Proceedings from the role of forest functions within ecosystem services

Proceedings from THE ROLE OF FOREST FUNCTIONS WITHIN ECOSYSTEM SERVICES International Scientific Conference 5 – 8 APRIL, 2016 / CHATEAU KŘTINY (CZE)

Publisher: Mendel University in Brno, Zemedelska 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic

Proceedings from THE ROLE OF FOREST FUNCTIONS WITHIN ECOSYSTEM SERVICES International Scientific Conference 5 – 8 APRIL, 2016 / CHATEAU KŘTINY (CZE) All papers published in this proceedings have been peer reviewed.

Editors: J. Schneider, K. Holušová, V. Karber

Publisher: Mendel University in Brno, Zemedelska 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic

The conference is one of the outputs of the project: "Increasing awareness and propagation of functions of forests in landscape and in-nature riverbeds in urban environment as a component of ecosystem drainage basin service"

Supported by grant from Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway

The main topic of the conference The importance and position of forest functions within ecosystem services and their ecological and economic evaluation The aim of the conference The aim of the conference is to contribute to the development of knowledge and possibilities of quantification of ecosystem production and social utilisation of forests functions. The goal of the conference is also to contribute to identification of functions of forests as an integral part and a natural base for evaluation of ecosystem services of forests. Last but not least, the conference serves as a platform for presentation of analyses of forest ecosystems as a way to evaluate the functional effects of forests.

Topics of the conference • Systems of evaluation of ecosystem services in general • Ecosystem forest services - methods of evaluation, examples and applications • Natural processes in forest ecosystems as their functional effects • Carbon-binding forest stand as a part of forest functions • Importance of biodiversity for production of forest functions • Perception of importance of forests and forestry by general public • Willingness to pay for ecosystem services of forests • Evaluation of functions and ecosystem services of forests as a part of decision making • Solution of conflicts of social demands on production of forest functions • Functions of natural vs. commercial forests • Indicators & economics of polyfunctional forestry • Importance of forests with regard to territorial and regional development

© Mendel University in Brno, Czech Republic ISBN 978-80-7509-464-3

Contents PRESENT STATE AND RELATIONSHIPS OF FOREST FUNCTIONS AND ECOSYSTEM SERVICES IN SLOVAKIA / Kunca V., Olah. B .................... 7 HOW CAN WE DEFINE FOREST FUNCTIONS AND SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT IN THE CASE OF TUSHETI REGION OF GEORGIA? / Holušová K., Holuša O. ................................................................. 14 MAKING INVISIBLE VALUES VISIBLE: THE ECONOMICS OF ECOSYSTEMS SERVICES IN MEXICO / José Alberto Lara-Pulido, Alejandro GuevaraSangines and Camilo Arias-Martelo ................................................. 16 THE POSSIBILITIES TO VALUATION OF FOREST ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONS / Šafařík Dalibor, Hlaváčková Petra ................................................... 19 THE VALUE OF NATURE: IMPLEMENTING ECOSYSTEM SERVICES / Boateng K. A., Hlaváčková P. ..................................................................... 24 WHO SHALL PAY FOR THE PROVISION OF ECOSYSTEM SERVICES? – AN ANALYTIC NETWORK PROCESS APPROACH / Dragoi M., Cirnu M. ....... 29 THE APPROACH TO ASSESSING THE RECREATIONAL FOREST FUNCTION OF THE INTEREST AREA / Březina D. , Hlaváčková P. ............................ 37 ASSESSMENT OF SOIL CARBON SEQUESTRATION SERVICES IN A HILL AND LOWLAND DIPTEROCARP FORESTS IN MALAYSIA / Ahmed A. Ch.; Siwar Ch.; Shaharuddin M. I.; Anizan I. ................................................... 43 COMMUNITY FORESTRY IN SRI LANKA: POLICY ADOPTION, POPULAR PARTICIPATION, CLIMATE ADAPTATION AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT / De Zoysa M., Inoue M. ................................................................. 65 CULTURAL AND HISTORICAL ASPECTS OF FORESTS QUALITY IN THE TOWN OF ZVOLEN / Slámová M., Jančura P............................................... 87 ECOLOGICAL-STABILISATION FOREST FUNCTION OF SMALL-SCALE PROTECTED AREAS ON TFE MASARYK’S FOREST KRTINY / Schneider J., Vyskot I. ..................................................................................... 88 EXPERT-BASED APPROACH ON ASSESSING ECOSYSTEM SERVICES DEMAND AND SUPPLY IN PROTECTED AREA / Kamlun K. U., BürgerArndt R. ...................................................................................... 89 EVALUATION OF PREFERENCES OF DIFFERENT FORMS OF FORESTS BY PUBLIC ON THE EXAMPLE OF TRAINING FOREST ENTERPRISE MASARYK FOREST KŘTINY (THE CZECH REPUBLIC) / Konečný Ondřej, Schneider Jiří, Lorencová Helena ................................................................. 106

Section A

THE IMPORTANCE AND VARIABILITY OF FOREST ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONS AND SERVICES

PRESENT STATE AND RELATIONSHIPS OF FOREST FUNCTIONS AND ECOSYSTEM SERVICES IN SLOVAKIA Kunca V., Olah B. Department of Applied Ecology, Faculty of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, Technical University in Zvolen, T.G. Masaryka 24, SK-960 53 Zvolen, Slovakia E-mail: kunca@tuzvo.sk, olah@tuzvo.sk ABSTRACT

Forests in Slovakia are classified by their primary function into following categories: commercial, protective and special purpose forests. The present state of forest categories is approximately 71.6 % of commercial forest, 17.2 % protective forests and 11.2 % forests with special purpose. The category of protective forests includes stands with prevailing protective (ecological) functions. Protective forests are being declared on extraordinarily unfavourable sites, in high mountainous locations, in the zone of dwarf pine for securing soil protection or others. Special purpose forests fulfil primarily social (environmental) functions such as recreational, medicinal-curative, nature protective, air pollutants control or educational-research. However, the area of commercial forests has had an increasing tendency since 2011 and on the other hand, the proportion of protective forests and special purpose forests has decreased (1.1 %). For every forest (forest spatial distribution unit) the one of the 67 specific function combinations is assigned in its Program of Forest Care (formerly Forest Management Plan). In the contemporary concept of ecosystem services cascade model following the (de Groot et al, 2010, Haines-Young et Potchin, 2010, Maes et al 2013), ecosystem functions are defined as the capacity or the potential to deliver ecosystem services. They are constituted by different combinations of natural processes, traits and structures. Ecosystem services are derived from ecosystem functions and represent the realized flow of services (or goods) for which there is demand. We argue that although forest functions and ecosystem functions are both understood as “functions� some forest functions are in fact ecosystem services. In the paper we present the current state of forest functions in Slovakia and their translation into ecosystem services classification to demonstrate their mutual relationships Key words: protective functions, social functions, function combinations, forest management plan

The The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016

Page 77 Page

The concept of ecosystem services (ESS) has been known for almost two decades (i.e., Constanza et al., 1997). It has become widely recognised after publishing of Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA, 2005) where the first ecosystem services classification system was introduced. This system was adopted and it is being further elaborated in two main classifications: The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) and the Common International Classification of Ecosystems Services (CICES). Whilst the TEEB classification focuses on economic side of ESS, the CICES builds on biophysical aspect of ESS tailored for accounting. Apart from theoretical value for natural sciences ESS aim to bridge two management paradigms: nature and biodiversity conservation on one hand and economic use of natural resources on the other hand. This may be done by valuation of until now nonvalued parts of natural resources or consequences of their utilisation known as economic externalities.

Mapping and assessment of ecosystems and ecosystem services gained a significant new momentum after issuing the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 and its headline target Halting the loss of biodiversity and the degradation of ecosystem services in the EU by 2020, and restoring them in so far as feasible, while stepping up the EU contribution to averting global biodiversity loss. This strategy in its Target 2 requires the EU member states to map and assess the state of ecosystems and ecosystems services in their national territory, to assess the economic value of such services, and to promote the integration of these values into accounting and reporting systems at EU and national level by 2020.

Several countries have been developing and implementing the ESS concept in their respective territories independently with different progress even before this Strategy. However, majority of the EU member states have started their mapping and assessment activities with the help of the EC (Maes et al., 2013) only after the Strategy was published.

Forests are considered to be ecosystems that provide a wide spectrum of ecosystems services due to their high degree of naturalness (in general). This has been traditionally well-known and recognised by forest owners and managers. In the Slovak Republic, foresters have developed and have been introducing a functionally integrated forest management already in the 1970s (Papånek, 1978). This system is based on a notion that forests fulfil different functions for the society. These functions are productive (production of commercial goods), protective (ecological function – using capability of forest stands to protect components of the environment such as soil) and special purposes (environmental function addressing various public needs).

All forests in Slovakia are classified by their primary function into following categories: commercial, protective and special purpose forests. The category of protective forests includes stands with prevailing protective (ecological) functions. Protective forests are being declared on extraordinarily unfavourable sites, in high mountainous locations, in the zone of dwarf pine for securing soil protection or others. Special purpose forests fulfil primarily social (environmental) functions such as recreational, medicinal-curative, nature protective, air pollutants control or educational-research.

