Complementary Financing for Environment in the Context of Accession – Innovative Resources: National Report Croatia. A project for the European Commission (contract 070201/2006/443879/MAR/E3)

This publication is a part of a five case studies exploring the possibility to establish payment for ecosystem services (PES) schemes for biodiversity conservation in two new EU Member States and three candidate countries, namely Bulgaria, Croatia, Former Yugoslavian Republic of Macedonia, Romania and Turkey. The report forms a part of a project "Complementary Financing for Environment in the Context of Accession – Innovative Resources" (070201/2006/443879/MAR/E3) that has been carried out by the WWF Danube-Carpathian Programme and IEEP for the European Commission in 2006-2007. The report on Croatia assesses the value and discusses possibilities of payments for ecosystem services of the Lonjsko Polje Nature Park - the largest maintained inundation area in the Danube river catchment. The opportunity costs and proposed payments for environmental services (PES) in the Lonjsko Polje Nature Park have been calculated using the most likely development scenarios for the three major land use categories: grassland, arable land and forest. In all scenarios transaction costs have been taken into account. Various options have been assessed, including six scenarios assuming conversion to organic farming management: 1) Conversion of the current grazing practice to organic management. 2) Abandoned pastures conversion to organic management. 3) Conversion of current meadows management to organic. 4) Abandoned meadows conversion to organic management 5) Conversion of maize production to organic management. 6) Conversion of wheat production to organic management

Impact of Organic Agriculture on the Environmental and Economic Performance of Croatia

Within the framework of an FAO technical assistance project for Croatia a study assessing the feasibility of large-scale conversion to organic farming was carried out. It examined the consequences of the conversion of a substantial portion of Croatian agricultural land to organic farming in relation to national agricultural output (food security) and related environmental and economic performance. As farming is closely linked with a range of economic activities, besides farming the assessment also took into account the impact of wide-spread adoption of organic agriculture on farm-upstream linked sectors (FULS). These include energy production and supply, manufacturing of agri-chemical inputs, trade, transport and research, education, advisory, veterinary and administrative services. The agricultural output, environmental and economic performance of the baseline scenario (average of 2001-2003) was compared with fourteen development scenarios involving various shares of utilised agricultural land (UAA) under organic management (10, 25, 50 and 100 per cent) and different yields (100, 75 and 50 per cent of the baseline). In order to enable the same consumer purchasing power as in the baseline situation, organic products were assumed to obtain no premium price in twelve scenarios. In two scenarios approaching the current situation in some European countries (10 and 25 per cent of UAA under organic management with 75 per cent yield) a 10 per cent premium price for organic produce was included. In order to obtain the real value added (RVA) created by farming and FULS, the generated gross value added (GVA) was corrected for the associated environmental costs (damage to air, water and soil) and public investments. The public investments, emissions and environmental degradation of air, water and soil were quantified using data from various official documents and databases, as well as by performing new calculations. A monetary value was assigned to all identified environmental damages throughout farming and FULS using various environmental accounting methods. The difference between the GVA created by the examined economic chain and the sum of environmental costs and public investments resulted in the RVA. The RVA was used as a measurement indicating the economic feasibility of organic farming development scenarios as compared with the baseline scenario. If the entire UAA in Croatia converted to organic farming and if the crops and livestock gave the same yields as in the baseline situation, the farming and FULS would generate a 43 per cent higher annual GVA and 155 per cent higher annual RVA than the baseline scenario. This scenario implies refraining from the use of nearly all agri-chemical inputs. It consumes far less fossil energy (notably in FULS) and causes less environmental damage to soil and water (notably in the farming sector). Consequently, its environmental costs are nearly two times lower than in the baseline. The study results suggest that Croatian farming and FULS in the period 2001-2003 when measured in terms of RVA produced a negative effect on the economy and society in general. Farming is the key sector since it accounts for 90 per cent of the workforce, 61 per cent of GVA, 89 per cent of environmental costs and 77 per cent of public investments of the entire economic chain examined. The scenario involving a 100 per cent organic area, but yielding only 75 per cent of the baseline scenario produces a 17 per cent lower GVA. However, when corrected for public investments and environmental costs it results in 71 per cent higher RVA than the baseline scenario. The 100 per cent organic area scenario achieving only half of the baseline yields results in both lower GVA (75 percent lower) and RVA (6 per cent lower) than the baseline scenario. Of all examined scenarios, this is the least favourable for organic farming as its results exhibit the biggest discrepancies in comparison with the baseline situation. Similar results were obtained in all other scenarios (involving 50, 25 and 10 per cent organic area with 100, 75 and 50 per cent yield levels as compared to the baseline). The organic options, measured against the RVA created are better (7-89 per cent), only in cases where the yield level is 75 or 100 percent of the baseline. If the obtained yields are 50 per cent lower, the organic scenario options create both lower GVA (1, 19 and 37 per cent) and RVA (1, 2 and 3 per cent) than the baseline. The scenarios assuming a 10 per cent premium price (10 and 25 per cent organic area achieving 75 per cent of the baseline yields) create about the same GVA as the baseline, but 10-25 per cent higher RVA. All scenarios involving organic farming decrease environmental costs compared to the baseline. Provided the yield is not 50 per cent lower, all organic scenarios result in a higher RVA than the baseline. The agricultural output (yields) remains the key factor in determining the feasibility of a shift to organic farming. A severe reduction in agricultural output jeopardises national food security. However, since organic farming goes hand in hand with careful management, in the case of Croatia it would not necessarily lead to (much) lower yields. Pioneering efforts in Croatia, as well as evidence from other countries with a similar agricultultural situation also indicate this. Conversion to large-scale organic farming requires high human and social capital. Organic farming is low-input from the point of view of the use of external farming inputs, but is high-input from the point of view of the knowledge and skills needed. In the case of Croatia where farmers and other key stakeholders have a relatively low level of general education and poor agricultural training, this point will certainly be the main obstacle preventing a greater spread of organic farming. Policy efforts should therefore focus primarily on stimulating the formation of social capital and increasing human capacities of all stakeholders involved in the organic food chain

