Advertisement

Sustainability Science

, Volume 10, Issue 2, pp 345–355 | Cite as

Landscape approaches; what are the pre-conditions for success?

  • Jeffrey SayerEmail author
  • Chris Margules
  • Agni Klintuni Boedhihartono
  • Allan Dale
  • Terry Sunderland
  • Jatna Supriatna
  • Ria Saryanthi
Special Feature: Original Article Pathways towards sustainable landscapes

Abstract

Landscape approaches are widely applied in attempts to reconcile tradeoffs amongst different actors with conflicting demands on land and water resources. Key principles for landscape approaches have been endorsed by inter-governmental processes dealing with climate change mitigation and adaptation and biodiversity conservation.

We review experiences from seven landscapes located in the Congo Basin, Eastern Indonesia and Northern Australia. Landscape initiatives were applied in situations where large-scale extractive industries, local peoples’ livelihoods and global biodiversity objectives were in conflict. We found that common published principles for landscape approaches are not applied systematically in the areas studied. Practitioners draw upon landscape approach principles selectively and adapt them to deal with local conditions. We consider that landscape approaches do not provide silver bullet solutions to these situations nor do they provide an operational framework for large-scale land management. Landscape approaches do, however, provide an organising framework for disentangling the complexity of the landscape and facilitating the investigation of impacts of different courses of action. They enable alternative scenarios for what future landscapes might look like to be investigated and they create the space for multi-stakeholder negotiations. Outcomes from landscape scale approaches are determined by the power differentials amongst stakeholders and the existence, or otherwise, of functional institutions to take decisions and enforce agreements. Landscape approaches cannot overcome disparities in power or entrenched interests nor can they substitute for institutions with authority to establish and legitimise property and resource rights. They can, however, provide a mechanism around which civil society can be mobilised to achieve better land use outcomes. Landscape approaches are successful when they have strong leadership, sustained long-term and facilitated processes, good governance, adequate budgets and adequate metrics for assessing progress. Private sector engagement is necessary and all parties must have sufficient shared interest in outcomes to motivate their participation.

Keywords

Tropical forest conservation Conservation and development trade-offs Forests and livelihoods Agricultural expansion in tropical forests Economic development and forest change Sangha group 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the participants in a workshop held at Cape Tribulation, Queensland, Australia in July 2014 which provided the inspiration for this paper. Mike Berwick, Penny Johnson, Maria Jose Montano, Rebecca Riggs, Vilbert Vabi Vamiloh, Benny Purnama, Marcellena Prastiwi, James Langston, John Garcia, Lucy McHugh, Hilda Lionata, Adi Widyanto and Emma Carson. The workshop was funded by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation and James Cook University Tropical Landscapes Joint Venture and the Center for Tropical Environmental and Sustainability Science of James Cook University. The work was also supported by the Australian Government Northern Futures Collaborative Research Network.