Protective forests and special purpose forests with prevailing non-production functions in Slovakia are being designated inter alia to provide protection of infrastructure and natural resources against injurious agents. The present state of forest categories is approximately 71.6 % of commercial forest, 17.2 % protective forests and 11.2 % forests with special purpose (Table 1).

Table 1 Forests by category and their functional types (Anonymous, 2015) Category of forest

Forest function

Commercial Protective

Page Page 8 8

Proportion of timber land ha

%*

Wood producing

1 389 504

71.55

Total

1 389 504

71.55

Erosion control

257 365

13.25

Water management

71 962

3.71

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

Special purpose

Avalanche control

1 454

0.07

Streamside protection

452

0.02

Deflation control

2 176

0.11

Total

333 409

17.16

Water purification

12 501

0.64

Recreation

24 970

1.29

Spa & wellness

2 244

0.12

Nature conservation

35 643

1.84

Air pollution mitigation

43 245

2.23

Game management

22 280

1.15

Education & research

31 862

1.64

Conservation of gene resources

10 810

0.56

State defence

35 524

1.82

Total

219 079

11.29

Note: *percentual proportion of functional type calculated from total forest cover

However, the area of commercial forests has had an increasing tendency since 2011 and on the other hand, the proportion of protective forests and special purpose forests has decreased (1.1 %). For every forest (forest spatial distribution unit) the one of the 67 specific function combinations is assigned in its Program of Forest Care (formerly Forest Management Plan). Air pollution mitigation function (functional type) was cancelled in 2005 and in 10 years cycle of forest management plans renewal should disappear in 2016.

In some regions these functions play only a marginal role, while in others (e.g. mountain forests) they are very important. The mountainous forests serve to protect the lands localised under them against avalanches. Along with the protection against avalanches it is important to provide also ecological functions like erosion control and water management. There is growing importance of the linear planting of trees, windbreaks, river bank vegetation, water reservoirs and protection forest zones in the areas of increased noise and dust.

Decreasing and eliminating of clearcuttings in Slovakia also favourably influenced silvicultural systems planned in forests of particular functional categories. However, original vegetation is often very old and at the end of its lifetime, regeneration is not sufficient which weakens its original functions. In present, it is important to use selective cutting to improve a forest structure and support natural regeneration in protective and special purpose forests.

The importance of multi-functional tasks of forests is growing because of support of their sustainable management for society development. Sustainable forest management is in general based on reasonable use of economic, ecological and social functions of the forests. A long-term multifunctional forestry fulfilling present and future societal needs is a challenge for future forestry.

On the other hand, current level of scientific knowledge confirmed global warming and predicts some irreversible impacts of climate change. It is expected that extreme weather events will contribute to increased incidence of large-scale natural disturbances in forests. Besides higher amount of events of bark beetle outbreaks and other forest, flooding, soil erosion, avalanches and landslides are expected to become a serious threat to infrastructure and urban settlements. Hence, the protection functions of forests are likely to significantly gain on importance.

The concept of multi-function forestry based on the nature-friendly management corresponds to diverse ecological, economic and social needs of forests in the area of Central Europe. The goal of

The The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016

Page 99 Page

nature friendly management is creation of a functionally integrated, ecologically stable and economically profitable forest economic system. Wider application of ecological and social functions of forests negatively affects the economics of forestry. However, the topical problem is an absence of a system to financially assure the social demand and payments for loss or for public services provided, for example for nature protection and other ecological and social functions and services of forest management, especially for private forest land owners. Currently, Slovakia still does not have any system of placing on market the non-wood forest products, forestry services and non-production forest functions. It is crucial to solve this problem in near future.

In the contemporary concept of ecosystem services cascade model following the de Groot et al.

(2010), Haines-Young et Potchin (2010) and Maes et al. (2013), ecosystem functions are defined as the capacity or the potential to deliver ecosystem services. They are constituted by different combinations of natural processes, traits and structures. Ecosystem services are derived from ecosystem functions and represent the realized flow of services (or goods) for which there is demand.

We argue that although forest functions and ecosystem functions are both understood as “functions” some forest functions are in fact ecosystem services. Table 2 shows a cross-walk between CICES v4.3 ecosystem classes and the forest categories and respective functions. Several ecosystem services classes are missing in the forest functions. Some of them are linked to agriculture, aquaculture or water ecosystems (marked as NA – not applicable). Other missing ESS may be provided by forest ecosystems but are not recognised by the existing forest categories and functions (therefore marked as NR – not recognised).

Table 2 Cross-walk table forest functions and forest ecosystem services (CICES v4.3) Category of forest

CICES version 4.3

Forest function

Section

Division

Group

Class

Provisioning

Nutrition

Biomass

Cultivated crops

NA

Reared animals and their outputs

NR

Wild plants, algae and their outputs

NR

Wild animals and their outputs

Water

Special purpose

Plants and algae from in-situ aquaculture

NA

Animals from in-situ aquaculture

NA

Surface water for drinking

Protective Special purpose

Ground water for drinking Materials

Page Page 10 10

Biomass

Game manage-ment

Fibres and other materials from plants, algae and animals for direct use or processing

Commer-cial

Water manage-ment Water purification NA Timber production

Materials from plants, algae and animals for agricultural use

NA

Genetic materials from all biota

NR

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

Water

Energy

Regulation & Maintenan-ce

Mediation of waste, toxics and other nuisances

Surface water for non-drinking purposes

NA

Ground water for non-drinking purposes

NA

Plant-based resources

NR

Animal-based resources

NA

Mechanical energy

Animal-based energy

NA

Mediation by biota

Bio-remediation by micro-organisms, algae, plants, and animals

Biomass-based energy sources

Mediation by ecosystems

Mediation of flows

Mass flows

Liquid flows

Gaseous / air flows Maintenan-ce of physical, chemical, biological conditions

Lifecycle maintenan-ce, habitat and gene pool protection

Soil formation and composition

Air pollution mitigation

Filtration/sequestration/storage/accumulat ion by micro-organisms, algae, plants, and animals

NR

Filtration/sequestration/storage/accumulat ion by ecosystems

NR

Dilution by atmosphere, freshwater and marine ecosystems

NR

Mediation of smell/noise/visual impacts

NR

Mass stabilisation and control of erosion rates

Protective

Erosion control

Buffering and attenuation of mass flows

NR

Hydrological cycle and water flow maintenance

NR

Flood protection

Protective

Streamsi-de protection

Storm protection

Protective

Ventilation and transpiration

Deflation control NR

Pollination and seed dispersal

NR

Maintaining nursery populations and habitats

Pest and disease control

Special purpose

Special purpose Special purpose

Nature conserva-tion Conserva-tion of gene

Pest control

NA

Disease control

NA

Weathering processes

NA

Decomposition and fixing processes

NR

The The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016

Page 11 11 Page

Water conditions

Atmosphe-ric composition and climate regulation

Cultural

Physical and Physical and intellectual experiential interactions interactions with biota, ecosystems, and land-/seascapes [environ-mental settings]

Chemical condition of freshwaters

NA

Chemical condition of salt waters

NA

Global climate regulation by reduction of greenhouse gas concentrations

NR

Micro and regional climate regulation

NR

Experiential use of plants, animals and land-/seascapes in different environmental settings

Special purpose

Recreation

Physical use of land-/seascapes in different environmental settings

Special purpose

Spa & wellness

Special purpose

Education & research

Special purpose

Heritage, cultural

Education & research NR

Entertainment

NR

Aesthetic

NR

Spiritual, Spiritual and/or Symbolic symbolic and emblematic other interactions with biota, ecosystems, and land-/seascapes [environmental settings]

NR

Intellectual and Scientific representative interactions Educational

Other cultural outputs

NR

NR

NR

Sacred and/or religious

NR

Existence

NR

Bequest

NR

NR

Special purpose

State defence

Note: NA – not applicable, NR – not recognised

The forest categories and functions may provide a good base for mapping and assessment of forest ecosystem services. They are based on a sound knowledge of local natural conditions and socioeconomic needs and bond to mapped forest stands. However, there still exist several challenges for linking forest functions and ecosystems services due to missing ESS in the forest function classification. In addition, the ESS concept foresees regular monitoring of ecosystems services, their monetary valuation, accounting and reporting. Practical implementation of ESS into forest Page Page 12 12

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

management will also require a trade-off analysis of different ESS and establishing a balanced and just payment system for ESS.

Acknowledgement The paper was supported by the scientific project VEGA No. 1/0186/14 „Assessment of ecosystem services on national, regional and local scale”.

References Anonymous, 2015: Správa o lesnom hospodárstve v Slovenskej republike za rok 2014 (Zelená správa) [Report on the Status of Forestry in the Slovak Republic of 2014 (Green Report)]. Bratislava, 86 p. (in Slovak) Costanza R, D’Arge R, DeGroot R, Farber S, Grasso M., Hannon B., Limburg K., Naeem S., O’Neill R., Paruelo J., Raskin R., Sutton P. and M. van den Belt, 1997: The Value of the World’s Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital. Nature, 387, 253–260. de Groot RS, Alkemade R, Braat L, Hein L, & Willemen L, 2010: Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecological Complexity 7(3):260-272.

Haines-Young RH & Potschin MP, 2010: The links between biodiversity, ecosystem services and human wellbeing. Ecosystem Ecology: a new synthesis, eds Raffaelli DG & Frid CLJ (Cambridge University Press), p. 162.