Environmental and macroeconomic impact assessment of different development scenarios to organic and low-input farming in Croatia

This study was commissioned by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) within the framework of an FAO technical assistance project for Croatia. It assessed macroeconomic and environmental impact assessment of large-scale conversion to organic agriculture. It examined the consequences of such a conversion to national agricultural output and related environmental and economic performance. The assessment also took into account the impact of wide-spread adoption of organic agriculture on farm-upstream linked sectors (FULS). These include energy production and supply, manufacturing of agri-chemical inputs, trade, transport and research, education, advisory, veterinary and administrative services. The agricultural output, environmental and economic performance of the baseline scenario (average of 2001-2003) was compared with fourteen development scenarios involving various shares of utilised agricultural land (UAA) under organic management (10, 25, 50 and 100 per cent) and different yields (100, 75 and 50 per cent of the baseline). In order to obtain the real value added (RVA) created by farming and FULS, the generated gross value added (GVA) was corrected for the associated environmental costs (damage to air, water and soil) and public investments. A monetary value was assigned to all identified environmental damages throughout farming and FULS using various environmental accounting methods. If the entire UAA in Croatia converted to organic farming and if the crops and livestock gave the same yields as in the baseline situation, the farming and FULS would generate a 43 per cent higher annual GVA and 155 per cent higher annual RVA than the baseline scenario. This scenario implies refraining from the use of nearly all agri-chemical inputs. It consumes far less fossil energy (notably in FULS) and causes less environmental damage to soil and water (notably in the farming sector). Consequently, its environmental costs are nearly two times lower than in the baseline. The study results suggest that Croatian farming and FULS in the period 2001-2003 when measured in terms of RVA produced a negative effect on the economy and society in general. Farming is the key sector since it accounts for 90 per cent of the workforce, 61 per cent of GVA, 89 per cent of environmental costs and 77 per cent of public investments of the entire economic chain examined. The scenario involving a 100 per cent organic area, but yielding only 75 per cent of the baseline scenario produces a 17 per cent lower GVA. However, when corrected for public investments and environmental costs it results in 71 per cent higher RVA than the baseline scenario. The 100 per cent organic area scenario achieving only half of the baseline yields results in both lower GVA (75 percent lower) and RVA (6 per cent lower) than the baseline scenario. Of all examined scenarios, this is the least favourable for organic farming as its results exhibit the biggest discrepancies in comparison with the baseline situation. Similar results were obtained in all other scenarios (involving 50, 25 and 10 per cent organic area with 100, 75 and 50 per cent yield levels as compared to the baseline). The organic options, measured against the RVA created are better (7-89 per cent), only in cases where the yield level is 75 or 100 percent of the baseline. If the obtained yields are 50 per cent lower, the organic scenario options create both lower GVA (1, 19 and 37 per cent) and RVA (1, 2 and 3 per cent) than the baseline. The scenarios assuming a 10 per cent premium price (10 and 25 per cent organic area achieving 75 per cent of the baseline yields) create about the same GVA as the baseline, but 10-25 per cent higher RVA. All scenarios involving organic farming decrease environmental costs compared to the baseline. Provided the yield is not 50 per cent lower, all organic scenarios result in a higher RVA than the baseline. The agricultural output (yields) remains the key factor in determining the feasibility of a shift to organic farming. A severe reduction in agricultural output jeopardises national food security. However, since organic farming goes hand in hand with careful management, in the case of Croatia it would not necessarily lead to (much) lower yields. Pioneering efforts in Croatia, as well as evidence from other countries with a similar agricultultural situation also indicate this. Conversion to large-scale organic farming requires high human and social capital. Organic farming is low-input from the point of view of the use of external farming inputs, but is high-input from the point of view of the knowledge and skills needed. In the case of Croatia where farmers and other key stakeholders have a relatively low level of general education and poor agricultural training, this point will certainly be the main obstacle preventing a greater spread of organic farming. Policy efforts should therefore focus primarily on stimulating the formation of social capital and increasing human capacities of all stakeholders involved in the organic food chain

