Workshop Report - The Blue Carbon Initiative

8th International Blue Carbon Scientific
Working Group Meeting
September 23 - 25, 2015
Zanzibar, Tanzania
WORKSHOP REPORT
Coordinating Organizations:
United,Nations
Educational,,Scientific,and,
Cultural,Organization,
Intergovernmental,
Oceanographic
Commission
1
Funding and Support Organizations:
2
Workshop Overview
Dr. James Kairo with the Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute and Dr. Mwita Mangora
with the Western Indian Ocean Mangrove Network hosted the 8th Meeting of the Blue Carbon
Initiative’s Scientific Working Group, in Zanzibar, Tanzania on September 23rd – 25th, 2015.
This three-day meeting brought together expert working group members, the African coastal
carbon research community, and decision makers to assess the current state of the knowledge
surrounding blue carbon ecosystems and to identify knowledge gaps and opportunities for
collaborations that will accelerate research in the future. Specific focus was placed not only on
gaining a better understanding of blue carbon ecosystems throughout eastern and western Africa
but also on the role blue carbon may play in coastal restoration decisions.
Coastal wetlands – mangroves, salt marshes and seagrasses – are some the most threatened
ecosystems on Earth. They are being degraded or destroyed at four times the rate of tropical
forests and climate change threatens to accelerate these losses. These ecosystems sequester and
store large quantities of “blue carbon” in both the plants above ground and in the sediment
below. When the ecosystems are degraded or destroyed carbon is released back into the
atmosphere as CO2 emissions. The emissions released through ecosystem conversion are now
being recognized by the IPCC and UNFCCC as significant sources of greenhouse gases (GHG).
The global CO2 emissions from the degradation and destruction of blue carbon ecosystems is
estimated at 45 billion metric tons annually, with an associated economic cost approaching $20
billion each year. Globally, coastal wetlands are some of the most valuable natural resources,
providing essential ecosystem services such as protection from storms and sea level rise, erosion
control, maintaining coastal water quality, carbon sequestration and storage, and food security.
They are vital to human well-being along the coasts of all continents and particularly for some of
the world's most vulnerable people. Thus, effective management and conservation of coastal
wetlands is now a critical priority, especially in regions where people are highly dependent on
these ecosystems for critical services.
In Africa, 12% of the urban population lives in areas classified as Low Elevation Coastal Zones,
collectively African’s consume 9.1 million tons of seafood annually, over 3 million people count
fishing as their primary source of income, and the African coast provide habitat to several
charismatic endangered species as well as globally important fisheries. However, this region is
predicted to be the hardest hit by effects of climate change. Coastal storms bring stronger winds
creating greater wave damage along shorelines. Weather extremes will also severely threaten the
region’s traditional livelihoods of farming and fishing. Warming seawaters and habitat
destruction threaten the incredible biodiversity that Africa is famous for; and coastal erosion
threatens the vast mangrove forests, tidal marshes, and seagrass meadows—which are already
being battered from over-exploitation, increased storm surges, and vulnerable to future sea level
rise. Healthy coastal systems will aid in mitigating the impacts of climate change and
conservation of the stored blue carbon found in those systems address the global need for
reduced GHG emissions.
This was the first time that the Blue Carbon Initiative’s Scientific Working Group has conducted
a meeting anywhere on the African continent.
3
The Blue Carbon Initiative
The Blue Carbon Initiative is an integrated program focused on mitigating climate change by
conserving and restoring coastal marine ecosystems globally. The Initiative is led by
Conservation International (CI), the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and
the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) of UNESCO, and works with partners
from national governments, research institutions, nongovernmental organizations, coastal
communities, inter-governmental and international bodies and other relevant stakeholders. For
more information see www.thebluecarboninitiative.org.
Meeting Goals
The three-day meeting brought together the research community and regional leaders to assess
the status of Africa’s coastal wetland systems and identify knowledge gaps and opportunities for
future work. Meeting attendees took an active role in developing a regional network of blue
carbon experts and identifying priority geographies, projects and research needs. The four
primary goals for the meeting were:
1.! Increase awareness of the importance of coastal wetlands for critical ecosystems services
specifically including carbon sequestration and storage and the potential for increased
emissions when these systems are degraded
2.! Assess the coastal carbon distribution in Africa, including compiling existing data and
analyses
3.! Identify priority regions for science, management and pilot project development.
4.! Identify opportunities and challenges in the region
5.! Explore ways to increase capacity through development of blue carbon networks and
identifying possible regional Blue Carbon focal points.
Meeting Outcomes
1.! Over 43 African and other regional experts in mangrove, saltmarsh, and seagrass ecology
and geochemistry came together to share their data and collaborate on future work.
2.! Separate breakout groups (one for Eastern Africa and one for Western Africa) spent an
afternoon exchanging information and discussing next steps for science and policy in
their respective regions. Information from both groups will be combined to develop a
review of blue carbon science and projects throughout Africa as well as outline future
research priorities.
3.! Igino Emmer led a session on developing carbon projects including goal setting, strategy
development, stakeholder engagement and science needs. Case studies from Kenya and
Costa Rica demonstrated carbon projects that are in the process of acquiring carbon
credits and entering the carbon market. This session was conducted to specifically
address the needs and interests of local and regional attendees.
4.! The Blue Carbon Initiative’s Scientific Working Group members held a session to assess
the carbon benefits associated with restoration activities. A paper will be submitted to a
peer review journal assessing the efficacy of including carbon sequestration and avoided
emissions into restoration project design and decisions.
5.! Blue Carbon Initiative Scientific Working Group members identified Indonesia as a
potential location for the next meeting. This will be the second time that the Working
Group has held a meeting in Indonesia. Since the last meeting in 2011, Indonesia has
continued to be exceptionally influential in integrating blue carbon into coastal marine
4
management and to a greater extent popularizing the concept of blue carbon as a viable
tool for climate mitigation and adaptation. Indonesia is poised to push blue carbon
science and policy forward and will provide a wealth of knowledge and lessons learned
for the member of the Working Group.
