Carbon sequestration in Himalaya's alpine meadows: Mitigating cropping encroachment on pastures in Northern Pakistan

Rangelands store about 30% of the world’s carbon and support over 120 million pastoralists globally. Adjusting the management of remote alpine pastures bears a substantial climate change mitigation potential that can provide livelihood support for marginalized pastoralists through carbon payment. Landless pastoralists in Northern Pakistan seek higher income by cropping potatoes and peas over alpine pastures. However, tilling steep slopes without terracing exposes soil to erosion. Moreover, yields decline rapidly requiring increasing fertilizer inputs. Under these conditions, carbon payment could be a feasible option to compensate pastoralists for renouncing hazardous cropping while favoring pastoral activities. The study quantifies and compares C on cropped and grazed land. The hypothesis was that cropping on alpine pastures reduces former carbon storage. The study area located in the Naran valley of the Pakistani Himalayas receives an annual average of 819 mm of rain and 764 mm of snow. Average temperatures remain below 0°C from November to March while frost may occur all year round. A total of 72 soil core samples were collected discriminating land use (cropping, pasture), aspect (North, South), elevation (low 3000, middle 3100, and high 3200 m a.s.l.), and soil depth (shallow 0-10, deep 10-30 cm). Thirty six biomass samples were collected over the same independent variables (except for soil depth) using a 10x10x20 cm steal box inserted in the ground for each sample. Aboveground biomass and coarse roots were separated from the soil aggregate and oven-dried. Soil organic carbon (SOC) and biomass carbon (BC) were estimated through a potassium dichromate oxidation treatment. The samples were collected during the second week of October 2010 at the end of the grazing and cropping season and before the first snowfall. The data was statistically analyzed by means of a one-way analysis of variance. Results show that all variables taken separately have a significant effect on mean SOC [%]: crop/pasture 1.33/1.6, North/South 1.61/1.32, low/middle/high 1.09/1.62/1.68, shallow/deep 1.4/1.53. However, for BC, only land use has a significant effect with more than twice the amount of carbon in pastures [g m-2]: crop/pasture 127/318. These preliminary findings suggest that preventing the conversion of pastures into cropping fields in the Naran valley avoids an average loss of 12.2 t C ha-1 or 44.8 t CO2eq ha-1 representing a foreseeable compensation of 672 € ha-1 for the Naran landless pastoralists who would renounce cropping. The ongoing study shall provide a complete picture for carbon payment integrating key aspects such as the rate of cropping encroachment over pastures per year, the methane leakage from the system due to livestock enteric fermentation, the expected cropping income vs. livestock income and the transaction costs of implementing the mitigation project, certifying it, and verifying carbon credits. A net present value over an infinite time horizon for the mitigation scenario shall be estimated on an iterative simulation to consider weather and price uncertainties. The study will also provide an estimate of the minimum price of carbon at which pastoralists would consider engaging in the mitigation activity.

Where Empires Meet: Orientalism and Marginality at the Former Russo-British Frontier

This article explores the intersection of orientalism and marginality in two regions at the former Russo-British frontier between Central and South Asia. Focussing on Tajikistan’s Gorno-Badakhshan and Gilgit-Baltistan in today’s Pakistan, an analysis of historical and contemporary orientalist projections on and in the two border regions reveals changing modes of domination through the course of the twentieth century (British, Kashmiri, Pakistani and Russian, Soviet, Tajik). In this regard, different local experiences of “ colonial ” rule, both in Gorno-Badakhshan and Gilgit-Baltistan, challenge “ classical ” periodisations of colonial/postcolonial and colonial/socialist/postsocialist. This article furthermore maintains that processes of marginalisation in both regions can be interpreted as effects of imperial and Cold War contexts that have led to the establishment of the frontier. Thus, a central argument is that neither the status of the frontier between Central and South Asia as a stable entity, nor the periodisations that have conventionally been ascribed to the two regions as linear timelines can be taken for granted.

Can the green economy enhance sustainable mountain development? The potential role of awareness building

Mountain socio-ecological systems produce valuable but complex ecosystem services resulting from biomes stratified by altitude and gravity. These systems are often managed and shaped by smallholders whose marginalization is exacerbated by uncertainties and a lack of policy attention. Human–environment interfaces in mountains hence require holistic policies. We analyse the potential of the Global Mountain Green Economy Agenda (GMGEA) in building awareness and thus prompting cross-sectoral policy strategies for sustainable mountain development. Considering the critique of the green economy presented at the Rio + 20 conference, we argue that the GMGEA can nevertheless structure knowledge and inform regional institutions about the complexity of mountain socio-ecological systems, a necessary pre-condition to prompt inter-agency collaboration and cross-sectoral policy formulation. After reviewing the content of the GMGEA, we draw on two empirical cases in the Pakistani and Nepali Himalayas. First, we show that lack of awareness has led to a sequence of fragmented interventions with unanticipated, and unwanted, consequences for communities. Second, using a green economy lens, we show how fragmentation could have been avoided and cross-sectoral policies yielded more beneficial results. Project fragmentation reflects disconnected or layered policies by government agencies, which inherently keep specialized agendas and have no incentive to collaborate. Awareness makes agencies more likely to collaborate and adopt cross-sectoral approaches, allowing them to target more beneficiaries, be more visible, and raise more funds. Nevertheless, we also identify four factors that may currently still limit the effect of the GMGEA: high costs of inter-agency collaboration, lack of legitimacy of the green economy, insufficiently-secured smallholder participation, and limited understanding of the mechanisms through which global agendas influence local policy.