CHALLENGE

Despite efforts to establish protected areas and improve the planning and management of these areas, Benin’s forests are being degraded through slash-and-burn agriculture, demand for wood-based fuel, uncontrolled bush fires, and intensive animal grazing continues. Such activities undermine the essential ecological services that forests provide to populations. In a country where the forest sector contributes over six percent to GDP (2009 estimate) and employs more than 200,000 people in the wood-energy sector alone, the direct and indirect impacts of forest degradation are significant.

To address these trends, the Beninese Government has prioritized the conservation and sustainable management of its forest resources. The World Bank is providing support by financing a background study on the state of forestry and biodiversity in Benin. To complement this IDA study, PROFOR is supporting a supplemental analysis into to the potential for productive forests in Benin, which will also recommend targeted investments for developing the sector in a sustainable manner and contributing to job creation. 

APPROACH

This activity will undertake an assessment of the productive forest sector in Benin, and opportunities for long-term investments in the areas of timber and fuel wood. The study will review the main stakeholders, including the timber industries; assess national timber production needs and capacity; and identify the relevant obstacles to developing the sector. Concrete recommendations will be made with a view toward reducing the country's dependence on imports to meet its domestic demand for timber and firewood.

RESULTS

This activity concluded in December 2018. The activities of this ASA integrated and reinforced several processes initiated by the Government of Benin: increasing knowledge of forest sector stakeholders, strengthening national information management systems, making a concrete contribution to the planning of the Government Action Program for 2016-2021, and defining interventions that could be carried out with the support of the World Bank.

The analysis recommended that the development strategy for timber should be based on the establishment of plantations, preferably in areas favourable to the growth of teak and Gmelina (southern and central areas) and in certain climatic enclaves. The management plans of these zones dedicate on average 40% of the forests surface to wood production, half of which can be devoted to timber plantations. The development of timber plantations will contribute to achieving the Government's goal of increasing the volume of timber annually to 250,000 m3 through large-scale plantations to generate forest-related jobs and increase public revenues. 

The activity helped to influence the way in which Benin’s DGEFC plans to secure its Gazetted Forests, including ways in which to promote forest resources as a valuable source of income for adjacent communities and their members, especially women and youth, to ensure sustainable development and exploitation. Benin is in the process of using this study’s findings to help shape a project that will lend support to productive forests, specifically for fuelwood, to supply its energy needs.  

CHALLENGE
Burkina Faso is a Sahelian savannah country which has experienced continued degradation of its natural resources including forests. Poor governance is seen as an important contributing factor to this degradation. Burkina Faso is also one of eight pilot countries selected by the Forest Investment Program (FIP) for investments that would address the underlying causes for deforestation and improve forest carbon sequestration. This program could result in significant investment activities totaling USD 30-35 million, however poor forest governance, corruption and lack of transparency could be a serious bottleneck to the implementation of the FIP. An early identification of the risks posed by weak governance could ecourage steps toward policy reforms, strengthening implementation capacity.

APPROACH
This PROFOR-financed activity aimed to apply a forest governance diagnostic tool to construct a baseline assessment of the forest governance situation in Burkina Faso and to pinpoint the areas requiring highest priority reforms. A forest governance reform strategy for the country would then be formulated on the basis of this assessment.

A second objective of this work was to support the production of a field manual to facilitate the application of forest governance diagnostics in any country interested in improving the quality of forest governance. The field manual would draw upon the lessons learned from the application of the diagnostics in Uganda (through a separate PROFOR activity) and in Burkina, as well as applications of the governance assessment framework by other agencies (for example, in Kenya by Indufor and in Russia by the Federal Forest Agency, with support from the World Bank and DFID).

RESULTS

• A background country assessment report, finalized in February 2011 (“Rapport de base sur la Gouvernance Forestière au Burkina Faso,” in French).
• A customized questionnaire (in French), finalized in October 2011.
• A multistakeholder workshop was held on October 12, 2011. The workshop report ("The Quality of Forest Governance in Burkina Faso: A first analysis of strengths and weaknesses") is available in a bilingual French and English file on this page.
• A User's Guide for a Forest Governance Diagnostic Tool was also produced to guide other countries in assessing and monitoring forest governance.