5
Coordinators
Name
Affiliation
Country
Emily Pidgeon
Conservation International
USA
Jennifer Howard
Conservation International
USA
Mwita Mangora
Western Indian Ocean Mangrove Network
Tanzania
James Kairo
Kenya Marine & Fisheries Research Institute
Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission,
UNESCO
Kenya
Kirsten Isensee
France
Attending Working Group Members
Name
Catherine Lovelock
Peter Ralph
Margareth Copertino
Marco Quesada
Miguel Cifuentes
Andreas Hutahaean
Daniel Murdiyarso
Igino Emmer
Miguel Fortes
Nuria Marba
Hilary Kennedy
Boone Kauffman
Faiz Rahman
Jim Fourqurean
Jim Morris
Marc Simard
Patrick Megonigal
Steve Crooks
Affiliation
University of Queensland
University of Technology Sydney
Universidade Federal do Rio
Grande
Conservation International
Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y
Enseñanza
Agency for Research and Development of Marine
and Fisheries
Center for International Forestry Research
Silvestrum
University Philippines
Instituto Mediterráneo de Estudios Avanzados
University of Bangor
Oregon State University
University of Texas - Pan American
Florida International University
University of South Carolina
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of
Technology
Country
Australia
Australia
Smithsonian Environmental Research Center
Environmental Science Associates
USA
USA
Brazil
Costa Rica
Costa Rica
Indonesia
Indonesia
Netherlands
Philippines
Spain
UK
USA
USA
USA
USA
USA
6
Attending Guest Experts
Name
Hongbo Li
Fabien Riera
Linwood Pendleton
Leonildo Alves Cardoso
Terry Kepel
Amina Juma
Jaco Venter
Lilian Mwihaki
Michael Njoroge
Mohammed Ahmad
Nderitu Dedan
Mike Olendo
Jessica Donovan
Liam Walsh
Dannick
Randriamanantena
Lalao Aigrette
Leah Glass
Lisa Benson
Raymond Raherindray
Remi Ratsimbazafy
Denise Nicolau
Henriques Balidy
Marieke van Katwijk
Steve Lutz
Bienvenu Sambou
Ibrahima Thiam
Mallé Diagana
Jenine Adams
Abdallah Ali
Edmond Alavaisha
Islam Salum
Jokha Mtoro
Affiliation
National Marine Environmental Monitoring Center
University of Brest
University of Brest
Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation - IBAP
Center for International Forestry Research
Kenya Marine & Fisheries Research Institute
Conservation International
Kenya Marine & Fisheries Research Institute
Edinburgh Napier University
Kenyata University
Kenya Forest Service
WWF Kenya
Conservation International
Conservation International
Country
China
France
France
Guinea Bissau
Indonesia
Kenya
Kenya
Kenya
Kenya
Kenya
Kenya
Kenya
Liberia
Liberia
WWF Madagascar
Madagascar
Blue Ventures
Blue Ventures
Blue Ventures
Blue Ventures
Ocean Dept. Forest, Ocean and Environment
Ministry
WWF Mozambique
Center for Sustainable Development of the Coastal
Zones (of MICOA)
Radboud University Nijmegen
GRID-Arundel
Institute of Environmental Sciences, University
Cheikh Anta Diop
Wetlands International Africa
Regional Partnership for the Conservation of
Coastal and Marine Areas (PRCM)
Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University
State University of Zanzibar
Institute of Marine Sciences UDSM
First Vice President's Office, Zanzibar
Department of Forest, Zanzibar
Madagascar
Madagascar
Madagascar
Madagascar
Madagascar
Mozambique
Mozambique
Netherlands
Norway
Senegal
Senegal
Senegal
South Africa
Tanzania
Tanzania
Tanzania
Tanzania
7
Julius Francis
Juma Bakari
Makemie Mabula
Marco Njana
Margareth Kyewalyanga
Mathias Igulu
Mwajuma Masika
Mwanahija Shalli
Ngwali Makame
Soud Jumah
Sware Semesi
Zawadi Mbwambo
Chris McOwen
Western Indian Ocean Marine Science Association
Department of Environment, Zanzibar
Institute of Marine Sciences UDSM
Sokoine University of Agriculture
Institute of Marine Sciences UDSM
Tanzania Fisheries Research Institute
Department of Forest, Zanzibar
Institute of Marine Sciences UDSM
Department of Forest, Zanzibar
First Vice President's Office, Zanzibar
WWF Tanzania Country Office
Tanzania Forest Service
UNEP-WCMC
Tanzania
Tanzania
Tanzania
Tanzania
Tanzania
Tanzania
Tanzania
Tanzania
Tanzania
Tanzania
Tanzania
Tanzania
UK
The International Blue Carbon Scientific Workshop participants at the 8th International Blue Carbon Initiative’s
Scientific Working Group Meeting, Zanzibar, Tanzania September 2015
8
DAY 1 – September 23rd
Opening the Meeting
Mwita Mangora, Western Indian Ocean Mangroves Network, Tanzania
James Kairo, Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute, Kenya
Welcome
Margareth Kyewalyanga, Representative of the Director, Institute of Marine Sciences, Zanzibar
Julius Francis, Executive Secretary, Western Indinan Ocean Marine Science Association
Jaco Venter, Senior Technical Director Africa and Madagascar Field Divisions, Conservation
International
Ibrahima Thiam, Director, Wetlands International – Africa
Isalam Salum, Deputy Principle Secretary, First Vice President’s Office, Zanzibar
9
Session 1: Introduction to Blue Carbon
Moderated by Jennifer Howard
Introduction to Blue Carbon Initiative: Recent activities, accomplishments, and its
increasing role in international policy
Emily Pidgeon, Conservation International
Steve Crooks, Environmental Science Associates
The International Blue Carbon Initiative is the first integrated program focused on mitigating
climate change by conserving and restoring coastal marine ecosystems globally. The
Initiative is led by Conservation International (CI), the International Union for Conservation
of Nature (IUCN) and the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) of
UNESCO, and works with partners from national governments, research institutions, nongovernmental organizations, coastal communities, intergovernmnetal and international
bodies and other relevant stakeholders. The Initiative strives to evaluate blue carbon
ecosystems at local, national, regional, and global scales as a means to assess if coastal blue
carbon can leverage better management, conservation, and restoration of coastal ecosystems.
