Drivers of deforestation and forest degradation from Montreal to Canada
1 like2,929 views
The document discusses various drivers of deforestation, highlighting the need for comprehensive analysis and understanding of population density, agricultural practices, and international trade impacts. It identifies recurrent themes in submissions and guidance, emphasizing the necessity to measure and address these drivers effectively. Additionally, it raises key questions about the interconnections between drivers and policies for sustainable land use management.
Drivers of deforestation and forest degradation from Montreal to Canada
- 2. Where and when?- Texts that address drivers • Decision 2/CP.13, para. 3. • Decision 4/CP.15, para. 1(a). • Decision 1/CP.16, para. 68. • Decision 1/CP.16, Appendix II, para. 1(a). • Decision 1/CP.16, Appendix II, para. 1(a). • Decision 1/CP.16, Appendix II. • Draft conclusions proposed by the Chair (FCCC/SBSTA/2011/L.14), paras. 1, 4.
- 3. Recurrent themes in guidance and submissions (tentative) • Identify, identify, Identify…. • Direct, Indirect (Underlying) • Measure impact on emissions reductions (MRV) • National vs International…… • Agriculture vs Non agriculture drivers • Agricultural drivers of deforestation • Methodological Issues: Participatory analysis, links to MRV, (FAO submission)
- 4. WHAT IS KNOWN: What drivers? Current and future? Geist and Lambin ( 2002)
- 5. Population and Deforestation • In about 70% of the cases deforestation is directly related to population density (log transformed). • Yet, we have not had a population discussion as part of the deforestation discussion? • Is it necessary and possible to handle?
- 6. On Agriculture as a driver •Intensification of agriculture is a necessary but not sufficient condition for forest protection (ASB-Indonesia, 1995; ASB- Brazil, 2001)
- 7. Agricultural intensification hypothesis More intensive agriculture at forest margins can save forest at equal total agricultural production Or… speed up forest conversion to profitable agriculture This may be true in ‘closed’ economies This is true in ‘open’ economies ASB hypothesis in 1992 ASB findings in 1994 Remote forest edge communities & Planet earth are closed systems, in between we have ‘open’ systems…
- 8. How true is Borlaug? -Global Rudel et al., 2010
- 9. How true is Borlaug? -Global II • Only between 1980 – 85 (sustained decline in prices & increased yield in 70s) we see evidence of intensification leading to reduced yields • Two pathways: • i. Increased Yields + Inelastic demand = lower prices= POSSIBLE DROP IN AREAS • ii. Increased yields + elastic demand = INCREASE IN AREAS CULTIVATED • (Rudel et al., 2009)
- 10. Sub- Saharan Africa Asia
- 11. Sparing vs Sharing Segregate vs Integrate • Sparing/segregate • Sharing/integrate multifunctionality hypothesis Therefore Landscape Approaches /
- 12. National Vs International •Most countries have reduced deforestation by displacing land use •Emissions Embedded in Trade- EET? •Land Grabbing in Developing countries? •Therefore International Leakage?
- 13. How true is Borlaug -Global IV? • Some six countries have succeeded in increasing both Agric production area and Forest area (China, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Vietnam); • But not from intensification only but through a combination of policies- (Lambin and Mefroidt, 2011- REDD ALERT Project); • Most have done through displacement of Land use to other countries ( Mefroidt et al. 2010 and ASB PB 17) Lambin and Mefroidt, 2011
- 14. SOME KEY QUESTIONS? • How about the links between drivers and REL? • What linkages between drivers and the relative / cummulative impact? • How about approaches that enable handling dynamic and diverse drivers in a systematic way with specific levers at specific leverage points? • What leverage does policy have on drivers in different contexts? Can these be measured and the trajectories mapped?
- 15. THANK YOU