Neil Dawson

From food to pest: Conversion factors determine switches between ecosystem services and disservices.

Abstract Ecosystem research focuses on goods and services, thereby ascribing beneficial values to the ecosystems. Depending on the context, however, outputs from ecosystems can be both positive and negative. We examined how provisioning services of wild animals and plants can switch between being services and disservices. We studied agricultural communities in Laos to illustrate when and why these switches take place. Government restrictions on land use combined with economic and cultural changes have created perceptions of rodents and plants as problem species in some communities. In other communities that are maintaining shifting cultivation practices, the very same taxa were perceived as beneficial. We propose conversion factors that in a given context can determine where an individual taxon is located along a spectrum from ecosystem service to disservice, when, and for whom. We argue that the omission of disservices in ecosystem service accounts may lead governments to direct investments at inappropriate targets.

Social-ecological outcomes of agricultural intensification

Land-use intensification in agrarian landscapes is seen as a key strategy to simultaneously feed humanity and use ecosystems sustainably, but the conditions that support positive social-ecological outcomes remain poorly documented. We address this knowledge gap by synthesizing research that analyses how agricultural intensification affects both ecosystem services and human well-being in low- and middle-income countries. Overall, we find that agricultural intensification is rarely found to lead to simultaneous positive ecosystem service and well-being outcomes. This is particularly the case when ecosystem services other than food provisioning are taken into consideration.A comprehensive review of studies about the impact of agricultural intensification on both human well-being and ecosystem services shows mixed evidence, which depends mostly on previous land use, the sort of intensification, and what specific outcomes are measured.

Bringing Context to Poverty in Rural Rwanda: Added Value and Challenges of Mixed Methods Approaches

Immense efforts and funds are directed towards trying to improve the lives of those in the world’s least developed countries. Yet, as current arguments surrounding the Millennium Villages Project highlight (Sanchez et al. 2007, Wilson 2013), the methods for achieving and measuring the desired poverty alleviation impacts are subjects of intense debate. There are different standpoints about how poverty should be conceptualised, the pathways through which the lives of the world’s poorest may be improved and how changes in their lives should be measured or assessed. Rwanda, a small landlocked state in Sub-Saharan Africa, provides a fascinating example of different perspectives on poverty and poverty reduction policies in developing countries. While politicians, practitioners and researchers hail Rwanda’s progress in meeting national socio-economic targets as representing a model of development (IMF 2011, UN 2013), a smaller group of academics and activists take a quite polar stance (see, for example, Straus and Waldorf 2011). While national indicators show a rapidly declining incidence of poverty, studies exploring the control that individuals are able to exercise over land and property, their individual freedoms and ability to participate in decisions affecting them paint a picture of a very contrasting trajectory in their wellbeing (Des Forges 2005, Pritchard 2013).

Environmental justice research shows the importance of social feedbacks in ecosystem service trade-offs

In this article, we shine a spotlight on approaches to research ecosystem service trade-offs and critically assess their representation of relevant social dynamics. Although studies linking ecosystem services and human well-being have provided theoretical insights into social and ecological trade-offs, we argue that ecosystem services research has paid insufficient attention to “social feedbacks,” people’s cognitive and behavioral responses to change. We demonstrate that augmenting ecosystem services research with environmental justice approaches (exploring perceptions of the distribution of costs and benefits, decision making procedures, and recognition of different values and identities) can more effectively capture important responses to ecosystem governance. Spatial analysis of land use change, mixed-method assessment of multidimensional well-being, and qualitative environmental justice research were applied in three villages adjacent to Nam Et-Phou Louey National Protected Area in northern Laos. Spatial analysis showed that, from 2006 to 2015, forest clearance for cultivation remained stable within the protected area. Well-being assessment revealed the local population benefited from rapidly increasing incomes, asset ownership, and reduced poverty during that time. In combination, spatial and well-being analyses paint a picture of limited trade-offs, despite growing incentives to exploit protected land and resources through cash crops and high-value forest products. In contrast, results from environmental justice research revealed profound trade-offs between conservation and local practices, and highlight governance deficiencies relating to procedure and recognition. Consequently, formal protected area rules were perceived to be illegitimate by many and actively undermined, for example through negotiated access with alternative authorities. We conclude that although well-being research provides an essential foundation to understand diverse attachments to natural resources, the addition of environmental justice research can reveal local perceptions and social feedbacks critical to ecosystem service trade-offs, and highlight pathways to reconcile them through satisfying stakeholders’ diverse, dynamic objectives.