Since its inception in 2011, the Initiative members have published over 100 papers in peer
reviewed journals and produced several manuals and best practices documents, including the
IPCC 2013 Wetlands Supplement being used by countries as a guide for including coastal
wetlands in there national GHG accounting. In addition to promoting the formation of a blue
carbon network in the countries they visit, the Initiative is working on developing a blue
carbon data archive.
Status of blue carbon science in Eastern Africa
James Kairo, Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute
Blue carbon science is evolving and there are now tools and methods available that allow
blue carbon analysis to be implemented throughout Africa, and indeed work in this area has
grown significantly in the last few years. Through recent work we know that there is a lot of
size variation (dwarf to massive) in the mangrove forests up and own the eastern coast of
Africa. Nigeria has the highest mangrove cover followed by Mozambique and Madagascar.
Mangrove loss in the region (~3,000 ha per year) is largely due to pollution, aquaculture
development, and salt harvesting. There is also significant degradation around mega cities.
Mangrove loss has been associated with declines in fisheries, increased shoreline erosion,
and increased poverty. Current efforts to conserve mangroves in eastern Africa include
marine protected areas, national and regional mangrove action plans, public outreach,
restoration activities, and the incorporation of mangroves into REDD+ activities.
10
Mangrove Carbon Stock by Country
Emissions from Mangrove Loss
Ecosystem carbon stocks of West African mangroves
Boone Kauffman, Oregon State University
Blue carbon studies in Africa have lagged behind those of other areas of the world. In an
effort to close the knowledge gap in Africa, and other developing areas, the Sustainable
Wetlands Adaptation and Mitigation Program (SWAMP) was initiated in 2013. SWAMP
provides policy makers with the credible scientific information needed to make sound
decisions relating to the role of tropical wetlands in climate change adaptation and mitigation
strategies. SWAMP projects in West Africa focused on Senegal, Liberia, Gabon. It was
determined that the mangroves in those countries had a carbon stock range of 154 – 1337 Mg
C/ha, with an average of 728 Mg C/ha making them comparable to global mean estimates.
Liberia mangrove forests consist of larger trees densely packed whereas Senegal has high
density forest cover but the trees are mostly small (less than 5 cm in diameter). The soil
found in the mangrove stands in Liberia had a high carbon content, unlike Gabon which had
huge trees but the soil was sandy with low levels of carbon. It was determined that Liberia
had the highest blue carbon potential.
A review of the seagrass biomass carbon in Africa
Micheal Njoroge, Edinburgh Napier University
There is increasing scientific interest in understanding carbon stocks and flows in seagrass
ecosystems as part of the ‘blue carbon’ sinks. However most of the literature has very limited
African data. This study conducted a comprehensive metadata analysis on seagrass biomass
and carbon storage in Africa. The review targeted the primary literature, published work,
technical reports and grey literature including conference proceedings. Search terms used
were ‘seagrass’ in combination with one of the following: “above ground and belowground
biomass stocks”, “carbon burial”, “carbon sequestration”, and “productivity patterns”. A total
of 23 papers and reports/theses were obtained. Literature was found on 13 of the 34 species
11
known to inhabit the bioregions in which the African coastline lies. On average, the above
and below ground biomass were 185.5 ± 30.2 g DW m-2 and 488.9 ± 82.6g DW m-2
respectively. The overall mean production was 3.01 ± 0.62 g DW m-2d-1 translating to 1100 g
DW m-2 per year. This review demonstrates the uneven global distribution of seagrass
knowledge with relatively few studies reported from Africa. Given the intrinsic interest of
this ecosystem, its importance in sustaining inshore fisheries and the growing recognition of
its role in the global carbon cycle there is a need to devote more research to seagrasses across
a wide range of geographical regions and more specifically in Africa.
Distribution of areas where biomass and productivity studies have been done
12
Session 2: Africa wetland conservation, restoration, and carbon science
Moderated by James Kairo and Mwita Mangora
Procedures for Quantification of Belowground Biomass of Three Mangrove Species
Marco Njana, Sokoine University of Agriculture
Quantifying carbon stored in mangrove ecosystems is one way of understanding their
productivity. The most common and accurate approach in quantifying carbon storage in the
vegetation is through the use of biomass models, however few allometric equations exists for
determining below ground biomass (BGB). However, excavation and dry weight
determination procedures are insufficiently documented. Focusing on three dominant
mangrove species in Tanzania, A. marina, S. alba and R. mucronata, the study aimed to
describe procedures for excavation of tree BGB, document procedures for determining dry
weight, provide basic information on tree BGB quantities, and test previously developed
models for predicting tree BGB. Both root sampling (A. marina and S. Alba) and full
excavation (R. mucronata) methods were employed. They found that, in general, the models
are underestimating BGB by as much as 34-68%, meaning that more work needs to be done
to improve the accuracy of current equations using excavated sampling.
13
Mangroves of Mozambique
Henrique Balidy, Center for Sustainable Development of Coastal Zones
Mozambique has approximately 2,955.76 km2 of mangroves, 261 ha are located within 7
marine protected areas. The Mozambique coast is dominated by corals in the north, swamp in
the center, and parabolic dunes in the south with most of the Mangroves occurring in the
center swampy areas. Most of the urban development is taking place within the coastal
districts and this has led to clearance of mangrove areas to pave way for port construction
and city development, this along with cutting for firewood (more intense in the 1990´s) is the
major threat to mangroves management in the country. In the 1990´s Mozambique
experienced the first managerial policies and laws drafted under the then National
Commission for Environment, later transformed into the Ministry for Coordination of
Environmental Affairs (MICOA), recently (in 2015) reorganized into the Ministry of Land,
Environment and Rural development (MITADER). These laws guided the establishment and
designation of marine protected area as national parks and reserves as well as support gazette
of forest reserves declared since 1990´s. There is also a National Strategy and Action Plan
for Mangrove Management (2015-2020), that will be approved in this year. Additionally, 49
ha of mangroves have been restored through the reestablishment of proper hydrology and
planting.
