Presentation held during the UNFF10 in Istanbul

1. National Assessment of the Potential
for Forest & Landscape Restoration
(FLR)
– a new tool to support landscape
restoration
Stewart Maginnis
Global Director
Nature-Based Solutions Group
IUCN

2. Different Landscapes – Different Dynamics
Protected Degraded Primary Forest
Primary
Forest Secondary forest
Plantations
Secondary forest
Degraded Permanent
Lands pasture
Permanent
pasture
Intecnsive
agriculture land
Permanent
pasture

3. Where and what to restore?

4. Objectives of National Assessment of FLR
potential
Assessments designed to help:
• bring different agency staff together with civil society
actors and researchers to look at the landscape, its
challenges and opportunities, through a multi-sectoral
lens.
• collectively assemble “best estimates” in data deficient
situations (and help define evidence gaps)
• establish a common restoration framework
• align with national priorities eg REDD+ strategy.
• identify restoration priorities and develop „value for
money‟ restoration investments.

5. A flexible method: different approaches depending on
data availability and end needs
Single na onal
Na onal level process
Use geometric
Assessment?
model for first
Yes. Data exists for level of Sub-Na onal level
all indicators assessment of Assessment? Mul ple workshops
selected for at sub-na onal level
assessment
FLR poten al
Single na onal
Use mixture of Na onal level process
geometric Assessment
Country is modeling and
rich in GIS par cipatory Sub-Na onal level Mul ple workshops
data? Some data assessment Assessment? at sub-na onal level
exists for
some
indicators
No. Limited or no Single na onal
data exists for any Na onal level
Use process
indicators
par cipatory Assessment
Assessment of
FLR poten al Sub-Na onal level Mul ple workshops
Assessment? at sub-na onal level

6. Mexico – a country rich in
geographical data
Used multiple criteria to
select sites for restoration:
Areas where restoration is
necessary, e.g.
1. Priorities for restoration
according to Forest Zoning

7. Many national institutions participated in
selecting criteria for prioritizing FLR sites
and provided relevant data layers.
Some criteria for where
restoration has more or
less probability of
success:
2. Socio-economical
Pressure Index/
Deforestation Risk

8. Different criteria were weighted
according to relative importance
3. Susceptibility to
erosion by type of
soil – including
levels of priority

9. Physical & environmental
criteria were balanced with
socio-economic criteria
4. Geographical
distribution of the
dominant patterns of land
tenure in the priority zones
for FLR in Mexico

10. Multiple data layers were
analyzed with geometric
model
5. Priority for restoration
based on
probability/resilience to
fires by type of
vegetation

11. Final product: A map showing
priority areas for restoration
based on multiple criteria
Areas with potential for
forest landscape
restoration – darker
colour indicates higher
priority based on agreed
criteria.

12. Assessment outcomes
• Rapid response that used available GIS data
• Good geographic prioritization and helped 3 different
government agencies develop a common restoration
framework
• To be followed with sub-national analysis including:
• Local stakeholder consultation
• Specification of interventions
• Economic analysis

13. Ghana – less available data. So local expertise and
stakeholder knowledge integrated more intimately with
spatial analysis
Starting from To a new
where the assessment of
woody biomass on-reserve
currently is forest condition
concentrated: To an
And concluding approximation
with classifying where key
landscapes ecosystem
where new goods and
opportunities services are
can missing
be found.

14. Landscape Restoration Interventions
Land Type Land sub-type General Category of Landscape
Restoration Intervention
If the land is without trees, there 1. planted forests and woodlots
Forest land: are two options: 2. natural regeneration
Ø Suitable for “Wide-
Scale” Restoration. If the land is degraded existing
3. silviculture
forests:
If the land is under permanent 4. Agroforestry
Agricultural land management:
Ø Suitable for “Mosaic
Restoration” If it is under intermittent
5. Improved fallow
management:
Coastal areas
Ø Suitable for “Mangrove 6. Mangrove restoration
Restoration”

15. 1.In sub-national workshops base maps were modified
Eliminate Irrelevant Areas
with local knowledge from different sectors

16. On-reserve opportunities for wide-scale restoration:
with an appropriate mix of interventions ascribed to each polygon

17. Followed by portfolios of options in the non-forest
landscape
(mosaic restoration)

18. Accompanied with best estimates of costs and benefits
0.5 ton of carbon

19. The National Assessement in Ghana helped
quantify the potential of different landscape
restoration interventions
Avoided
Deforestation
Silviculture 127
303
Planted
Forests Agroforestry
202 565
Regeneration
267
Fallow
168
Source: Greeley, 1925 (in Williams 2006)

20. Ghana Landscape Restoration Carbon Abatement Curve
..and the
understanding
Net benefits per ton of CO2e sequestration (Cedis)
the potential net
return
CO2e sequestration potential (Mt)

21. Which in turn was used for regional prioritisation
ABATEMENT CURVES – ( map – bullets –
map)
Volta
Region
Central
Region
Today: Forests are coming back
AD
AD
Source: Greeley, 1925 (in Williams 2006)

22. Concluding remarks
• Assessment methodology is an analytical tool: it is not designed for
spatial planning
• The methodology – even at the pilot stage - has proven its ability to
generate relevant knowledge that informs national planning
• Different emphasis can be given to different components depending on
local requirements;
• Mexico:- • Ghana
• Facilitated common • Informed prioritisation in the
prioritisation among govt Ghana FIP
agencies • Maps less important and key
• Maps are an important role was to provide spatial
representation of broad estimates for economic
geographic potential analysis.

23. Thank
you!
forestlandscaperestoration.org