Maes J, Teller A, Erhard M, Liquete C, Braat L, Berry P, Egoh B, Puydarrieux P, Fiorina C, Santos F, Paracchini ML, Keune H, Wittmer H, Hauck J, Fiala I, Verburg PH, Condé S, Schägner JP, San Miguel J, Estreguil C, Ostermann O, Barredo JI, Pereira HM, Stott A, Laporte V, Meiner A, Olah B, Royo Gelabert E, Spyropoulou R, Petersen JE, Maguire C, Zal N, Achilleos E, Rubin A, Ledoux L, Brown C, Raes C, Jacobs S, Vandewalle M, Connor D, Bidoglio G, 2013: Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services.

An analytical framework for ecosystem assessments under action 5 of the EU biodiversity strategy to 2020.

Publications office of the European Union, Luxembourg.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005: Ecosystems and human well-being: biodiversity synthesis. World Resources Institute. Washington, D.C. Papánek F., 1978: Teória a prax funkčne integrovaného lesného hospodárstva [Theory and practice of functionaly integrated forest management]. Bratislava, 218 p. (in Slovak)

The The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016

Page 13 13 Page

HOW CAN WE DEFINE FOREST FUNCTIONS AND SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT IN THE CASE OF TUSHETI REGION OF GEORGIA? Holušová K. , Holuša O. Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00, Brno, Czech Republic E-mail: holusova.katerina@seznam.cz, holusao@email.cz ABSTRACT

There are several protected areas in the region of Tusheti, Georgia (National Park, Strict Nature Reserve - IUCN and Protected Landscape Area). Their management has considerable gaps (inventory and forest management principles are missing). The condition of protected areas is not satisfactory and dynamic changes occur recently (vegetation dieback, occurrence of insects under bark). These are reasons for which the monitoring of forest ecosystems has to take place and forest management measures have to be adjusted in order to allow careful exploitation of forest ecosystems in line with the management targets.

There are declared needs in this region: non-existence of the forest inventory; occurrence of forests, grasslands, pasturelands and their acreage has not been determined precisely; forest areas have not been precisely defined and forest types have not been determined – the characterization of natural conditions does not exist; definitions of quantitative and qualitative characteristics of wood-producing resources and forest functions do not exist; the health condition of forest ecosystems is not assessed; methodological procedures and necessary care for the damaged forest ecosystems; requirements of local communities for using the forest ecosystems are not respected; indicators of timber volume in the given area are not defined (annual increment, timber supply, timber use possibilities, logging limits, regeneration possibilities etc.); species composition and representation of individual species in the given area are not defined or determined etc.

On these lines we expect an implementation of forest protection principles into forest management, based on the recorded and evaluated data, framework principles of forest management will be proposed with regard to the significance of individual biotic and abiotic factors at a general level so that they could be applied in another area too.

All these kinds of information should be entered into the evaluation of forest functions. The activity includes field investigations in the pilot area focused on the determination of the fulfilment of forest functions such as soil protection function (recording of erosion rills, landslides or impact of grazing on the vegetation cover), water retention function (determined will be forest types affected by water – wetland alder woods, alluvia of streams etc., their size and acreage in the selected area) and ecologic-stabilization forest functions (biodiversity, value of biotopes). Social functions of the forests will be assessed from the perspective of recreation, zones of prohibited entry, hazardous terrains, possibly also pollution with waste. For this case, a questionnaire campaign is used to address local inhabitants. Production functions of the forests are assessed from the perspective of their economic use.

A basic model of sustainable forest management will be built on actual data obtained about the natural condition of forest ecosystems. Within the solution, a simple forest management plan should be set up that would provide a general view about possibilities of using wood for the local population with respect to the current condition of forest stands within the framework of forest classes. Emphasis will be put on the underpinning of negative factors, namely the occurrence of forest insect pests.

Page Page 14 14

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

Key words: natural conditions, Georgia, Tusheti region, mountains, sustainable forest management, forest function

The The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016

Page 15 15 Page

MAKING INVISIBLE VALUES VISIBLE: THE ECONOMICS OF ECOSYSTEMS SERVICES IN MEXICO JosĂŠ Alberto Lara-Pulido1, Alejandro Guevara-Sangines2 and Camilo AriasMartelo3 1

Universidad Iberoamericana, Department of Business studies, Mexico

3

Universidad Iberoamericana, Research assistantt, Mexico

2 Universidad

Iberoamericana, Department of Economics, Mexico

E-mail: Jose.alberto.lara@gmail.com ABSTRACT

This paper presents a comprehensive review of the literature on the economic values for ecosystem goods and services in Mexico. We analyze 132 studies that estimate an economic value for any given environmental good or service in the country. In total, we code and classify 371 values in a matrix developed on the basis of the Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES) and on the Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) ecosystem classification. An important finding of our analysis is that the change from forest and mangrove land use to agriculture is not cost-effective.

We discuss two ways in which our work can serve as a policy tool. First, the estimation of the price of greenhouse emissions offsets in forests, which we found at a range between 8.2 and 15.2 USD/tCO2e; and second, the estimation of the total economic value for specific types of ecosystem like mangroves, whose value ranges between 21,891 and 38,889 USD/hectare/year according to our analysis.

Finally, we present an econometric model that estimates the elasticity between the value of ecosystem services (in USD/hectare per year) and the supply of each ecosystem (in hectares). According to our model, this elasticity is statistically significant and ranges between -0.42 and -0.55. This finding is consistent with the result of diminishing returns to scale in mangrove ecosystems found by de Groot, et al. (2012). Furthermore, this estimate is also relevant in policy terms, as it adds an economic rationale for conservation to other moral and philosophical criteria, especially in those sites that currently face a high degree of deforestation and degradation.

Key words: ecosystem services, Mexico, biodiversity, meta-analysis monetary values, forest

Page Page 16 16

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

Section B

THE ECONOMIC AND MANAGEMENT ASPECTS OF FOREST ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONS AND SERVICES

The Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page 17

THE POSSIBILITIES TO VALUATION OF FOREST ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONS Šafařík Dalibor, Hlaváčková Petra Mendel University in Brno, Brno, Czech Republic E-mail: dalibor.safarik@mendelu.cz ABSTRACT

Current science and evaluation of practice has a set of explicit and implicit methods available, by which monetary value of non-productive functions of forest can be expressed, i.e. ecosystem services. However, since these ecosystem services are not yet implemented on the market, individual procedures of monetary evaluation stay only in the theoretical level. The article is focused on description of possible methods of evaluation of function of forest ecosystems and their limits for usage in practice. The effort is to find theoretical and methodological solution which enables to determine monetary flows related to offering ecosystem functions. The article brings theoretical and methodological bases that will be used in further research, thus especially secondary data from publications of domestic and foreign authors were used. These authors deal primarily with the terms value and price, standards of value, administrative vs. market price and further valuation of services of forest ecosystems. The further source of information was the Czech legislation. The methods used in the article include analysis, synthesis, comparison and deduction. The article brings theoretical and methodological bases to the area of valuation of functions of forest ecosystems. According to the valuation practice, the yield method of valuation seems to be a suitable way. This method is currently based on derivation of forest land value from an expected yield and an interest rate plays the most important role. However, in case of functions of forest ecosystems it is not possible to find out specific financial contribution because these ecosystem services have not yet gone through the market in the required intensity. In these cases it is necessary to apply an estimated price expressed in money, which would be paid for a transaction between individuals and independent partners. Thus, the most probable price is excluded by special factors or circumstances such as atypical financing or specific popularity. The article proves that there still does not exist a unified view on the issue of valuation of forest ecosystem function and it has outlined some limits of currently used valuation methods.

Key words: forestry, economics, pricing, cash flow, valuation methods

Introduction

Non-productive functions of forest, so-called ecosystem services are defined as the direct and indirect benefits provided by ecosystem for human well-being (Haines-Young and Potschin, 2010; Nunes et al., 2014) or that humans obtain from natural ecosystem (Daily, 1997).

Following the Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES, 2013), there are three types of services: (provisioning (products obtained from ecosystems, e.g. food, wood, water); (2) regulation and maintenance (moderation or control of environmental conditions, e.g. flood control, water purification by aquifers, carbon sequestration by forests), (3) cultural (non-material benefits obtained from ecosystems, e.g. recreation, education, aesthetics).

Ecosystem services have received significant attention in global environmental policies in recent years (see e.g. MEA, 2005; TEEB, 2010; Bhandari et al., 2016). Forest ecosystem services and their

The Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page 19

monetary values have received considerable attention both at the national and local scale (Zang, Li, Xie, 2010).

The valuation of ecosystem services is the first step towards documenting changes in their nature and availability. In addition to the assessment of ecosystem services it is useful to be able to provide an economic quantification of these services. (Busch et al., 2012) The identification and valuation of ecosystem services supports decision-making and policy aimed at biodiversity conservation and sustainable development (see e.g. Burkhard et al., 2009; Fisher and Turner, 2008; Seppelt et al., 2011). However, the assessment of ecosystem services is limited due to lack of appropriate data, methodology and validity, classifications of ecosystem services, tools, and management framework (Bateman et al. 2010; Turner et al., 2010; Kupec, 2014).

Currently, property and services, according to the Act no. 151/1997 of Coll., about evaluation of property and about change of some laws, are evaluated by so-called usual price in the Czech Republic.