Before
Now
14
Community Focused Blue Carbon
Leah Glass, Blue Ventures
Over 40% of the world's population is living within 100km of the coast and especially in
tropical countries, these people are strongly dependent on coastal resources for their
livelihoods. So in any part of the world, even if you're working with a protected area model,
there will be few examples where local people aren't intrinsic to project success. While local
coastal people are often the primary agents of mangrove deforestation, they also stand to lose
the most from its destruction and the consequent loss of mangrove ecosystem goods and
services. In Ambanja Bay in NW Madagascar the rate of mangrove loss is approximately 4%
per year, largely due to charcoal production, with complete ecosystem fragmentation likely
occurring in 10 years. Blue carbon is being tested as a potential means to incentivize and
fund locally led sustainable mangrove management and conservation. The projects success is
due to the heavy focus on community led management plans and a theory of change
approach. The exercise of completing a theory of change has improved understanding of the
perceived state of those resources (declining, stable or increasing), direct threats to them,
underlying causes of threats and the possible solutions that could be implemented to reduce
these threats. Challenges and lessons learned through the Blue Forest project include
explaining carbon markets and climate change to often illiterate coastal communities,
accurately communicating the potential financial gain the communities may expect, and
maintaining community buy-in. Ensuring communities stay enthused by the project is really
challenging but incorporating shorter term incentives such as fisheries activities may help
keep momentum going. To work, carbon finance has got to be more than an incentive. It
needs to offset the opportunity costs born by the community due to the project. For example,
if the project wants to stop logging for timber, the project needs to give communities the
amount of money they would have earned from timber sales, or develop livelihoods
alternative to timber. The most important thing is to be realistic not just from a carbon price
perspective, but also, in the long term conservation goal. Bigger is not always better, smaller
projects may improve positive results and carbon marketability. Leakage – determine how
much and what can be done to prevent it, what is the major threat and the market demand
(i.e. charcoal and price that fetches). And provide alternative livelihoods.
Current deforestation rate =
3.74%/yr
-> 417 ha lost between 20132014
15
Transboundary Management of Mangroves in CCLME PRCM Region
Malle Diagana, Regional Partnership for the Conservation of Coastal and Marine Areas
The Regional Partnership for the Conservation of Marine and Coastal Area in West Africa
(PRCM) oversees the Mauritania to Sierra Leon region of West Africa. Within that area there
are about 800,000 ha of mangroves consisting of 8 species. According to the FAO Forest
Resource Assessment 2010 and 2015, mangroves have declined in all of the countries except
Gambia from 1990 to 2015 at a rate of 2.1% per year. However, the current loss rate reflects
a decline in loss by 1.3% per year due to plantation and reforestation efforts. Mangrove loss
and degradation is due to extensive drought, erosion, and over exploitation for timber. There
were four initiatives focused on mangrove conservation and restoration in the region. The
first is a reforestation project with the IMAO Project (IUCN, Wetlands International) that is
also developing baseline studies, demonstration projects and national mangrove conservation
policies. A second initiative with the CCLME/FAO Mangrove Project promotes a
multinational agreement on policies and plans for sustainable management of mangrove
forests. Another initiative with the Océanium de Dakar group works on reforestation.
Currently one initiative is under implementation in Senegal by Wetlands International Africa,
in partnership with the BMZ mangrove Project which is developing sustainable management
of mangroves by restoring the ecological and socio-economic development including
considerations for the livelihoods of local communities. A wide variety of programs on
mangroves in West Africa are under development by IUCN, WIA and PRCM. It will be the
dashboard of all the intervention in terms of mangroves ecosystem restoration and
conservation. Despite initiative achievements, the degradation of mangrove in the region is
increasing (population pressure, climate change, pollution, coastal infrastructures,
urbanization), for sustainability, there is need to coordinate initiatives for better synergy and
efficiency.
Spatial'Evolution'of'the'Saloum Mangrove'(197292010)(DIEYE,' 2014)
The Progress Carbon Initiative in Guinea-Bissau
Leonildo Cardoso, Institute of Biodiversity and Marine Protected Areas
Guinea-Bissau boasts the 2nd largest mangrove forest in Africa, after Nigeria, with
mangroves covering approximately 9% of the country. Mangroves thrive due to the many
rivers and estuaries along the coast and are important for biodiversity and ecotourism.
16
Mangroves are important habitats for the five species of sea turtles that visit Guinea-Bisau,
the rare saw fish native only to Guinea-Bisau, and over 1 million migratory birds. Currently
Guinea-Bisua has 8 protected areas that contain 26% of the country territory within MPA
borders. Main threats include agriculture for rice, river sedimentation due to deforestation,
cutting for fish smoking and domestic energy, and timber for construction. To date local
communities have restored over 300 ha and there is a draft law being developed for the
protection of mangroves. Other activities mean to improve mangrove protection and increase
awareness of their importance include a Mangrove Action Plan, use of improved stoves,
limits on new rice field development, and development of a new REDD+ program that
includes mangroves. Despite recent progress many risks and challenges prevail include
navigating the country context (political instability, weak capacity, lack facilities), technical
complexity (methodologies, process), rapidly evolving international dialogue, costs, volatility
of carbon price, marketing/finding buyers and transaction complexity, reducing deforestation
rates on the ground (changing behavior, unpredictable external factors).
Mangrove Conservation in Liberia: Laying the foundation for Effective Protected Area
Management, Blue Carbon and Beyond
Liam Wash, Conservation International
Liberia hosts two of West Africa’s three largest remaining rainforest blocks containing many
plants and animal species that are endemic and whose survival is severely threatened. These
forest areas have also been internationally recognized as “biodiversity hotspots” and,
therefore, are priorities for global conservation efforts. Liberia’s forests provide a wide range
of benefits to the Liberian people such as habitat for a biodiverse group of species, ecological
services, ecotourism potential, timber and non-timber forest products, and significant input to
the national budget through commercial forestry development. Much of Liberia’s primary
mangrove forest has been lost, leaving small pockets of primary mangroves and secondary
growth. It is estimated that the rate of mangrove deforestation could be as high as 65% since
1980. Liberia’s protected areas network has proposed four mangrove areas for inclusion, but
little has been implemented to date to ensure mangrove conservation. The Lake Piso Multiple
Use Reserve has been established, but would still benefit significantly from land-use
planning and alternative livelihood activities. A GEF project is under development aimed
at reducing pressure on mangroves both within and outside the protected area network. The
project will introduce the Conservation Agreement (CA) methodology with communities
living in and around key mangrove areas. Conservation International will trial Conservation
Agreements as a delivery mechanism that should allow for future blue carbon payments and
payments for ecosystem services.
