PIN

Transcription

NTFP - PFM R & D PROJECT
CARBON OFFSETS
PLAN VIVO PROJECT CONCEPT NOTE
Mizen Teferi,
July, 2009
NTFP-PFM RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
CONTENTS
METHODOLOGICAL NOTE....................................................................................... v
SUMMARY OF PROJECT IDEA ............................................................................... vi
1. TARGET GROUPS AND PROJECT OBJECTIVES ........................................... 1
1.1
Project Area ................................................................................................ 1
1.2
Target Groups ............................................................................................. 3
1.2.1
Primary Target Groups ......................................................................... 3
1.1.2
Other Project Target Groups ................................................................ 4
1.2
Non Timber Forest Products Research and Development Project Objectives
4
2. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AREA ................................................................ 6
2.1
Physical Environment .................................................................................. 6
2.2
Existing Vegetation and Land Use............................................................... 6
2.2.1
Dominant Land Cover Types and Extent .............................................. 6
2.2.2
Forest Coffee Ecosystems: .................................................................. 7
2.2.3
Agricultural Land Use Systems ............................................................ 8
2.2.4
Trends in Land Cover Change ........................................................... 10
2.2.5
Proximate and Underlying Causes of Land Cover Change and Key
Agents 12
2.2.6
Influencing Environmental Factors ..................................................... 15
2.3
Socio-economic Environment .................................................................... 15
2.3.1
Local Cultural Groups ........................................................................ 15
2.3.2
Identification and Characterization of Social Groups .......................... 15
2.4
National and Local Governance Structures ............................................... 17
2.4.1
National and Regional Structures ....................................................... 17
2.4.2
Local Forest Management Institutions ................................................ 17
2.5
Estimated Carbon Baseline ....................................................................... 18
2.5.1
Methodology ...................................................................................... 18
2.5.2
Preliminary Estimates of Carbon Lost from Current Rates of
Deforestation without and with the Project ....................................................... 19
3. OWNERSHIP OF CARBON RIGHTS – LAND TENURE AND BENEFIT
SHARING ................................................................................................................ 22
3.1
National Framework .................................................................................. 22
3.1.1
Land Administration ........................................................................... 22
3.1.2
Forestry.............................................................................................. 22
3.1.3
Investment ......................................................................................... 23
3.2
Local Framework....................................................................................... 24
3.3
Benefit Sharing of Funds from the Sale of Carbon Offsets ........................ 25
4. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTIVITIES AND ECOSYSTEM IMPACTS ....... 27
5. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND GOVERNANCE
STRUCTURE .......................................................................................................... 28
5.1
Project Organization .................................................................................. 28
5.2
Governance Structure ............................................................................... 29
5.2.1
Project Coordinator ............................................................................ 29
5.2.2
Technical Team ................................................................................. 29
5.2.3
Technical Support Services................................................................ 30
6. COMMUNITY LED DESIGN PLAN .................................................................. 31
7. ADDITIONALITY ANALYSIS ........................................................................... 34
7.1
Current Barriers to avoiding Deforestation................................................. 34
7.2
How the Project will overcome these barriers ............................................ 34
8. COMPLIANCE WITH NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL REGULATIONS .... 35
9. SOURCES OF START UP FUNDING. ............................................................ 35
PLAN VIVO PROJECT CONCEPT
ii
iii
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AGB
BGB
CBO
CO2
DNA
ENTRO
ETB
FAO
GHG
ha
IPCC
LULUCF
masl
NPV
NTFP
PFM
PLUM
RDCO
REDD
SNNPRS
TEV
WBISPP
Above Ground Biomass
Below Ground Biomass
Community Based Organisation
Carbon Dioxide
Designated National Authority
Eastern Nile Technical Regional Office
Ethiopian Birr
Food and Agricultural Organization
Green House Gas
hectare
Inter-government Panel on Climate Change
Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry
meters above sea level
Net Present Value
Non Timber Forest Product
Participatory Forest Management
Participatory Land Use Management
Rural Development Coordination Office
Reduced Deforestation and Degradation of Forest
Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples Regional State
Total Economic Value
Wood Biomass Inventory and Strategic Planning Project (19902005)
iv
METHODOLOGICAL NOTE
The development of this pre-feasibility study has relied on the following
methodologies:
·
Plan Vivo Project Concept Application Template
·
Plan Vivo Manual: Guidance for Developing Projects
·
Good Practice Guidelines for Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry
(IPCC, 2003);
·
Chapter 5 ("Project Based Activities") of the IPCC's Land Use, Land Use
Change and Forestry (IPCC, 2000);
·
"Sourcebook for Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry Projects"
(Pearson et al., 2005);
·
"Draft REDD Methodology" prepared by CATIE for the World Bank's
BioCarbon Fund (Pedroni, 2008).
v
SUMMARY OF PROJECT IDEA
This Project Concept Note examines a potential carbon offset project involving
Reduced Deforestation and Degradation of Forests (REDD) in the Montane Forests
of Southwest Ethiopia. Current deforestation rates are estimated to be 2,530 ha/yr
within the Project's Reference region or approximately 1 percent per annum.
The project will cover some 81,000 ha of Montane Broadleaf Forest and build on the
activities of the Non Timber Forest Products – Participatory Forest Management
Research and Development Project. The main objective of the Project is:
‘To maintain a forested landscape to support improved livelihoods of local
forest-dependent communities and thereby ensure the delivery of
environmental services in a wider context’
Deforestation is being reduced by establishing village level Participatory Forest
Management (PFM) Associations as legal entities. The PFM Associations are
developing forest management plans for designated and geo-referenced blocks of
natural forest. The forest management plans set out sustainable NTFP harvesting
activities that maintain the integrity of the forest. The PFM Associations are
supported by local Government Rural Development Coordinating Offices. Village
level Private Limited Companies are being established to undertake quality control
and marketing of NTFP's to increase value added and thus farm-gate prices.
Proximate causes of deforestation (in particular expansion of agriculture) are being
addressed through support to communities in intensification of crop and livestock
production, expanding the range of alternative livelihoods (fruit trees production,
homestead garden spice production) and participatory development of sustainable
land use and management systems. Underlying causes of deforestation (policy
failures, lack of strategic land use planning) are being addressed through networking
with other CBO's and BGO's involved with SFM; through capacity building support to
CBO's and Government Rural Development Staff and through advocacy activities.
The Project would (i) undertake a detailed inventory of wood biomass to estimate the
carbon in the forest, (ii) estimate the amount of avoided deforestation on which the
carbon estimate would be made allowing for an insurance buffer and un-avoided
deforestation1, and (iii) secure certification from the Plan Vivo Foundation following
an external review. The Certified Carbon Offsets (certificates) can then be sold to
generate funds. The funds would be deposited in a woreda Trust Fund managed by a
Board of Trustees representing Communities and Government. In order to ensure a
regular flow of carbon funds (i.e. every 3 to 5 years) forest cover and biomass
monitoring would be required over a 25 year timeframe.
1
Carbon offsets are only eligible from the forest prevented from deforestation (approximately
1%/annum) – not the entire forest.
vi
Front Map 1. Location Map of the NTFP – PFM R & D Project in
Southwest Ethiopia.
vii
Front Map 2.
The NTFP – PFM Project Reference Region showing
Project Area woredas. (Note: Land over 2,000masl not suitable for
coffee).
viii
Front Map 3. The NTFP - PFM Reference Region showing 24 Project Area
kebeles.
ix
1.
1.1
TARGET GROUPS AND PROJECT OBJECTIVES
Project Area
The Project is located in the north-western part of the Southern Nations,
Nationalities and Peoples Regional State (SNNPRS) (see Front Map 1) and
focuses on five woredas2: Anderacha and Masha woredas in Sheka
Administrative Zone, Gesha woreda in Kefa Administrative Zone and Sheko,
South Bench woreda in Bench-Maji Administrative Zone (see Front Map 2).
The five woredas cover some 347,381 ha with some 139,750ha of Montane
Rain Forest and Highland bamboo (covering 40 percent of the area).
Following the draft REDD methodology developed by CATIE for the World
Bank Bio-Carbon Fund two areas are defined:
·
Reference Region: Domain from which information on deforestation and
forest degradation agents, underlying and proximate causes and rates are
extracted and projected.
·
Project Area: The area where the forest to be protected is located.
Reference Region covers some 347,381 ha and comprises the area located
in the western part of the Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples
Regional State (SNNPRS) and focuses on five woredas: Anderacha and
Masha woredas in Sheka Zone, Gesha woreda in Kefa Zone and Sheko,
Bench woreda in Bench-Maji Zone.
Project Area: The project Area comprises 24 kebeles3 indicated in table 1
and Map 1 with a total area of 107,086 ha and a forest area of 80,988 ha.
2
3
“Woreda” is an administrative unit equivalent to District.
Kebeles are the smallest administrative Unit below the Woreda.