The article deals with theoretical and methodological bases for valuation of functions of forest ecosystems. The objective is description of possible methods of valuation of forest ecosystems and their limits for usage in practice.

Material and methodology The article brings theoretical and methodological bases that will be used in further research, thus especially secondary data from publications of domestic and foreign authors were used. These authors deal primarily with the terms value and price, standards of value, administrative vs. market price and further valuation of services of forest ecosystems. The further source of information was the Czech legislation. The methods used in the article include analysis, synthesis, comparison and deduction.

Results and Discussion In the valuation practice we can often meet with the requirement to determine an objective value of goods and services. It is necessary to highlight that an objective value does not exist in the economic practice. But what is a value in the economical meaning and how to understand it? In the economic sense, a value is understood as a relationship between a certain subject and an object assuming rational behaviour, while it is based on two basic facts of economic life: Human needs in general do not have limits Resources for satisfaction of human needs are limited.

An ability of goods and services to satisfy needs forms their use value, if goods or services are a subject of exchange and at the same time they are available to a limited extent, they have an exchange value. In response to the previous considerations it is possible to distinguish several basic categories of value and it raises the following practical questions: How much is an ordinary person willing to pay and how much it is possible to gain at the market – market value?

What is the value of goods and services from the perspective of buyer – demand value?

Which value can be considered as the least questionable?

Further, there will be explained currently the most used approaches to monetary valuation of environmental goods and services resulting from the completed literary search of individual methods used in the valuation practice in these days. The possible approaches are shown in Figure 1.

Page Page 20 20

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

These valuation methods that we know so far are able to evaluate ecosystem services, however, each of them states different results. For example, Kupec (2014) focused on the comparison of three methods of forest function valuation useful in the Czech professional forest practice – the Method of Quantification and Evaluation of Forest Functions (Vyskot et al., 2003), the Method of Biotopes Apprising (Seják, Dejmal, 2003) and the Method of Socio-economic Importance of Basic Non-wood Production Forests Functions Apprising (Šišák et al., 2002). The finding is that differences in results of these methods are big in case of same localities.

The purpose of valuation

privat goods and services

public goods and services with measurable market effect

public goods and services without any measurable market effect

„real preference“

„revealed preference“

„preference of public interest“

Market method

Product pricing method

Travel cost method

Contingent valuation method

Combination of methods – experiment

Implicit pricing method

Opportunity cost method

Extra costs and lower revenues method

Fig. Approaches to monetary valuation of environmental goods and services Source: Bergen et al., 2013

Valuation of property, property rights in general and especially forest properties in the Czech Republic is currently carried out according to the Act No. 151/1997 Coll., on property valuation and amendments to some laws. According to this Act, forest property is evaluated by a so-called usual price. This price is primarily based on comparison of evaluated property or service with the price of similar properties or services established by domestic business relations to the day of evaluation (thus the price arising in the market), exceptionally with justification of expected capitalized yield of property. In evaluation of ecosystem services it is not possible to use the comparative method in practice because there does not exist market equivalents and price-setting characteristics, which would enable comparison defined by law. In this case it is possible to use so-called found prices. According to § 2 of the Act no. 151/1997 of Coll., there exist several ways how to find out this price.

It seems appropriate the valuation by yield method. The value of the forests land derives from the expected yield. In this case, an important role is played by the interest rate. In terms of ecosystem services, the disadvantage of this method is the impossibility to identify specific financial benefits.

The reason is the absence of a market for forest ecosystem functions. The financial contribution would be possible to find by surrogate manner, e.g. by monitoring cash flows arising from the utilization of forest ecosystem in the territory of the forest enterprise and the consequent multiplication of these flows in the local economy. The application of the local multiplier as an indicator that lets specify the cash flows associated with the provision of ecosystem functions is also problematic. The problem is

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 21 21

mainly in detection of the exact data for the calculation of this indicator. It would be possible to create a methodological tools for valuing forest tools for valuing forest ecosystem functions called valuation multiplier with this method.

Conclusions The article brings theoretical and methodological bases to the area of valuation of functions of forest ecosystems. According to the valuation practice, the yield method of valuation seems to be a suitable way. This method is currently based on derivation of forest land value from an expected yield and an interest rate plays the most important role. However, in case of functions of forest ecosystems it is not possible to find out specific financial contribution because these ecosystem services have not yet gone through the market in the required intensity. In these cases it is necessary to apply an estimated price expressed in money, which would be paid for a transaction between individuals and independent partners. Thus, the most probable price is excluded by special factors or circumstances such as atypical financing or specific popularity. The article has proven that there still does not exist a unified view on the issue of valuation of forest ecosystem function and it has outlined some limits of currently used valuation methods.

Acknowledgement The paper was prepared with the support of the Internal Grant Agency project of the Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology, Mendel University in Brno No. LDF_VT_2015010 and 2016007.

Page Page 22 22

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

References Act No. 151/1997 Coll., on property valuation and amendments to some laws, as amended.

Bateman, I.J., Fezzi, G.G.M., Atkinson, C., Turner, G.K., 2010. Economic analysis for ecosystem service assessments. Environmental Resource Economics, 48(2), 177-218.

Bergen, V., Löwenstein, W., Olschewski, R. (2013). Forstökonomie. München: Franz Vahlen. 167.

Bhandari, P., KC, M., Shrestha, S., Aryal, A., Shrestha, U.B. (2016). Assessment of ecosystem services indicators and stakeholder’s of Nepal. Applied Geography, 69, 25-34.

Burkhard, B., Kroll, F., Müller, F., & Windhorst, W. (2009) Landscapes’ capacities to provide of ecosystem services from a Himalayan forest, Nepal. Ecosystem services, 8, 118-127.

Busch, M., La Notte, A., Laporte, V., Erhard, M. (2012). Potentials of quantitative and qualitative approaches to assessing ecosystem services. Ecological Indicators, 20, 89-103.

Daily, G. (1997). Nature’s services: Societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Island Press.

Fisher, B., Turner, K., Zylstra, M., Brouwer, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Ferraro, P., Green, R., Hadley, D., Harlow, J., Jefferiss, P., Kirby, C.,Morling, P.,Mowatt, S., Naidoo, R., Paavola, J., Strassburg, B., Yu, D., Balmford, A. (2008). Ecosystem services and economic theory: integration for policy-relevant research.

Ecological Applications, 18(8), 2050-2067.

Haines-Young, R., Potschin, M. (2010). Proposal for a Common International Classification of Ecosystem Goods and Services (CICES) for Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounting (V1). Report to the European Environment Agency.

Retrieved May 26, 2014, from http://unstats.un.org/unsd/envaccounting/ceea/meetings/UNCEEA-5-7-Bk1.pdf.

Kupec, P. (2014). Possibilities of the recreational function of forests assessment with using of the complex methods of forest function evaluation. In Fialová, J. - Pernicová, D. Public recreation and landscape protection - with man hand in hand? 1. ed. Brno: Mendel University in Brno, 194-197.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA). (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: Biodiversity synthesis. Island Press.

Nunes, P.A.L.D., Kumar, P., Dedeurwaerdere, T. (eds.). (2014). Handbook on the Economics of Ecosystem Services and Biodiversity. Edward Elgar.

Seják,J., Dejmal, I. (2003). Hodnocení a oceňování biotopů České republiky. Prague: Czech Environmental Institute, 422.

Seppelt, R., Dormann, C.F., Eppink, F.V., Lautenbach, S., & Schmidt, S. (2011). A quantitative review of ecosystem services studies: approaches, shortcomings and the road ahead. Journal of Applied Ecology, 48(3), 630-636. Šišák, L. Švihla, V., Šach, F. (2002). Oceňování společenské sociálně-ekonomické významnosti základních mimoprodukčních funkcí lesa. Prague: Ministry of agriculture Czech Republic, 71.

TEB. (2010). The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: Mainstreaming the economics of nature: A synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB, 36.

Turner, R.K., Morse-Jones, S., Fisher, B., 2010. Ecosystem valuation, a sequential decision support system and quality assessment issues. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1185, 79-101.

Vyskot et al. 2003. Kvantifikace a hodnocení funkcí lesů České republiky. Prague: Ministry of Enviornment Czech Republic, 210.

Zhang, B., Li, W., Xie, G. (2010). Ecosystem services research in China: progress and perspective.

Ecological Economics, 69(7), 1389-1395.

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 23 23

THE VALUE OF NATURE: IMPLEMENTING ECOSYSTEM SERVICES Boateng K. A., Hlaváčková P. Mendel University in Brno, Brno, Czech Republic E-mail: xboateng@node.mendelu.cz ABSTRACT

Conservation of ecosystem services is very essential to ensuring human welfare and sustainable development. A systematic review approach was used to highlight key features of the subject matter. In the end, 81 relevant and eligible peer-reviewed works were analysed and highly simplified. The simplification were under these main broad topics; ecosystem functions and Services, natural capital and ecosystem services, conservation and development, operationalisation and challenges of implementing ecosystem services. This paper reviews genuine and potential opportunities as well as challenges of implementing ecosystem services approach for the preservation of biodiversity. Developing economic, social and government systems which is capable of ending poverty while achieving sustainable development still remains a priority in modern-day politics. The paper focuses on modern key functions of ecosystem services delivery, progress and limitations. This paper further emphasises on the interdependence of human wellbeing and the ecosystem and its operationalisation as well as government’s intervention by intensifying natural capital’s relevance in influencing decisionmaking. Furthermore, is an introduction of guiding principles that can serve to orient key analysis and correspondence with respect to trade-offs. The study revealed that there is a crucial interconnection between ecosystem service and natural capital; this results in a depletion of the stock of natural capital when there is an appropriation of some classes of ecosystem by humans.