17
Session 3: Breakout groups – East and West Africa
West Africa moderated by Emily Pidgeon, Conservation International
East Africa moderated by Steve Crooks, Environmental Science Associates
Attendees were split into two groups based on geography to discuss the potential for blue carbon
in their region, concerns, questions, and to share information on current efforts in the respective
countries. The West Africa group chose to identify a 10-year goal and then discuss the capacity
needs (scientific and political) for reaching that goal. The East Africa group started by listing
current programs and efforts and then looked for gaps and areas of opportunity. Both approaches
yielded valuable, yet different, results. The Blue Carbon Initiative’s Scientific Working Group
will attempt to follow up with each group and develop a more comprehensive assessment of blue
carbon programs, opportunities, and capacity needs based on the break out group discussions as
well as compile blue carbon ecosystem data presented in sessions 1 and 2 to create an overview
of blue carbon for the continent of Africa.
West Africa Discussion
What is the long term goal for the region? Looking 10 years into the future the goal for the
region is to have sufficient government and NGO capacity to support sustainable
management of coastal ecosystems. Ideally this will involve clear leadership, or leadership
group, that can rally and support efforts (science particularly) and aid in cross-sectorial and
east west exchange of information through expert working groups and networks.
What are the technical challenges for implementing blue carbon projects in the region? The
biggest challenge is the existence of large data gaps (particularly in Guinea Bisua and
saltmarsh and seagrasses more generally) and a need for methods that work within the West
African context for monitoring, reporting, and verifying blue carbon data. However, in order
to address the data challenge technical capacity to gather the data is needed, and perhaps
more importantly a means of disseminating knowledge and training early career scientist in
cutting edge data collection techniques. Sophisticated data analysis, mapping, and ecosystem
service valuation were identified as areas where greater capacity is needed.
What are the capacity challenges for implementing blue carbon in the region? The
overwhelming challenge is that educational institutions are limited (both in terms of access
and level of education offered), there is not a culture of mentoring, and the experts that are
well trained in data collection and analysis are not many and not well connected. The socioeconomic structure of the region places a high value on specialized training and where
unemployment is high and knowledge is seen as power the incentive to share data and train
someone that could then be seen as competition for jobs is very low. Language also poses a
barrier to information sharing between countries. The level of awareness and appreciation of
the mangroves by the general public and decision makers is low. Countries in the region are
working on various communication strategies that focus on ecosystem services (i.e.,
fisheries, shore protection) as a means to increase public appreciation for coastal ecosystems
as a first step.
Opportunities and Next Steps: There are several projects that are underway or being
developed including the West Africa Biodiversity and Climate Change program with USAID
18
that will involve 15 countries, have a budget of $50 Million, and a timeline of 5 years. The
project will start early next year and mangroves are one of the three top priorities. Through
this project there will be opportunities for capacity building including training sessions with
experts (maybe BCSWG members) and possible funding to establish labs for sample
analysis. The idea of small start-ups for blue carbon data analysis and consulting is a possible
avenue for increasing the employment opportunities for skilled experts using USAID small
business grants. Opportunities to expand collaboration with western and central Africa was
discussed and it was mentioned that for a network to work there needs to be an institution or
initiative driving it. Possible options include WIOMSA which conducts an international
meeting every two years, the Nairobi Convention as many similar networks are anchored by
this Convention and Parliamentry Groups.
19
East Africa Discussion
What makes carbon finance a high priority? Programs like REDD+ are well established
throughout the region making mangroves and blue carbon integration into these kinds of
existing mechanisms appealing. NAMAs are also an interesting and relevant tool for carbon
finance in the region but there is a general lack of awareness and experience with designing
and implementing NAMAs and this poses a challenge. Carbon finance is a critical concern
for regional managers because many coastal conservation and restoration projects fail, never
begin, or are done incorrectly due to lack of funding to bring in experts, build capacity or do
the proper assessments prior to project implementation.
What are some of the challenges/limitations of conducting coastal carbon projects? For
seagrasses the challenge is that they are a low priority and their significant carbon
sequestration value and all the ecosystem services that they provide are not well known to
decision makers. Mangroves, despite being a higher priority to coastal managers and being
well recognized for their carbon value and ecosystem services, they are challenging to access
and communities are very protective of the mangroves stands under their jurisdiction.
Scientific capacity to carry out carbon assessments is also a challenge, mainly due to lack of
trained individuals and laboratories that can do the carbon analyses.
Despite the scientific challenges there is a high level of national support to pursue coastal
carbon as a means of supporting coastal management decisions and mitigating climate
change. National support in Madagascar is limited but has been improving in recent years,
Tanzania and Mozambique have good national support, and South Africa has national
legislation but they lack the financial means and tools to implement blue carbon projects (this
is limiting for all countries). In addition, long-term financial commitment for carbon projects
is lacking - most of the funding is short term, but this is exactly the type of challenge that
blue carbon could potentially address.
20
The group decided that mapping out projects and programs in each country was a good way to start identifying opportunities for
partnerships.
