IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v80y2017icp192-199.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A look at Intact Forest Landscapes (IFLs) and their relevance in Central African forest policy

Author

Listed:
  • Haurez, Barbara
  • Daïnou, Kasso
  • Vermeulen, Cédric
  • Kleinschroth, Fritz
  • Mortier, Frédéric
  • Gourlet-Fleury, Sylvie
  • Doucet, Jean-Louis

Abstract

Tropical forests are major providers of natural resources and ecosystem services but their ecological functions are at threat, due to increasing human pressure linked to economic development. The identification of priority areas for conservation is crucial for land use planning to ensure the protection of biodiversity and ecological function. Intact Forest Landscapes (IFLs), as defined by Greenpeace and World Resources Institute (WRI), are areas of the forest ecosystems not subjected to human activities. They have been identified by mapping human disturbances through remote sensing. Contrary to similar global-scale concepts, IFLs have been integrated into the standards of the certification body Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and therefore have practical implications for forest management policies. The Motion 65, approved in the general assembly of FSC in 2014, mandates the protection of IFLs located in FSC certified logging concessions. Until the implementation of national standards, forestry operations are banished from 80% of the IFL area within each forest management unit. To trace the history and evaluate the suitability of IFLs in the Central African context, we searched for documents related to the IFL method, and related approaches focusing on the identification of areas devoid of human disturbances. The IFL method is simple and cost-effective and allows for a global assessment of the influence of human infrastructures and industrial exploitation on forests. However, the method does not consider the situation below the canopy and those forest components not visible by satellites. For example, hunting, one of the main threats faced by wildlife in Central African forests today, cannot be detected with satellite imagery. On the other hand, other anthropogenic activities which remote sensing may detect may be compatible with forest ecosystem conservation. To better tailor the IFL approach to Central African forests, we recommend (i) the consideration of wildlife communities in the intactness analysis, (ii) a thorough evaluation of the impacts of human activities on forest ecosystems, and (iii) the integration of local stakeholders and governments in the design of land management strategies to respond to social, economic and environmental needs.