Poljoprivreda koja štiti prirodu: zaštira pridode kroz mjere Programa ruralnog razvoja RH 2014.–2020.

This book provides an overview of measures in the Rural Development Programme of Croatia 2014-2020 which contribute to nature protection. It covers organic farming (Measure 11); agri-environment/climate measures (Measure 10); areas with natural constraints (Measure 13) and support for non-productive investments for environmental purposes/public amenity (Measure 4.4). The chapter on organic farming provides an overview on basic principles and practices and contribution of organic farming to nature protection

The Organic Market in Croatia

Land use and production The Croatian organic agriculture sector is still in an early stage of development but has recorded a rapid expansion over the last three years. According to the estimates of the Ministry of Agriculture, Croatia has some 7’000 hectares under organic management managed by some 250 (mostly family) farms. Cereals seem to account for more than 70 percent of the total organic production in Croatia. State regulations and support Organic farming in Croatia is regulated by the La w on Organic Agriculture adopted in 2001. In 2003 the government introduced subsidies to support organic farming (400 EUR/ha of arable land). This had a great impact on the development of the sector and the area under organic management in 2003 has increased tenfold as compared to 2002. Inspection and certification Croatia has a fully functioning domestic inspection and certification system. There are six inspection and two certification organisations accredited by the Ministry of Agriculture. Market and consumers Data about the organic market as well as a thorough market analysis do not exist and the value of the Croatian organic food sector is difficult to estimate. Almost all products are sold on the domestic market. The price premium is in the range of 50 to 100 percent. Only a few organic enterprises export their products and these are mostly herbs and spices. The total export value in 2003 was about 0.65 million EUR. Organic produce is sold either directly at the farm and farmers’ markets or at numerous health food shops. Almost all supermarket chains also sell organic products but most of these are imported. Imported organic food includes pasta, cereals, juices, sweets, biscuits and soy products. Not a single shop sells organic fruit, vegetables, meat and dairy products. Organic data collection There is no structural data collection on organic agri culture in Croatia. Production data are based on the information recorded by the inspection and certification n bodies which have to report to the Ministry of Agriculture. The Croatian Statistical Office so far has not collected any data on organic farming but preparations have been made to start with collection of some basic production data. Data on the market volumes, imports and exports as well as price statistics are not yet available. Several private market information companies occasionally conduct surveys on consumer attitudes and behaviour related to organic products. Ecologica, one of the leading organic organisations in the country has also started data collection on organic production, marketing and consumer attitudes