1
GIS ID #
30
34
50
46
39
66
Kebelle
Duwina
Goja
Shera
Chegecha
Gada
Yoki Cheche
TOTAL
Wereda
Andracha
Andracha
Andracha
Andracha
Andracha
Andracha
12
16
19
18
21
Turo Acharachi
Alemgena
Bahito Chechitoyeri
Dingiro Endera
GerechoGocheti
TOTAL
Gesha
Gesha
Gesha
Gesha
Gesha
4,075
3,210
4,393
6,208
3,623
21,510
2
1
3
39
7
8
Uwa
Keja
W elo Kela
Gada
W elo Bato
W elo Shoba
TOTAL
Masha
Masha
Masha
Andracha
Masha
Masha
2,589
2,474
4,171
3,258
2,820
2,984
18,297
Shimi
Shayta
Jemdos
Sanka
TOTAL
Sheko
Sheko
Sheko
Sheko
4,955
1,401
7,764
4,517
18,637
157
114
100
113
116 Fandoka
South Bench
149 Bebeka Ersha Lemate South Bench
118 No Name
South Bench
TOTAL
GRAND TOTAL
Area (ha)
4,681
10,711
12,658
1,714
3,258
4,149
37,172
2,411
3,737
5,323
11,471
107,086
Table 1. Target Kebeles in the project Area where Avoided Deforestation
Activities will take place.
If sufficient funding is approved the Project will upscale this to cover an
additional 30 kebeles in the same 5 woredas to ensure that all major forested
areas are covered by participatory forest management arrangements.
The Project is supporting the establishment of Community-based
Organizations (CBO’s), initially at the got level and subsequently at the kebele
level, termed Participatory Forest Management Associations (PFMA’s).
PFMA’s are registered legal institutions under the Penal Code and non-profit
organizations. PFMA’s have legal agreements with the Woreda Agriculture
and Rural Development Coordination Offices (ARDCO’s) to administer areas
of forest within their jurisdiction. The Project has also supported the same
communities to establish small Private Limited Companies (PLC’s) to deal
with the marketing of NTFP’s. In addition the government also supports
establishment of Cooperatives for input supply, marketing and for savings and
credit.
2
1.2
Target Groups
1.2.1 Primary Target Groups
The primary target groups are local communities whose economies are partly
forest-based and partly with economies based on annual crops and livestock
agriculture and partly based on annual/perennial crops and agro-forestry.
Households are the target for all productive activities with men and women
given equal opportunities. PFMA’s and other CBO's, both formal and
informal, involved with NTFP production, processing, marketing and
participatory forest management, are the specific target groups, with a strong
PFMA at each kebele envisaged to function as an umbrella organisation for
others at the got4 level.
The target groups have been identified through the present work in the project
area. Forest-dependent communities are chosen because they have the
greatest interest in the long-term survival of the forests. PFMA’s are required
for sustainable and effective development of activities related to NTFP
production and marketing, as well as PFM activities. PLC’s and Cooperatives
are essential for the organisation of NTFP marketing in general and especially
for certified marketing.
The major needs which the communities, PFMA’s and Cooperatives have
expressed include:
·
·
·
·
·
·
better income generating opportunities to reduce poverty and improve
livelihood security,
greater clarity on access and use rights for forest areas, especially for
community rights,
improved access to information on government policies and related
rules and guidelines which affect them, especially on forests,
resettlement, and private investment,
capacity building, in terms of skills, materials and finance, to improve
production systems, especially NTFPs which contribute cash income
and help address seasonal food security,
market information for gaining better prices for their produce, especially
NTFPs, and
greater recognition by government and involvement of communities in
participatory decision making relating to forest use and development.
Socio-economic and socio-cultural details of the various target groups are
provided in section 2.2.
4
A “got” is a village. Two or more gots comprise a kebele.
3
1.1.2 Other Project Target Groups
Secondary target groups include Government Administration and other
Government Organizations (GO's) involved in policy development at the local,
regional and national levels; government technical and field staff, education
and research centres in the project area. Primary Cooperatives and
Cooperative Unions are considered as target groups, especially in relation to
processing and trading of NTFP.
Specific needs and constraints identified by government staff include:
·
·
·
poor exchange of information, on markets, access rules, rights and
responsibilities, etc.,
centrally elaborated sectoral policies are often contradictory and not
compatible with the local needs and opportunities, and
lack of investment funds, potential divergent interests and opportunities
among different groups and potential tensions.
Through full involvement in and support for implementing project activities, the
local government institutions will feel strengthened to play a key role in
supporting rural development, based on local environmental and social
conditions, reducing the potential conflicts and competing claims on the
resource base of the area.
The progress and preliminary findings of the NTFP-PFM R&D project show
clearly that the participatory approach and focus on NTFP
development/trading and PFM are being considered as highly relevant for
sustainable local development, both by community members and local
governments.
1.2 Non Timber Forest Products Research and Development
Project Objectives
The overall objective of the project is:
‘To maintain a forested landscape to support improved livelihoods of local forestdependent communities and thereby ensure the delivery of environmental services in a
wider context’
This refers to the maintenance of a range of forest landscapes – with different
tree species due to altitude and rainfall, which can contribute to improved
livelihoods amongst the communities who are to various degrees dependent
on the forests and are living in these forests and adjoining areas. In addition,
the objective of forest maintenance has globally important implications for the
maintenance of biodiversity, specifically of wild Coffea arabica, and national
and regional implications for the maintenance of the sound hydrological
functioning of this area as a key headwater area of the Nile Basin and a
source of moisture for the monsoon in Northern Ethiopia.
4
The specific objective through which the overall objective of the project will be
obtained is:
‘To develop and promote integrated practices of non-timber forest product
development, local participatory forest management and forest-based economic
activities for different people/forest scenarios through local capacity building and
advocacy.’
This will contribute to the overall objective of maintaining a forested landscape
to support improved livelihoods, by developing increased economic value
from forested areas, thereby increasing the interest of communities to
manage these areas in a sustainable manner which maintains the forest.
These activities are being organised around NTFP Producer Groups, who will
be supported to develop skills not only in production of these products but
also in adding value to them through processing and in niche marketing. The
latter has a considerable potential and wild forest coffee, spices and honey
will be tested as marketing brands building on coffee certification.
These NTFP groups are being linked to community groups responsible for
Participatory Forest Management (PFM). The approach to PFM seeks to
develop recognition of the value of different forest areas for different benefits,
especially different NTFPs – both for market and domestic use, but also
biodiversity conservation and watershed management. Broad forest zonation
will form the basis for the development of management practices, which will
be implemented by the local communities, these seeking to ensure the
maintenance of the forest and the NTFPs therein.
This process towards the development of well managed and productive
forests will be supported by training and capacity development activities for
government staff that will support the farmers groups in their NTFP and PFM
activities. There will also be, with project support, policy dialogue development
between communities and government staff to develop improved local,
regional and national policy frameworks for forest protection and sound
environmental management with PFM supported and local access rights
confirmed.
The project activities will be adjusted to the different people/forest scenarios.
By this is meant different ecological types of forest, different degrees of forest
degradation or preservation and diversity in terms of the peoples involved with
the forests, including minority groups who are indigenous to the areas. In all
cases the interaction with the surrounding land uses is important and action to
reduce clearance pressure on the forest will be taken through the
development with communities of models for sustainable land management.
5
2.
2.1
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AREA
Physical Environment
The Project area lies between 900 and 2,750 masl and is located partly in the
river basins of the Baro-Sobat-White Nile and the Omo-Lake Turkana (see
Front Map 2).
The target woredas are underlain by Tertiary Trapp basalts, which give rise to
humic Nitosols5. When recently cleared for agriculture these soils are well
structured, high in organic matter and fertile. However, they rapidly loose
these properties under constant cultivation.
The rainfall pattern is uni-modal from April through to October although rain
can fall in any month. Over the target woredas mean annual rainfall is
between 1,700 to 2,000 mm in the south rising to 2,000 to 2,300 mm in the
north. Mean annual temperatures are governed largely by altitude: areas in
the north over 2,000 masl are between 13° and 17° C, whilst those between
1,500 and 2,000 masl range between 17° and 22° C (End map 4).
2.2
Existing Vegetation and Land Use
2.2.1 Dominant Land Cover Types and Extent
Data on the existing vegetation and land use and changes in land cover from
1973 has been obtained by the NTFP-PFM Project using Landsat TM images
of the project area for 1973, 1984, 2001 and 2005.
The main forest types are correlated strongly with altitude:
lower altitude (900 – 1,500 masl) Transitional Rainforest of the
south-western escarpment (with coffee above 1,100 masl) which
merges into,
(ii- a) medium altitude (1,500 – 1,950 masl) Broadleaved Afro-montane
forest (with coffee),
(ii- b) higher altitude (1,950 – 2,500 masl) Broadleaved Afro-montane
forest without coffee;
(iii)
pure stands of Highland Bamboo (Arundinaria alpina) forest
between 2,500 – 2,750 masl
(Source: Friis, 1992).
(i)
(i)
Transitional Forests
The Transitional Forests occur between 900 to 1,500 masl. The major tree
species are Aningeria altissima, Anthocleista schweinfurthii, Ouratea
bukobense, Celtis philippensis, Croton machrostachyus, Elaeodendron
5
Deep red sandy clay loam soils: slightly to moderately acidic, with topsoil high in organic
matter.
6
buchananii, Eugenia bukobensis, Ficus exasperata Garcinia huillensis,
Manikara butugi, Morus mesozygia, Strychnos mitis, Trichilia degeana and
Trilepsium madagascerensis. Transitional forest in the five woredas covers
some 36,140 ha or some 19% of the total forest. Most of this forest has wild
and managed coffee.