CHALLENGE
Burkina Faso is a Sahelian savannah country which has experienced continued degradation of its natural resources including forests. Poor governance is seen as an important contributing factor to this degradation. Burkina Faso is also one of eight pilot countries selected by the Forest Investment Program (FIP) for investments that would address the underlying causes for deforestation and improve forest carbon sequestration. This program could result in significant investment activities totaling USD 30-35 million, however poor forest governance, corruption and lack of transparency could be a serious bottleneck to the implementation of the FIP. An early identification of the risks posed by weak governance could ecourage steps toward policy reforms, strengthening implementation capacity.

APPROACH
This PROFOR-financed activity aimed to apply a forest governance diagnostic tool to construct a baseline assessment of the forest governance situation in Burkina Faso and to pinpoint the areas requiring highest priority reforms. A forest governance reform strategy for the country would then be formulated on the basis of this assessment.

A second objective of this work was to support the production of a field manual to facilitate the application of forest governance diagnostics in any country interested in improving the quality of forest governance. The field manual would draw upon the lessons learned from the application of the diagnostics in Uganda (through a separate PROFOR activity) and in Burkina, as well as applications of the governance assessment framework by other agencies (for example, in Kenya by Indufor and in Russia by the Federal Forest Agency, with support from the World Bank and DFID).

RESULTS

• A background country assessment report, finalized in February 2011 (“Rapport de base sur la Gouvernance Forestière au Burkina Faso,” in French).
• A customized questionnaire (in French), finalized in October 2011.
• A multistakeholder workshop was held on October 12, 2011. The workshop report ("The Quality of Forest Governance in Burkina Faso: A first analysis of strengths and weaknesses") is available in a bilingual French and English file on this page.
• A User's Guide for a Forest Governance Diagnostic Tool was also produced to guide other countries in assessing and monitoring forest governance.

CHALLENGE
Burkina Faso is a Sahelian savannah country which has experienced continued degradation of its natural resources including forests. Poor governance is seen as an important contributing factor to this degradation. Burkina Faso is also one of eight pilot countries selected by the Forest Investment Program (FIP) for investments that would address the underlying causes for deforestation and improve forest carbon sequestration. This program could result in significant investment activities totaling USD 30-35 million, however poor forest governance, corruption and lack of transparency could be a serious bottleneck to the implementation of the FIP. An early identification of the risks posed by weak governance could ecourage steps toward policy reforms, strengthening implementation capacity.

APPROACH
This PROFOR-financed activity aimed to apply a forest governance diagnostic tool to construct a baseline assessment of the forest governance situation in Burkina Faso and to pinpoint the areas requiring highest priority reforms. A forest governance reform strategy for the country would then be formulated on the basis of this assessment.

A second objective of this work was to support the production of a field manual to facilitate the application of forest governance diagnostics in any country interested in improving the quality of forest governance. The field manual would draw upon the lessons learned from the application of the diagnostics in Uganda (through a separate PROFOR activity) and in Burkina, as well as applications of the governance assessment framework by other agencies (for example, in Kenya by Indufor and in Russia by the Federal Forest Agency, with support from the World Bank and DFID).

RESULTS

• A background country assessment report, finalized in February 2011 (“Rapport de base sur la Gouvernance Forestière au Burkina Faso,” in French).
• A customized questionnaire (in French), finalized in October 2011.
• A multistakeholder workshop was held on October 12, 2011. The workshop report ("The Quality of Forest Governance in Burkina Faso: A first analysis of strengths and weaknesses") is available in a bilingual French and English file on this page.
• A User's Guide for a Forest Governance Diagnostic Tool was also produced to guide other countries in assessing and monitoring forest governance.