Carbon finance
Kenya
Tanzania
Mozambique
Gazi Bay Upscalling to other
regions as apart of
the Blue Forest
Project
Planvivo
Blueforest similar to
GAZI 3 sites
(proposal)
Zambezi
Considering
mangroves in the
national REDD,
also village REDD
projects
Considering to
include mangroves
in the readiness plan
Madagascar
South
Africa
Planvivo
VCS Northwest
NAMA
REDD (extension to
mangroves)
NBsap
All mangroves include in
the readiness plan
Mangroves are included
Zanzibar mangrove
ecotourism
PES
GAZI bay,
participatory forest
management
Conservation
community
agreements
Government
agreement with
community forest
association along
the coast
Include
mangroves in
readiness
preparation plan
Mangroves are
included
In development
with shrimp
fisheries
Mangroves
are included
Mangrove
Ecotourism
Community forest
agreement activities
Community agreement - 3
examples in different
regions
Government
supported
community
management
transfer of
resources
21
Kenya
Restoration
Mangroves,
seagrass Shimoni,
mangroves along
the coast
Mapping/Monitoring
Project seagrass
(Mombasa to Gazi)
bed and carbon
stocks, as well for
mangroves mapping along the
coast- Mombasa,
Gazi, Vanga
In development for
mangroves
National
management plan
ICZM, includes
seagrasses and
mangroves
Tanzania
Mozambique
Madagascar
South
Africa
Limited
estuaries
restoration
(marsh and
seagrass)
Mangrove along the
coast
Mangrove along the coast
Mangrove along
the west coast
CMS Rufiji Delta
Zambesi delta (carbon
monitoring system) CMS,
ecosystem mangroves
national mapping (Denise
more info)
National
As part of
Mangrove
the national
change map
biodiversity
exists, more
assessment
detailed maps for (saltmarshes,
5 sites
mangroves)
Mangrove
National coastal zone
monitoring plan for
management strategy
Zanzibar, restoration
including seagrass and
plan for 3 sites main
mangrove
land Tanzania
A management plan
will be developed for
the whole coast with
National mangrove
regard to mangroves management to be approved
2015
Map of mangroves
and seagrasses for
Tanzania
National
commission for
monitoring
mangroves priority activity
to establish this
plan
ICZM
National
estuary
biodiversity
plan
22
DAY 2 – September 24th
Trip to the Field
Morning
Community Initiatives in Conservation of Natural Stands of Mangroves at Kibele-Bungi villages
23
Lunch
Mangrove Boardwalk at Jozani Chwaka Bay National Park
24
Afternoon
Community mangroves restoration site and beekeeping at Kiogani Village
25
Day 3 – September 25th
Session 4: Blue carbon and coastal ecosystem restoration best practices and
challenges
Moderated by Kirsten Isensee
Saltmarsh
Steve Crooks, Environmental Science Associates
Why do restoration projects fail? Too often restoration projects are designed to be impressive
large scales efforts that provide dramatic before and after images that make for a good
headline. However, approaches that try to restore too much area too quickly, have
inappropriate goals, do not allow for a learning curve, and do not take into account the
hydrology or address the reason that the wetland was degraded initially will almost assuredly
fail. The most important steps in any wetland restoration project is to assess the drivers of
ecosystem degradation and assess the biogeomorphic parameters (e.g. location of the flood
plain, sedimentation rates, wave energy, sea level rise) needed to ensure habitat growth and
sustainability. Sedimentation rate and wave energy models are good way to predict the
success for the restoration project. After the biogeomorphology has been assessed the area to
be restored can be divided into sections so that each section is specifically designed
according to its parameters. Once the area has bee assessed and determined prime for
restoration selecting species for planting will be key. It is important to survey the location
and elevation in which plants grow best and making sure that plants are being placed in the
proper elevations and tide levels. Planting will increase the cost of the project significantly
and if the hydrology is correct planting might not even be needed (depending on the
proximity of similar habits that could propagate the area of interest over time). The steps
described can all be found in “Guiding principles for Delivering Coastal Wetland Projects”
from CIFOR and while it sounds difficult much can be done through simple traditional
ecological knowledge at the village scale.
Mangroves
Catherine Lovelock, University of Queensland
Over the years, there have been many different attempts to restore mangroves. Some of these
efforts have been gargantuan, involving several thousand hectares of coastal lands. Other
efforts have been small in comparison, with perhaps less than a hectare of mangroves
restored. Yet, in these efforts, both large and small, the lessons learned in this important
process are vital in reestablishing otherwise rapidly vanishing mangrove forests. Many
different strategies have been employed but the most successful efforts have focused on
community engagement (up to half of the project budget in some cases), understanding the
hydrology of the site, incorporating other ecosystem service benefits (i.e. fishing) and had a
plan for monitoring, learning, and adjusting the plan as needed. Despite the many successes
there have been many set backs even though the science behind mangrove restoration is well
established. Failures are largely due to not addressing the hydrological requirements for a
mangrove to thrive and loosing public engagement. Mangrove restoration can take a very
long time so it is important to have short term goals that keep communities motivated. Some
of the most prominent challenges are dealing with land tenure rights and convincing
26
communities and other stakeholders to embrace the entire process and not just rush to
planting as a “quick fix”. When it comes to the carbon benefit of restoring mangroves there is
a very limited number of studies showing that soil carbon is slow to regenerate and biomass
is the big component of carbon recovery early on. Looking at cost effectiveness, mangrove
restoration is more cost effective than salt marsh or seagrass restoration and is cheaper in
developing countries then developed countries presumably due to labor costs. One interesting
finding is that bigger projects do not necessarily mean they will be more cost effective, when
it comes to mangrove restoration there is no real economy of scale.
Bosire et al., 2008
Seagrass
Marieke van Katwijk, Radbound University Nijmegen
Coastal vegetation like seagrasses function as important social and economic resources (i.e.,
improved fisheries, ecotourism, etc.) but they also provide hugely valuable ecological
services within their own range as well as provide benefits to neighbouring ecosystems like
mangroves and corals. Seagrasses are declining resulting in the loss of these valuable
ecosystem services thus promoting efforts to restore large areas of seagrass meadows.
However, restoration is often challenging, due to the specific environmental requirements
that seagrass need to thrive. A worldwide meta-analysis of seagrass restoration trials (1786
trials), was done to determine best-practices and lessons learned. From that analysis, it was
determined that successful seagrass restoration must include an examination of why the
seagrasses were degraded initially (e.g. eutrophication, sedimentation) and a plan to address
those threats before planting. Planting techniques can influence restoration success. Planting
seeds or shoots at high densities over larger areas, close to the donor site has the highest
success rate.