(ii)
Medium and Higher Altitude Afro-montane Forest
The Afro-Montane forest becomes more diverse in species from east to west
(i.e. with increasing rainfall) and with decreasing altitude (i.e. with increasing
temperature). Forests in the Baro catchment are thus floristically richer than in
the Omo catchments. Four strata can be generally recognized. The highest
stratum is formed by trees 30 to 50 m high, the most important of which are
Aningeria adolfi-friederici, Ficus spp, and Syzygium guineense. Below this is a
dense stratum of tree 18 to 25 m high with a wide range of species. The third
stratum of small trees and bushes includes Galinera coffeodes and Coffea
arabica. Coffee arabica is not found above 1,900 masl in its wild state. The
ground stratum includes Aframomum korarima and long pepper, important
local spices. The Afro-montane forest in the project area covers some
153,4400ha or 81% of the total forest.
(iii)
Highland Bamboo (Arundinaria alpina)
Highland bamboo is found above 2,450 masl on a broad plateau in Masha
and Anderecha woredas that overlooks the Gambella Lowlands. A similar
block of highland plateau at the same altitude to the northeast in Gesha
woreda is devoid of Highland bamboo. It is not clear why this is so, although
the area in Gesha woreda may be in the rain-shadow of the highland area in
Masha and Anderacha woredas. After a number of years (variously put at
between 20 and 50 years) the bamboo flowers then dies in large areas.
Recovery takes about 2 to 4 years. Currently, the bamboo is used only locally,
mainly for fencing and house construction. Highland Bamboo in the Project
area covers some 11,100 ha.
2.2.2 Forest Coffee Ecosystems:
Three forest coffee ecosystems have been recognized (Feyera Senbeta and
Dench, 2006), which follow a trajectory of increasing forest disturbance, from
undisturbed wild coffee forest through to “semi-forest coffee plantation”:
(i)
Undisturbed wild coffee forest which only involves harvesting of
wild coffee,
(ii)
Semi-forest coffee which involves clearing of the under-storey and
thinning a larger trees, and
(iii)
Semi-forest coffee plantations which involve modification of forest
vegetation as with semi-forest coffee but with the addition of
seedlings either from undisturbed coffee forest or from traditional or
modern cultivars from nurseries.
7
Tadesse Woldemariam (2003) in his study of the Yayu Forest near Gore in
Oromiya Region to the north of the Project area, divided Semi-forest coffee
into two age groups: (a) less than and (b) more than 5 years old. This division
was based on clear differences in tree species numbers and vegetation
structure. Areas of older Semi-forest Coffee had fewer species, shade tree
density was lower and greatly reduced under-storey.
A fourth coffee cultivation system is the homestead garden coffee-based
agro-forestry systems under natural or planted shade trees.
The three categories of coffee forest differ considerably in their degree of
human alteration of the original wild coffee forest and thus of importance in
determining their relative importance for carbon sequestration as well as for
conservation of the coffee gene pool.
2.2.3 Agricultural Land Use Systems
There is a clear distinction between the agro-forestry landscapes of the
southern part of the Project area (Bench and Sheko woredas) and those of
the north in Masha, Anderacha and Gesha woredas.
(i)
Agro-Forestry Landscapes of South Bench and Sheko Woredas in
the South
Generally the target kebeles lie between 1,100 and 1,700 masl and are thus
well within the wild coffee zone. The agricultural-settlement landscape is quite
distinct from the forest landscapes. The settlement-agricultural landscape has
a number of landscape elements. The homestead and homestead gardens
are quite distinct from cropland and from the grazing lands. Homesteads are
generally located along the ridges. The homestead gardens are quite complex
and exhibit a number of sub-elements:
·
·
·
·
·
·
Enset garden: small number of plants (10-30)
small vegetable patch (local cabbage, taro, beans, sweet potato, onions,
peppers)
Fruit (mango, papaya)
Banana garden (10 – 30 plants)
Coffee (little/no shade)
Small Eucalyptus woodlots
The annual croplands are generally located on steep slopes below the ridge
crests. Very occasionally Vetiver grass strips are seen. The main crop is
maize with sorghum and more recently teff. Cropping is practiced for 6 to 9
years before being fallowed for 1 or 2 years. Fields are un-fenced.
Grazing lands are also located on the steep slopes and are often infested with
shrubs. Livestock feed and water supply are problems in the dry season.
Grazing areas are unfenced. No homestead forage is cultivated.
8
Wetlands: These are used for dry-season maize and all-year round taro
production. Problems are reported with over-drainage and loss of fertility
(particularly important for taro).
Figure 1.
Annual cropland on steep slopes in Shayito kebele. (Note
Vetiver grass strip in foreground.)
(ii)
Agro-forestry Landscapes of Anderacha, Masha and Gesha
Woredas in the North
Much of the area of Anderacha, Masha and Gesha woredas is above the wild
coffee zone. Compared with South Bench woreda the area of forest is
significantly larger. The Agro-forest landscapes and landscape elements
exhibit some significant differences from those in Sheko and Bench woredas.
The homestead garden is dominated by enset with three to four times the
number of plants than the southern agro-landscape. Coffee is of very minor
importance (altitude is 2,200 masl) and where grown is for own-consumption
only. Vegetable crops include taro and local cabbage.
Crop and grazing lands are invariably fenced, often with Euphorbia spp. The
range of crops is wider than the south: maize, teff, wheat, barley and pulses.
Grazing fields are often individually owned. Many of the livestock are tethered
9
when grazing. The farmers follow a field rotation of first year crops, next year
grass followed by crops again. There is also a crop rotation superimposed on
the field rotation of maize, pulses, teff and then wheat or barley. Maize trash
lines are used in teff fields only, farmers having recognized the higher erosion
potential of a teff crop. These systems are extremely efficient in retaining and
recycling soil organic matter and nutrients.
Figure 2.
Enset Gardens and Fenced Crop and Grassland Fields in
Uwa Kebele.
Elsewhere many areas have fenced communal grazing fields that are
generally not cropped. Along the main road between Masha and Gecha
cabbages and Irish potatoes are common in many fields. Eucalyptus woodlots
are common and in Gesha woreda there are planted Highland bamboo
patches.
2.2.4 Trends in Land Cover Change
Trends in land cover change were derived from the interpretation of Landsat
satellite images for the years 1973, 1987, 2001 and 20056. The years 1973,
1987 and 2001-2005 represent three major political phases through which
Ethiopia passed. Thus, 1973 represents the pre-1975 revolution years of the
reign of Haile Selassie; 1987 represents the era of the Derg (1975-1991)
whilst the 2001-2005 years represent the post-Derg era (1991 to the present).
6
This is currently being updated for 2009.
10
Following the Menelik conquest of Southern Ethiopia land that was often
under communal access institutions came under the control of northern
landlords or the Government. Although the original inhabitants continued to
crop the land this was as tenants and they were obliged to return to the
landlord a third ("siso") of their production. Under the post-conquest system
the forest lands were divided into blocks and the landlords allocated rights to
their tenants to use the forest land for honey production. The land to which
these rights belonged became recognized as "kobo" land. Following the land
reform in 1975 the cropland reverted to individual user rights although the
State retained ultimate control. In the northern woredas Kobo rights
continued to be recognized, but only in the use of trees for honey production,
rather than to the land itself. This has continued in the post-Derg era.
Land cover changes in the five woredas of the Project Reference Area are
shown in Table 3. Total forest lost during the period 1973-2005 is 95,956 ha.
The annual rates of change have varied in the three time periods: 0.8%/yr in
the first period, rising to 1.0%/yr in the second and to 2.8%/yr in the final
period. There was also a loss of 1,386 ha (11 percent of total bamboo) of
bamboo forest during the period 1987 – 2001. The main increase in land
cover type is in agriculture and agro-forestry and coffee and tea plantation.
The increase in agriculture and agro-forestry accelerated in the last period:
2001-2005, from 2.2%/yr in the previous period to 4.54%/yr.
11
Table 2.
Land Cover Change: 1973 – 2005: NTFP-PFM Project
Reference Area.