CHALLENGE

The World Bank’s 2002 Forest Strategy laid down two bold targets, which it saw as the collective outcome of global efforts to promote Sustainable Forest Management, through improving forest governance. First, by 2012/13, a reduction of global illegal logging by 50 percent (from an estimated baseline value of $10 billion per annum); and, second, a 50 percent decrease in the estimated value of taxes, fees, and levies willfully evaded. However, there has been little systematic effort to assess the extent to which these targets have been achieved. This is a drawback (applicable not only to the World Bank but to other development agencies as well) as it limits our ability to learn from evidence and to apply the learning in designing effective interventions.

APPROACH

By looking at a suite of the Bank’s forestry programs and projects (which have significant forest governance components), this report identifies the bottlenecks to improve tracking the impacts of forest governance interventions and suggests ways in which they can be removed and the capacity for impact evaluation (IE) strengthened.

FINDINGS AND RESULTS

The report finds that most Bank-financed projects track impacts in forest governance projects almost exclusively through log-frame approaches such as a Results Framework or a Policy Matrix. These have been used to measure progress toward project objectives through the use of performance indicators, coupled with baseline surveys and proposed target values. However, the ex-ante approaches to monitoring and evaluation in Bank projects typically do not try to establish attribution, nor do they systematically track spill-over effects (positive or negative) and leakages resulting from project interventions. They also do not consider the role of “confounding factors” that is, non-project influences, which can influence expected project outcomes. Finally, in most cases impacts are not monitored beyond the life-cycle of the project. Because of these shortcomings, the Policy Matrix or Results Framework approaches do not fully measure the impacts of Bank interventions.

The current gaps in being able to measure impacts systematically should not be taken to mean that Bank-financed interventions have not had any impacts. However, the need is to develop a culture of measurement whereby impacts are objectively and routinely measured and the learning potential through IE maximized. To this end the report recommends three broad actions:

• Develop a compendium of practical techniques for IE in forestry and raise awareness among project task team leaders. This would demonstrate the value of starting with causal pathways linking the intended outcomes to the necessary inputs and outputs;
• Enhance resources and improve opportunities to embed IE in project design and implementation. The Bank should consider “up-streaming” a discussion of tracking project impacts at the Project Concept Note stage; and,
• Establish a community of practice (CoP) and a help-desk on IE for forestry. Establishing a CoP within and outside the Bank can increase member knowledge by sharing information and experiences to allow for an effective exchange of learning.

Because poverty reduction, improvements in the security of livelihoods, conservation of wildlife and biodiversity, and cross-sectoral collaboration, to name some objectives, go hand-in-hand with interventions to improve forest governance, this report recommends that evaluation approaches should track all activity impacts. Thus, the three actions suggested above should consider tracking impacts more widely than for forest governance alone.

The report acknowledges the main limitations of the analysis. The experiences and the data are all from one institution—the World Bank—and (including as it does, twenty programs and projects) are limited in coverage. Thus, caution has to be exercised in any attempt to draw out general lessons. Nevertheless, this report provides a useful first cut contribution to the challenge of assessing the impacts of forest governance interventions and of assessing impacts more generally. Future work should emphasize collaborative exploration (among development partners assisting with sustainable forest management and key client countries) as a way to build up the evidence base on cost-effective and easy to replicate impact evaluation techniques and to rapidly build up a compendium of practical approaches.

CHALLENGE

The World Bank’s 2002 Forest Strategy laid down two bold targets, which it saw as the collective outcome of global efforts to promote Sustainable Forest Management, through improving forest governance. First, by 2012/13, a reduction of global illegal logging by 50 percent (from an estimated baseline value of $10 billion per annum); and, second, a 50 percent decrease in the estimated value of taxes, fees, and levies willfully evaded. However, there has been little systematic effort to assess the extent to which these targets have been achieved. This is a drawback (applicable not only to the World Bank but to other development agencies as well) as it limits our ability to learn from evidence and to apply the learning in designing effective interventions.

APPROACH

By looking at a suite of the Bank’s forestry programs and projects (which have significant forest governance components), this report identifies the bottlenecks to improve tracking the impacts of forest governance interventions and suggests ways in which they can be removed and the capacity for impact evaluation (IE) strengthened.