In addition the study suggests that conservation may also be a useful tool in shaping economic development with respect to agendas that are not in line with communities where they are implemented.

Key words: ecosystem, forest functions, natural capital, valuation

Introduction

Humans have devised many intellectual systems to understand and manage the complicated world in which we live, from physics to philosophy to economics (Weathers, Strayer & Likens, 2013). People everywhere depend on nature for their well-being. Nature is a source of such obvious necessities as food and fresh water. Its ecosystems also provide less obvious services such as storm protection and pollination (Ranganathan, 2008).

Gomez-Baggethun and de Groot (2010), link the historic development of the concept ecosystem services to the evolution of general economic concerns about and the emergence and expansion of environmental economics as a discipline.

This paper focus on modern key functions of ecosystem delivery, progress and limitations and gives a theoretical background for further research in economics of ecosystem services. Secondary research methods focused on literature review mainly foreign sources were used in the paper.

Page Page 24 24

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

Ecosystem Functions and Ecosystem Services The difference in focus or perspective on value is carried over to the distinction between ecosystem functions from an ecological point of view and ecosystem services from an economic point of view.

Ecosystem functions include such things that are primary productivity (photosynthesis), decomposition, nutrient recycling and so on. Ecosystem service flows are the materials and services provided by ecosystems that enhance human welfare and therefore are valued by people (Simpson & Christensen, 2012). Ecosystems play substantial roles in maintaining the environment as their original function, such as nutrient cycling, water purification and air-quality regulation and in producing natural resources. These are extremely important life-supporting bases for humanity; if these are likened to economic activities, the former can be seen as supply of services and the latter as a supply of goods (Managi, 2012).

Natural Capital and Ecosystem Services Generally, capital is viewed as a stock of materials or information which exists at a point in time.

Every type of capital stock creates, either autonomously or in conjunction with services from other capital stocks, a flow of services which may be utilised to transform materials, or the spatial setup of materials, to enhance the welfare of humans. The human utilisation of this flow of services may or may not leave the original capital stock intact. Capital stock takes diverse identifiable forms, most notably in physical forms including natural capital, such as trees, minerals, ecosystems, the atmosphere, etc.; manufactured capital, such as machines and buildings; and the human capital of physical bodies. In addition, capital stocks can take intangible forms, especially as information such as that stored in computers and in individual human brains, as well as that stored in species and ecosystems (Costanza, 1997; Flamholtz, 2012).

Linking Conservation and Development Forests are under severe threat in many areas across the globe. An estimated average of about 15 million hectares of forest were lost every year during the 1990s, predominantly in the tropics (FAO, 2001). This loss of forests has been accompanied by a loss of the many valuable services that forests provide – such as regulation of hydrological flows and carbon sequestration – and of the biodiversity they contain (Myers, 1997; Bishop & Pagiola, 2012). This loss as depicted in Picture 1 below show a steady decline over the years in both Africa and South Asia.

Pic. 1 World Forest Cover, 1990-2010 Source: Based on FAO data

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 25 25

In order to realise the sustainability of the ecosystems, there is the need to link it with the education of the local communities (see Picture 2.). Local knowledge has been referred to as the knowledge of any people who have lived in an area for a long period of time and it is the knowledge used by them to make a living in a particular environment. Terms used in the field of sustainable development to describe this concept include; indigenous technical knowledge, traditional environmental knowledge, rural knowledge, local knowledge and a farmer’s or pastoralist’s knowledge (Langill, 1999; Davies, 2012).

Pic. 2 Policy Influencing Approaches Source: Addapted from Star & Hovland, 2004

According to Davies (2012), in natural resource management, existing knowledge systems can be largely distinguished into two main categories; scientific knowledge and local knowledge. Scientific knowledge comprises of knowledge generated through scientific investigations carried out mostly by research institutions through carefully designed investigations. Local knowledge on the other hand is mostly derived from farmers’ careful observations of various factors and processes and their logical interpretation (Berkes et al., 2000). In order to ensure sustainability, there is the need for cooperation in both disciplines.

Operationalising Ecosystem Services Since the launch of The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) outcomes in 2010, several high level policy commitments have been made to integrate the value of nature into decisionmaking processes at global, national and local level. For example, both the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 to implement the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 urge countries to assess the socio-economic value of ecosystem services and integrate these values into national accounting and reporting systems (Kettunen et al., 2012).

Challenges of Implementation Notwithstanding the increasing adoption of ecosystem services as a framework and suite of tools by the conservation community, there are still rising concerns over the application and efficacy of these approaches for conserving all of the components of biodiversity that the conservation community is Page Page 26 26

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

charged with ensuring its continuity. The fundamental reason for these concerns is that at their core, ecosystem services approaches prioritise those processes that contribute to human wellbeing (Ingram, Redford & Watson, 2012).

Conclusion What this study obviously points out is the fact that ecosystem services contribute a remarkable portion of the aggregate contribution to human welfare on this planet. As a result, we should start to give the natural capital stock which delivers these services the necessary considerations in decisionmaking processes. Anything short of this will hamper both the current and future human generation. In spite of the fact that the idea of ecosystem services is simple in concept, its application in administration and policy is complex in practice. In the event that we are to convey the practical benefits of managing natural capital in ways that can help sustain human prosperity, it is clear that to overcome some of these difficulties. There is the need to discover a means of describing and measuring ecosystems and their services consistently. Additionally, the challenge for the conservation and development community is to take part in a social process that compromises and allows explicit acknowledgement of risks, while alongside gaining even more clarity and purpose in connection to the very things that ought not to be traded off. Furthermore, commercial enterprises hold a critical part in an all-encompassing approach for the sustainability of ecosystem services. Hence the present framework and existing mechanisms for industries’ ecosystem services management need a periodic re-examining to include sustainability in its core values. Lastly, there should be intensification of regular revision of tools and frameworks that is thought to be significantly vital to ensure a functioning cooperation between industries and ecosystem services. The popular question of how much restoration is needed is at the heart of goal setting because stakeholders and politicians must reconcile the balance of ecological needs against other competing needs.

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 27 27

References Berkes, F. (2009). Evolution of co-management: role of knowledge generation, bridging organizations and social learning. Journal of environmental management, 90(5), 1692-1702.

Berkes, F., Colding, J., & Folke, C. (2000). Rediscovery of traditional ecological knowledge as adaptive management. Ecological applications, 10(5), 1251-1262.

Bishop, J., & Pagiola, S. (Eds.). (2012). Selling forest environmental services: market-based mechanisms for conservation and development. Taylor & Francis.

Costanza, R., & Folke, C. (1997). Valuing ecosystem services with efficiency, fairness and sustainability as goals. Nature’s services: Societal dependence on natural ecosystems, 49-70.

Daily, G. C., Kareiva, P. M., Polasky, S., Ricketts, T. H., & Tallis, H. (Eds.). (2011). Natural Capital: Theory & Practice of Mapping Ecosystem Services. Oxford University Press.

Davies, J. (2012). Conservation and sustainable development. Abingdon, Oxon: Earthscan from Routledge.

Flamholtz, E. G. (2012). Human resource accounting: Advances in concepts, methods and applications.

Springer Science & Business Media.

Gómez-Baggethun, E., & de Groot, R. S. (2010). Natural capital and ecosystem services: the ecological foundation of human society.

Guerry, A. D., Polasky, S., Lubchenco, J., Chaplin-Kramer, R., Daily, G. C., Griffin, R., & Feldman, M. W. (2015). Natural capital and ecosystem services informing decisions: From promise to practice. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(24), 7348-7355.

Ingram, J. C., Redford, K. H., & Watson, J. E. (2012). Applying ecosystem services approaches for biodiversity conservation: benefits and challenges.SAPI EN. S. Surveys and Perspectives Integrating Environment and Society, (5.1).

Kettunen, M., Vihervaara, P., Kinnunen, S., D’Amato, D., Badura, T., Argimon, M., & Ten Brink, P. (2012). Socio-economic importance of ecosystem services in the Nordic Countries. Nordic Council of Ministers.

Langill, S. (1999). Introduction to indigenous knowledge.

Managi, S. (Ed.). (2012). The economics of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Routledge.

Myers, N. (1997). The world's forests and their ecosystem services. Nature's Services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems, 215-235.

Ranganathan, J. (2008). Ecosystem services. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.

Simpson, R. D., & Christensen, N. L. (Eds.). (2012). Ecosystem Function & Human Activities: Reconciling Economics and Ecology. Springer Science & Business Media.

Start, D. and Hovland, I. (2004). Tools for Policy Impact: a handbook for researchers. Overseas Development Institute. www.odi.org.uk/resources/download/156.pdf.

Weathers, K., Strayer, D., & Likens, G. (2013). Fundamentals of ecosystem science. Amsterdam: Academic Press/Elsevier.