LAND COVER CHANGE: NTFP PROJECT REFERENCE AREA
1973 - 2005
Landcover
Forest
Agriculture/Agoforestry
Lowland Shrubland/woodland
Wetlands
Bamboo forest
Coffee/Tea Estate
1973
ha
300,434
80,044
22,108
5,352
13,168
-
1987
ha
265,839
109,920
22,033
5,334
13,142
4,839
2001
ha
230,451
143,626
22,286
5,396
11,782
7,566
2005
ha
204,838
169,252
22,286
5,396
11,782
7,566
TOTAL
421,107
421,107
421,107
421,119
Difference (ha)
Landcover
1987
ha
-34,594
29,876
-75
-18
-27
4,839
Forest
Wetlands
Bamboo forest
Coffee/Tea Estate
2001
ha
-35,388
33,706
253
61
-1,360
2,728
2005
ha
-25,614
25,626
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
ha
-95,596
89,207
178
43
-1,386
7,566
Difference (%)
Landcover
1973-1987 1987-2001 2001-2005
%
%
%
-12%
-13%
-11%
37%
31%
18%
0%
1%
0%
0%
1%
0%
0%
-10%
0%
0%
56%
0%
Forest
Wetlands
Bamboo forest
Coffee/Tea Estate
Total
change
-32%
111%
1%
1%
-11%
0%
Annual Difference (%)
Landcover
1973-1987 1987-2001 2001-2005
%
%
%
-0.8%
-1.0%
-2.8%
2.7%
2.2%
4.5%
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
-0.7%
0.0%
0.0%
4.0%
0.0%
Forest
Wetlands
Bamboo forest
Coffee/Tea Estate
years
14
14
4
Total
change
%
-1.0%
3.5%
0.0%
0.0%
-0.3%
4.0%
32
2.2.5 Proximate and Underlying Causes of Land Cover Change and Key
Agents
Following Geist and Lambin (2001) these can be divided into two broad
categories:
·
·
(i)
Proximate Causes (Direct forces, predisposing environmental factors))
Underlying Causes (Driving forces)
Proximate causes (Direct Forces and Agents)
The direct forces and the agents affecting forest landscapes within the project
areas include the following:
12
·
·
·
·
·
·
Clearing forest for traditional small-scale rainfed agriculture by local
inhabitants,
Clearing forest for traditional small-scale rainfed agriculture by informal
immigrants,
Clearing forest for traditional small-scale rainfed agriculture by government
sponsored resettlement,
Clearing forest for traditional small-scale rainfed agriculture by Tea and
Coffee Estate workers,
Clearing forest for small-scale estate-type cash crop development (mainly
coffee) by outside investors through land purchase or through government
Investment Bureau support,
Clearing forest for large-scale estate-type cash crop development (coffee,
tea, rubber) by outside investors through government Investment Bureau
support.
These activities result in a complete change of land cover from forest to
agriculture (cropland, homestead gardens and grazing) and settlement. In
addition there are "qualitative" changes in the forest structure and tree species
composition to a lesser and greater degree. These changes are being
effected through various activities including:
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
Clearing ground-storey vegetation for wild coffee harvesting by local
inhabitants and by outside purchasers of land,
Tree thinning (reducing shade), clearing ground-storey vegetation and
transplanting wild coffee seedlings for enhancing wild coffee production by
local inhabitants and by outside purchasers of land,
Tree thinning (reducing shade), clearing ground-storey vegetation,
transplanting wild coffee seedlings and planting "improved" coffee seedling
for coffee production by local inhabitants and by outside purchasers of
land,
Placing bee hives in undisturbed forest by local inhabitants,
Harvesting of wild spices from undisturbed forest by local inhabitants,
Extraction of fuelwood and house construction wood by local inhabitants for
own use and for sale by local inhabitants,
Extraction of fuelwood and house construction wood by Estate workers
Clearing of forest for urban and other infrastructural (e.g. road)
construction.
(ii)
Underlying Causes (Driving Forces)
The underlying causes can form linked chains of some complexity, which are
often non-linear and with feed-back loops. In the project area some of these
have been identified as follows:
Demographic
·
Natural increase in local population (local and settler) and increasing
agricultural land requirements for annual crops, perennial crops, grazing
land and settlement,
13
·
·
·
In-migration: both formal and informal resulting from areas of land scarcity
and high population densities in other parts of SNNPRS and Ethiopia,
Increases in urban populations impacting on increased markets for food,
bio-fuels and wood products from the surrounding rural areas (linked to
economic factors),
Low skill levels in rural populations and lack of off-farm employment
opportunities (linked to economic factors) leading to need for agricultural
land.
Economic
·
·
·
·
Growth in market demand (local, national and inter-national) for agricultural
goods leading to expansion of cropland and coffee plantation,
Improved
market
accessibility
and
information
(roads,
telecommunications) leading to increased farm-gate prices for agricultural
products.
Increased producer prices due to improvements to value-added chains
(improved processing, quality control, "trade mark registration),
Lack of appreciation of total economic value (local, national, regional and
global) of forests, forest products and services with government budgets
determined by size of population only.
Technical
·
·
·
Increased availability of "improved" coffee types (higher yielding, coffee
berry disease resistant) and planting in wild coffee forests,
Low level of agricultural technology (crops and livestock production) linked
to poverty and lack of credit availability,
Inappropriate emphasis of official agricultural research and extension on
annual crops to detriment of root crops.
Cultural
·
·
Breakdown in traditional environmental protection institutions for forest
conservation,
Breakdown in traditional natural resource access institutions (e.g. kobo
system).
Policy and Institutional
·
·
·
·
·
Contradictions in various sectoral policies (e.g. Forestry, Land Registration,
Investment),
Inconsistencies in policy formation and insensitive implementation with little
consideration for local social, economic and environmental conditions,
Weak development of rules and regulations in forest and environmental
conservation policy,
Limited government and community capacity to enhance participatory
forest management (PFM) and forest conservation efforts,
Lack of sensitivity of policies to the region and lack of awareness of the
need for specific policies.
14
2.2.6 Influencing Environmental Factors
Influencing environmental factors leading to deforestation and forest
degradation include degree of slope, soil type, forest type (e.g. undisturbed,
disturbed). These shape the spatial patterns of deforestation and degradation.
Of particular importance are areas of steep slopes and shallow soils, which
will tend not to be cleared for agriculture. Other factors include the prevalence
of malaria for humans and trypamosomiasis for livestock, which constrain
settlement in many areas below 1,500 masl. Above 2,400 masl low ambient
temperatures are a constraint on the production of the preferred cereal maize.
However, where population densities are high these factors no longer
constrain expansion of agriculture and settlement.
2.3
Socio-economic Environment
2.3.1 Local Cultural Groups
The project area can be divided into two main cultural areas: a northern and a
south zone mirroring to some extent the two physiographic zones: high
altitude forest and bamboo zone, and low altitude coffee zone. In the northern
part of the project area the ethnic composition is 35% Shakicho, 21%
Kafficho, 21% Amhara, 10% Oromo, 5% Sheko, 5% Bench, and 2% percent
Mezengir (NTFP-PMF Livelihoods Survey, 2004). Amhara and Oromo
peoples have migrated into the area over the past century as part of the wider
north to south population movements across Ethiopia. Sheko and Bench
peoples dominate in the southern part of the project area in Bench and Sheko
woredas.
2.3.2 Identification and Characterization of Social Groups
Within the main cultural groups there are socio-economic groups that can be
recognized based on household asset holdings. In the project area different
criteria are used by communities to divide the community into four economic
classes: ‘rich’, ‘medium’, ‘poor’ and ‘very poor’. Criteria used for this division
were the number of beehives, cattle, size of agricultural land and size of enset
plantation. The Communities also emphasise that family size is another
decisive factor in determining wealth status. Usually, the larger the family size
the better the household is able to engage in many activities and thus the
household economy is stronger.
Northern Zone
In the High Altitude Zone keeping bee hives and sale of honey and the
cultivation of enset are the key livelihood strategies that distinguish this Zone
from the Low Altitude Zone.
(i)
"Rich" Category
The "rich" category comprised between 10 and 20% of households. They
generally own between 50 and 100 bee-hives, about 0.25 ha of enset garden
15
and between 2 and 5 ha of cropland. Livestock assets included 2 oxen, 20 to
30 milking cows and 1- 2 horses.
(ii)
"Medium" Category
The medium category comprise between 35 and 50 percent of households.
They own between 50 and 100 bee hives, 0.12 – 0.2 ha of enset garden and
1 – 3 ha of cropland. Livestock assets include 2 oxen, 10 – 15 milking cows
and 1 horse.
(iii)
"Poor" Category
The poor category comprise between 20 to 30 percent of households. They
generally own between 25 and 50 bee-hives, none to 0.05 ha of enset garden
and 0.5 to 1 ha of cropland. Livestock assets include none to sharing 1 ox and
2 – 5 milking cows.
(iv)
"Very Poor" Category
Most very poor households are female headed or are disabled. They are not
found in all villages. Where found, they comprise between 15 and 30 percent
of households. They own none to 10 bee-hives, have 0.05 ha of enset garden,
none to 0.25 ha of cropland. They own no livestock.
Southern Zone:
In the southern Low Altitude Zone coffee cultivation and wild coffee harvesting
is the key livelihood strategy. Honey and enset are much less important. With
higher ambient temperatures fruit trees are also important. The variation
between different villages as to the proportions of the wealth categories
appears to be much greater than in the High Altitude Zone. Ownership of
coffee land is a key determinant as to wealth category.
(i)
"Rich" Category
The rich category comprises some 12 to 15 percent of households. They have
5 to 15 ha of coffee and 2 to 5 ha of cropland. Livestock assets include 2 oxen
but only 5 milking cows. Only a few have bee hives but most have fruit trees.
(ii)
Medium Category
The medium category comprise between 25 and 60 percent of households.
They have between1 – 8 ha of coffee and 0.5 – 2 ha of cropland. Livestock
assets include 1 ox and between 1 and 5 cows. Only a few have bee hives
but have fruit trees.
(iii)
Poor Category
The poor category comprise between 25 and 57 percent. They only have
between 0.5 – 1 ha of coffee and less than 0.5 ha of cropland. Most have no
16
livestock or fruit trees. One village identified a very poor category (24 percent
of households) that had no livelihood assets (coffee or cropland, livestock,
bee hives or fruit trees).
2.4
National and Local Governance Structures
2.4.1 National and Regional Structures
The project area is located within the Southern Nations, Nationalities and
Peoples Regional State (SNNPRS). The Region is divided into Zones and
Woredas. Woredas are divided into "kebeles" (or Peasant Associations),
which are the lowest level of government administration. Each kebele
comprises two or more "gots" or villages. The Project Area comprises Masha
and Anderacha Woredas in Sheka Administrative Zone and Sheko and
Bench Woredas in Bench-Maji Zone, and Gesha Woreda of Kefa Zone.