FINDINGS AND RESULTS

The report finds that most Bank-financed projects track impacts in forest governance projects almost exclusively through log-frame approaches such as a Results Framework or a Policy Matrix. These have been used to measure progress toward project objectives through the use of performance indicators, coupled with baseline surveys and proposed target values. However, the ex-ante approaches to monitoring and evaluation in Bank projects typically do not try to establish attribution, nor do they systematically track spill-over effects (positive or negative) and leakages resulting from project interventions. They also do not consider the role of “confounding factors” that is, non-project influences, which can influence expected project outcomes. Finally, in most cases impacts are not monitored beyond the life-cycle of the project. Because of these shortcomings, the Policy Matrix or Results Framework approaches do not fully measure the impacts of Bank interventions.

The current gaps in being able to measure impacts systematically should not be taken to mean that Bank-financed interventions have not had any impacts. However, the need is to develop a culture of measurement whereby impacts are objectively and routinely measured and the learning potential through IE maximized. To this end the report recommends three broad actions:

• Develop a compendium of practical techniques for IE in forestry and raise awareness among project task team leaders. This would demonstrate the value of starting with causal pathways linking the intended outcomes to the necessary inputs and outputs;
• Enhance resources and improve opportunities to embed IE in project design and implementation. The Bank should consider “up-streaming” a discussion of tracking project impacts at the Project Concept Note stage; and,
• Establish a community of practice (CoP) and a help-desk on IE for forestry. Establishing a CoP within and outside the Bank can increase member knowledge by sharing information and experiences to allow for an effective exchange of learning.

Because poverty reduction, improvements in the security of livelihoods, conservation of wildlife and biodiversity, and cross-sectoral collaboration, to name some objectives, go hand-in-hand with interventions to improve forest governance, this report recommends that evaluation approaches should track all activity impacts. Thus, the three actions suggested above should consider tracking impacts more widely than for forest governance alone.

The report acknowledges the main limitations of the analysis. The experiences and the data are all from one institution—the World Bank—and (including as it does, twenty programs and projects) are limited in coverage. Thus, caution has to be exercised in any attempt to draw out general lessons. Nevertheless, this report provides a useful first cut contribution to the challenge of assessing the impacts of forest governance interventions and of assessing impacts more generally. Future work should emphasize collaborative exploration (among development partners assisting with sustainable forest management and key client countries) as a way to build up the evidence base on cost-effective and easy to replicate impact evaluation techniques and to rapidly build up a compendium of practical approaches.

CHALLENGE

The World Bank’s 2002 Forest Strategy laid down two bold targets, which it saw as the collective outcome of global efforts to promote Sustainable Forest Management, through improving forest governance. First, by 2012/13, a reduction of global illegal logging by 50 percent (from an estimated baseline value of $10 billion per annum); and, second, a 50 percent decrease in the estimated value of taxes, fees, and levies willfully evaded. However, there has been little systematic effort to assess the extent to which these targets have been achieved. This is a drawback (applicable not only to the World Bank but to other development agencies as well) as it limits our ability to learn from evidence and to apply the learning in designing effective interventions.

APPROACH

By looking at a suite of the Bank’s forestry programs and projects (which have significant forest governance components), this report identifies the bottlenecks to improve tracking the impacts of forest governance interventions and suggests ways in which they can be removed and the capacity for impact evaluation (IE) strengthened.

FINDINGS AND RESULTS

The report finds that most Bank-financed projects track impacts in forest governance projects almost exclusively through log-frame approaches such as a Results Framework or a Policy Matrix. These have been used to measure progress toward project objectives through the use of performance indicators, coupled with baseline surveys and proposed target values. However, the ex-ante approaches to monitoring and evaluation in Bank projects typically do not try to establish attribution, nor do they systematically track spill-over effects (positive or negative) and leakages resulting from project interventions. They also do not consider the role of “confounding factors” that is, non-project influences, which can influence expected project outcomes. Finally, in most cases impacts are not monitored beyond the life-cycle of the project. Because of these shortcomings, the Policy Matrix or Results Framework approaches do not fully measure the impacts of Bank interventions.