Representation and participation in formulating Nepal’s REDD+ approach

ABSTRACT REDD+ is an international policy aimed at incentivizing forest conservation and management and improving forest governance. In this article, we interrogate how newly articulated REDD+ governance processes established to guide the formulation of Nepal’s REDD+ approach address issues of participation for different social groups. Specifically, we analyse available forums of participation for different social groups, as well as the nature of their representation and degree of participation during the country’s REDD+ preparedness phase. We find that spaces for participation and decision-making in REDD+ have been to date defined and dominated by government actors and influential civil society groups, whereas the influence of other actors, particularly marginalized groups such as Dalits and women’s organizations, have remained limited. REDD+ has also resulted in a reduction of influence for some hitherto powerful actors (e.g. community forestry activists) and constrained their critical voice. These governance weaknesses related to misrepresentation and uneven power relations in Nepal cast doubt on the extent to which procedural justice has been promoted through REDD+ and imply that implementation may, as a consequence, lack the required social legitimacy and support. We discuss possible ways to address these shortcomings, such as granting greater prominence to neglected civil society forums within the REDD+ process, allowing for an increase in their influence on policy design, enhancing capacity and leadership of marginalized groups and institutionalizing participation through continued forest governance reform. Key policy insights Participation is a critical asset in public policy design. Ensuring wide and meaningful participation can enhance policy legitimacy and thus its endorsement and potential effective implementation. Fostering inclusive processes through dedicated forums such as multi-stakeholder groups can help overcome power dynamics. While REDD+ is open to participation by different actors through a variety of formal means, many countries lack a clear framework for participation in national policy processes. Nepal’s experience with representation and participation of non-state actors in its REDD+ preparedness programme provides useful insights for similar social and policy contexts.

Drivers of Forests and Tree-based Systems for Food Security and Nutrition

With the establishment of the Global Forest Expert Panels (GFEP) initiative in the year 2007, the Collaborative Partnership on Forests (CPF) created an international mechanism which effectively links scientific knowledge with political decision-making on forests. The GFEP responds directly to key forest-related policy questions by consolidating available scientific knowledge and expertise on these questions at a global level. It provides decision-makers with the most relevant, objective and accurate information, and thus makes an essential contribution to international forest governance. This report entitled “Forests, Trees and Landscapes for Food Security and Nutrition” presents the results of the fourth global scientific assessment undertaken so far in the framework of GFEP. Previous assessments addressed the adaptation of forests and people to climate change; international forest governance; and the relationship between biodiversity, carbon, forests and people. All assessment reports were prepared by internationally recognised scientists from a variety of biophysical and social science disciplines. They have all been presented to decision-makers across relevant international policy fora. In this way, GFEP supports a more coherent policy dialogue about the role of forests in addressing broader environmental, social and economic challenges. The current report reflects the importance of policy coherence and integration more than any previous GFEP assessment. It comes at a time when the United Nations General Assembly seeks to adopt a set of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) which build upon the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and converge with the post-2015 development agenda. In this context, the eradication of hunger, realisation of food security and the improvement of nutrition are of particular relevance. By 2050, the international community will face the challenge of providing 9 billion people with food, shelter and energy. Despite impressive productivity increases, there is growing evidence that conventional agricultural strategies will fall short of eliminating global hunger and malnutrition. The assessment report in hand provides comprehensive scientific evidence on how forests, trees and landscapes can be – and must be - an integral part of the solution to this global problem. In other words, we must connect the dots and see the bigger picture. The review of the International Arrangement on Forests by the member states of the United Nations Forum on Forests provides a unique opportunity to integrate forests into the SDGs in a holistic manner and to promote synergies in the implementation of the post-2015 development agenda across multiple levels of governance. It is my hope that those with a responsibility for forests, food security and nutrition at all levels will find this report, and its accompanying policy brief, a useful source of information and inspiration.

