Assessing sustainable forest management under REDD+: a community-based labour perspective

Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation plus (REDD+) encourages economic support for reducing deforestation and conserving or increasing existing forest carbon stocks. The way in which incentives are structured affects trade-offs between local livelihoods, carbon emission reduction, and the cost-effectiveness of a REDD + programme. Looking at first-hand empirical data from 208 farming households in the Bolivian Amazon froma household economy perspective, our study explores two policy options: 1) compensated reduction of emissions fromold-growth forest clearing for agriculture, and 2) direct payments for labour input into sustainable forest anagement combined with a commitment not to clear old-growth forest. Our results indicate that direct payments for sustainable forest management – an approach that focuses on valuing farmers' labour input – can be more cost-effective than compensated reduction and in some cases is themost appropriate choice for achieving improved household incomes, permanence of changes, avoidance of leakages, and community-based institutional enforcement for sustainable forest management.

Sustainable Pasture Management : LforS learning and simulation game

Three teams consisting of 2 to 5 persons each play the game. Each team represents a farm. Each team decides jointly on its strategy. In annual meetings in winter, the farm teams jointly discuss, evaluate and decide on how to proceed and actions to be taken. The farms make use of three different pasture areas (village pasture, intensive pasture and summer pasture) for grazing their livestock. The carrying capacity of each pasture area is different and varies according to the season. In each season, the farms have to decide on how many livestock units to graze on which pasture. Overgrazing and pasture degradation occur if the total number of livestock units exceeds the carrying capacity of a specific pasture area. Overgrazing results in a reduction of pasture productivity. To diversify and improve their livelihood strategy farms can make individual investments to increase productivity at the farm level, eg. in fodder production or in income generating activities. At the community level, collective investments can be made which may influence livestock and household economy, e.g. rehabilitate and improve pasture productivity, improve living conditions on remote pastures etc. Events occurring in the course of the game represent different types of (risk) factors such as meteorology, market, politics etc. that may positively or negatively influence livestock production and household economy. A sustainable management of pastures requires that farms actively regulate the development of their herds, that they take measures to prevent pasture degradation and to improve pasture productivity, and that they find a balance between livestock economy and other productive activities. The game has a double aim: a) each farm aims at its economic success and prosperity, and b) the three farm teams jointly have to find and implement strategies for a sustainable use of pasture areas.

Biofuels for a Greener Economy? Insights from Jatropha Production in Northeastern Ethiopia

Many observers view Jatropha as a miracle plant that grows in harsh environments, halts land degradation and provides seeds for fuel production. This makes it particularly attractive for use in Ethiopia, where poverty levels are high and the degradation of agricultural land is widespread. In this article, we investigate the potentials and limitations of a government-initiated Jatropha project for smallholders in northeastern Ethiopia from a green economy perspective. Data are based on a 2009 household survey and interviews with key informants, as well as on a 2012 follow-up round of interviews with key informants. We conclude that the project has not contributed to a greener economy so far, but has the potential to do so in the future. To maximize Jatropha’s potential, interventions must focus mainly on smallholders and pay more attention to the entire biofuel value chain.