Agri-Environment Programme for Croatia

In the period 2002-2004, the Netherlands Government's Pin-Matra programme funded an international project aiming to support the introduction of an agri-environment programme (AE) in Croatia. The project resulted in proposals for national and pilot agri-environment programmes. The project addressed key actors working on agri-environmental issues in Croatia, such as government representatives, scientists, farmers, environmental and nature conservation NGOs. An AE Programme has been operating in the EU since 1992. Today it is the only obligatory measure under the EU Rural Development Regulation. The costs of the AE programmes are part-financed from the EU budget and partly from national budgets. The programme is based on voluntary agreements between farmers and public authorities and currently covers some 25% of agricultural land in the EU. The AE schemes have become an important policy instrument for protecting the environment and maintaining biodiversity on EU agricultural land. At present Croatia still does not have the appropriate legislative framework needed to facilitate an AE programme. However, Croatia has been working to improve this situation: a Code of Good Agricultural Practices and a National Programme for Agriculture and Rural Areas are soon to be adopted. The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management runs a comprehensive agricultural support scheme for farmers. However, 98% of this budget is devoted to production-linked direct payments, while support for rural development is limited to only 0.4% of the total agricultural aid budget. Except for subsidies for organic farming and local breeds, currently there are no other financial provisions for environmentally friendly farming in Croatia. Responsibility for environmental and nature protection in Croatia is divided between three ministries: the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management; the Ministry of Environmental Protection, Spatial Planning and Construction; and the Ministry of Culture (nature protection). There are a number of opportunities for the introduction of an agri-environment programme in Croatia, notably the political climate and Croatia's aspirations to join the EU. However, there are also some obstacles. A particular problem is the high level of the current direct payments. In order to be attractive enough, the AE subsidies would have to be high as well. The Croatian agricultural sector has two parallel production systems: private family farms and agricultural companies. Private farming constitutes the core of the agricultural sector of Croatia. The recent agricultural census, satellite images and the Ministry of Agriculture's Farm Register indicate that the agricultural area utilised in Croatia is nearly three times smaller than the agricultural area recorded in official statistics. According to these figures, Croatia has only 0.18 ha of arable land per capita, which puts it in the group of countries with a critical land per capita ratio. This is also one of the reasons why Croatia is a great food importer and is self-sufficient in only five agricultural products. Agriculture is by far the biggest single influence on the Croatian environment and countryside. Croatia practices bipolar agriculture: high-input in regions with intensive arable farming and low-input farming in less favoured areas, most of which are karst regions. The environmental impact of Croatian agriculture is much greater than usually believed. Croatia is a heavy user of mineral fertilisers and pesticides. With an average consumption of 260 kg of nutrients and 4.1 kg of pesticide active ingredients per ha of arable land in the last five years, Croatia significantly exceeds the EU average. Agri-chemicals are applied only on arable land and permanent crops. Most Croatian farms practice very narrow crop rotation, resulting in a number of environmental problems and a decline in biodiversity. Soil erosion is a significant problem, although the biggest one seems to be land abandonment. Shrubs and forest-like vegetation are rapidly invading a vast area of Croatian agricultural land, notably species-rich grassland. The Croatian AE programme is designed to contribute to environmental and nature protection and the countryside. It will encourage farmers to continue practising environmentally friendly measures or introduce those that are not economically attractive, but essential from the environmental and biodiversity point of view. In this respect, the Programme is an instrument through which Croatian society rewards farmers for the public goods and services they provide (clean water and air, fertile soil, rich biodiversity, appealing landscape, etc.). Through the AE payments, Croatian society would reward farmers for the public goods and services they provide, as the value of this is not recognised by the market. The Agri-Environment Programme has been designed to respond to two major problems that Croatia faces concerning agriculture, and environmental and nature protection: a rapid decline in (grassland) biodiversity and environmental degradation caused by inappropriate agricultural practices. The AE Programme consists of six schemes: 1. The Information Transfer Scheme It should provide training to farmers, administrators and extensionists, as well as inform general public on the Programme importance. 2. Abandoned Land Clearance Scheme This Scheme should enable farmers to clean and restore agricultural land overgrown by shrubs. 3. Arable Land Scheme It facilitates reduction of environmental pressure caused by intensive arable farming. The Scheme consists of the following packages: crop rotation, undersowing, anti-erosion and field strips package. 4. Organic Farming Scheme This should protect soil, water, air and biodiversity by increasing the area under organic management. 5. Grassland Scheme It encourages farmers to continue with traditional (extensive) grassland management. The Scheme has two packages: for grassland management and species-rich grasslands- and provides payments for mowing and grazing. 6. Biodiversity Scheme This consists of five packages: the Meadow Orchards Package; Local Breeds and Traditional Varieties Package; Countryside Stewardship Package; Wild Species Protection and Carp Fish Ponds Package. These are targeted to improve habitat, species and landscape biodiversity. Most of the proposed packages are horizontal measures and can be practised in all regions. However, the Species-Rich Grassland, Wild Species Protection and Carp Fish Ponds Packages are site-specific and can be applied only in selected areas. Only farms that are bigger than 3 hectares and inscribed in the Farm Register should be eligible for support under the AE Programme. These farms manage 87% of the Croatian UAA. The only exceptions are farms in protected natural areas and organic farms, whose size can be smaller. It is estimated that some 2-10% of arable land and 20% of grassland would take part in the Programme, while the target for organic agriculture is 3% of the UAA. The Biodiversity Scheme is hopped to occupy 23,000 hectares, involve 2.5% of all livestock units and provide 175 km under linear habitats. The envisaged cost for the first three years of the AE Programme's implementation is 23 million EUR per year on average, representing some 7% of the current budget for the state's support for agriculture. Once Croatia joins the EU, the AE Programme could be 85% financed by the EU and 15% by the national agricultural budget. Reaching the targets set out by this Programme would enhance the rural landscape, protect the environment, improve biodiversity and maintain Croatia's rich natural heritage. Therefore, this Programme should be given a prominent place when designing Croatia’s future agricultural policy