Page Page 28 28

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

WHO SHALL PAY FOR THE PROVISION OF ECOSYSTEM SERVICES? – AN ANALYTIC NETWORK PROCESS APPROACH Dragoi M. , Cirnu M. University of Suceava, University of Suceava, Suceava, 720229, Romania E-mail: mariac@usv.ro ABSTRACT

The study aims at demonstrating how the analytic network process (ANP) can be used to assess the contribution worth being paid by the direct and indirect beneficiaries of the ecosystems services (ES) provided by forests, taking into consideration that a series of private forest owners shall be compensated for revenue they have to give up in order to deliver the ecosystem services.

The prevailing stakeholders, on the one hand, and bunches of ecosystem services, on the other hand, were incorporated in five clusters, each cluster having within appropriate items, like flood prevention and run-off regulation for water-related services, municipalities, producers’ association, hunters’ organization, and so on. In contrast to the Analytic Hierarchical Process, well-known for its logic and mathematical consistency, which allows only one-way pairwise evaluations of entities located at a given level against each entity located above, the ANP helps handle more complex networks, wherein some entities could be connected in both ways, which means interdependency, not only one-way dependency. Hence all stakeholders have been gathered in a single cluster, labeled as Alternatives, while the four main important ES were gathered in four clusters, labeled as follows: water-related ES, soil-related ES, landscape ES and biodiversity ES. According to the extent to which ES is being used by each type of stakeholders, or depends on another ES, the relative importance of each end-user has been assessed through ANP methodology.

The content of the nodes, the connection between nodes and clusters and the relative importance, likelihood or preference between each two nodes have been evaluated by means of a survey distributed to the representatives of the main important stakeholders identified in Muntii Maramuresului Natural Park, where WWF has been implementing a system of payments for ecosystem services provided by forest and aquatic ecosystem within the park.

Ranked in descending importance, the following stakeholders were pinpointed as main beneficiaries of ecosystem services: municipalities, national company of road, farmers’ associations, railway company, tourism, hunters’ associations, beekeepers’ associations.

In so doing some stakeholders have assessed their relative dependencies on the ecosystem services and, more important, they have realized that lowering the ecological impact on the aquatic and terrestrial ecosystem their relative contribution to whatever fundraising system may decrease. Another important outcome of the case study was a better understanding of the role played by the national company of water in a broader social and economic context, aligned to the provisions of the Water Directive.

Key words: economic instruments, forest protective functions

Introduction

Parallel to the intriguing issue of payments for ecosystem services (Jack, Kousky et al. 2008, Farley and Costanza 2010, Dunn 2011) the environmental taxation is another problem, which popped up even

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 29 29

before finding who might be the providers of ecosystem services. The concept of double dividend (Goulder 1995, Fullerton and Metcalf 1997, Bovenberg 1999) came up from the macro-economic perspective upon the environmental protection and it stems on the assumption that differential taxation helps the economic system get rid of the most important negative externalities. Meanwhile the neoliberal philosophy was somehow disconnected from the environmental challenges (Levy 2006) because the so-called new environmental tax reform had been criticized for not considering the ethic and social aspects (Luckin 2000).

The situation seems to be simple if the end-user of the ecosystem services is a large company, like Vittel ((Perrot-Maitre 2006), or wealthy communities and stakeholders (Bottorff 2014) but it is more difficult to design appropriate financial mechanisms when PES are means to reduce poverty (Bulte, Lipper et al. 2008, Schreckenberg and Luttrell 2009). The problem is complex because even though we know who are the providers and the beneficiaries, we don’t know who are the buyers, i.e. the ones willing to pay for ecosystem services they make use of (Engel, Pagiola et al. 2008) In Romania the neo-liberal approach on forest policy brought forth a large restitution process of forest land which, for political reasons, took a long period of time: from 1991 to now, the land restitution process was resumed two times because new amendments were adopted by the Parliament to the land restitution law, issued in 1991 (Strimbu, Hickey et al. 2005).

In order to accommodate the forest legal framework to the Civil Code in 2015 the Forest Act ([Anon] 2008) was also amended in order to allow whoever forest owner to negotiate with the forest public authority when special harvesting restrictions are required by the ecosystem services provided by her or his private forest. One means of negotiation is a compensation for the foregone revenue, estimated as the value of timber the forest owners’ give up in order to provide whatever ecosystem services. Part of the problem was solved, as long as the opportunity cost of not harvesting trees can be easily evaluated, but the second problem to be solved is to indicate who are the direct or indirect beneficiaries of the ecosystem services and to which extent they can contribute to this trust.

Who are the beneficiaries and other stakeholders of ecosystem services?

The direct beneficiaries (users) of ecosystem services are economic entities with a quantifiable advantage benefiting the environmental services provided by ecosystems. The indirect beneficiary is that entity benefiting indirectly or passively of ecosystem services.

According to another definition, the beneficiaries are individuals or groups that make use of the ecosystem goods and services through active or passive consumption or through simple appreciation resulting from awareness of the existence and importance of the ES (Nahlik et al., 2012).

When it comes to the beneficiaries’ dependency on ES there are a different degrees of dependency.

For example, the energy sector - hydroelectric power plants strictly depend upon water provision. Or we may have beneficiaries that are not depending on ES, because they can easily substitute any ecosystem services with other source (for example visitors, hikers for recreational services). Residents and local administration can be a dependent beneficiary, a direct and indirect beneficiary and a stakeholders able to influence the decisions made by municipalities in the area. A distinction between different group of beneficiaries serves to admit the dependency of economic activity on Protected Area.

Distinction between stakeholders and beneficiaries is regarding the ability to influence deciding policies and the condition of benefiting (Schirpke et al., 2014) The beneficiaries of ES from a

Page Page 30 30

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

Protected Area can be at the same time stakeholders (subjects involved or interested in management site), but not vice versa; not all stakeholders are necessarily beneficiaries. As Freeman said, a stakeholders is ,,any group or individual who can affect or is affected by the achievement of the organisation's objective” (Fassin, 2009).

The goal of this study is twofold: on the one hand, to identify the main beneficiaries of the ecosystem services provided by the forests within Maramures Mountains Natural Park, on the other hand to weigh the degree to which each beneficiary depends on one or more ES.

Methodology In order to weigh each stakeholder regarding its dependency on the whole bundle of ecosystem services or on a specific ES, we have conceived a network of two clusters, one for the beneficiaries, and one for the ES. Each ES may support one or more beneficiaries, while some beneficiaries (municipalities and insurance companies) depends on other beneficiaries, i.e. national company of roads.

The theoretical background of such evaluations is the Analytic Network Process (Saaty 1994, Saaty 1999, Saaty 2004, Wolfslehner and Vacik 2008) whose simplified version, namely AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) has been used for a large series of decision making problems (Figueira, Greco et al. 2005). A standard ANP analysis can be carried out in order to assign priorities to a series of alternatives, in our case an alternative being a stakeholder that makes use, in a direct or indirect way of one or more ES. The following steps are to be done: 1) draft the clusters where the relevant items (nodes of the network) are to be gathered; 2) draw connections between different nodes in different clusters, obeying the rule that each node must be connected to at least two other nodes from the same different cluster; 3) if it makes sense, draw connections between nodes within the same cluster, observing the same rule of two depending nodes at least; 4) draw connections between clusters, if it makes sense (an overall priority of the cluster overrides local priorities of the nodes within); 4) make pairwise comparisons between nodes against each relevant node by assigning notes between 1 to 9 or their reciprocals otherwise according to the following rule: 1 – A and B are equally important/ likely / preferable; 3 – A is slightly more important / likely/preferable than B; 5) A is much more important /likely/preferable than B; 7) A is very important/likely/preferable compared with B; 9 – A is extremely important/likely/preferable compared with B. Apart from the AHP, whose local priorities is the eigenvector that corresponds to the highest eigenvalue of the comparison matrix, the ANP assumes that the weighed matrix (local comparisons of each node multiplied by the cluster priority where it is the case) shall be raised to powers until the its values become stable – this is the so-called limit matrix. The values the diagonal of the limit matrix are the final priorities of nodes. In so doing all indirect influences are propagated in all cells up to the level where the marginal influences (the relative change in value of the same cell after a new iteration) between the nodes connected in the network are gone.

One on the main advantages of AHP/ANP is their ability to assess the evaluation inconsistency (Niemira and Saaty 2004, Brunelli, Canal et al. 2013). One way to reduce the risk of making inconsistent comparisons is to reduce the number of items compared against each other (see Pictures 3-5), which makes sense when, for example, the hydrological regulation is more or less important for three beneficiaries. Yet other ES like

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 31 31

Data collection In the first phase the beneficiaries and ecosystem services from the pilot area was established. Then we analysed every beneficiaries according to services that benefit (Table 1).

Tab. 1 Beneficiaries analysis according to ecosystem services that benefit

No. 1.

Beneficiary Municipalities

ES Flood protection Hydrological regulation Erosion control Aesthetic framework Wood and non-wood resources Pharmacology resources Flood protection Erosion control

No. 8.

Beneficiary Educational and Research Institutions

ES Pharmacology resources

2.

National Company of Roads Insurance Companies

9.

Tourism Sector

Aesthetic framework Habitat and refuge

Flood protection

10.

Hunting Associations

Aesthetic framework Habitat and refuge Wood and non-wood resources Genetic resources

Energy Sector – hydroelectric energy production Water bottling Companies

Hydrological regulation

11.

Wood and nonwood Products Companies

Wood and non-wood resources Genetic resources

Hydrological regulation

12.

Beekeeper Associations

6.

