Forest Landscape Restoration: Who Decides? A Governance Approach to Forest Landscape Restoration

Forest landscape restoration is currently gaining momentum as a means of jointly addressing climate change and future agricultural demands. Forest landscape restoration does not aim to ‘just’ restore forests, but to restore them from a broader perspective on the landscape as a whole, allowing simultaneous restoration of the ecological and productive functions of forests. There are many ways in which forested landscapes can be restored, depending on the biophysical characteristics of the landscapes, but also, and even more so on the interests of a landscape’s stakeholders, and the way in which they negotiate, and make landscape decisions. This complex process of decision making between stakeholders operating at various levels and scales is usually referred to as landscape governance. Landscape governance often does not tally with the political-administrative structures of states, because landscapes are usually not incorporated as a formal layer in the political and administrative structures of states. Instead, landscape governance is captured in a messy web of multi-actor networks, institutions and institutional arrangements, (in)formally constructed across levels and scales, more or less embedded in locally existing livelihood strategies and socially embedded institutional frames. Global initiatives on forest landscape restoration are therefore not to be institutionalized along structures of formal (de)centralized structures of states, but ‘bricoled’ though informal networks, multi-stakeholder coalitions, or public-private partnerships engaged in processes of landscape learning, where stakeholders learn to create and share institutional space. In this way, forest landscape restoration can become a catalyst for institutional change, transforming governance into a process of place-bound negotiation and decision making, to collectively make place.

[1]  C. Lund,et al.  Chapter 1. Access and Property: A Question of Power and Authority , 2010 .

[2]  W. Adger Social and ecological resilience: are they related? , 2000 .

[3]  J. W. Termorshuizen,et al.  Landscape services as a bridge between landscape ecology and sustainable development , 2009, Landscape Ecology.

[4]  Y. Yasmi,et al.  Can biodiversity conservation go hand in hand with local livelihoods? A case of conflict resolution in Thailand. , 2010 .

[5]  K. F. Wiersum Use and conservation of biodiversity in East African forested landscapes , 2003 .

[6]  Susan I. Stewart,et al.  Sense of Place: An Elusive Concept That is Finding a Home in Ecosystem Management , 1998, Journal of Forestry.

[7]  S. Rantala,et al.  Changing landscapes, transforming institutions: local management of natural resources in the East Usambara Mountains, Tanzania , 2011 .

[8]  A. J. Woodhill Shaping behaviour: How institutions evolve , 2008 .

[9]  B. Art,et al.  Forest governance: a state of the art review , 2012 .

[10]  F. Cleaver,et al.  Institutional bricolage in community forestry: an agenda for future research , 2012 .

[11]  A. Wals,et al.  The Acoustics of Social Learning: Designing learning processes that contribute to a more sustainable world. , 2009 .

[12]  G. Bull,et al.  Mediating Forest Transitions: 'Grand Design' or 'Muddling Through' , 2008 .

[13]  J. Rayner,et al.  Embracing complexity: meeting the challenges of international forest governance. A global assessment report. , 2010 .

[14]  J. D. Koning Reshaping institutions : bricolage processes in smallholder forestry in the Amazon , 2011 .

[15]  Pushpam Kumar Payments for environmental services , 2009 .

[16]  Robert Dyball,et al.  Social Learning in Environmental Management: Towards a Sustainable Future , 2005 .

[17]  Mieke Uyttendaele,et al.  Wageningen Academic Publishers , 2005 .

[18]  J. Stephen Lansing,et al.  Priests and Programmers: Technologies of Power in the Engineered Landscape of Bali , 1992 .

[19]  T. Tomich,et al.  To segregate or to integrate? the question of balance between production and biodiversity conservation in complex agroforestry systems , 1997 .

[20]  M. Ros-Tonen Non-timber forest product extraction as a productive bricolage process , 2012 .

[21]  W. Dressler,et al.  REDD Policy Impacts on Indigenous Property Rights Regimes on Palawan Island, the Philippines , 2012 .

[22]  M. C. Diaw Elusive meanings: decentralization, conservation and local democracy , 2010 .

[23]  Cees Leeuwis,et al.  Rethinking Communication in Innovation Processes: Creating Space for Change in Complex Systems , 2011 .

[24]  J. Sayer,et al.  The political economy of reforestation and forest restoration in Asia-Pacific: Critical issues for REDD+ , 2012 .

[25]  Christoph Görg,et al.  Landscape governance: The “politics of scale” and the “natural” conditions of places , 2005 .

[26]  Stephen G. Perz,et al.  Crossing boundaries for environmental science and management: combining interdisciplinary, interorganizational and international collaboration , 2010, Environmental Conservation.

[27]  S. Batterbury Landscapes of Diversity: A Local Political Ecology of Livelihood Diversification in South-Western Niger , 2001 .

[28]  C. Colfer,et al.  Collaborative governance of tropical landscapes , 2011 .

[29]  Frances Cleaver,et al.  Reinventing Institutions: Bricolage and the Social Embeddedness of Natural Resource Management , 2002 .

[30]  D. Massey Landscape as a Provocation , 2006 .

[31]  W. Adger,et al.  Social Vulnerability to Climate Change and the Architecture of Entitlements , 1999 .