IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v121y2022ics0264837722003490.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What could forest landscape restoration look like in the Ramu-Markham Valley of Papua New Guinea?

Author

Listed:
  • Wiset, Kanchana
  • Fisher, Robert
  • Baynes, Jack
  • Wampe, Nathan
  • Thom, Melinda
  • Jackson, William
  • Herbohn, John

Abstract

Implementing global environmental initiatives at the local level requires modifications to accommodate site-specific factors such as social organisation, land tenure and gender. This is particularly challenging for forest restoration initiatives such as Forest Landscape Restoration (FLR), which require the cooperation and support of local communities and families. FLR has been developed as a global approach to forest restoration supported by various sets of guidelines and principles which may not fit local contexts. In this paper we explore how the local context of the traditional social organisation and gender roles in the Ramu-Markham Valley (RMV) of Papua New Guinea (PNG) could fit with a broad approach to FLR. We investigated villagers’ perceptions, preferences, gender roles and decision-making related to landscape restoration at the family and clan levels in three villages in the grasslands of the RMV. First, we confirmed that small-scale initiatives implemented with families better matched the traditional land use customs compared to a whole of landscape scale approach. Second, a family-based approach fitted with informants’ preferences on land use practices and accommodated shared decision-making of men and women within the family or household. Third, we found that the preferences of women and men often differ in terms of the types of services they want from trees and the preferred locations for planting. Fourth, we found that landscape restoration through agroforestry generates multiple benefits for livelihoods and the environment and can be incorporated into existing farming practices. Fifth, while FLR literature advocates a negotiated approach to managing landscapes as a mosaic of different uses rather than a planned approach, we found that neither a negotiated or centrally planned approach at a landscape level is practical in the RMV, because there are no decision-making social or administrative institutions that operate on a “whole of landscape scale”. Landscape restoration is in a preliminary stage in the RMV. This research suggests that the results of expanded efforts would meet the higher-level objectives of FLR: enhancing human well-being and regaining ecological functionality by applying an adaptive approach. We suggest that large numbers of small-scale farmer-based initiatives, at a family or clan level, have the potential to contribute to the higher objectives of FLR across a forest landscape.

Suggested Citation

  • Wiset, Kanchana & Fisher, Robert & Baynes, Jack & Wampe, Nathan & Thom, Melinda & Jackson, William & Herbohn, John, 2022. "What could forest landscape restoration look like in the Ramu-Markham Valley of Papua New Guinea?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:121:y:2022:i:c:s0264837722003490
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106322
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837722003490
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106322?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. Matthew Leggett & Heather Lovell, 2012. "Community perceptions of REDD+: a case study from Papua New Guinea," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(1), pages 115-134, January.
    2. McLain, Rebecca & Lawry, Steven & Guariguata, Manuel R. & Reed, James, 2021. "Toward a tenure-responsive approach to forest landscape restoration: A proposed tenure diagnostic for assessing restoration opportunities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    3. Paudel, Naya S. & Vedeld, Paul O. & Khatri, Dil B., 2015. "Prospects and challenges of tenure and forest governance reform in the context of REDD+ initiatives in Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 1-8.
    4. Venugopal, Rajesh, 2018. "Ineptitude, ignorance, or intent: The social construction of failure in development," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 238-247.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ota, Liz & Lidestav, Gun & Andersson, Elias & Page, Tony & Curnow, Jayne & Nunes, Lilian & Goltiano, Henry & Gregorio, Nestor & dos Santos, Natalia Ferreira & Herbohn, John, 2024. "Reviewing gender roles, relations, and perspectives in small-scale and community forestry – implications for policy and practice," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).