Suggested Citation

  • Haurez, Barbara & Daïnou, Kasso & Vermeulen, Cédric & Kleinschroth, Fritz & Mortier, Frédéric & Gourlet-Fleury, Sylvie & Doucet, Jean-Louis, 2017. "A look at Intact Forest Landscapes (IFLs) and their relevance in Central African forest policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 192-199.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:80:y:2017:i:c:p:192-199
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2017.03.021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934116303008
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2017.03.021?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Amacher, Gregory S. & Koskela, Erkki & Ollikainen, Markku, 2009. "Deforestation and land use under insecure property rights," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(3), pages 281-303, June.
    2. Naughton-Treves, Lisa, 2004. "Deforestation and Carbon Emissions at Tropical Frontiers: A Case Study from the Peruvian Amazon," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 173-190, January.
    3. Betha Lusiana & Meine Noordwijk & Feri Johana & Gamma Galudra & S. Suyanto & Georg Cadisch, 2014. "Implications of uncertainty and scale in carbon emission estimates on locally appropriate designs to reduce emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD+)," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 19(6), pages 757-772, August.
    4. Katrina Brandon, 2014. "Ecosystem Services from Tropical Forests: Review of Current Science - Working Paper 380," Working Papers 380, Center for Global Development.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Till Neeff, 2021. "What is the risk of overestimating emission reductions from forests – and what can be done about it?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 1-19, May.
    2. Qing Liu & Dongdong Yang & Lei Cao & Bruce Anderson, 2022. "Assessment and Prediction of Carbon Storage Based on Land Use/Land Cover Dynamics in the Tropics: A Case Study of Hainan Island, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-24, February.
    3. Salant, Stephen W. & Yu, Xueying, 2013. "The Effect of Stochastic Oscillations in Property Rights Regimes on Forest Output in China," RFF Working Paper Series dp-13-08, Resources for the Future.
    4. Dilnessa Gashaye & Zerihun Woldu & Sileshi Nemomissa & Enyew Adgo, 2023. "The Land-Use and Land-Cover Changes in the Este District, South Gondar Zone, Northwestern Ethiopia, in the Last Four Decades (the 1980s to 2020s)," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-18, August.
    5. Barua, Sepul K. & Lintunen, Jussi & Uusivuori, Jussi & Kuuluvainen, Jari, 2014. "On the economics of tropical deforestation: Carbon credit markets and national policies," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 36-45.
    6. Montoya-Zumaeta, Javier G. & Wunder, Sven & Tacconi, Luca, 2021. "Incentive-based conservation in Peru: Assessing the state of six ongoing PES and REDD+ initiatives," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    7. Erik Lilleskov & Kevin McCullough & Kristell Hergoualc’h & Dennis Castillo Torres & Rodney Chimner & Daniel Murdiyarso & Randy Kolka & Laura Bourgeau-Chavez & John Hribljan & Jhon Aguila Pasquel & Cra, 2019. "Is Indonesian peatland loss a cautionary tale for Peru? A two-country comparison of the magnitude and causes of tropical peatland degradation," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 591-623, April.
    8. Britta Rude & Bennet Niederhöfer & Fabio Ferrara, 2020. "ifo Migrationsmonitor: Entwaldung und Migration," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 73(09), pages 66-74, September.
    9. Gregmar Galinato & Suzette Galinato, 2013. "The Role of Government Spending on Deforestation and Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Land Use Change," Working Papers 2013-14, School of Economic Sciences, Washington State University.
    10. Jeffrey Chiwuikem Chiaka & Qing Yang & Yanwei Zhao & Feni Agostinho & Cecília M. V. B. Almeida & Biagio F. Giannetti & Hui Li & Mingwan Wu & Gengyuan Liu, 2024. "Assessment of Water-Related Ecosystem Services and Beneficiaries in the Hainan Tropical Rainforest National Park," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-18, October.
    11. Jichuan Sheng, 2017. "Effect of Uncertainties in Estimated Carbon Reduction from Deforestation and Forest Degradation on Required Incentive Payments in Developing Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-14, September.
    12. Yvonne Hargita & Lukas Giessen & Sven Günter, 2020. "Similarities and Differences between International REDD+ and Transnational Deforestation-Free Supply Chain Initiatives—A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-33, January.
    13. Wolfersberger, Julien & Amacher, Gregory S. & Delacote, Philippe & Dragicevic, Arnaud, 2022. "The dynamics of deforestation and reforestation in a developing economy," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(3), pages 272-293, June.
    14. Shinde, Nilesh N. & Do Valle, Stella Z. Schons & Maia, Alexandre Gori & Amacher, Gregory S., 2022. "Can an environmental policy contribute to the reduction of land conflict? Evidence from the Rural Environmental Registry (CAR) in the Brazilian Amazon," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322584, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    15. Jonah Busch & Jens Engelmann, 2015. "The Future of Forests: Emissions from Tropical Deforestation With and Without a Carbon Price, 2016-2050," Working Papers id:7819, eSocialSciences.
    16. Ermias Aynekulu & Marta Suber & Meine van Noordwijk & Jacobo Arango & James M. Roshetko & Todd S. Rosenstock, 2020. "Carbon Storage Potential of Silvopastoral Systems of Colombia," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-12, September.
    17. Galinato, Gregmar I. & Galinato, Suzette P., 2016. "The effects of government spending on deforestation due to agricultural land expansion and CO2 related emissions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 43-53.
    18. Hasan, Syed M. & Zhang, Wendong, 2020. "Will Urbanization in Developing Countries Reduce Carbon Emissions? Panel Data Evidence from Pakistani Household Surveys," ISU General Staff Papers 202005040700001117, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    19. Andrea Chávez Michaelsen & Leticia Huamani Briceño & Ronny Fernandez Menis & Nemin Bejar Chura & Frank Valera Tito & Stephen Perz & I. Foster Brown & Sandro Domínguez Del Aguila & Raúl Pinedo Mora & G, 2013. "Regional Deforestation Trends within Local Realities: Land-Cover Change in Southeastern Peru 1996–2011," Land, MDPI, vol. 2(2), pages 1-27, April.
    20. Yi-Bin Chiu, 2012. "Deforestation and the Environmental Kuznets Curve in Developing Countries: A Panel Smooth Transition Regression Approach," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 60(2), pages 177-194, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:80:y:2017:i:c:p:192-199. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.