The Rwandan agrarian and land sector modernisation:confronting macro performance with lived experiences on the ground

ABSTRACT Rwanda has embarked on an ambitious policy package to modernise and professionalise the agrarian and land sector. Its reform fits into a broader call – supported by major international donors – to implement a Green Revolution in Sub-Saharan Africa. After 10 years of implementation, there is increased production output and value-addition in commercialised commodity chains. These are promising results. However, poverty reduction, particularly in more recent years, seems limited. Moreover, micro-level evidence from the field calls into question the long-term sustainability of the agricultural and land sector reform. In this article, a group of researchers, having engaged in in-depth qualitative research in a variety of settings and over an extended period, bring together their main research results and combine their key findings to challenge the dominant discourse on Rwanda as a model for development.

Publisher Correction: Social-ecological outcomes of agricultural intensification

In the version of this Review originally published, the top heading in the first column of Fig. 2 was mistakenly written ‘Food poisoning’; it should have read ‘Food provisioning’. This has now been corrected.

The Park is Ruining our Livelihoods. We Support the Park! Unravelling the Paradox of Attitudes to Protected Areas

Despite considerable field-based innovation and academic scrutiny, the nexus between conservation approaches, local support for parks and park effectiveness remains quite puzzling. Common approaches to understanding notions of environmental justice are to understand distributional and procedural issues, representation in decision making, and recognition of authorities and claims. We took a different approach and analysed environmental justice claims through institutional, ideational and psychological lenses. We sought to understand how the national park could have such broad support from local communities despite their acknowledgement that it severely curtailed their livelihoods. We conducted 100 household interviews in three villages that border Nam Et-Phou Louey National Protected Area. Our study found that villagers 1) hold on to broken promises by the State for agricultural activities and alternative revenues without fully changing forest use behaviours; 2) were influenced heavily by the ‘educational’ programmes by the State; 3) accepted the authority of the State and lack of participation in decision-making based on historical experiences and values; 4) justified their burdens by over-emphasising the positive aspects of the park. Our findings present a complementary framework to explain environmental justice claims, allowing for a nuanced analysis of how people respond to justices and injustices, and specifically how injustices can be identified through proven social science concepts.

Leaving no-one behind? Social inequalities and contrasting development impacts in rural Rwanda

ABSTRACT Two polar viewpoints have emerged regarding Rwanda’s post-genocide development: (1) that economic development has improved the wellbeing of Rwandans and (2) that repressive policies have negatively impacted many. Assessing the impacts and inclusiveness of policies through trends among different social groups is timely in the context of the Sustainable Development Goals’ pledge to ‘leave no-one behind’. This study examines rural Rwandans’ perspectives on the changes affecting them. A multidimensional wellbeing approach was applied through mixed-method research involving 115 rural households in two locations in western Rwanda, in 2011–12. Findings reveal that the household-level impact was heavily influenced by socio-economic power and socio-ethnic grouping. Negative impacts, including restricted freedom and loss of material and cultural resources are disproportionately felt by the poorest. The indigenous Batwa suffer particularly detrimental impacts. The findings suggest that strategies deemed successful in making progress towards the Millennium Development Goals in Rwanda need, as a minimal measure, to be supported by social protection programs that specifically target the landless, vulnerable and cultural minorities. However, to align Rwanda’s development policies with the ambitions of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), a dramatic strategic shift is required to ‘leave no-one behind’ and avoid the reproduction of poverty and exacerbation of inequality.