufficient to meet global challenges such as poverty alleviation, biodiversity conservation, and food production. The pressing challenge of integrated landscape management is to link agricultural practices, institutions and policies with other landscape-scale activities. “Integrated Landscape Approaches” provide a basic framework for balancing competing demands and integrating policies for multiple land uses within a given area. However, attempts to formalize and characterize what landscape approaches actually represent have resulted in a plethora of interlinked terminology and re-invention of ideas and practices under multiple guises. This has led to delayed uptake amongst policy makers and resistance to implementation on the ground. This protocol will describe the methodology to be employed for a systematic map that will chart the development of the landscape approach theory, consolidate and synthesize existing definitions, and identify where and how these approaches have been implemented in the humid and dry tropics.Methods/DesignA scoping exercise gave rise to a selection of search terms appropriate to the research question which will then be applied to a suite of specialist, online and institutional databases. The protocol will follow a population-intervention-comparator-outcome (P.I.C.O) framework which provides the basic rationale for evidence-based systematic literature searches. The P.I.C.O serves as the inclusion criteria and together with a pre-determined exclusion criteria will be used to screen retrieved literature for relevance at title, abstract and full text levels. All studies investigating either landscape approach theory or implementation within the humid and dry tropics will be included. The resulting studies will be coded and used to satisfy two key outcomes. First, literature on the theory of landscape-scale approaches will be compared and contrasted to identify where overlap and disjuncture exists. Second, studies of landscape approach implementation will be assessed for effectiveness, geographically mapped, made available in searchable databases and supplemented with a full report.

Measuring the effectiveness of landscape approaches to conservation and development

Landscape approaches attempt to achieve balance amongst multiple goals over long time periods and to adapt to changing conditions. We review project reports and the literature on integrated landscape approaches, and found a lack of documented studies of their long-term effectiveness. The combination of multiple and potentially changing goals presents problems for the conventional measures of impact. We propose more critical use of theories of change and measures of process and progress to complement the conventional impact assessments. Theories of change make the links between project deliverables, outputs, outcomes, and impacts explicit, and allow a full exploration of the landscape context. Landscape approaches are long-term engagements, but short-term process metrics are needed to confirm that progress is being made in negotiation of goals, meaningful stakeholder engagement, existence of connections to policy processes, and effectiveness of governance. Long-term impact metrics are needed to assess progress on achieving landscapes that deliver multiple societal benefits, including conservation, production, and livelihood benefits. Generic criteria for process are proposed, but impact metrics will be highly situation specific and must be derived from an effective process and a credible theory of change.

To what extent does the presence of forests and trees contribute to food production in humid and dry forest landscapes?: a systematic review protocol

BackgroundAn increasing evidence base is improving our understanding of how forests and trees provide important ecosystem services to agriculture. However, the specific functions and contributions forests and trees make to agricultural systems is far from being fully understood. This review assesses the strength of the evidence that reports how forests and trees contribute to agricultural (food) production in order to prioritize further research for better decision-making. We consider there may be significant gaps in the literature with regard to, 1) Which ecosystem services are provided by forests and trees within a landscape, 2) Over what spatial scales are these services transferred and, 3) To what extent are these services ultimately translated to increased food production? The contributions of trees to agriculture have often been poorly understood and poorly integrated into agriculture and conservation policy and practice.MethodsThe primary question of this systematic review is: To what extent does the presence of forests and trees contribute to food production in humid and dry forest landscapes? The search strategy will employ terms from studies on forests, agroforestry, ecosystem services and agriculture. A scoping exercise in CAB Abstracts, Scopus and ISI Web of Knowledge was used to understand the breadth of ecosystems literature, and further to conduct a preliminary scoping study. An equivalent search in Google Scholar will be used to cross-reference studies retrieved to ensure that relevant studies are not missed. Specialist searches at universities, relevant agricultural and forestry organizations’ websites, and a call for unpublished studies will identify important grey literature. Retrieved articles will be screened by title, abstract and full text and inclusion/exclusion exercise will generate the final list of studies. Data from these studies will be extracted using a coding tool. Due to anticipated heterogeneity in the retrieved data, we will group findings into appropriate categories as an initial presentation of the data. Sub group meta-analysis by types of ecosystem services and other appropriate predictors will be conducted to show the positive or negative effects of forests and trees on food production.

Natural Resource Management Schemes as Entry Points for Integrated Landscape Approaches: Evidence from Ghana and Burkina Faso

In recognition of the failures of sectoral approaches to overcome global challenges of biodiversity loss, climate change, food insecurity and poverty, scientific discourse on biodiversity conservation and sustainable development is shifting towards integrated landscape governance arrangements. Current landscape initiatives however very much depend on external actors and funding, raising the question of whether, and how, and under what conditions, locally embedded resource management schemes can serve as entry points for the implementation of integrated landscape approaches. This paper assesses the entry point potential for three established natural resource management schemes in West Africa that target landscape degradation with involvement of local communities: the Chantier d’Aménagement Forestier scheme encompassing forest management sites across Burkina Faso and the Modified Taungya System and community wildlife resource management initiatives in Ghana. Based on a review of the current literature, we analyze the extent to which design principles that define a landscape approach apply to these schemes. We found that the CREMA meets most of the desired criteria, but that its scale may be too limited to guarantee effective landscape governance, hence requiring upscaling. Conversely, the other two initiatives are strongly lacking in their design principles on fundamental components regarding integrated approaches, continual learning, and capacity building. Monitoring and evaluation bodies and participatory learning and negotiation platforms could enhance the schemes’ alignment with integrated landscape approaches.