Water Distributors

Hydrological regulation

13.

Pharmaceutical Companies

Habitat and refuge Wood and non-wood resources Genetic resources Non-wood resources Pharmacology resources

7.

Agricultural Exploitations

Flood protection Erosion control

3.

4.

5.

The beneficiaries attended a one day workshop where they have discussed their opinions about the ecosystem services they are interested in and agreed upon the evaluation scheme, nodes and clusters.

In the second phase, we have referred to the beneficiaries as alternatives (we have 14 nodes in beneficiaries cluster), and in the second we have considered a cluster of the ecosystem services (8 nodes). All dependencies between nodes was drawn as one-to-many connectors. Each node has to be compared with each other node to the same link, using the standardized evaluation scale of Thomas Saaty (Drăgoi & Rusu, 2014) 1 – equally as important as, 3 - moderately more important than, 5 – strongly more important than, 7 – very strongly more important than, 9 – extremely more important than. Intermediate marks 2, 4, 6, 8 can also be used, when needed.

The pairwise comparisons were conducted between beneficiaries and forest ecosystem services. All calculations have been done with SuperDecisions software, freely available for for a certain period in non-commercial purpose (http://www.superdecisions.com/). This software implements the theory of ANP conceived by Thomas Saaty, and all technical supports and computation details are available and

Page Page 32 32

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

downloadable on the mentioned internet source. In the following lines we just present some aspects of ANP work (Pic. 1).

At pairwise comparisons between nodes we establish the marks in participatory with the stakeholders at workshops. Some examples of this pairwise comparisons between nodes are presented in Pic. 2

Pic. 1 Flowchart of nodes, clusters and links between nodes

Pic. 2 Pairwise comparisons of beneficiaries who make use of water flow regulation ecosystem services

An analytical network doesn’t suppose unidirectional influences from goal to criteria and alternatives, which is the case with AHP, because the it is assumed that all nodes can be connected in a logical way, not necessarily organized in a hierarchical order. Dependencies, reciprocal or not, are established by the person who is modelling the problem in a logical manner. For example, Romanian Water National Company, local administration, water consumers, farmers and tourism sector benefit of regulating flow function in the river, due to forest vegetation, but National Company of Roads and Railways and beekeepers’ associations do not benefit, because it does not require constant flow rates. In the same logic, tourism sector, hunters’ associations and beekeepers’ associations benefit of landscape conservation, but the same landscape is altered by local authorities, farmers' associations, The National Company of Roads and Railways, interference with the Romanian Waters National Company being negligible. Also, the hydrological function through flow regulating component influence the habitats, especially on the wetlands, where we have a diverse avifauna. Groundwater supply is an ecosystem service that benefit farmers and local authorities.

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 33 33

Results The flowchart of all comparisons and link between nodes are presented in Pic. 1. Although the connectors were drawn between nodes, and not between clusters, pairwise comparisons were made between nodes against another node (Pic. 2), where hydrological regulation gets different weights for different beneficiaries, the largest on corresponding to residens and local administration – beneficiaries.

The results are presented in the in Pic. 3, which shows that the main beneficiaries who shall pay for ecosystem services are touristy companies, municipalities, national road company, hydro power plants, farmers and pipe water companies.

Pic. 3 Priorities assigned to the beneficiaries of ecosystem services

The other stakeholders, less important as beneficiaries of the ecosystem services are insurance companies, mineral water companies, hunter associations, beekeepers and drug industry. Because the provision of non-wood products is quite ambiguous as ecosystem service, the ones who are taking advantage of it are local residents, who are also considered users along with municipalities. This may suggest a sort of double tax situation, which may not be considered the best solution. The question about how much each user shall pay is not answered by the three columns on the right side of Pic. 3.

The raw priorities are calculated Quite important to notice is the degree to which quite rick beneficiaries (like drug industry, insurance companies)

Conclusions The methodology we came up with in this short application is appropriate for assessing the relative importance of a given set of entities (alternatives, according to the ANP standards) which depends on another series of factors, in our case the ecosystem services. On the one hand, the final priorities presented Pic. 3 do not render the relative contribution of each beneficiary to the fund needed to compensate the forest owners who provide the ecosystem services simply because some of them may not make use of those the whole bundle of ecosystem services not even in indirectly.

On the other hand, some end-users are more important than others due to some intrinsic dependencies within the alternative cluster. For example, the municipalities depend on the road company and the mineral water companies also depend on the municipalities and the road company, two stakeholders

Page Page 34 34

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

who are providing important logistic support for whatever economic activity. Because municipalities are connected to the national power grid their dependency to the hydro power companies is negligible.

Acknowledgement The study was financed through SOLIDARON project: "Solidarity and respect for people and nature pilot project for legislative developing, testing and promoting of "beneficiary pays" principle for environmental services in Romania (SOLIDARON - Pilot Pay PES, EEA Grants).

References [Anon] (2008). Romanian Forest Act, Offcial Journal of Romania.

Bottorff, C. (2014). "PAYMENTS FOR ECOSYSTEM SERVICES." communities 7: 15.

Bovenberg, A. L. (1999). "Green tax reforms and the double dividend: an updated reader's guide."

International Tax and Public Finance 6(3): 421-443.

Brunelli, M., L. Canal and M. Fedrizzi (2013). "Inconsistency indices for pairwise comparison matrices: a numerical study." Annals of Operations Research 211(1): 493-509.

Bulte, E. H., L. Lipper, R. Stringer and D. Zilberman (2008). "Payments for ecosystem services and poverty reduction: concepts, issues, and empirical perspectives." Environment and Development Economics 13(03): 245-254.

Dunn, H. (2011). "Payments for ecosystem services." Evidence and Analysis Series Paper 4.

Drăgoi, M., & Rusu, V. (2014). FOREST AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT Conference Brașov Romania 24-25 October 2014: 89-95 Engel, S., S. Pagiola and S. Wunder (2008). "Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issues." Ecological economics 65(4): 663-674.

Farley, J. and R. Costanza (2010). "Payments for ecosystem services: From local to global." Ecological Economics 69(11): 2060-2068.

Fassin, Y. (2009). The stakeholder model refined. Journal of Business Ethics, 84(1), 113–135.

Figueira, J., S. Greco and M. Ehrgott (2005). Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys, Springer Science & Business Media.

Fullerton, D. and G. E. Metcalf (1997). Environmental taxes and the double-dividend hypothesis: Did you really expect something for nothing?, National Bureau of Economic Research.

Goulder, L. H. (1995). "Environmental taxation and the double dividend: a reader's guide." International tax and public finance 2(2): 157-183.

Jack, B. K., C. Kousky and K. R. E. Sims (2008). "Designing payments for ecosystem services: Lessons from previous experience with incentive-based mechanisms." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105(28): 9465-9470.

Levy, J. D. (2006). "Between Neo-Liberalism and No Liberalism: Progressive Approaches to Economic Liberalization in Western Europe."

Luckin, D. (2000). "Environmental Taxation and Red-Green Politics." Capital & Class 24(3): 161-188.

Nahlik, A. M., Kentula, M. E., Fennessy, M. S., & Landers, D. H. (2012). Where is the consensus? A proposed foundation for moving ecosystem service concepts into practice. Ecological Economics, 77, 27–35.

Niemira, M. P. and T. L. Saaty (2004). "An analytic network process model for financial-crisis forecasting."

International Journal of Forecasting 20(4): 573-587.

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 35 35

Pagiola and S. Wunder (2008). "Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issues." Ecological economics 65(4): 663-674.

Perrot-Maitre, D. (2006). "The Vittel payments for ecosystem services: a “perfect” PES case." International Institute for Environment and Development, London, UK: 1-24.

Saaty, T. L. (1994). "Fundamentals of decision making." Pittsburgh: RWS Publications.

Saaty, T. L. (1999). Fundamentals of the analytic network process. Proceedings of the 5th international symposium on the analytic hierarchy process.

Saaty, T. L. (2004). "Decision making—the analytic hierarchy and network processes (AHP/ANP)." Journal of systems science and systems engineering 13(1): 1-35.

Schirpke, U., Scolozzi, R., De Marco, C., & Tappeiner, U. (2014). Mapping beneficiaries of ecosystem services flows from Natura 2000 sites. Ecosystem Services, 9, 170–179.

Schreckenberg, K. and C. Luttrell (2009). "Participatory forest management: a route to poverty reduction?"

International Forestry Review 11(2): 221-238.

Strimbu, B. M., G. M. Hickey and V. G. Strimbu (2005). "Forest conditions and management under rapid legislation change in Romania." The Forestry Chronicle 81(3): 350-358.

Wolfslehner, B. and H. Vacik (2008). "Evaluating sustainable forest management strategies with the Analytic Network Process in a Pressure-State-Response framework." Journal of Environmental Management 88(1): 110.

