Building National Forest and Land-Use Information Systems: Lessons from Cameroon, Indonesia, and Peru

This working paper examines the institutional, human resources, and financial capacities of three countries that have developed a forest and land-use information system, and highlights common enabling factors and challenges

Blended Value Investing: Innovations in Real Estate

In March 2006, The World Economic Forum published Blended Value Investing: Capital Opportunities for Social and Environmental Impact. That paper, written by Jed Emerson and Joshua Spitzer, presented and explored the notion that between market-rate financial investments and philanthropy lie investment opportunities that intentionally create both financial returns and environmental and social value. These investment instruments seek not simply to balance extra-financial value with financial value, to avoid doing harm, or to add token social responsibility to financial investing (as is true of many 'double bottom line' funds); rather they pursue a sustained blending of value creation -- in financial, environmental and other dimensions. That paper presented 12 case studies of funds and investment instruments in this blended value investing category with a focus on global economic and social value creation more than environmental value creation.In the autumn of 2006, The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation funded a new exploration of blended value, this time focused more specifically on the area of environmental and conservation finance. Many innovations are advancing the field of environmental finance, many of these strategies have been well documented in a variety of articles, books and websites. Nevertheless, for many asset owners and managers, creating blended financial and environmental returns still remains a difficult goal to attain. These actors continue to ask questions regarding the types of investment option before them, the degree (if any) to which they carry a financial penalty, and the nature of the environmental value created (among other questions). Accordingly, this paper offers a broad overview of various real estate-based investment instruments and funds that are structured to generate financial returns while simultaneously advancing environmental value. The specific audience for this paper includes foundation executives seeking to move beyond traditional grantmaking, as well as high-net-worth individuals and other asset trustees working to understand options for pursuing full, blended value investments -- namely, those that create a defined level of economic value combined with environmental impact.This inquiry introduces frameworks for approaching blended value investments, and it raises a series of questions potential investors will probably ask. While the authors believe these investments will ultimately prove viable and efficient, this inquiry stops short of comparing these blended value investments to more traditional alternatives. In the absence of further data, the authors cannot assert that these investments are superior to traditional strategies. The inquiry's conclusion suggests future studies that might bring more data to the ongoing discussion

Banking on Nature's Assets: How Multilateral Development Banks Can Strengthen Development by Using Ecosystem Services

Outlines the benefits of integrating the management of ecosystem services and trade-offs into strategies to improve economic development outcomes, mitigate climate change effects, and reduce economic and human costs. Recommends tools and policy options

Using Eco-schemes in the new CAP: a guide for managing authorities

This guide has been developed primarily for policy makers and Member State officials involved in the national and regional programming processes of the CAP Strategic Plans (CSPs). This process might involve different administrative levels (national, regional, local), different political fields (agriculture, environmental, food and health ministries), different public bodies (paying agencies, environmental agencies, rural development offices) depending on the administrative setting of each MS. In addition, the guide provides support to other stakeholders and practitioners from the public and private sectors and civil society (including agricultural, environmental, food, health and consumer NGOs), with a direct or indirect involvement in the programming and evaluation process of the CSPs. Since these new plans will have a strong impact on MS environments, agricultural sectors, rural areas, etc., the engagement of all stakeholders will be an important asset for supporting an effective implementation of the CSP objectives. There are many others with potential interests in the contents of this guide. EU citizens have demonstrated their increasing interest in the contents of the CAP objectives and policy framework, as demonstrated both by civil society initiatives and consumption decisions. The contents of this guide may therefore also be of interest to other societal actors with interests in agricultural and environmental policies, such as researchers, journalists, trade unions, and civil society organizations. However, the guide is intentionally more focused on the technical needs of those involved in CSP development and implementation

Strategies for adapting to climate change in rural Sub-Saharan Africa

The ten ASARECA member countries (Burundi, Democratic Republic of Congo, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Madagascar, Rwanda, Sudan, Tanzania, and Uganda) have adopted, or are planning to adopt, a range of climate change adaptation strategies in agriculture (see Table 1 for a summary). Of the 26 strategies mentioned, only two are common to all 10 countries, while five more are common to five or more. The strategies common to all member countries include the development and promotion of drought-tolerant and early-maturing crop species and exploitation of new and renewable energy sources. Most countries have areas that are classifiable as arid or semiarid, hence the need to develop drought-tolerant and early-maturing crops. Strangely, only one country recognizes the conservation of genetic resources as an important strategy although this is also potentially important for dealing with drought. Biomass energy resources account for more than 70 percent of total energy consumption in ASARECA member countries. To mitigate the potential adverse effects of biomass energy depletion, ASARECA countries plan to harness new and renewable energy sources, including solar power, wind power, hydro and geothermal sources, and biofuels. Eight of the 10 countries cite the promotion of rainwater harvesting as an important adaptation strategy, either small scale with small check dams or large scale with large dam projects. The five measures that are common to more than five countries are (a) the conservation and restoration of vegetative cover in degraded and mountain areas; (b) reduction of overall livestock numbers through sale or slaughter; (c) cross-breeding, zero-grazing, and acquisition of smaller livestock (for example, sheep or goats); (d) adoption of traditional methods of natural forest conservation and food use; and (e) community-based management programs for forests, rangelands, and national parks. The promotion of environmentally friendly investments and Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) projects that can be funded through carbon trading is a feature of only one country. Three examples of strategies that warrant greater region wide collaboration are the conservation of genetic materials, development and promotion of drought-tolerant species, and soil conservation. To date, the national adaptation policies of only three countries have indicated that they carry out these strategies.Adaptation, ASARECA, Climate change, NAPA, Natural resource management, PRSP,