Ten people‐centered rules for socially sustainable ecosystem restoration

As the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration begins, there remains insufficient emphasis on the human and social dimensions of restoration. The potential that restoration holds for achieving both ecological and social goals can only be met through a shift toward people-centered restoration strategies. Toward this end, this paper synthesizes critical insights from a special issue on “Restoration for whom, by whom” to propose actionable ways to center humans and social dimensions in ecosystem restoration, with the aim of generating fair and sustainable initiatives. These rules respond to a relative silence on socio-political issues in di Sacco et al.'s “Ten golden rules for reforestation to optimize carbon sequestration, biodiversity recovery and livelihood benefits” on socio-political issues and offer complementary guidance to their piece. Arranged roughly in order from pre-intervention, design/initiation, implementation, through the monitoring, evaluation and learning phases, the 10 people-centered rules are: (1) Recognize diversity and interrelations among stakeholders and rightsholders'; (2) Actively engage communities as agents of change; (3) Address socio-historical contexts; (4) Unpack and strengthen resource tenure for marginalized groups; (5) Advance equity across its multiple dimensions and scales; (6) Generate multiple benefits; (7) Promote an equitable distribution of costs, risks, and benefits; (8) Draw on different types of evidence and knowledge; (9) Question dominant discourses; and (10) Practice inclusive and holistic monitoring, evaluation, and learning. We contend that restoration initiatives are only tenable when the issues raised in these rules are respectfully addressed

Assessing social equity in Farmer-Managed Natural Regeneration (FMNR) interventions: findings from Ghana

Achieving social equity in land and forest restoration is a key objective of major international frameworks and commitments, including the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration. Meeting this objective requires consideration of key governance ques- tions such as who makes decisions about what is restored, where, and how? And how do factors specific to local contexts influence which decisions are made, and, in turn, the distribution of benefits? Despite the demonstrated importance of social equity on project outcomes in many natural resource-based fields, there have to date been no assessments of social equity of farmer-managed natural regeneration (FMNR), an approach used mainly for restoring degraded agricultural land. Drawing on findings from community-based fieldwork in 2019–2020 in northeastern Ghana, this paper aims to fill this void. We address the following question: How do historical, socio-ecological, and political processes condition prospects for social equity in FMNR interventions? Key findings were: 1) Preexisting hierarchies in authority, control, and access over land and trees shaped decision-making in project design and the potential distribution of benefits from FMNR 2) FMNR, when implemented on farmland, generally aligned with local agroecological practices; but, when implemented to restore communal lands, it created tensions with local perceptions of equity as well as traditional land and natural resource management practices, and 3) The FMNR project reflected the continuing salience of dominant political and environmental discourses, which carry implications for restoring landscapes with FMNR. To support practitioners, we provide several recommendations for strengthening social equity of FMNR project designs

Farmers’ perspectives and context are key for the success and sustainability of farmer-managed natural regeneration (FMNR) in northeastern Ghana

Restoring degraded landscapes is critical for achieving global environmental and development goals, and agroforestry is increasingly promoted as a nature-based solution to land degradation. Farmer-managed natural regeneration (FMNR) is an agroforestry-based approach for restoring degraded agricultural land and it has been widely implemented in African drylands. However, a recent systematic review found significant gaps in the evidence base for FMNR, including that its upscaling has been based on inadequate understandings of local contexts. Furthermore, studies reporting on farmer adoption of FMNR have mainly relied on quantitative data from household surveys, resulting in limited understandings of what motivates farmers who practice FMNR. This paper draws on the results of a qualitative study in northeastern Ghana to address two questions: 1) How and why do farmers practice FMNR? And 2) How does context influence farmers’ rationales for practicing FMNR? We found that farmers grounded their perspectives on the utility of FMNR in nuanced understandings of the local farming and land and tree tenure systems. The results of our study also demonstrate how farmers’ decision-making was situated within socially and agroecologically differentiated contexts, which were conditioned by long-term, multi-faceted change in the region. We conclude that in spite of the rush to scale up FMNR, more attention should be directed to assessing where, when, and for whom FMNR might be appropriate. Such assessments should be grounded in resource managers’ preferences, local agricultural and land and tree tenure systems, and the requisite biophysical conditions for FMNR. To support these efforts, we propose an FMNR suitability assessment framework, based on our findings and those from related studies. As landscape restoration is scaled up globally, initiatives should be informed by evidence demonstrating how and why resource managers might practice a restoration activity as well as how context influences their choices.ISSN:0305-750