27
28
Session 5: Concurrent session for in depth discussion
Restoration Break Out Group
Moderated by Catherine Lovelock
Group Members
Margareth Copertino, Miguel Fortes, Janine Brown, Faiz Rahman, Jim Fourqurean, Nuria
Marba, Hilary Kennedy, Jessica Benson, Makemie Mabula, Boone Kauffman, Daniel
Murdiyarso, Emily Pidgeon, Steve Crooks, Jennifer Howard, Marieke van Katwijk
Goal
Conduct an assessment of the role blue carbon can/should play in coastal restoration planning
given the relatively small amount of carbon sequestered per year following restoration
activities. Prepare a publication for a peer reviewed journal.
Discussion
Given the small amount of carbon sequestered in restoration projects should they even be
considered carbon projects? Depends on how you choose to define the carbon benefits, on
the one hand carbon sequestration rate is low (~8 tons of carbon per ha per year) in restored
areas and increases over time as the ecosystem becomes more established. However, taking
into account reductions in any ongoing emissions (especially if you are rewetting) and
restoring a functional carbon cycle may be enough to warrant using carbon as an incentive
for restoration.
Are we looking at the role of carbon in restoration the right way? As a justification for
restoration activities? The general consensus was yes; however, we may be using the wrong
words. The idea of “is it justifiable” is not capturing the entire issue, perhaps a better way to
state the issue is “is this feasible or economically defensible”. However, everyone agreed that
not all good restoration projects are going to be suitable carbon projects.
What is the value added by including carbon in the project design and management? One
option id to highlight that restoration projects are usually only funded in the short-term
planting phase and long term monitoring is often incomplete due to lack of funds. Carbon
could be used in a long term funding strategy. Alternatively, could the carbon component of
one project be used to purchase land to maintain the restored habitat (i.e. flexible movement
related to sea level rise)?
If carbon is a good reason to promote restoration, how much carbon can actually be
sequestered? This is not currently known but might be possible to estimate based on total
area that is suitable for restoration and the potential carbon removals associated with that
area. Ideally an assessment could be done to determine estimates of total restorable area,
potential sequestration rates and net carbon gain for each ecosystem, accompanied by an
economic analysis of those carbon gains. Then based on this information we could begin to
understand and prioritize locations where restoration activities will yield the highest carbon
benefits.
29
Brief outline, this will likely change dramatically as the paper is formed:
!! Science
o! Determining if a restoration project can also be a carbon project
!! Ongoing carbon emissions
!! Potential emissions removals directly related to the project
!! Carbon sequestration rate for the area and habitat type
o! How much can be restored and will this have a global impact on carbon emissions
removals
!! Estimated area of converted land from wetland to some other use
!! Percentage of land available for restoration
!! Translate into carbon sequestered per year and compare to global emission
rates
!! Can we be more quantitative about the risks? And can we manage for it?
•! Drought
•! SLR
•! Frost
•! Interactions among drivers
o! FIGURE – decision tree or scoring system (Steve Crooks will draft)
!! Avoided emissions
!! Carbon sequestration
!! Methane emissions reductions
!! Potential permanence
!! Risk of reversal
!! Site selection
!! Planning and management
!! Context of ecosystem service co-benefits
!! Policy
o! Funding restoration projects under the UNFCCC climate mitigation mechanisms
o! Time scale is important – something that works in the US for 50 years but the
same thing in Zanzibar might not work under the same time scale due to political
and social issues
!! Case studies (with economic analyses)
Output
The group members will produce a peer reviewed publication that summarizes our current
understanding of the role blue carbon can play in restoration.
Timeline for the Paper
A draft will be prepared by January 1st, 2016
Completed review by the working group by March 1st, 2016
Submit to a peer review journal by April 15th, 2016
30
Carbon Project Development Break Out Group
Moderated by Igino Emmer
The goal of this group was to provide country representative, project managers, and decision
makers with background information on how to implement a blue carbon project with particular
focus on entering carbon markets. The format centered on presentations by Working Group
members outlining projects that they are involved in (including lessons learned, advice on how to
scale up a project, and the steps for carbon crediting) followed by an extensive question and
answer session.
Costa Rica – Gulf of Nicoya
Miguel Cifuentes and Marco Quesada
The project goal is to improve human well being in the Nicoya Peninsula by promoting the
long-term sustainable use, restoration and effective management of the region’s critical
mangrove ecosystems. Results from the project include a completed assessment of critical
ecosystem services provided by mangroves in the Gulf of Nicoya, communication and
outreach to policy-makers on the importance of the ecological and economic mangroves,
micro-entrepreneurs on Chira Island have increased capacity and support to develop new
mangrove-based tourism opportunities, and at least 100 school children have participated in
the mangrove restoration project and education program. In terms of the carbon component
of this project it was determined that mangroves in the gulf area covered 13,516 ha and
contained between 413-1335 Mg/C/ha worth over $50 million in the Gulf region alone. The
main threats to the carbon stock are shrimp ponds, and while mangroves in Costa Rica are all
federally protected illegal cutting for shrimp production is still carried out.
As knowledge of Costa Rica’s carbon stocks build, there is a need to start thinking about how
to incorporate wetland carbon measurements into forest monitoring systems, specifically
under REDD+, and provide consistent information on activity data and emissions factors
which can be fed into national GHG inventories. Ultimately the goal is for this work to
inform policy and help determine implementation options and the costs associated to them.
Approach used in the Gulf of Nicyoa:
-! Carry out ecosystem-level carbon stocks inventories in priority sites
-! Analyze historical land-use dynamics and estimate historic carbon emissions associated
to those dynamics
-! Study the linkages between the provision of ecosystem services by mangroves and the
stability of local livelihoods
-! Promote human capacities (both scientific/technical and political) across the region
-! Promote the development of policy statements
-! Build regional networks of practice to scale up and disseminate knowledge
The project is now 2 years old and the carbon analysis has been completed and a feasibility
assessment for carbon crediting is underway. The project has been scaled up from a single
research project to a series of actions and topics across the CARD region.