EU CAP NETWORK - The role of knowledge and promotion

High Diversity Landscape Features (HDLF) are small natural or semi-natural areas of vegetation (e.g. flower strips, hedges, tree grove, etc.) and specific habitats (e.g. dry-stone walls, terraces, etc.) in agricultural land which provide important contributions to biodiversity and other ecosystem services. The EU Biodiversity Strategy 2030 sets a target of at least 10% of agricultural area under HDLF. For this to succeed, farmers need to be motivated to maintain these elements on their farms or to create new ones. However, many farmers have not explicitly considered HDLF elements on their farm, know the benefits of biodiversity for food production, know how these features should be created and maintained, or which ones best suit their own farm enterprise. Various factors can contribute to addressing these issues such as rewards and incentives for habitat creation, financial and technical support for maintenance services, increased awareness of direct benefits for production or an adapted knowledge transfer. In this paper we focus on knowledge exchange for the promotion of HDLF for biodiversity. We explore the methods and tools currently used to communicate and disseminate biodiversity knowledge in the agricultural knowledge system. We examine the effectiveness of different mechanisms and look at which approaches are successful and which less so, and for what reasons. Good practice examples are provided. Based on the review and description of tools, we identify research needs and highlight potential ideas for innovation

Agri-Environment Programme for Žumberak-Samoborsko Gorje Nature Park

In the period 2002-2004, the Netherlands Government's Pin-Matra programme funded an international project aiming to support the introduction of an agri-environment (AE) programme in Croatia. The project resulted in proposals for national and pilot agri-environment programmes. This publication summarises the proposal for the Pilot project. The Agri-Environment Programme is an integral part of the EU Rural Development Regulation (1257/1999). It is the only obligatory measure under this regulation. The programme sets up the framework for the comprehensive protection of the environment and nature from adverse agricultural practices. The programme is based on voluntary agreements between farmers and public authorities. By providing economic incentives and supporting related education and demonstration activities, the programme encourages and enables farmers to employ agricultural practices that are beneficial for nature and the environment. The agri-environment programme has recorded very rapid expansion. Currently some 25% of EU agricultural land is included in the agri-environment programme. The costs of the AE programmes are partly financed from the EU budget and partly from national budgets. The AE schemes have become an important policy instrument for protecting the environment and maintaining biodiversity on EU agricultural land. Croatia still does not have an agri-environment programme. Therefore, it was proposed to select a Croatian protected natural area and design a pilot agri-environment programme for it. The Žumberak- Samoborsko Gorje Nature Park was selected because in this region agriculture is essential for maintaining the basic Park phenomena: a man-made mosaic landscape and biodiversity depending on traditional land use. Besides, data needed to design an AE programme were available and the Park management team was highly professional and motivated. The Žumberak-Samoborsko Gorje Nature Park represents a cultural landscape created through human activities, which shaped the landscape and contributed to the enrichment of biodiversity. Human activity, particularly grazing and mowing, created the conditions for the existence of many wildlife species. Over the last decades, and especially in the 1990s, livestock farming has been seriously declining in the Park. As a result, many species-rich grasslands are no longer managed and are overgrowing with shrubs and trees. The Agri-environment programme for the Žumberak-Samoborsko Gorje Nature Park is designed to respond to the rapid decline of landscape, habitats and species diversity due to the loss of agricultural land, notably grassland. The Programme will encourage farmers to continue practising environmentally friendly measures or introduce those that are not economically attractive, but essential from the environmental and biodiversity point of view. The proposed schemes and packages consists of four schemes: 1. The Information Transfer Scheme It should provide training to farmers, administrators and extensionists, as well as inform general public on the Programme importance. 