Your search found 3 records
1 Chitakira, M.; Nhamo, L.; Torquebiau, E.; Magidi, J.; Ferguson, W.; Mpandeli, S.; Mearns, K.; Mabhaudhi, Tafadzwanashe. 2022. Opportunities to improve eco-agriculture through transboundary governance in transfrontier conservation areas. Diversity, 14(6):461. (Special issue: The Human Dimension of Biodiversity Protection) [doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/d14060461]
Eco-agriculture ; Conservation areas ; Governance ; Biodiversity conservation ; Ecosystems ; Sustainable Development Goals ; Resource conservation ; Poverty alleviation ; Sustainable livelihoods ; Policies ; Legislation ; Landscape approaches ; Local communities / Mozambique / Eswatini / South Africa / Lubombo Transfrontier Conservation Area / Usuthu-Tembe-Futi Transfrontier Conservation Area
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H051227)
https://www.mdpi.com/1424-2818/14/6/461/pdf?version=1654685762
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H051227.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H051227.pdf
(0.89 MB) (906 KB)
Transfrontier Conservation Areas (TFCAs) are critical biodiversity areas for the conservation and sustainable use of biological and cultural resources while promoting regional peace, cooperation, and socio-economic development. Sustainable management of TFCAs is dependent on the availability of an eco-agriculture framework that promotes integrated management of conservation mosaics in terms of food production, environmental protection or the conservation of natural resources, and improved human livelihoods. As a developmental framework, eco-agriculture is significantly influenced by existing legal and governance structures at all levels; this study assessed the impact of existing legal and governance frameworks on eco-agriculture implementation in the Lubombo TFCA that cuts across the borders between Mozambique, Eswatini, and South Africa. The assessment used a mixed research method, including a document review, key informant interviews, and focus group discussions. Although the three countries have no eco-agriculture policies, biodiversity practices are directly or indirectly affected by some policies related to environmental protection, agriculture improvement, and rural development. The assessment found that South Africa has the most comprehensive policies related to eco-agriculture; Mozambican policies mainly focus on equity and involvement of disadvantaged social groups, while Eswatini is conspicuous for explicitly making it the responsibility of each citizen to protect and safeguard the environment. The protection of conservation areas is critical to preserving natural habitats and ensuring the continued provision of ecosystem services. The lack of transboundary governance structures results in the Lubombo TFCA existing as a treaty on paper, as there are no clear processes for transboundary cooperation and collaboration.
2 Ratner, B. D.; Larson, A. M.; Barletti, J. P. S.; ElDidi, H.; Catacutan, D.; Flintan, F.; Suhardiman, Diana; Falk, T.; Meinzen-Dick, R. 2022. Multistakeholder platforms for natural resource governance: lessons from eight landscape-level cases. Ecology and Society, 27(2):2. [doi: https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-13168-270202]
Natural resources management ; Multi-stakeholder processes ; Collaboration ; Inclusion ; Landscape approaches ; Resilience ; Conflicts / Peru / Brazil / India / United Republic of Tanzania / Ethiopia / Kenya / Somalia
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H051241)
https://ecologyandsociety.org/vol27/iss2/art2/ES-2021-13168.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H051241.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H051241.pdf
(0.37 MB) (379 KB)
Multistakeholder platforms (MSPs) are the subject of increasing attention and investment in the domain of collaborative natural resource governance, yet evidence-based guidance is slim on policy and investment priorities to leverage the MSP approach. We provide a comparative analysis of eight landscape-level MSPs spanning seven countries (Peru, Brazil, India, Tanzania, Ethiopia, and a cross-border case from Kenya and Somalia), representing a diversity of resource systems covering forests, rangelands, and multiuse agricultural landscapes. Applying an adapted social-ecological systems framework, our synthesis identifies the influence of these MSPs on patterns of stakeholder interaction and draws implications for the design and organization of MSPs that are both appropriate and effective. From the cases, we distill lessons addressing: (1) how to design an MSP in relation to the governance context, including the fit between institutional and ecological dimensions of the system and with attention to cross-scale linkages; (2) how to implement inclusive processes that address power inequities, including through capacity building and procedural rules; and (3) how to support adaptive learning to expand the MSP’s influence over time, including monitoring outcomes, adapting the scope of stakeholder engagement, and investing in MSP durability.
3 Atampugre, Gerald; Mensah, E.; Mabhaudhi, Tafadzwanashe; Cofie, Olufunke. 2022. Towards a framework for assessing the sustainability of social-ecological landscapes. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI). CGIAR Initiative on West and Central African Food Systems Transformation. 30p.
Landscape approaches ; Social aspects ; Ecological factors ; Sustainability ; Frameworks ; Biodiversity ; Ecosystem services ; Agroecology ; Livelihoods
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H051655)
(1.07 MB)
The report proposes a framework for assessing the sustainability of social-ecological landscapes (SEL) to be used by the West and Central African Food Systems Transformation (TAFS-WCA) initiative for research, planning, and implementation of its Work Package 3 (WP3). It builds on existing assessment frameworks from relevant fields (e.g., Eco agriculture, Agroecology, Integrated Landscape Management, etc.). At the center of a Sustainable Social-Ecological Landscape (SSEL) is the improvement of the management of land and the natural resource base in such a way that land use concurrently meets three goals: (i) provision of products (e.g., food) and services on a sustainable basis, (ii) support for sustainable livelihoods for all social groups and (iii) conservation of the full complement of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Globally, SSEL related approaches like eco-agriculture, agroecology, and landscape approaches are already being applied, with promising results, especially in places where food production, poverty alleviation, and conservation of biodiversity, water, and ecosystem services are all high priorities. However, a comprehensive framework for measuring/monitoring landscape status and performance vis-a-vis competing landscape uses and management interventions has not been given much priority in the literature. Different forms of land use, such as forestry, agriculture, extraction of minerals, conservation/protected areas, and settlements, are interdependent. Therefore, landscape performance and monitoring frameworks that focus exclusively on protecting natural resources or the intensification of agriculture and other land uses can only give an incomplete viewpoint/overview of landscapes with all their uses and stakeholders. Considering the SSEL goals above, a holistic conceptual framework for landscape-based assessment is needed; such a framework must consider the drivers and effects of land use and the individual management interventions as well as the complex interactions among different land uses and interventions across the landscape. The present study proposes the Drivers-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) framework for SEL. It is important to emphasize that this study recognizes that different individuals and organizations under the TAFS-WCA initiative may have different interests in understanding the status and performance of selected SELs. The research envisages two important applications of a framework for measuring and understanding SEL: i) it can facilitate inclusive decision-making by multiple stakeholders working in the same landscape by explaining interactions, synergies, and trade-offs among SSEL goals and landscape components, and ii) when SSEL-related management innovations are successful (or otherwise), the framework can help document the same, reinforcing the case for adopting and scaling up innovations.
Powered by DB/Text WebPublisher, from