References

  1. Boedhihartono A, Gunarso P, Levang P, Sayer J (2007) The principles of conservation and development: do they apply in Malinau? Ecol Soc 12:2Google Scholar
  2. Bohnet I, Smith DM (2007) Planning future landscapes in the Wet Tropics of Australia: a social–ecological framework. Landsc Urban Plan 80:137–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bruinsma J (2009) The resource outlook to 2050: by how much do land, water and crop yields need to increase by 2050? How to feed the World in 2050. Proceedings of a technical meeting of experts, Rome, Italy, 24–26 June 2009. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) 1–33Google Scholar
  4. Brussaard L, Caron P, Campbell B, Lipper L, Mainka S, Rabbinge R, Babin D, Pulleman M (2010) Reconciling biodiversity conservation and food security: scientific challenges for a new agriculture. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2:34–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Campbell B, Sayer JA, Frost P, Vermeulen S, Pérez M R, Cunningham A, Prabhu R (2003) Assessing the performance of natural resource systems. Integrated natural resource management: linking productivity, environment and development. Conserv Ecol 5(2):22Google Scholar
  6. Campbell BM, Sayer JA, Walker B (2010) Navigating trade-offs: working for conservation and development outcomes. Ecol Soc 15(2):16Google Scholar
  7. Chazdon RL, Harvey CA, Komar O, Griffith DM, Ferguson BG, Martínez-Ramos M, Morales H, Nigh R, Soto-Pinto L, van Breugel M (2009) Beyond reserves: A research agenda for conserving biodiversity in human-modified tropical landscapes. Biotropica 41:142–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Conservation InternatioNAL (2010) Optimizing conservation and production—a collaboration between conservation and business. Conservation International, Arlington VirginiaGoogle Scholar
  9. Dale A (2014) World Heritage and the Northern Psyche. Springer, Beyond the North-South Culture WarsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dale A, Mcdonald G, Weston N (2008) Integrating effort for regional natural resource outcomes: the wet tropics experience. In: Living in a dynamic tropical forest landscape. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 398–410 Google Scholar
  11. Dale AP, Ryan S, Broderick K (Forthcoming) Integrated natural resource governance across multiple scales: a national health check from a regional perspective. In: Daniels K (ed) Multi-level governance. ANU Press, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  12. De Wasseige C, Devers D, De Marcken P, Eba’a Atyi R, Nasi R, Mayaux P (2010) The Forests of the Congo Basin: State of the Forest 2008. Publications Office of the European Union, LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
  13. Defries R, Rosenzweig C (2010) Toward a whole-landscape approach for sustainable land use in the tropics. Proc Natl Acad Sci 107:19627–19632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Endamana D, Boedhihartono A, Bokoto B, Defo L, Eyebe A, Ndikumagenge C, Nzooh Z, Ruiz-Perez M, Sayer J (2010) A framework for assessing conservation and development in a Congo Basin forest landscape. Trop Conserv Sci 3:262–281Google Scholar
  15. Figueira J, Greco S, Ehrgott M (2005) Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys. In: International series in operations research and management science, vol 78. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  16. Fischer J, Lindenmayer DB, Manning AD (2006) Biodiversity, ecosystem function, and resilience: ten guiding principles for commodity production landscapes. Front Ecol Environ 4:80–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Giller KE, Leeuwis C, Andersson JA, Andriesse W, Brouwer A, Frost P, Hebinck P, Heitkönig I, van Ittersum MK, Koning N (2008) Competing claims on natural resources: what role for science. Ecol Soc 13:34Google Scholar
  18. Laurance WF, Sayer J, Cassman KG (2014) Agricultural expansion and its impacts on tropical nature. Trends Ecol Evol 29:107–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lindenmayer D, Hobbs RJ, Montague-Drake R, Alexandra J, Bennett A, Burgman M, Cale P, Calhoun A, Cramer V, Cullen P (2008) A checklist for ecological management of landscapes for conservation. Ecol Lett 11:78–91Google Scholar
  20. Milder JC, Buck LE, Declerck F, Scherr SJ (2012) Landscape approaches to achieving food production, natural resource conservation, and the millennium development goals. Integrating ecology and poverty reduction. In: Integrating ecology and poverty reduction. Springer, New York, pp 77–108Google Scholar