2. Abandoned Land Clearance Scheme This Scheme should enable farmers to clean and restore agricultural land overgrown by shrubs. 3. Species Rich Grassland Scheme It encourages farmers to continue with traditional (extensive) grassland management enabling maintenance of species rich grassland. The Scheme has two packages: for mowing and grazing. 4. Biodiversity Scheme This consists of three packages: the Traditional Fruit Trees Package, Wild Species Protection Package and Ponds Package. These are targeted to improve habitat, species and landscape biodiversity. Participation in the AE Programme is granted to all farmers having at least 1 ha of agricultural land within the Park borders. Exempted from this rule are the farms participating in the Wild Species Protection Package, whose size can be smaller than 1 hectare. The Park Authority may also be a recipient of the Programme's aid. Since this kind of programme is quite new and has never been tested in the Park, it is very difficult to forecast the number of farmers and the land area that will enrol in the Programme. The following estimate has been made for the first three years of the Programme: Abandoned Land Clearance Scheme: 800 hectares. This area represents 20% of the currently estimated abandoned grassland area. Species Rich Grassland Scheme: 2,000 hectares. This is equal to 20% of the total Park grassland area. Biodiversity Scheme: 400 hectares and 10 km under linear habitats. The Traditional Fruit Trees Package is expected to cover 100 hectares of meadow orchards, The Wild Species Protection Package is most likely to cover some 300 hectares and The Ponds Package is expected to involve 10 ponds. The Information Transfer Scheme: is to provide training for some 1000 farmers, a number of local agronomists, environmentalists and Park experts. The Scheme will also provide information on the Programme to the Park's inhabitants and visitors. The uptake is expected to record an annual increase in the first years of the Programme's implementation. The envisaged cost for the first three years of the AE Programme's implementation is 400.000 EUR per year on average. Once Croatia joins the EU, the AE Programme could be 85% financed by the EU and 15% by the national agricultural budget. While designing and starting with the implementation of a national AE programme takes time, the pilot AE programme can be tested in a relatively short period. The Žumberak Samoborsko Gorje Nature Park AE Programme would test several AE measures. Experiences and lessons that could be learned from it would be beneficial both for designing the national AE programme and similar region-specific AE programmes. Reaching the targets set out by this Programme would enhance the rural landscape, protect the environment and improve biodiversity. By encouraging farmers to continue with appropriate agricultural management the Programme will significantly contribute to preventing any further decline of landscape, habitats and species diversity in the Park

EU CAP NETWORK - Benefits of HDLFs for on-farm adaption to climate change

The Biodiversity Strategy 2030 objectives include a target for 10% of agricultural land to incorporate landscape features or non-productive areas (European Commission, 2020). In practise and under the proposed Nature Restoration Law (Directorate-General for Environment, 2022), that is currently in the process of political negotiation, these features are divided into four groups (woody, stony, grassy, and wet features), and among others include buffer strips, rotational or non-rotational fallow land, hedgerows, individual or groups of trees, tree rows, field margins, patches, ditches, streams, small wetlands, terraces, cairns, stonewalls, small ponds, and cultural features. Many of these features are perennial and are positioned in the agricultural landscape for longer periods. The longevity of features raises a question of their flexibility, adaptability, and long-term functionality in the scope of changing environments and climate changes. Woody features in agricultural landscapes have often been out of the interest of farmers and foresters in the past but better collaboration between the agriculture and forestry sectors is required. HDLFs are a typical example of joint knowledge and action that can mitigate climate change and provide other benefits