ENVIRONMENTAL AND FINANCIAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND FINANCIAL SYNERGIES ON AFFORESTATION OF SYNERGIES ON AFFORESTATION OF

DEGRADED LANDSDEGRADED LANDS

V. Blujdea – Forest Research and Management Institute Bucharest

I. Abrudan – Transilvania University of Brasov

Romania

Climate: mild continental

Temperature: -2.5 +⋯ 11.4 oC

Precipitation:

• 385 mm (L) and >1000 mm (H)

• West/East: 700/ 400 mm

Relief: balanced among plains\hills\mountains

A place like any other ….

A place like any other ….

but vulnerable to …

Drought intensity areas in Romania

(according to palfay index corrected by soil

properties, relief and ground water)

Hazards in Romania

OVERALL, ALL ARRABLE AGRICULTURAL LAND OF THE COUNTRY IS AFFECTED BY DROUGHT and HALF OF THE COUNTRY AREA IS AFFECTED BY DIFFERENT LAND DEGRADATION TYPE

NAP/UNCCD: Drought and Land Degradation and their combat ….

Monitoring, warning, prevention of drought

Rehabilitation and improvement of the irrigation system

Improve land use and balance at local/regional scale (afforestation, …)

Improvement of hydrological regime of the rivers

Improvement of land use practices

Promotion of drought tolerant crops

Promotion of ‘close to nature’ ecosystem’s management

Water management systems

Afforestation of bad lands in RomaniaAfforestation of bad lands in Romania

Tradition, Experience, Continuity, Necessity

Financing of afforestation worksFinancing of afforestation works

• Dedicated sources (special funds: Degraded Lands Afforestation Fund, own companies effort)

• EU funds (SAPARD and structural)• Joint Implementation approach (under Kyoto

Protocol)

What is synergy ?

• A mutually advantageous conjunction of distinct elements (a common dictionary definition)

• Hunt three rabbits with one single bullet ?

• Share one piece of …. to three lions ?

Land degradation / desertification

Climate change

Biological Diversity

Multiple partners Multiple partners Financial synergies Financial synergies

Environmental synergies Environmental synergies Long term commitment Long term commitment Sustainable developmentSustainable development

KP’s JI/CDM approach in afforestation of degraded lands

How we practically deal with …?

Afforestation activity / project cycle:A. Development of partnership B. Land availability and land useC. Type of structure to be createdD. Technology to be usedE. Chosen of species to be plantedF. IncentivesG. Ensure sustainability of the forest/ administration/

management type / local integrationH. Units of C transfer

A. Partners interested …

• Communities ?Communities ?

• Private owners ?Private owners ?

• State forests administrator ?State forests administrator ?

Issues: uncertain land property, financial, uncertain will, long Issues: uncertain land property, financial, uncertain will, long negotiations, weaknegotiations, weak// lack of capacity of administration, technical lack of capacity of administration, technical

solutions “at command”, communication problems solutions “at command”, communication problems

B. Type of structures to be created …B. Type of structures to be created …

• Ecological restorationEcological restoration• Plantations Plantations // tree cropstree crops• AgroforestryAgroforestry• Energy plantationsEnergy plantations• Plantations with socio-economical purposesPlantations with socio-economical purposes• PioneerPioneer// transitory plantations transitory plantations

Issues: targeted function of the new forest, local needs, local Issues: targeted function of the new forest, local needs, local threats, local vulnerability, land status, former land usethreats, local vulnerability, land status, former land use

C. Land availability and actual land use …

• Ownership on the land

• Land use category and real land use

• Land status

• Aggregation of lands

Issues: cadastral situation, ownership (clear ?), land use correlate with vegetation type, land status (chemical, physical and biological degradation), legislation on land use, procedures on LUC, EIA (?), land consolidation (total area, shape of the contour), conservation approaches, institutional communication, limited capacity of negotiations of the different stakeholders or decision makers

D. Technology to be used …

• Land preparation

• Soil preparation

• Planting technologyIssues: former land use, intensivity of the works (terracing, deep ploughing vs. strips preparation), complexity of the plantations works

E. Chosen of species to be planted …

• A high request of fast growing and dense wood species• In degraded lands combat is a request of species that

quickly halt the erosional processes and soon provide services

• Management objectives of the plantations

Issues: Multitude of options regarding species - exotic vs. native; legal restrictions regarding use of species (Golden Law of Local Provenance); rate of C sequestration vs. C offsets income; owner wish; endeavored functions of the new stand; availability of the seedling on recommended species, collateral problems (genetic introgression, invasion, management, non-permanence, vulnerability), assess risks related to species used

Species Area(ha)

Indigenous speciesFraxinus communis, Fraxinus ornus, Fraxinus pallisae 178

Populus alba, Populus nigra 1455

Salix sp. 310

Pinus nigra 30

Pyrus pyraster, Prunus cerasifera, Ulmus laevis, Crataegus monogyna, Juglans regia, Morus alba 19

Quercus patraea, Quercus robur, Acer campestre, Acer tataricum, Acer platanoides, Cerasus avium, Alnus incana, Carpinus betulus

157

Quercus cerris, Tilia cordata, Tilia argentea 136

Quercus pedunculiflora 1009

Rosa cannina, Ligustrum vulgare 19

Total indigenous species 3313 (55 %)

Exotic speciesElaeaganus angustifolia, Ailantus altissima 739

Gleditschia triachantos 274

Quercus rubra 4

Robinia pseudacacia 1688

Ulmus turkmeniaca, Prunus mahaleb 15

Total exotic species 2720 (45 %)

TOTAL afforested area in project 6033 (100 %)

Area on species and groups of species Area on species and groups of species (according technical afforestations plans)(according technical afforestations plans)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15

Plantation age (years)

Sequestr

atio

n (

tC/h

a) Total Robinia (III)

Total Robinia (V)

Total Poplar (III)

Total Quercus (V)

Pattern of C sequestration in tree plantations

Species

(tC/ha)

Total biomass

Woody biomass

Soil

(incl. litter)

Quercus sp. 20 13.5 7.5

Populus sp. 31 22 10

Robinia sp. 44 34 15

C accumulation projection and validation

Project duration (years)

Pro

ject

tot

al s

eque

stra

tion

(tC

)

CO2fix3PGField estimation

F. Incentives for …

• Who afford what ? (big administrators vs. small land owners)

• Local species planting may/should be an incentive for additional payment by the C offsets buyer? It is a subject of negotiation

• Free services for local people (no charge for forest fruits or medicinal, bees keeping)

G. Ensure sustainability of the new forestG. Ensure sustainability of the new forest// administrationadministration// management type management type // local integrationlocal integration

• Management plansManagement plans

• Protection against illegal cut, grazing, insects Protection against illegal cut, grazing, insects outbreaks, forest firesoutbreaks, forest fires

• Awareness and compensation programme Awareness and compensation programme

Issues: long term forest management; decentralization is just happening Issues: long term forest management; decentralization is just happening in Romania; addressing grass roots problems of the communities - in Romania; addressing grass roots problems of the communities -

compensation measures; limited knowledge on cross sectoral or compensation measures; limited knowledge on cross sectoral or integrated management integrated management

Accum

ulated CO

2

M1 M2 M3

5 years balance Re - parametyzing the

model

H. Carbon and biodiversity monitoring

Conclusions

Options & Trade-offs: Options & Trade-offs: Which step ?

Scientific soundness is needed every step

Afforestation activity (of degraded lands) could be financially supported via sequestered carbon transactions

C financing may act as incentive in the mobilizing national/other partner resources

Plantations of degraded lands creates multi-benefits for local population and environment