The Regional Bureau of Agriculture and Rural Development (BoARD) is the
primary government organization with respect to agriculture and forestry. It
has bureaus at the Regional, Zonal and Woreda levels. The BoARD has one
to three Development Agents (DA's) stationed at the kebeles.
An important policy of the project has been to coordinate its activities with the
BoARD Coordination Offices (CO's) in the selected woredas where it is
working. Within the government’s policy of decentralization and
democratization these COs are responsible for developing local development
plans. The project activities are planned in consultation with the BoARD COs
and local Administrative Authorities and their implementation is considered as
part of the implementation of the woreda development plans. For this purpose
in each woreda a focal person in the RDCO is assigned as a liaison officer to
the project and the project’s activities are included in the annual RDCO work
plans. Moreover, relevant woreda experts and the Development Agents (D.A.)
are involved in the implementation and monitoring of project activities.
Regular consultation also takes place with relevant government institutions
above the woreda level and with NGO’s which are active in similar fields.
These contacts facilitate active participation in inter-institutional, geographic
and/or thematic networks for the exchange of information and project
experiences.
2.4.2 Local Forest Management Institutions
The project currently works at the got level although it will shortly scale up to
the kebele level. Based on the outputs of the baseline studies and
participatory planning events, it was decided to opt for a Participatory Forest
Management (PFM) approach as the most secure way of achieving the
sustainable use and management of the remaining forest resources. At the
same time it is envisaged that this would guarantee that the local communities
would benefit from their forest management initiatives and so improve
livelihoods. The project, within the current policy framework, supports the
involvement of local communities in the sustainable management of natural
resources for their livelihoods. At the same time, the project contributes to the
17
further development of methods for successful implementation of the PFM
approach and shares these experiences through contributions to policy
debates.
2.5
Estimated Carbon Baseline
2.5.1 Methodology
Information from the National Woody Biomass Inventory and Strategic
Planning Project (WBISPP 2001, 2000, 2003) provides data on wood biomass
stocks and yields for a wide range of land cover types in the major agroecological zones. This data has been used to provide initial estimates of
biomass stocks within the project area. As part of the main Feasibility Study
and Baseline survey a wood biomass inventory will be undertaken in the
project area in representative forest types.
The WBISPP (2001) estimated above ground volume for Dense (50-80%
crown cover) Broadleaf Forest to be 82 tons/ha biomass and 40 tons/ha for
Open Forest (20 - 50% crown cover). These values have been used for
"Undisturbed" and "Disturbed" forest respectively. Using the estimated
average above ground wood biomass (AGB) and using the UNFCC accepted
method (Pearson et al., 2005) of calculating below ground tree biomass
(BGB)7, BGB is approximately 21 percent of AGB. The results are shown in
Table 4 for the target kebeles that constitute the Project Area. Front Map 3
indicates the location of the target kebeles.
7
BGB = exp(-1.0587+ 0.8836* lnAGB)
18
Table 3.
Area
Total Biomass Stocks in the Target Kebeles of the Project
NTFP PROJECT AREA
TARGET KEBELLES
ESTIMATED BIOMASS STOCKS (2005)
Undisturbed forest (tons/ha)
82
Disturbed forest (tons/ha)
40
AGB:BGB ratio
0.21
BIOMASS (tons)
GIS ID #
30
34
50
46
39
66
UNDIST
ha
3,415
5,102
6,067
645
1,913
909
18,050
DIST
ha
921
4,799
5,465
742
666
573
13,165
TOTAL
ha
4,336
9,900
11,531
1,388
2,578
1,482
31,216
UNDIST
tons
280,046
418,347
497,462
52,917
156,846
74,513
1,480,130
DIST
tons
36,822
191,945
218,587
29,699
26,622
22,934
526,609
TOTAL
ABOVE
GROUND
tons
316,868
610,291
716,049
82,616
183,468
97,447
2,006,739
Gesha
Gesha
Gesha
Gesha
Gesha
2,822
1,987
2,106
3,563
1,574
12,053
434
351
612
705
404
2,506
3,257
2,338
2,718
4,268
1,978
14,558
231,439
162,928
172,700
292,156
129,102
988,323
17,365
14,024
24,481
28,201
16,156
100,227
248,803
176,952
197,181
320,357
145,258
1,088,551
52,249
37,160
41,408
67,275
30,504
228,596
301,052
214,112
238,588
387,632
175,762
1,317,146
Uwa
Keja
Welo Kela
Gada
Welo Bato
Welo Shoba
TOTAL
Masha
Masha
Masha
Andracha
Masha
Masha
1,686
1,870
2,793
1,913
1,794
1,385
11,441
414
251
720
666
357
355
2,763
2,099
2,121
3,513
2,578
2,151
1,740
14,203
138,228
153,349
229,047
156,846
147,094
113,581
938,144
16,549
10,047
28,799
26,622
14,278
14,213
110,509
154,777
163,396
257,846
183,468
161,372
127,794
1,048,652
32,503
34,313
54,148
38,528
33,888
26,837
220,217
187,280
197,709
311,994
221,996
195,260
154,631
1,268,869
Shimi
Shayta
Jemdos
Sanka
TOTAL
Sheko
Sheko
Sheko
Sheko
2,529
287
5,445
2,644
10,905
1,723
279
1,743
770
4,515
4,253
566
7,188
3,413
15,420
207,418
23,508
446,490
216,770
894,186
68,939
11,168
69,722
30,785
180,614
276,357
34,676
516,213
247,555
1,074,800
58,035
7,282
108,405
51,987
225,708
334,392
41,958
624,617
299,542
1,300,509
893
1,728
1,836
4,457
369
251
512
1,133
1,262
1,979
2,349
5,590
73,234
141,698
150,578
365,510
14,762
10,050
20,494
45,306
87,996
151,748
171,071
410,816
18,479
31,867
35,925
86,271
106,475
183,616
206,996
497,087
56,906
24,082
80,988
4,666,293
963,266
5,629,559
1,182,207
6,811,766
Kebelle
Duwina
Goja
Shera
Chegecha
Gada
Yoki Cheche
TOTAL
Wereda
Andracha
Andracha
Andracha
Andracha
Andracha
Andracha
12
16
19
18
21
Turo Acharachi
Alemgena
Bahito Chechitoyeri
Dingiro Endera
GerechoGocheti
TOTAL
2
1
3
39
7
8
157
114
100
113
116 Fandoka
South Bench
149 Bebeka Ersha Lemate South Bench
118 No Name
South Bench
TOTAL
GRAND TOTAL
BELOW
GROUND
BIOMASS
tons
66,542
128,161
150,370
17,349
38,528
20,464
421,415
TOTAL
BIOMASS
tons
383,410
738,452
866,419
99,966
221,996
117,911
2,428,154
2.5.2 Preliminary Estimates of Carbon Lost from Current Rates of
Deforestation without and with the Project
The Carbon ratio for wood biomass is 0.5 and the Carbon Dioxide (CO2) to
Carbon ratio is 3.67. A buffer of 30 percent of the total carbon sequestered
has been retained as an insurance against post-project subsequent forest
loss. It has been assumed that following deforestation some 20 percent of
biomass would have remained as standing trees in agricultural land and
homestead gardens. This has been excluded from the "with project" scenario
calculations.
In the "with project" situation deforestation avoided has been calculated as an
accumulating 1.0 percent per annum. Of this it is estimated that due to the
support provided by the Project to the forest communities, some 50 percent of
the total deforestation will be prevented. Subtracting the 30 percent buffer this
amounts to some 401 ha per year. This is shown in Table 4 and in Figure 3.
Annual estimated avoided loss of carbon and CO2 is 27,608 tons/yr and
101,228 tons/yr respectively.
19
Table 4.
