Search

As the role of forests in climate change mitigation is explicitly recognized in the Paris Agreement, the need to enhance the adoption of Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) practices is crucial. Therefore, this paper aims at identifying and evaluating barriers in adopting SFM practices in the context of forest carbon emission reductions. A total of 15 barriers in adopting SFM practices are listed through literature and expert inputs. Using Cameroon as a case study, the listed barriers are then evaluated by experts to determine their relative importance using the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) method. According to our findings, the 'Regulatory and Legislative frameworks' barrier category was attributed to the highest importance among other categories, in adopting SFM practices in the forestry sector. 'Inadequate political will and incentive to enforce regulations' appears to be the major obstacle in adopting SFM practices in Cameroon. As carbon emission reduction initiatives are being developed, there is need to move from broad to concrete suggestions that will overcome these barriers. However, proper diagnosis is necessary in order to target barriers with the right incentives and enabling conditions that will support carbon programs and projects to deliver effective emission reductions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is growing interest in designing and implementing climate change mitigation and adaptation (M + A) in synergy in the forest and land use sectors. However, there is limited knowledge on how the planning and promotion of synergies between M + A can be operationalized in the current efforts to mitigate climate change through forest carbon. This paper contributes to fill this knowledge gap by exploring ways of planning and promoting M + A synergy outcomes in forest carbon initiatives. It examines eight guidelines that are widely used in designing and implementing forest carbon initiatives. Four guiding principles with a number of criteria that are relevant for planning synergy outcomes in forest carbon activities are proposed. The guidelines for developing forest carbon initiatives need to demonstrate that (1) the health of forest ecosystems is maintained or enhanced; (2) the adaptive capacity of forest-dependent communities is ensured; (3) carbon and adaptation benefits are monitored and verified; and (4) adaptation outcomes are anticipated and planned in forest carbon initiatives. The forest carbon project development guidelines can encourage the integration of adaptation in forest carbon initiatives. However, their current efforts guiding projects and programs to deliver biodiversity and environmental benefits, ecosystem services, and socioeconomic benefits are not considered explicitly as efforts towards enhancing adaptation. An approach for incentivizing and motivating project developers, guideline setters, and offset buyers is imperative in order to enable existing guidelines to make clear contributions to adaptation goals. We highlight and discuss potential ways of incentivizing and motivating the explicit planning and promotion of adaptation outcomes in forest carbon initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]