The current gaps in being able to measure impacts systematically should not be taken to mean that Bank-financed interventions have not had any impacts. However, the need is to develop a culture of measurement whereby impacts are objectively and routinely measured and the learning potential through IE maximized. To this end the report recommends three broad actions:

• Develop a compendium of practical techniques for IE in forestry and raise awareness among project task team leaders. This would demonstrate the value of starting with causal pathways linking the intended outcomes to the necessary inputs and outputs;
• Enhance resources and improve opportunities to embed IE in project design and implementation. The Bank should consider “up-streaming” a discussion of tracking project impacts at the Project Concept Note stage; and,
• Establish a community of practice (CoP) and a help-desk on IE for forestry. Establishing a CoP within and outside the Bank can increase member knowledge by sharing information and experiences to allow for an effective exchange of learning.

Because poverty reduction, improvements in the security of livelihoods, conservation of wildlife and biodiversity, and cross-sectoral collaboration, to name some objectives, go hand-in-hand with interventions to improve forest governance, this report recommends that evaluation approaches should track all activity impacts. Thus, the three actions suggested above should consider tracking impacts more widely than for forest governance alone.

The report acknowledges the main limitations of the analysis. The experiences and the data are all from one institution—the World Bank—and (including as it does, twenty programs and projects) are limited in coverage. Thus, caution has to be exercised in any attempt to draw out general lessons. Nevertheless, this report provides a useful first cut contribution to the challenge of assessing the impacts of forest governance interventions and of assessing impacts more generally. Future work should emphasize collaborative exploration (among development partners assisting with sustainable forest management and key client countries) as a way to build up the evidence base on cost-effective and easy to replicate impact evaluation techniques and to rapidly build up a compendium of practical approaches.

Assessing the Potential for Forest Landscape Restoration to Contribute to Poverty Alleviation, Climate Change Mitigation & Sustainable Forest Management

CHALLENGE

Forests once covered almost twice the area that they do today. Today the loss is continuing at the rapid pace of roughly 13 million has per year. While the focus of the international forest and climate debate has been on avoiding further deforestation and degradation of forests in developing, often tropical, countries, these discussions have begun to acknowledge the potential for forest restoration to enhance carbon stocks and increase resilience to the impacts of climate change.

Forests can recover. Restoration of degraded lands is receiving increasing attention because of growing demand for forest products and bioenergy, and for the potential to create socio-economic opportunities, increase carbon densities, contribute to food security, and adapt to climate change.
The amount of land in need of restoration appears to be huge. Until now, however, very little was known about the scope, extent, geographical variation, and priorities of the restoration potential.
 

APPROACH 

This activity, implemented by World Resources Institute and IUCN, on behalf of the Forest Landscape Restoration Global Partnership, aimed to assess the potential for forest landscape restoration worldwide and create awareness of this potential among decision-makers and the public. 
The project used existing knowledge and spatial imagery to:

• Assess the scope and scale of the opportunity for restoration of degraded forest landscapes around the world
• Provide a basis for identifying restoration priorities
• Highlight existing examples from around the world
• Describe weaknesses and gaps in the assessment and underlying data
• Propose next steps

A range of possible restoration purposes will be considered including restoration of ecosystem services, increasing carbon density, and creating of livelihood opportunities.

MAIN FINDINGS

Preliminary findings from this global assessment indicated that there is a total area of lost and degraded forest lands of more than 1 billion hectares worldwide that is suitable and available for restoration – an area greater than that of China. 

Further research increased that area to more than 2 billion hectares.

The activity authors have produced a  map showing where global forests have great potential for recovery. While many maps show forest loss, this one is the first of its kind to show areas where forests could be regained. This has significant implications for climate negotiators that are working to reduce and reverse carbon emissions from forests.