Dioxide
NTFP-PFM Project Area Target Kebeles: Estimated Carbon Offsets and Annual Avoided Loss of Carbon and Carbon
Biomass:carbon ratio
Buffer
Annual Deforestation rate
CO2:C ratio
Remaining after deforestation
% losses avoided thru' project
price US$/ton CO2
0.5
30%
0.9%
3.67 /yr
7.99 t C/ha
50%
$2.00
CARBON STOCKS
AGB (i)
KEBELLE
SHEKIBEDO
SHERA
GOJA
DAYINA
GEY
SHEBI YEMENIGISIT DEN
GEMADIRO
CHEGECHA
MODI
YOKO CHICHI
GECHA TOW N
BESHIFA
SUB-TOTAL
WOREDA
ANDERACHA
ANDERACHA
ANDERACHA
ANDERACHA
ANDERACHA
ANDERACHA
ANDERACHA
ANDERACHA
ANDERACHA
ANDERACHA
ANDERACHA
ANDERACHA
KEBELLE
WOREDA
YERDANIT
GAW ACHA
ANDERACHA
GECHETO YERI
SUB-TOTAL
GESHA
GESHA
GESHA
GESHA
KEBELLE
WOREDA
YESHA AKAKO
YEPO
ATLE
KARINA
GANGA
KEW O
GADA
OUW A
CHAGO
ATESO
BETO
W ELO
KEJA
GATIMO
SUB-TOTAL
MASHA
MASHA
MASHA
MASHA
MASHA
MASHA
MASHA
MASHA
MASHA
MASHA
MASHA
MASHA
MASHA
MASHA
TOTAL
tons C
1,208,256
1,143,312
366,948
234,657
355,095
200,638
161,957
255,468
250,995
242,477
74,634
77,586
4,572,023
AGB (i)
tons C
317,953
130,654
229,236
145,368
823,210
AGB (i)
tons C
515,591
292,744
314,723
250,055
163,328
137,259
125,508
77,065
165,044
132,688
74,382
242,910
93,420
102,453
BGB (ii)
tons C
253,734
240,095
77,059
49,278
74,570
42,134
34,011
53,648
52,709
50,920
15,673
16,293
960,125
BGB (ii)
tons C
66,770
27,437
48,139
30,527
172,874
BGB (ii)
TOTAL
(i+ii) = (iii)
tons C
1,461,990
1,383,407
444,007
283,935
429,665
242,772
195,967
309,117
303,704
293,397
90,308
93,879
5,532,148
TOTAL
(i+ii) = (iii)
tons C
384,723
158,091
277,375
175,895
996,084
TOTAL
(i+ii) = (iii)
tons C
108,274
61,476
66,092
52,512
34,299
28,824
26,357
16,184
34,659
27,864
15,620
51,011
19,618
21,515
tons C
623,865
354,220
380,815
302,567
197,627
166,083
151,865
93,248
199,704
160,552
90,002
293,921
113,039
123,969
2,687,169
564,306
3,251,475
8,082,403
1,697,305
9,779,707
Potential
Gross
Potential Net
Carbon
Carbon
Carbon
losses from
remaining in
losses from
total
fields after
total
deforestation deforestation deforestation
(iii* 1%) = (iv) (iv* 20%) = (v) (v)-(iv) = (vi)
69
253
tons C/yr
13,158
12,451
3,996
2,555
3,867
2,185
1,764
2,782
2,733
2,641
813
845
49,789
tons C/yr
1,366
1,293
415
265
401
227
183
289
284
274
84
88
5,169
tons C/yr
11,792
11,158
3,581
2,290
3,465
1,958
1,581
2,493
2,450
2,366
728
757
44,620
Potential
Gross
Potential Net
Carbon
Carbon
Carbon
losses from
remaining in
losses from
total
fields after
total
(iii* 1%) = (iv) (iv* 20%) = (v) (v)-(iv) = (vi)
tons C/yr
3,463
1,423
2,496
1,583
8,965
tons C/yr
359
148
259
164
931
tons C/yr
3,103
1,275
2,237
1,419
8,034
Potential
Gross
Potential Net
Carbon
Carbon
Carbon
losses from
remaining in
losses from
total
fields after
total
(iii* 1%) = (iv) (iv* 20%) = (v) (v)-(iv) = (vi)
tons C/yr
5,615
3,188
3,427
2,723
1,779
1,495
1,367
839
1,797
1,445
810
2,645
1,017
1,116
Expected
Carbon losses
avoided thru'
Project) (vi)*
50% = (vii)
tons C/yr
5,896
5,579
1,791
1,145
1,733
979
790
1,247
1,225
1,183
364
379
22,310
Expected
Carbon losses
avoided thru'
Project) (vi)*
70% = (vii)
tons C/yr
1,552
638
1,119
709
4,017
Expected
Carbon losses
avoided thru'
Project) (vi)*
50% = (vii)
LESS BUFFER
CARBON
(vii) * 30% = (viii)
NET
NET
ANNUAL
ANNUAL
CLAIMABLE CLAIMABLE
AVOIDED C
AVOIDED
LOSS
CO2 LOSS
(vii) - (viii) = (ix)* 3.67 =
(ix)
(x)
tons C/yr
1,769
1,674
537
344
520
294
237
374
367
355
109
114
6,693
tons C/yr
tons CO2/yr
4,127
15,133
14,319
3,905
4,596
1,253
802
2,939
1,213
4,447
2,513
685
553
2,028
873
3,200
3,144
857
828
3,037
255
935
972
265
15,617
57,262
LESS BUFFER
CARBON
(vii) * 30% = (viii)
tons C/yr
465
191
336
213
1,205
LESS BUFFER
CARBON
(vii) * 30% = (viii)
tons C/yr
755
429
461
366
239
201
184
113
242
194
109
356
137
150
NET
ANNUAL
AVOIDED C
LOSS
(vii) - (viii) =
(ix)
NET
ANNUAL
AVOIDED
CO2 LOSS
(ix)* 3.67 =
(x)
tons C/yr
tons CO2/yr
1,086
3,982
446
1,636
2,871
783
497
1,821
2,812
10,310
NET
ANNUAL
AVOIDED C
LOSS
(vii) - (viii) =
(ix)
NET
ANNUAL
AVOIDED
CO2 LOSS
(ix)* 3.67 =
(x)
tons C/yr
583
331
356
283
185
155
142
87
187
150
84
275
106
116
tons C/yr
5,032
2,857
3,071
2,440
1,594
1,340
1,225
752
1,611
1,295
726
2,371
912
1,000
tons C/yr
2,516
1,428
1,536
1,220
797
670
612
376
805
647
363
1,185
456
500
tons C/yr
tons CO2/yr
6,457
1,761
3,666
1,000
1,075
3,942
854
3,132
2,046
558
469
1,719
429
1,572
965
263
564
2,067
453
1,662
932
254
3,042
830
319
1,170
350
1,283
29,263
3,038
26,225
13,112
3,934
9,179
33,655
88,017
9,138
78,879
39,439
11,832
27,608
101,228
20
Figure 3.
Preliminary Estimates of Carbon Sequestered with and
without the NTFP-PFM R and D Project
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES OF C SEQUESTERED WITH AND WITHOUT
NTFP CARBON OFFSET PROJECT
3,500,000
tons Carbon
3,000,000
2,500,000
WITHOUT
PROJECT
2,000,000
1,500,000
WITH PROJECT
(50%)
1,000,000
500,000
47
45
43
41
39
37
35
33
31
29
27
25
23
21
19
17
15
13
9
11
7
5
3
1
years
21
3.
3.1
OWNERSHIP OF CARBON RIGHTS – LAND TENURE
AND BENEFIT SHARING
National Framework
Three main areas of Federal and regional policy impact on efforts to maintain
forest landscapes within the project area:
·
·
·
Land Administration
Forestry
Investment
3.1.1 Land Administration
Land administration is governed nationally by the Federal Rural Land
Administration and Use Proclamation (No. 456/2005). This Proclamation
repealed that of 89/1997. SNNPRS is covered by the similarly named SNNPR
Rural Land Administration and Use Proclamation (110/2007). This
Proclamation repealed that of 53/2003. The region is currently drafting
Regulations under the Regional Proclamation.
Land registration is complete or still underway in Tigray, Amhara, Oromiya
and SNNP Regions. Only in Amhara Region are the Kebele boundary,
Communal Land and Individual land measured and registered. In all other
Regions only Individual Land is measured and registered. In SNNPRS coffee
land within forest areas under individual ownership is not currently measured
and registered, although where farmers with land in coffee forest pay land tax
this is regarded as de facto registration of ownership. This is in accordance
with a Regional policy directive. However, homestead gardens ("guaro") and
homestead coffee gardens are registered. In all the Project woredas
measurement and registration will be completed in 2009.
3.1.2 Forestry
Federal Policy is now governed by the Forestry Development Conservation
and Utilization Proclamation (542/2007), which repealed Proclamation
94/1994. Currently, SNNPRS is drafting its own Forestry Proclamation. The
NTFP-PFM Project is providing sundry and technical assistance for this to be
based on a participatory process.
The previous Federal and Regional legislation recognized three types of
forest: (i) Federal, (ii) Regional and (iii) Private. Federal and Regional Forests
were "State" Forests, and as such had to be demarcated, management plans
prepared and the forest gazetted. Although some State forests had been
demarcated during the Derg, and a few management plans prepared, none
had been gazetted. The situation is that SNNPRS, the Region with the largest
area of forest, has no demarcated forest.
"Private" forests were defined and are so under the new legislation defined as
22
"forest other than a state forest developed by any private person and includes a
forest developed by members of a Peasant Association or by any association
organized by private individuals, investors and governmental and non-governmental
organizations".
“Private” refers to individuals, Associations, Communities and other forms of
organizations. In interpreting this definition the emphasis has always been on
the word "developed" inferring that this did not include natural forests, and that
"natural forests" were "State Forests" whether gazetted or not (Head of Land
Administration and Natural Resources, Awassa BoARD, SNNPR).
However, the new Federal legislation has a new section (4. Promotion of
Forest Development subsection 3/, which appears to distinguish two types of
"natural forest" – (i) Designated State Forest and (ii) Forests that have not
been designated as protected or productive state forests. The full section is as
follows:
3/
Management plans shall be developed with the participation of the local
community, for forests that have not been designated as protected or
productive state forests, and such forests shall be given to the
community, associations or investors so that they conserve and utilize
them in accordance with directives to be issued by the appropriate
body".
"State Forests" are either "Protected" or "Productive" Forests under the
legislation.