31
Lessons learned:
-! Data is powerful and an image speaks a thousand words
-! There is a need to raise awareness and capacities among decision-makers and technicians.
To do this, we need “champions” – people who own the message and can inform others.
-! Talking about carbon and mitigation to local communities is a “no-go”. Coastal
communities are more urgently concerned with maintaining their livelihoods, with local
degradation of their resources, and with seeking adaptation measures against climate
change and external human influences
-! Lastly, this is a broad topic that needs many different skills. This is why seeking
partnerships and developing networks of practice is so important.
• 2431)ha)lost
• =28%)of)national GHG)
emissions
• Nation=wide)47610)ha)lost)
(1992=2014)
• Carbon neutrality goal?
Cifuentes)et)al.)(2014)
Kenya – Gazi Bay
James Kairo
This project aims to enhance mangrove productivity and integrity by carrying out activities
that benefit local communities and attract carbon investments using the Plan Vivo system and
standards to sell carbon credits on the voluntary carbon market. Activities include:
reforestation of degraded mangroves areas, reporting and verification of carbon stocks in
designated mangrove areas, establishing woodlots to subsidize mangrove wood harvesting,
sale of carbon credits (approx. 3,000t CO2-per annum), and community consultations. The
project in Gazi Bay encompasses 651 ha of mangroves that are heavily exploited for energy
and building products. The project started in 2010 and since its inception it has stimulated
livelihoods (ecotourism and energy), funded community service projects (education and
water sanitation), and contributed to mangrove restoration. This is also the fist and still one
of the only carbon projects where carbon credits can be purchased through the Markit
32
Registry ($11/ton, minimum purchase of 10 credits). Proceeds from selling carbon credits are
used based on what the community has decided are its top priorities. This is done through an
annual stakeholder and community consultation process.
Economics of Coastal Blue Carbon
Linwood Pendleton
The presentation covered the basic economic and financial issues associated with blue
carbon. A distinction was drawn between economic impacts (how blue carbon affects the
wellbeing of society) and the financial impacts of carbon offsets. The affect of carbon
market prices on the viability of carbon offsets was discussed showing that at its highest
price, the European carbon offset market would offer blue carbon projects a financial return
at least as great as shrimp farming. The relative economic pros and cons of blue forest
restoration were discussed and its was proposed that, all things being equal, it is more
33
economically cost effective to protect existing blue forest ecosystems than to let them
degrade and then try to restore them. The presentation ended with a discussion about two
different economic perspectives for analyzing blue carbon economics: a) is blue carbon the
most cost effective way to store carbon and b) can payments for blue carbon improve coastal
conservation and management.
Potential)Carbon-Credit)Values
34
Following the presentations, session participants compiled a list of possible blue carbon
projects including information and capacity needs.
Country
Projects/Programs
Goal
China
Guinea Bissau
Indonesia
Mangrove, restoration,
conservation, preparing
road map for REDD
accounting
Several mangroves
projects in progress,
funded by government
and bilateral countries
Kenya
Existing mangrove
projects that could be
upscaled to seagrass
Kenya
Part of the upscaling
project mentioned
before, focusses on
seagrass
Upscaling in the south
Try to include the
accounting part in their
projects – used measures
planvivo (established)
standard will include
VCS
Upscaling also spatially
for mangroves
Kenya
Kenya
Kenya
Kenya
Kenya
Blue solution,
how to use the
ecosystem in a
sustainable way,
carbon credits
are not the major
focus due to bad
experience from
terrestrial
projects
Targeting the
voluntary
market
Support and
Science Needs
Standards for
measurement
Baseline for
accounting needed,
methodology
Analysis of carbon
samples, and how
to transfer the
knowledge into
legislation, and
how to
communicate it to
local communities
Link to carbon
market, how to
account for the
carbon stored
Scientific
project
REDD+, VCS
planvivo
Capacity building,
communicating
with policy makers
Important to control
the expectations
towards blue
carbon projects
35
Country
Liberia (CI)
Madagascar
Madagascar
Madagascar WWF
Mozambique
Senegal
Senegal/Gambia
Tanzania
Tanzania
Tanzania
Projects/Programs
Goal
Mangrove conservation
project (soon), rapid
mangrove assessment,
followed by hydrology,
carbon assessment
Northwest large scale,
Southwest small scale
Conservation,
MPA creation
National project, climate
change vulnerability of
all mangroves
West part Madagascar,
assessment
Management
project,
carbon credits
Including in
REDD+
Small scale project
mangrove
No blue carbon projects,
Mangrove reforestation,
together with 7 countries
in west Africa
Feasibility study –
mangroves
Main goal
carbon market
No blue carbon projects
so far, but strategies and
pilot project plans
existing – preparation
process
Mangrove – restoration,
focusing on other
ecosystem services
Estimate for carbon
stocks exists, based on
model
Carbon projects
Support and
Science Needs
Methodology for
VCS for mangrove,
carbon accounting
mechanism, sea
level rise how to
incorporate that?
Technical capacity
for implementation
is needed, financial
support
Support
Wants to learn what
blue carbon
projects are
Targeting the
voluntary
market
Capacity building
in particular for
science aspects as
data collection and
interpretation, as
well as
communication and
awareness raising
with policy makers.
But no carbon
finance included
Quantifying
carbon stocks
More field data
needed, to validate
models
36
Country
Projects/Programs
Tanzania
Tanzania
Plans to work closer
with Fisheries
Department, integration
of blue carbon and
fisheries
Tanzania
Tanzania
Tanzania
Tanzania (Institute of
Marine Sciences)
Goal
Intend to include
mangrove in
REDD+
Pilot project for Carbon accounting
REDD +
mechanisms
REDD+ and
voluntary
market
Collaboration with other
universities, e.g. UK,
new project for blue
carbon credits with UK
and Kenya in Tanzania,
5 pilot sites
Mangroves Fisheries
Support and
Science Needs
Awareness raising
in the communities,
also be realistic
about blue carbon
projects
Including
Payment for
Ecosystem
Services
Training for carbon
measurements
37