The Agro-Biodiversity Initiative (TABI): Landscape planning and management from the ground up
•Als PPTX, PDF herunterladen•
0 gefällt mir•221 views
This presentation was made at the WLE Greater Mekong Forum on Water, Food and Energy and explains the importance of using planning tools which are participatory, map out actual land use and focus more broadly on landscape approaches
Empfohlen
Empfohlen
Weitere ähnliche Inhalte
Andere mochten auch
Andere mochten auch (20)
Mehr von The Agro-Bioversity Inititiave
Mehr von The Agro-Bioversity Inititiave (17)
Kürzlich hochgeladen
Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)
The Agro-Biodiversity Initiative (TABI): Landscape planning and management from the ground up
- 1. The Agro-Biodiversity Initiative (TABI): Landscape planning and management from the ground up Micah Ingalls, PhD, Center for Development and Environment micah.ingalls@cde.unibe.ch
- 2. Why a Landscape Approach? Tenure Insecurity Unclear Boundaries Transboundary Resources Shifting Cultivation and National Forest Targets Sustainable Development
- 4. Landscape-Scale Planning for Transboundary Management
- 5. 2014 2015 Forest area 1,114 ha Forest area 1,1518 ha 36% increase Forest Conservation and Swidden Co-Location for Long Fallowing
- 6. Development Interventions Built on Local Agrobiodiversity
- 7. The End.
Hinweis der Redaktion
- Problems to address through LUP/landscape approach- insecure land tenure and concessions, unclear village boundaries making management domains unclear, upstream/downstream and shared resources (forests, etc.) not addressed only at village level, deforestation and shifting cultivation at cross-purposes with national forest cover targets, need for a basis for sustainable development at the village level linked to wider development efforts (at the landscape scale).
- The “solution”– landscape-scale planning. Kumban level boundary demarcation as first step, then the village-level process (four images), and rigorous data collection and consultation with communities to understand their uses of local resources, management planning. Also, early identification of possible products and resources around which to build development interventions (SPAs)
- Boundaries are agreed as a basis for planning and management, rectifying inter-village conflict. Landscape-level planning for addressing upstream-downstream management of shared catchments and water resources (upper box), effectiveness in management planning for transboundary forest resources (lower box).
- On shifting cultivation and forest cover- comparison of current land use and future plans, example of 36% increase in area set aside for forest (left two images). Cooperative planning for co-location of shifting cultivation rotations on an annual basis, allowing for longer fallow periods and the conservation of forest values by reducing fragmentation at the landscape scale
- Community development through SPAs, using the LUPs as a basis for development by identifying resources on which to build these interventions, leveraging the development potential of local resources while incentivizing the conservation of agrobiodiversity. On this slide, also discuss weaknesses in our application of the Landscape approach: Not yet clear the impact of LUP on land tenure, though this is being explored, agricultural officials convinced of the approach but the forestry officials are not yet, SPA activities not always strategically-linked to LUPs, different teams and government partners doing different tasks and responsive to requests and market development opportunities and these are not always in the same places.