This new section clearly opens the way for Communities or Associations to be
allocated natural forests that have not been designated as "State Forests"
(Protective or Productive"). This opens the way for communities under
“Private Ownership”. According to the Federal MoARD this was clearly the
intention of the Federal legislation (personal comm. Kiflu Segu, MoARD).
Much will depend on how the SNNP Region interprets this section in the
Regional Forestry Proclamation and the ensuing "Directives". The
Proclamation is ready in draft form in Amharic and this clarifies this section
further. In the Proclamation "appropriate body" is "an executive organ of the
Regional State empowered to undertake activities related to the development,
conservation and utilization of forest in the Region".
3.1.3 Investment
The Federal Investment Proclamation number 37/1996 vests the power of
allocating land for investment activities to the Regional governments. The
SNNPRS has issued investment regulation number 2/1997. Article 11 and 12
of the regulation states that every investor has the duty to conserve the land
and natural resources found thereon. According to the regulations, rural land
reserved for natural resources development and conservation may not be
allocated for private investment especially peasant holding.
23
It was acknowledged in the Regional Investment Bureau and the
Environmental Section of the Land Administration and Natural Resources
Department of the Regional BoARD that in the past there had been a lack of
effective contact between the two agencies and also proper consultation at
local levels. The Investment Bureau said that in theory they were to be guided
by Zonal Land Use Plans that would clearly demarcated areas suitable for
agro-investment, but these were not available.
3.2
Local Framework
The project has worked through locally established Participatory Forest
Management (PFM) “Associations”. Access and use rights have been
institutionally assured by registering the PFM group as an “Association” at
regional level. Thus, an “Association” is a legally established CBO registered
with the Ministry of Justice.
Legal agreements have been signed between the Kebele Administrative
Office, the Woreda Agriculture and Rural Development Coordination Office
(ARDCO) and the PFM Association under which the rights and responsibilities
of all parties are prescribed. One of the duties of the ARDCO is to monitor the
implementation of the PFMA’s management plan, to provide technical
support, resolve border conflicts and provide legal support. It is stipulated that
if the forest is needed for the public interest, appropriate compensation will be
provided to the PFM Association. The Kebele Administrative Office also has
conflict management tasks as well as dealing with cases of illegal occupation
of land and assuring that implementation is in line with Proclamations.
As the PFM is registered as an Association it cannot engage in income
generating activities. However, as the PFMA has the status of an NGO, it has
opportunities for fundraising. An agreement has been signed between the
PLC (marketing group) and the PFMA in which it is stipulated that a certain
percent of the income of PLC is given to the PFM group for running and
management costs. Each PLC decides the level of the contribution they can
render to the PFM.
The PFM Association decides on forest management and how to share
benefits from forest management, to obtain information on the forests and to
claim for compensation. The responsibilities in forest management include the
prevention of forest clearing for settlement, agricultural or other purposes.
Graduated sanctions are defined in case of violation of rules and
responsibilities. Each PFM Association has developed by-laws that elaborate
membership rights, organisation, rights and responsibilities of the
management board and the duties and responsibilities of the three
coordinators (protection, development and utilisation). Also some forbidden
activities in relation to resource use are prescribed.
The PFM Association empowers the local community to have a stronger stand
towards large-scale investors. The villagers developed the criteria for
membership. In general, everyone who is a member of the got can become a
24
member, but sometimes also the existing rights to coffee lands in the forests
have been determined as a criterion.
3.3
Benefit Sharing of Funds from the Sale of Carbon Offsets
The Project is supporting the kebele PFMA’s in establishing woreda level
networks of PFMA’s to enable sharing of information, experiences, capacity
building and policy advocacy. It is proposed that Carbon Trust Funds would
be established at the woreda level. Bank accounts would be opened at one of
the branches of the Commercial Banks or Micro Finance Institutions (MFI) in
all five woredas.
A Board of Trustees would be established at each woreda to administer the
Carbon Trust Fund. Membership of the Board of Trustees would include the
following:
· One Elected representative of each Kebele PFMA
· Head of the Woreda Bureau of Agriculture and Rural Development
· The Woreda Administrator.
An established Ethiopian NGO: the Ethiopian Wetlands and Natural
Resources Association (EWNRA) – a partner in the existing Project - would be
contracted by the Trust Fund to provide technical support to both the Woreda
Trust Fund and to the individual kebeles for estimating carbon offsets, regular
monitoring, repeat inventories and forest mapping, etc.
Each Kebele PFMA would have a “Carbon Account” based on agreed
estimates of carbon stocks deriving from the area of avoided deforestation.
Changes may be made to such an account based on agreed results of
periodic forest area and biomass monitoring. The agreed Kebele PFMA
carbon offsets would be aggregated to the woreda level for the issue of Plan
Vivo certificates. The sale of the woreda aggregate Plan Vivo Certificates
would be carried out with the support of EWNRA.
Funds would flow from the buyers of the Plan Vivo certificates into the Woreda
Trust Fund account. These funds would be distributed to each Kebele PFMA.
Each PFMA would have opened an account either with a Commercial Bank,
MFI or a kebele Rural Savings and Credit Cooperative where these have
been established. Funds from the Woreda Trust Fund account would be
transferred directly to the Kebele PFMA account.
The Board of Trustees would be empowered to make any necessary
payments to cover e.g. fees of carbon brokers, to EWNRA for contractual
services rendered, etc., prior to distribution to kebele PFMAs. The Woreda
Carbon Trust Fund Account would be subject to annual external audit.
The Kebele PFMA members would make decisions in consultation with the
kebele Administration on the utilization of funds received from the Trust Fund
25
.
26
4.
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTIVITIES AND
ECOSYSTEM IMPACTS
The objectives will be achieved in a number of ways of which the most central
one is the development of non-timber forest product (NTFP) production,
processing and marketing. These activities will be organised around
producers groups, who will be supported to develop skills not only in the
production of these products but also in adding value to them through
processing and in niche marketing. The latter has a considerable potential and
wild forest coffee, spices and honey will be tested as marketing brands
building on coffee certification.
These NTFP groups will be linked to, and usually part of, community groups
responsible for Participatory Forest Management (PFM). The approach to
PFM seeks to develop recognition of the value of different forest areas for
different benefits, especially different NTFPs – both for market and domestic
use, but also biodiversity conservation and watershed management. Broad
forest zonation will form the basis for the development of management
practices, which will be implemented by the local communities seeking to
ensure the maintenance of the forest and the NTFPs therein.
This process towards the development of well managed and productive
forests will be supported by training and capacity development activities for
government staff who will support the farmers groups in their NTFP and PFM
activities. There will also be policy dialogue development with project support
between communities and government staff to develop improved local,
regional and national policy frameworks for forest protection and sound
environmental management with PFM supported and local access rights
confirmed.
The project activities will be adjusted to the different people/forest scenarios.
By this is meant different ecological types of forest, different degree of forest
degradation or preservation and diversity in terms of the peoples involved with
the forests, including minority groups who are indigenous to the areas. In
some cases the project will be working in National Priority Forest Areas, but in
other cases in degraded community forest or forest patches within the
agricultural areas, focusing on the restoration of the forested landscape. In all
cases the interaction with the surrounding land uses is important and action to
reduce clearance pressure on the forest will be taken through the
development with communities of models for sustainable land management.
27
5.
5.1
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND
GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE
Project Organization
Figure 2 outlines the links between the different actors in the project at the
field level. The project is implemented by a team of Ethiopian specialists
working in close collaboration with the relevant government departments and
also with local CBOs and communities. The team is based in this remote area,
with two offices –one in Mizan Teferi and one in Masha, the respective
capitals of Bench Maji and Sheka zones. From these offices support will be
provided to the Zonal RDCOs and Cooperative Unions and to the lower level
woreda RDCOs and cooperative societies. In order to ensure close
collaboration with the woreda government officials and the CBOs at
community levels, woreda facilitators have been appointed. They are the
lowest level employee of the project. At the kebele and community (subkebele) level the project works with the three government extension staff
(development agents) per kebele, and through them and directly with
community groups with different interests. (See Figure 1)
BoARD CO’s are the associate partners in project implementation and are
fully involved in it. Collaboration agreements have been signed with details of
the modalities of collaboration, time inputs, responsibilities of the partners in
implementation, project support etc. In each BoARD CO office a GO staff is
assigned as focal person for coordination purposes and provided with a motor
bike to facilitate their activities.
GO capacity building efforts are focused on enhancing staff skills and
knowledge so that they can provide sensitive support to communities,
especially in the areas of PFM management, NTFP development and trading,
and the provision of environmental services. In particular, support and training
will focus on how these activities will interact so that an integrated approach
can be taken by government staff.
Joint planning, monitoring and evaluation of project activities are a key
instrument for building up GO institutional capacities. This is done within the
context of the existing strategic plans in each of the woredas, with project
activities integrated therein. Where necessary, support is provided for the
elaboration of new strategic plans, aiming at incorporation of the project
approach and its contribution to sustainable development.
28
Fig. 2 Project implementation structure
5.2
Governance Structure
5.2.1 Project Coordinator
Ethiopian Wetlands and Natural Resource Association (EWNRA) has
extensive field experience of community-based natural resource management
research, implementation and dissemination in south-west Ethiopia. It is
currently a local partner in the NTFP-PFM Research and Development Project
and has proved to be very effective, both in obtaining matching funds and in
providing training in participatory methods. It has long experience of
collaborating with government offices including RDCOs and has office
facilities in Addis Ababa which can be used for liaison purposes.