• An estimated billion and a half hectares of deforested and degraded forest land offer opportunities for forest landscape restoration, either wide-scale or mosaic type. About two thirds of the potential is on deforested lands; the rest is in degraded forests and woodlands.
• In addition, up to half a billion hectares would be suitable for wide-scale restoration of closed forests. (An additional 200 million hectares, mainly in the far northern boreal forests, have been degraded by fire but would be difficult to restore.)
• Additional restoration opportunities -— mainly for protective purposes – are scattered within the world’s croplands.
• The restoration opportunities are typically not located in areas of ongoing deforestation and degradation; they tend to occur where degradation and deforestation have already made their mark.
• These areas should not all be restored in the same fashion. There is no one-size-fits-all solution. Each forest landscape is unique and needs its own restoration design which responds in a balanced way to societal preferences and needs. Lands that are currently used for crop production or grazing, for example, are not suitable for wide-scale restoration. They may, however, offer opportunities for restoration in mixed land-use mosaics. Many historically deforested areas belong to this category.

OUTCOME

The main finding -- landscape restoration opportunities worldwide on a huge scale -- was presented at a Ministerial Roundtable on Forest Landscape Restoration, held in London, on November 26, 2009, as well as during Forest Day 3 and 4 on the sidelines of the UNFCCC climate change talks in Copenhagen and Cancun.

On September 2, 2011 the German Government and the IUCN hosted a ministerial meeting and mobilized financial pledges to restore 150 million hectares of degraded and deforested land by 2020 (Learn more about the Bonn Challenge ) Nearly a dozen countries are mobilizing to meet the restoration pledge – among them Brazil, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Rwanda, and the United States. IUCN estimates that the reaching the restoration goal would reduce current carbon dioxide emissions by 11-17% and that national and local economies would realize an annual net benefit of approximately US$ 85 billion a year. To facilitate restoration activities and meeting the Bonn Challenge, IUCN, in March 2014, released a handbook called the Restoration Opportunities Assessment Methodology (ROAM). This tool, developed in partnership with WRI and with PROFOR input, helps countries assess the amount of their land that can be restored and where restoration would provide the most value. (Learn more about ROAM )

Assessing the Potential for Forest Landscape Restoration to Contribute to Poverty Alleviation, Climate Change Mitigation & Sustainable Forest Management

CHALLENGE

Forests once covered almost twice the area that they do today. Today the loss is continuing at the rapid pace of roughly 13 million has per year. While the focus of the international forest and climate debate has been on avoiding further deforestation and degradation of forests in developing, often tropical, countries, these discussions have begun to acknowledge the potential for forest restoration to enhance carbon stocks and increase resilience to the impacts of climate change.

Forests can recover. Restoration of degraded lands is receiving increasing attention because of growing demand for forest products and bioenergy, and for the potential to create socio-economic opportunities, increase carbon densities, contribute to food security, and adapt to climate change.
The amount of land in need of restoration appears to be huge. Until now, however, very little was known about the scope, extent, geographical variation, and priorities of the restoration potential.
 

APPROACH 

This activity, implemented by World Resources Institute and IUCN, on behalf of the Forest Landscape Restoration Global Partnership, aimed to assess the potential for forest landscape restoration worldwide and create awareness of this potential among decision-makers and the public. 
The project used existing knowledge and spatial imagery to:

• Assess the scope and scale of the opportunity for restoration of degraded forest landscapes around the world
• Provide a basis for identifying restoration priorities
• Highlight existing examples from around the world
• Describe weaknesses and gaps in the assessment and underlying data
• Propose next steps

A range of possible restoration purposes will be considered including restoration of ecosystem services, increasing carbon density, and creating of livelihood opportunities.

MAIN FINDINGS

Preliminary findings from this global assessment indicated that there is a total area of lost and degraded forest lands of more than 1 billion hectares worldwide that is suitable and available for restoration – an area greater than that of China. 

Further research increased that area to more than 2 billion hectares.

The activity authors have produced a  map showing where global forests have great potential for recovery. While many maps show forest loss, this one is the first of its kind to show areas where forests could be regained. This has significant implications for climate negotiators that are working to reduce and reverse carbon emissions from forests.