From global complexity to local reality Aligning implementation pathways for the Sustainable Development Goals and landscape approaches

Introduction The Global Landscapes Forums held in Warsaw (November 2013) and Lima (December 2014), coupled with the CGIAR Development Dialogues (New York, September 2014), have helped position ‘landscape approaches’ at the center of sustainable development initiatives and global discourse. The Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) and its many partners continue to devise ways to best introduce a holistic and integrated ‘landscapes’ approach to balance trade-offs between conservation and development, including agriculture, with the aim of influencing both policy and practice.

Evidence-based causal chains for linking health, development, and conservation actions:

Abstract Sustainability challenges for nature and people are complex and interconnected, such that effective solutions require approaches and a common theory of change that bridge disparate disciplines and sectors. Causal chains offer promising approaches to achieving an integrated understanding of how actions affect ecosystems, the goods and services they provide, and ultimately, human well-being. Although causal chains and their variants are common tools across disciplines, their use remains highly inconsistent, limiting their ability to support and create a shared evidence base for joint actions. In this article, we present the foundational concepts and guidance of causal chains linking disciplines and sectors that do not often intersect to elucidate the effects of actions on ecosystems and society. We further discuss considerations for establishing and implementing causal chains, including nonlinearity, trade-offs and synergies, heterogeneity, scale, and confounding factors. Finally, we highlight the science, practice, and policy implications of causal chains to address real-world linked human–nature challenges.

Conservation Science and Practice Must Engage With the Realities of Complex Tropical Landscapes

There is a growing disconnect between the international conferences where grand solutions for tropical conservation are designed and the complex local realities in tropical landscapes where plans need to be implemented. Every tropical landscape is different and no “one size will fit all.” There is a tendency for global processes to prescribe simple generalized solutions that provide good sound bites that can be communicated with political actors and the media. Sustainable outcomes in tropical landscapes require locally adapted, unique approaches supported by long-term processes of learning and adaptation. Tropical biologists and conservationists can play a key role by establishing effective local–global links and by directly engaging in local policy discourses while remaining connected to evolving political imperatives.

Five challenges to reconcile agricultural land-use and forest ecosystem services in Southeast Asia

Southeast Asia possesses the highest rates of tropical deforestation globally and exceptional levels of species richness and endemism. Many countries in the region are also recognized for their food insecurity and poverty, making the reconciliation of agricultural production and forest conservation a particular priority. This reconciliation requires recognition of the trade-offs between competing land-use values and the subsequent incorporation of this information into policy making. To date, such reconciliation has been relatively unsuccessful across much of Southeast Asia. We propose an ecosystem services (ES) value-internalization framework that identifies the key challenges to such reconciliation. These challenges include lack of accessible ES valuation techniques; limited knowledge of the links between forests, food security, and human well-being; weak demand and political will for the integration of ES in economic activities and environmental regulation; a disconnect between decision makers and ES valuation; and lack of transparent discussion platforms where stakeholders can work toward consensus on negotiated land-use management decisions. Key research priorities to overcome these challenges are developing easy-to-use ES valuation techniques; quantifying links between forests and well-being that go beyond economic values; understanding factors that prevent the incorporation of ES into markets, regulations, and environmental certification schemes; understanding how to integrate ES valuation into policy making processes, and determining how to reduce corruption and power plays in land-use planning processes.

From Synergy to Complexity: The Trend Toward Integrated Value Chain and Landscape Governance

This Editorial introduces a special issue that illustrates a trend toward integrated landscape approaches. Whereas two papers echo older “win–win” strategies based on the trade of non-timber forest products, ten papers reflect a shift from a product to landscape perspective. However, they differ from integrated landscape approaches in that they emanate from sectorial approaches driven primarily by aims such as forest restoration, sustainable commodity sourcing, natural resource management, or carbon emission reduction. The potential of such initiatives for integrated landscape governance and achieving landscape-level outcomes has hitherto been largely unaddressed in the literature on integrated landscape approaches. This special issue addresses this gap, with a focus on actor constellations and institutional arrangements emerging in the transition from sectorial to integrated approaches. This editorial discusses the trends arising from the papers, including the need for a commonly shared concern and sense of urgency; inclusive stakeholder engagement; accommodating and coordinating polycentric governance in landscapes beset with institutional fragmentation and jurisdictional mismatches; alignment with locally embedded initiatives and governance structures; and a framework to assess and monitor the performance of integrated multi-stakeholder approaches. We conclude that, despite a growing tendency toward integrated approaches at the landscape level, inherent landscape complexity renders persistent and significant challenges such as balancing multiple objectives, equitable inclusion of all relevant stakeholders, dealing with power and gender asymmetries, adaptive management based on participatory outcome monitoring, and moving beyond existing administrative, jurisdictional, and sectorial silos. Multi-stakeholder platforms and bridging organizations and individuals are seen as key in overcoming such challenges.