5.2.2 Technical Team
The core technical team is based at Mizan and Masha and consists of seven
professional staff whose functions are given by their titles:
Project Co-ordinator
Rural Development and Land Use Specialist
Forest Management Specialist
NTFP Specialist
Capacity Building Specialist
Market Development Specialist
Participatory Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist
29
In addition the project employs five Woreda NTFP-development facilitators
based in the five woredas where the project operates. Three regular advisers
(two international and one national) support, advise and monitor the
permanent staff. Additionally, short term consultants are available for
specialist support when this is required.
5.2.3 Technical Support Services
Huddersfield University has over 20 years of experience of managing
training and field development activities in Ethiopia for a range of international
funding agencies. The Centre for Wetlands, Environment and Livelihoods has
implemented two field development projects in South-West Ethiopia to date,
including the original NTFP-PFM R&D project from which this one is
developed. Huddersfield University is the Coordinator to the European Union
(EU) for the present NTFP-PFM Project.
Sustainable Livelihood Action has considerable experience of working in
the south-west of Ethiopia, in collaboration with Huddersfield University and
has supported EWNRA in its institutional development. In addition, it has
particular expertise among its staff in community based natural resource
management, sustainable forest management, local level land use planning
and multi-stakeholder involvement in rural development and participatory
forest management.
30
6.
COMMUNITY LED DESIGN PLAN
The development and empowerment of CBO’s is considered to be a key
element in order to sustain the project outcomes. CBOs can play an important
role in organising local energy and initiatives, as well as providing
organisational units which can efficiently manage different activities where
groups of farmers / households need to collaborate. CBOs also provide
mechanisms for discussion, agreement and conflict resolution. Hence the
building of capacity in the CBOs is essential for effective achievement of
project goals both during and beyond the project period.
Empowerment of CBOs involves creating leadership capacities, conflict
resolution abilities, as well as ensuring transparent behaviour by CBO leaders
and democratic operation of the organisation. These are all essential if the
CBOs are to gain support from their members and to be sustainable in the
long term.
Two specific target groups of CBO’s are being supported:
a) Grassroots organisations established around project related activities at
community and kebele levels, especially in the areas of NTFP production and
marketing, and PFM, and
b) Existing Primary Multi-purpose Cooperative Societies and Cooperative
Unions, at respectively woreda and zonal levels.
Since organizational development at community level is traditionally weak in
the area, the project will facilitate the process of CBO establishment through a
process of advice, discussion and support. CBOs will be established to
assume the considerable range of new challenges of forest-based community
development. These CBO’s will build both on existing local institutions for
forest management, -whenever relevant- and experiences accumulated in the
NTFP-PFM R&D project.
CBO’s to be considered will include informal NTFP producers or processors
groups, women's groups, etc, but also legalized CBO’s, such as Associations,
Cooperatives or PFM-groups. Several CBO’s can be formed within one kebele
as primary target groups, but an effort will be made to ensure that there is an
umbrella type of CBO in each kebele, in order to ensure integration of the
different groups and their respective activities.
The organizational models to be chosen for each CBO will depend on internal
efficiency for effective management, the CBO’s objectives and consequently
the external requirements according to the policy framework for CBO’s.
Training will be given for CBO-leaders, including Cooperative and Union
leaders. The precise content of training will depend on participatory needs
assessment bearing in mind the objective of the CBO. Specific activities for
CBO empowerment include:
31
-
facilitation of the establishment of CBO’s and their legalization, in the
cases where this is needed,
leadership, organizational and financial management, and
conflict management.
Appropriate training and extension materials for CBO-leaders will be
developed and made available in Amharic. Exchange visits for CBO leaders
will be organized to similar CBO’s in the area to reinforce training through
practical experience. Support will be provided for the formulation of bylaws,
rules and regulations and internal procedures of the CBO, based on
democratic principles. The facilitation of a participatory planning, monitoring
and evaluation system at CBO level will be a key element for strengthening
organizational capacities. Initially, some material support will be provided to
assist in the establishment and operation of the CBOs. The achievement of
financial sustainability, especially of CBO’s involved in marketing and trading
of NTFPs, will be supported through linkage with existing funding mechanisms
for CBOs and Cooperatives in the country.
Responsibility for activities to empower CBOs will be jointly assumed by the
project’s specialist staff and RDCO staff. After Training of Trainers has been
undertaken by the project for RDCO staff, these staff will provide training of
the CBO leaders and will be in charge of technical assistance to them through
day to day follow-up and support activities. Exchange visits and more specific
supportive activities will be guided by the Project staff, with additional support
as needed from EWNRA staff, which has experience in CBO development for
natural resource management.
The current Project has followed a participatory approach in forest
management planning with a simplified methodology applied to enable full
understanding and ownership by the Participatory Forest Management (PFM)
members. First a Participatory Forest Resource Assessment is carried out by
members of the PFM group, with support of the PFM specialist and woreda
staff. In this assessment the general condition of the forest and the presence
of key NTFPs and endangered tree species are assessed. In the subsequent
management planning, boundaries and different PFM Units are identified
based on traditional names for those forest types. It is therefore very easy for
villagers to recognise the different forest units. The management plan involves
the whole area and includes agricultural fields and settlement area. It is
therefore not so much a forest management plan but rather a land use plan.
Using the GPS to delineate the PFM Management Units provides a digital
geo-referenced map of the kebele. It can be overlain on topo-maps (Figure 4),
satellite images (Figure 5), landcover maps and watershed maps. Having a
geo-referenced map of the kebele with the Management Units clearly
portrayed, adds some measure of tenure security for Communities in the face
of possible land alienation (e.g. by investors). Similarly, it provides the basis
for future land registration. Land Registration Teams at the Woreda BARD
Offices state that the current rope/measuring tape method of delineating plots
would not be possible to use in forest areas, and the GPS is the cheapest
option.
32
By covering the whole of the kebele this permits an integrated approach to
land use zoning covering the total natural resource base. Finally, the PFM
Management Unit system has found wide acceptance amongst Government
woreda and Zonal BoARD staff.
Figure 4.
The Geo-referenced PFM Management Units of Yigo Got,
Uwa Kebele, Masha Woreda over the 1:50,000 topo map sheet.
Figure 5.
The Geo-referenced PFM Management Units of Yigo Got,
Uwa Kebele, Masha Woreda over the Landsat TM Satellite Image (NB:
Clear felled East African Tea Estate in top right corner)
33
7.
7.1
ADDITIONALITY ANALYSIS
Current Barriers to avoiding Deforestation
The proximate and underlying causes of deforestation and forest degradation
in the Project area have been detailed in para. 2.2.5. In summary the major
proximate causes are (i) clearing for agriculture by a range of stakeholders
and (ii) removal of trees and under-storey vegetation to increase light and
remove competitive vegetation for coffee cultivation. This is being driven in
part by increasing population from natural increase and in-migration and in
part by increased market access and increases in farm-gate prices for maize.
Recent increases in international coffee prices are driving expansion of coffee
planting in existing forest. A weak forest policy environment and lack of
appreciation of the total economic value of forests has led to low levels of
government investment in forest conservation and little support for community
managed forests.
7.2
How the Project will overcome these barriers
1.
Improve policy environment: advocacy and technical support to
developing strong regional government forest policy and regulatory
framework supportive of community forest management.
2.
Supporting development of Participatory Forest Management
Associations and Community level NTFP marketing Private Limited
Companies to conserve and sustainably utilize remaining forest
resources.
3.
Supporting Community Forest Management Associations in
developing sustainable coffee forest management systems by
retaining and developing an optimal and sustainable tree cover for
coffee production.
4.
Supporting community NTFP marketing limited companies in
developing value added chains and linkages to marketing
opportunities for forest products such as spices (corrorima, long
pepper), honey and coffee. In this way the economic value of
forests will be raised.
5.
Supporting Community Forest Management Associations in
intensifying current crop, livestock and fuel and construction
material production and diversifying into new agricultural production
activities (e.g. irrigated vegetables and fruit trees).
6.
Supporting communities to develop long-term land use plans to
cater for within-community agricultural expansions.
It is estimated that these Project activities will reduce the current rates of
deforestation by approximately 70 percent.
34
8.
COMPLIANCE WITH NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL
REGULATIONS
The Project has lodged its PIN with the Ethiopian Environmental Protection
Authority (EPA), which is the Designated National Authority (DNA) for the
Clean Development Mechanism. The EPA have indicated that they have no
objection to the Project proceeding with the application. The Project is
currently seeking similar assurances from the Regional Administration of the
Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples Regional State.
9.
SOURCES OF START UP FUNDING.
The Project has as one of its components the development of modes of
payment for environmental services. The implementation of the carbon off-set
activities is currently covered by Project funding, including carbon assessment
and the production of the Operational Manual.
35

PIN

Transcription

Similar documents

SUSTAINABLE PACIFIC GROVE APRIL MEETING

Los combustibles fósiles liberan bióxido de carbono al quemarse e

What`s Happening at Oak Forest UMC

Retail Leasing Brochure Here

crankers main

Lumholtz`s Tree-Kangaroo: Conserving a rare marsupial

Monitoring of Italian Forests and environment

Climate Change solutions in Madagascar: The role of forests

climbing area - Hocking Hills