• An estimated billion and a half hectares of deforested and degraded forest land offer opportunities for forest landscape restoration, either wide-scale or mosaic type. About two thirds of the potential is on deforested lands; the rest is in degraded forests and woodlands.
• In addition, up to half a billion hectares would be suitable for wide-scale restoration of closed forests. (An additional 200 million hectares, mainly in the far northern boreal forests, have been degraded by fire but would be difficult to restore.)
• Additional restoration opportunities -— mainly for protective purposes – are scattered within the world’s croplands.
• The restoration opportunities are typically not located in areas of ongoing deforestation and degradation; they tend to occur where degradation and deforestation have already made their mark.
• These areas should not all be restored in the same fashion. There is no one-size-fits-all solution. Each forest landscape is unique and needs its own restoration design which responds in a balanced way to societal preferences and needs. Lands that are currently used for crop production or grazing, for example, are not suitable for wide-scale restoration. They may, however, offer opportunities for restoration in mixed land-use mosaics. Many historically deforested areas belong to this category.

OUTCOME

The main finding -- landscape restoration opportunities worldwide on a huge scale -- was presented at a Ministerial Roundtable on Forest Landscape Restoration, held in London, on November 26, 2009, as well as during Forest Day 3 and 4 on the sidelines of the UNFCCC climate change talks in Copenhagen and Cancun.

On September 2, 2011 the German Government and the IUCN hosted a ministerial meeting and mobilized financial pledges to restore 150 million hectares of degraded and deforested land by 2020 (Learn more about the Bonn Challenge ) Nearly a dozen countries are mobilizing to meet the restoration pledge – among them Brazil, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Rwanda, and the United States. IUCN estimates that the reaching the restoration goal would reduce current carbon dioxide emissions by 11-17% and that national and local economies would realize an annual net benefit of approximately US$ 85 billion a year. To facilitate restoration activities and meeting the Bonn Challenge, IUCN, in March 2014, released a handbook called the Restoration Opportunities Assessment Methodology (ROAM). This tool, developed in partnership with WRI and with PROFOR input, helps countries assess the amount of their land that can be restored and where restoration would provide the most value. (Learn more about ROAM )

CHALLENGE

Jamaica’s coastal areas play vital economic and social roles and reduce vulnerability to natural hazards. Protecting and restoring these coastal habitats is both an opportunity and a need. Targeting mangrove ecosystems could increase resilience to climate change, reduce the risk to disasters in coastal areas, and provide co-benefits associated to livelihoods maintenance (i.e. tourism) and food security (i.e. fisheries). This activity will support the Government of Jamaica in promoting cost-effective coastal protection measures through mangrove ecosystems enhancement.

APPROACH

1. Measure physical data on the natural capital associated with mangrove forests of varying quality in Jamaica;
2. Estimate the coastal protection services provided by mangroves, including as an economic value;
3. Undertake a habitat risk assessment to evaluate the risk posed to mangrove habitats by human activities, and identify the potential reduction of ecosystem services involved in coastal protection;
4. Conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis, comparing different coastal protection measures and associated co-benefits.

RESULTS

This project has been completed. Final outputs delivered as part of this effort include: 

1. The Mangrove Monitoring and Evaluation Manual-Jamaica.This provides detailed instructions on replicating the monitoring methods for mangrove forests - ecological, biophysical and socio-economic aspects. This Manual is applicable to other small island developing states, as well as other tropical countries. In addition, the online mapping tools are capable of providing mapped outputs for other projects, is publicly open for all audiences, and is adaptable overtime. The workshops throughout the project provided stakeholders with theoretical and hands on capacity building in the elements of the data collection for them to replicate within their organizations. 
2. online tool for coastal management and risk reduction
3. The Final Dissemination Report entitled Forces of Nature: Assessment and Economic Valuation of Coastal Protection Services Provided by Mangroves in Jamaica. This report supports the growing interest within the development agenda to include nature-based solutions for disaster risk management (DRM), and provides vital information for discussion on climate change adaptation and mitigation, insurance, and disaster recovery decisions. This report provides knowledge on the current health status of Jamaican mangroves, how the loss of mangroves can increase coastal flood risk and identifies potential risk reduction measures. It also presents important data on benefits beyond coastal protection such as erosion control, water quality, carbon sequestration, and fisheries provision, which can have significant implications on poverty reduction.