    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. Gilani, Haris R. & Yoshida, Tomoko & Innes, John L., 2017. "A Collaborative Forest Management user group's perceptions and expectations on REDD+ in Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 27-33.
    2. Saeed, Abdul-Razak & McDermott, Constance & Boyd, Emily, 2018. "Examining equity in Ghana's national REDD+ process," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 48-58.
    3. Neil M. Dawson & Michael Mason & Janet A. Fisher & David Mujasi Mwayafu & Hari Dhungana & Heike Schroeder & Mark Zeitoun, 2018. "Norm Entrepreneurs Sidestep REDD+ in Pursuit of Just and Sustainable Forest Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-19, May.
    4. Gakou-Kakeu, Josiane & Di Gregorio, Monica & Paavola, Jouni & Sonwa, Denis Jean, 2022. "REDD+ policy implementation and institutional interplay: Evidence from three pilot projects in Cameroon," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    5. Chambers, Josephine M. & Massarella, Kate & Fletcher, Robert, 2022. "The right to fail? Problematizing failure discourse in international conservation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    6. Kandel, Matt & Anghileri, Daniela & Alare, Rahinatu S. & Lovett, Peter N. & Agaba, Genevieve & Addoah, Thomas & Schreckenberg, Kate, 2022. "Farmers’ perspectives and context are key for the success and sustainability of farmer-managed natural regeneration (FMNR) in northeastern Ghana," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    7. Stibniati S Atmadja & Erin O Sills, 2016. "What Is a “Community Perception” of REDD+? A Systematic Review of How Perceptions of REDD+ Have Been Elicited and Reported in the Literature," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(11), pages 1-14, November.
    8. Laudari, Hari Krishna & Aryal, Kishor & Maraseni, Tek & Pariyar, Shiva & Pant, Basant & Bhattarai, Sushma & Kaini, Tika Raj & Karki, Gyanendra & Marahattha, Anisha, 2022. "Sixty-five years of forest restoration in Nepal: Lessons learned and way forward," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    9. Kemi Fuentes-George, 2017. "Consensus, Certainty, and Catastrophe: Discourse, Governance, and Ocean Iron Fertilization," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 17(2), pages 125-143, May.
    10. Dil B. Khatri & Thuy Thu Pham & Monica Di Gregorio & Rahul Karki & Naya S. Paudel & Maria Brockhaus & Ramesh Bhushal, 2016. "REDD+ politics in the media: a case from Nepal," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 138(1), pages 309-323, September.
    11. Kusters, Koen & de Graaf, Maartje & Ascarrunz, Nataly & Benneker, Charlotte & Boot, René & van Kanten, Rudi & Livingstone, John & Maindo, Alphonse & Mendoza, Heidi & Purwanto, Edi & Rodríguez, Carlos , 2022. "Formalizing community forest tenure rights: A theory of change and conditions for success," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    12. Manda, Simon & Mukanda, Nyambe, 2023. "Can REDD+ projects deliver livelihood benefits in private tenure arrangements? Experiences from rural Zambia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    13. Mucahid Mustafa Bayrak & Lawal Mohammed Marafa, 2016. "Ten Years of REDD+: A Critical Review of the Impact of REDD+ on Forest-Dependent Communities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-22, July.
    14. Sikor, Thomas & He, Jun & Lestrelin, Guillaume, 2017. "Property Rights Regimes and Natural Resources: A Conceptual Analysis Revisited," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 337-349.
    15. Lacuna-Richman, Celeste & Devkota, Bishnu P. & Richman, Mark A., 2016. "Users' priorities for good governance in community forestry: Two cases from Nepal's Terai Region," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 69-78.
    16. Aparna Howlader & Amy W. Ando, 2020. "Consequences of Protected Areas for Household Forest Extraction, Time Use, and Consumption: Evidence from Nepal," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 75(4), pages 769-808, April.
    17. Mucahid Mustafa Bayrak & Tran Nam Tu & Lawal Mohammed Marafa, 2014. "Creating Social Safeguards for REDD+: Lessons Learned from Benefit Sharing Mechanisms in Vietnam," Land, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-22, August.
    18. Paudel, Jayash, 2018. "Community-Managed Forests, Household Fuelwood Use and Food Consumption," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 62-73.
    19. Eve Bohnett & Sanju Lamichhane & Yanjing Tracy Liu & Scott Yabiku & Digambar Singh Dahal & Siraj Mammo & Kossi Fandjinou & Bilal Ahmad & Li An, 2023. "The Implications of Community Forest Income on Social and Environmental Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-23, April.
    20. Katusiime, Juliet & Schütt, Brigitta & Mutai, Noah, 2023. "The relationship of land tenure, land use and land cover changes in Lake Victoria basin," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).

    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:lauspo:v:121:y:2022:i:c:s0264837722003490. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.