Advertisement

Can Forest-protection carbon projects improve rural livelihoods? Analysis of the Noel Kempff Mercado climate action project, Bolivia

  • Nigel M. Asquith
  • María Teresa Vargas Ríos
  • Joyotee Smith
Article

Abstract

We studied the Noel KempffMercado Climate Action Project (NKMCAP),Bolivia, to assess whether forestprotection carbon (C) projects cansignificantly benefit local people. Wehypothesized that forest protection canonly securely deliver C if significantstakeholders are meaningfully andtransparently involved, traditional orcustomary rights are recognized and theirloss compensated for, and there are directlinkages between conservation anddevelopment objective. Our researchfocused on 53 members of the communities ofFlorida, Porvenir and Piso Firme and 36secondary stakeholders. In each of thevillages we held half-day meetings withcommunity leaders, complemented bysemi-structured one-hour interviews with 5,10, and 7 families, representing 20%, 10%and 8% of each community. The long-termimpact of the NKMCAP on the localcommunities may well be positive. However,in the short run, certain sections of thelocal communities are financially poorer. Forest protection projects clearly have thepotential to sequester C, protectbiodiversity and simultaneously contributeto sustainable rural development, but ifthey really are to improve rurallivelihoods, they must be designed andimplemented carefully and participatively.

carbon and development links clean development mechanism forest carbon conservation integrated conservation and development projects rapid rural appraisal stakeholder participation sustainable rural development 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bass, S., Dubois, O., Moura Costa, P., Wilson, C., Pinard, M. and Tipper, R.: 2000, Rural Livelihoods and Carbon Management, London, IIED Natural Resource Issues Paper No. 1, International Institute for Environment and Development.Google Scholar
  2. Biodiversity Conservation Network: 1996, Stories from the Field and Lessons Learned. Evaluating an Enterprise-Based Approach to Community Conservation in the Asia/Pacific region, Washington DC, WWF/TNC/WRI.Google Scholar
  3. Brandon, K., Redford, K.H. and Sanderson, S.E.: 1998, Parks in Peril. People, Politics, and Protected Areas, Washington DC, Island Press.Google Scholar
  4. Brown, S., Burnham, M., Delaney, M., Powell, M., Vaca, R. and Moreno, A.: 2000, 'Issues and challenges for forest-based carbon-offset projects: A case study of the Noel Kempff climate action project in Bolivia,' Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 5(1): 25–37.Google Scholar
  5. Catari, M., Armijo, E., Ibisch, C., Torrico, A., Vargas, I. and Ibisch, P.: 1996, Bases para un Plan de Manejo de los Recursos Naturales de la Franja del Bajo Paragua, Santa Cruz, Bolivia, FAN.Google Scholar
  6. Chambers, R.: 1994, Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA): Analysis of Experience. World Development 22, 1253–1268.Google Scholar
  7. Child, G.: 1995, Wildlife and People: The Zimbabwean Success, Harare, Wisdom Foundation.Google Scholar
  8. COP Decision 17/CP.7: 2001 Modalities and Procedures for a Clean Development Mechanism as defined in Article 12 of the Kyoto Protocol, 8th plenary meeting UNFCCC COP.Google Scholar
  9. Cornwall, A., Gujit, I. and Welbourn, A.: 1994, 'Extending the horizons of agricultural research and extension: Methodological challenges,' Agric. Human Values 11, 38–57.Google Scholar
  10. IIED: 1994, Economic Evaluation of Tropical Forest Land Use Options. A Review of Methodology and Applications, London, International Institute for Environment and Development.Google Scholar
  11. IFAD/FAO: 2000, Carbon Sequestration Options under the Clean Development Mechanism to address Land Degradation, Rome, IFAD/FAO.Google Scholar
  12. IPCC: 2000, Summary for Policymakers, Land-use, Land-use Change and Forestry, A Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Montreal, IPCC.Google Scholar
  13. Killeen, T.J. and Schulenberg, T.S.: 1998, A Biological Assessment of Parque Nacional Noel Kempff Mercado, Bolivia, RAP Working Paper No. 10, Washington DC, Conservation International.Google Scholar
  14. Metcalfe, S.C.: 1995, 'Communities, parks, and regional planning: A co-management strategy based on the Zimbabwean experience', in J.A. McNeely (ed.), Expanding Partnerships in Conservation, Washington DC, Island Press, pp. 270–279.Google Scholar
  15. Plan de Manejo Parque Nacional Noel Kempff Mercado, Bolivia: 1996, Ministerio de Desarrollo Sostenible y Medio Ambiente, La Paz, Ministerio de Desarrollo Sostenible.Google Scholar
  16. Ostrom, E.: 1990, Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Pearce, D., Day, B., Newcombe, J., Brunello, T. and Bello, T.: 1998, The Clean Development Mechanism: Benefits of the CDM for Developing Countries, London, CSERGE, University College.Google Scholar
  18. Pronk, J.: 2001, Core Elements for the Implementation of the Buenos Aires Plan of Action (dated 21 July, 2001, 10.47 pm), IISD, Linkages, Negotiations: Sunday, 22 July, 2001.Google Scholar
  19. Rocheleau, D.E.: 1994, 'Participatory Research and the race to save the planet: Questions, critique and lessons from the field,' Agric. Human Values 11, 4–25.Google Scholar
  20. Salafsky, N. and Margoluis, R.: 1999, 'Threat reduction assessment: a practical and cost-effective approach to evaluating conservation and development projects,' Conserv. Biol. 13, 830–841.Google Scholar
  21. Sedjo, R.A., Sohngen, B. and Janger, P.: 2001, 'Carbon sinks in the post-Kyoto world', in M.A. Toman (ed.), Climate Change Economics and Policy, Washington DC, Resources for the Future, pp. 134–142.Google Scholar
  22. Smith, J. and Scherr, S.J.: in press, 'Capturing the Value of Forest Carbon for Local Livelihoods', World Development.Google Scholar
  23. Smith, J., Mulongoy, K., Persson, R. and Sayer, J.: 2000, 'Harnessing carbon markets for tropical forest conservation: Towards a more realistic assessment,' Envir. Conserv. 27(3), 300–311.Google Scholar
  24. Toman, M.A.: 2001, Climate Change Economics and Policy, Washington DC, Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
  25. UNFCCC: 1997, Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Bonn, UNFCCC.Google Scholar
  26. UNFCCC: 2001, The Marakesh Accords & The Marrakesh Declaration. http://www.unfcc.intGoogle Scholar
  27. Wells, M. and Brandon, K.: 1992, People and Parks: Linking Protected Area Management with Local Communities, Washington DC, World Bank.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nigel M. Asquith
    • 1
  • María Teresa Vargas Ríos
    • 2
  • Joyotee Smith
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for International Forestry ResearchJakartaIndonesia
  2. 2.Fundación Natura BoliviaSanta CruzBolivia

Personalised recommendations