  21. Moffett A, Sarkar S (2006) Incorporating multiple criteria into the design of conservation area networks: a minireview with recommendations. Divers Distrib 12:125–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Naveh Z (2001) Ten major premises for a holistic conception of multifunctional landscapes. Landsc Urb Plan 57:269–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pressey RL, Bottrill MC (2009) Approaches to landscape-and seascape-scale conservation planning: convergence, contrasts and challenges. Oryx 43:464–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rittel HW, Webber MM (1973) 2.3 Planning Problems are Wicked. Polity 4:155–169Google Scholar
  25. Sandker M, Suwarno A, Campbell BM (2007) Will forests remain in the face of oil palm expansion? simulating change in Malinau, Indonesia. Ecol Soc 12:37Google Scholar
  26. Sandker M, Campbell BM, Nzooh Z, Sunderland T, Amougou V, Defo L, Sayer J (2009) Exploring the effectiveness of integrated conservation and development interventions in a Central African forest landscape. Biodivers Conserv 18:2875–2892CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sayer J, Maginnis S, Laurie M (2005) Forests in landscapes: ecosystem approaches to sustainability. Earthscan/James & James, London Google Scholar
  28. Sayer J, Campbell B, Petheram L, Aldrich M, Perez MR, Endamana D, Dongmo Z-LN, Defo L, Mariki S, Doggart N (2007a) Assessing environment and development outcomes in conservation landscapes. Biodivers Conserv 16:2677–2694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sayer J, Campbell B, Petheram L, Aldrich M, Perez MR, Endamana D, Dongmo ZLN, Defo L, Mariki S, Doggart N (2007b) Assessing environment and development outcomes in conservation landscapes. Biodivers Conserv 16:2677–2694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sayer J, Bull G, Elliott C (2008) Mediating forest transitions:’Grand design’or’Muddling through’. Conserv Soc 6:320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sayer J, Endamana D, Ruiz-Perez M, Boedhihartono A, Nzooh Z, Eyebe A, Awono A, Usongo L (2012) Global financial crisis impacts forest conservation in cameroon. Int For Rev 14:90–98Google Scholar
  32. Sayer J, Sunderland T, Ghazoul J, Pfund J-L, Sheil D, Meijaard E, Venter M, Boedhihartono AK, Day M, Garcia C (2013) Ten principles for a landscape approach to reconciling agriculture, conservation, and other competing land uses. Proc Natl Acad Sci 110:8349–8356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Scherr SJ, McNeely JA (2008) Biodiversity conservation and agricultural sustainability: towards a new paradigm of ‘ecoagriculture’landscapes. Philos Trans Royal Soc B: Biol Sci 363:477–494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Scott JC (1998) Seeing like a state: how certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed. Yale University Press, Newhaven, Connecticut, USAGoogle Scholar
  35. Stewart RE, Desai A, Walters LC (2011) Wicked environmental problems: managing uncertainty and conflict. Island Press, Washington, USAGoogle Scholar
  36. Stork N, Turton, SM (2009) Living in a dynamic tropical forest landscape. Blackwell, Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
  37. Stork NE, Turton SM, Hill R, Lane MB (2014) Revisiting crisis, change and institutions in the tropical forests: the multifunctional transition in Australia’s wet tropics. J Rural Stud 36:99–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sunderland TC, Ehringhaus C, Campbell B (2007) Conservation and development in tropical forest landscapes: a time to face the trade-offs? Environ Conserv 34:276–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sunderland TC, Sayer J, Hoang MH (2012) Evidence-based conservation: lessons from the lower Mekong. Routledge, London Google Scholar
  40. Wollenberg E, Iwan R, Limberg G, Moeliono M, Rhee S, Sudana M (2007) Facilitating cooperation during times of chaos: spontaneous orders and muddling through in Malinau District, Indonesia. Ecol Soc 12(1):3 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeffrey Sayer
    • 1
    Email author
  • Chris Margules
    • 1
  • Agni Klintuni Boedhihartono
    • 1
  • Allan Dale
    • 2
  • Terry Sunderland
    • 3
  • Jatna Supriatna
    • 4
  • Ria Saryanthi
    • 5
  1. 1.Center for Tropical Environmental and Sustainability ScienceJames Cook UniversityCairnsAustralia
  2. 2.The Cairns InstituteJames Cook UniversityCairnsAustralia
  3. 3.Center for International forestry ResearchBogorIndonesia
  4. 4.Research Center for Climate ChangeUniversity of IndonesiaDepokIndonesia
  5. 5.Burung IndonesiaBogorIndonesia

Personalised recommendations