Page Page 36 36

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

THE APPROACH TO ASSESSING THE RECREATIONAL FOREST FUNCTION OF THE INTEREST AREA Březina D. , Hlaváčková P. Mendel University in Brno, Brno, Czech Republic

E-mail: david.brezina@mendelu.cz, petra.hlavackova@mendelu.cz ABSTRACT

The aim of the article is to describe an approach focused on identifying the potential financial flows associated with the fulfilment of the recreational function of forest ecosystems in the area of interest of the Training Forest Enterprise Masaryk Forest Křtiny (hereinafter referred to as “TFE MF Křtiny”). The research focused on the recreational function of the area of interest in the reference period of 2013 – 2015 was performed by the Department of Forest and Wood Products Economics and Policy and the Department of Landscape Management of the Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology of Mendel University in Brno. Financial support has been provided from the Development Project 2013 called: “Alternative approaches to assessing the recreation potential of the interest area TEF MF at Křtiny” and the Internal Grant Agency project 2015 with the name: “The importance of the Training Forest Enterprise Masaryk Forest Křtiny for the local economy”, of the Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology of Mendel University in Brno. Currently, the methodology is verified in other areas within the Internal Grant Agency project of the Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology of Mendel University in Brno called: “The quantification of the influence of the selected forest enterprise on the local economics of the region”. The methodological approach to determination of importance of the TFE Křtiny for the local economy is based on identification of monetary flows into the region. Specifically, expenditures of the TFE Křtiny on local employees and local supplier and multiplication of these expenditures further in the local economy were surveyed. The calculation of local multiplier LM3 was used as a method. The methodological approach based on the calculation of local multiplier appears to be a suitable alternative to currently used methods of valuation of ecosystem functions. By this approach it is possible to quantify a monetary flow of a forest enterprise and forest economy contributing to development of a local economy. The research results will be useful not only for operating activities of the TFE Křtiny, but also as a basis for decision-making in forestry and environmental policies not only at the local level.

Key words: economics, forestry, Křtiny, Training Forest Enterprise, ecosystem services, local economics

Introduction

Ecosystem services are defined as the benefits that ecosystems provide to humans (Nunes et al., 2014).

The concept of an ecosystem service highlights the role of natural ecosystems in providing goods and services for human well-being, economic development, and poverty alleviation (Nelson et al., 2009).

The concept has been used as a policy instrument in biodiversity conservation and natural resource management (see e.g. Burkhard et al., 2009; Seppelt et al. 2011).

Currently, recreation is a major ecosystem service and an important co-benefit of nature conservation (Schägner et al., 2016), although, the term “recreational services” is relatively new and has emerged in conjunction with the rising interests in ecosystem services (He, Yi, Liu, 2016). Recreational benefits derived through direct use of forests are usually assessed through estimates of the number of visits, or visitors, to forests in a given country or region over a given time period (Edwards et al., 2011).

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 37 37

As an area of interest has been chosen Training Forest Enterprise Masaryk Forest Křtiny (hereinafter referred to as “TFE Křtiny”). The forest covers of the TFE Křtiny are of great importance for recreation and tourism.

Forests of the TFE Křtiny are mostly suburban forests and as such they are abundantly used for recreational purposes. The extensive network of forest trails and bicycle paths is predominantly used.

Recreational trails are one of the most common types of infrastructure facilitating access to, and movement within natural areas for a range of recreational activities (Leung and Marion, 2000; Cole, 2004).

The aim of the article is to describe a methodological approach of research activities of the Department of Forest and Wood Products Economics and Policy, Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology, Mendel University in Brno in years 2013 – 2015. These activities focus on identifying the actual and potential cash flows in the area of interest and benefits of forest enterprises for the local economy.

Methodological approach Training Forest Enterprise Masaryk Forest Křtiny is an organisational part of the Mendel University in Brno and a special-purpose facility of its Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology. The total area is 10,495 ha. (TFE, 2015) The research focused on the recreational function of the area of interest in the reference period of 2013 – 2015 was performed by the Department of Forest and Wood Products Economics and Policy and the Department of Landscape Management of the Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology of Mendel University in Brno. Financial support has been provided from the Development Project 2013 called: “Alternative approaches to assessing the recreation potential of the interest area TEF MF at Křtiny” and the Internal Grant Agency project 2015 with the name: "The importance of the Training Forest Enterprise Masaryk Forest Křtiny for the local economy," of the Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology of Mendel University in Brno.

One part of the analysis of the recreational use of the territory consisted of monitoring the visitor traffic of the TFE Křtiny territory. The monitoring was performed at selected localities of the forest districts of TFE Křtiny in two ways. The most frequented paths and trails were selected.

The first way was visitors monitoring by a specialized company Partnerství, o. p. s. The monitoring by Partnerství, o. p. s. was done using automatic counters produced by Eco-counter, type Pyro Box Compact. The counter records the thermal radiation of human body. The passage of visitors was recorded in two directions (IN and OUT). Data evaluation was performed at hourly intervals. The visitors were divided into six groups – hikers, cyclists, in-line, cars, horses, others. The “other” group includes prams, wheelchair user for example.

The second way was the monitoring through questionnaire survey with direct addressing of respondents. This survey was carried out by students of the Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology. The monitoring by students took place one week from Monday to Sunday from 9am to 5pm. This is questionnaire which has 22 questions. When compiling the questionnaires, inspiration was taken from publications and case studies of foreign authors for example Bateman et al, 2002; Verbič and Slabe-Erker, 2009. At the top of first page is the introducing of the project and description what we want from respondents. First four questions are about age, education, occupation and place of residence. The other nine questions dealing with use of the interest area. How often they go there, what they do there, how to find information about this place, which activities they do there, if is the sufficient infrastructure there etc. The next questions are based on the travel cost method. Four Page Page 38 38

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

questions to ask on their journey – distance from residence, type of transport, expenses for travel and stay in place. The next four questions are focused on the willingness to pay a fee to enter the area and how much are they willingness to pay. The last questions is for complete the information. Currently, the data from the questionnaires are evaluated.

In the first month students also performed a calibration of the counters. Based on the calibration, a correlation coefficient was calculated which was then used to adjust the data in the other days of measurement.

The methodological approach to determination of importance of the TFE Křtiny for the local economy is based on identification of monetary flows into the region. Specifically, expenditures of the TFE Křtiny on local employees and local supplier and multiplication of these expenditures further in the local economy were surveyed. The calculation of local multiplier LM3 was used as a method. The method of local multiplier has been used for example by authors Sacks, 2002; Kutáček, 2007; Březina, Šafařík, Hlaváčková, 2013; Silovská, 2015, however, never in connection with forest economy or protection of nature and landscape. First case studies were carried out by authors Březina, 2014; Hlaváčková, Březina, 2015; Březina, Hlaváčková, Šafařík, 2015.

Conclusions The article presents a methodological approach to the quantification of the importance of a forest enterprise for the local economy. The methodological approach to determining the potential of the recreational function of forestry for the economic development of the territory stems from the methodology which allows, on one hand, the measurement of the visitor’s willingness to pay for the services arising from the use of the forest trails and cycle paths on the territory of TFE Křtiny, while, on the other hand, measuring the expenditures of TFE Křtiny for providing recreational functions and their impact on the local economy.

The methodological approach based on the calculation of local multiplier appears to be a suitable alternative to currently used methods of valuation of ecosystem functions. By this approach it is possible to quantify a monetary flow of a forest enterprise and forest economy contributing to development of a local economy.

The research results will be useful not only for operating activities of the TFE Křtiny, but also as a basis for decision-making in forestry and environmental policies not only at the local level.

Acknowledgement The article was prepared with the support of the Internal Grant Agency project of the Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology, Mendel University in Brno No. LDF_VT_2015010.

References Bateman, I.J., Carson, R.T., Day, B., Hanemann, M., Hanleys, N., Hett, T., Jones-Lee, M., Loomes, G., Mourato, S., Ozdemiroglu, E., Pearce, D., Sugden, R., Swanson, J. (2002). Economic valuation with stated preference techniques: a manual. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK. Březina, D. (2014). Ekonomické aspekty Správy Národního parku Podyjí. Dissertation Thesis. Brno: Mendel University in Brno. 132.

Březina, D., Hlaváčková, P., Šafařík, D. (2015). Vliv Správy národního parku Podyjí na lokální ekonomiku v okrese Znojmo. Zprávy lesnického výzkumu: Reports of forestry research, 60(2). 53-60.

Březina, D., Šafařík, D., Hlaváčková, P. (2013). LM3 - Local Multiplier in Environmental Economics. In

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 39 39

Fialová, J., Kubíčková, H. (ed): Public Recreation and Landscape Protection – with man hand in hand.

Sborník referátů. Brno, 1. - 3. května 2013. Brno: Mendel University in Brno, 77-81.

Burkhard, B., Kroll, F., Müller, F., & Windhorst, W. (2009) Landscapes’ capacities to provide of ecosystem services from a Himalayan forest, Nepal. Ecosystem services, 8, 118-127.

Cole, D.N. (2004). Impact of hiking and camping on soils and vegetation: a review. In: Buckley, R. (ed.).

Environmental impacts of Ecoturism. GABI Publishing, London, UK. (pp. 41-60).

Edwards, D., Jensen, F.S., Marzano, M., Mason, B., Pizzirani, S., Schelhass, M.J. (2011). A theoretical framework to assess the impacts of forest management on the recreational value of European forests.

Ecological Indicators, 11, 81-89.

He, J., Yi, H., Liu, J. (2016). Urban green space recreational service assessment and management: A conceptual model based on the service generation process. Ecological Economics, 124, 59-68. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.01.023.

Hlaváčková, P., Březina, D. (2015). Benefits of the forest enterprise for the regional economy. Proceedings from X. International Conference on Applied Business Research ICABR 2015, 312-321.

Kutáček, S. (2007). Penězům na stopě: měření vašeho dopadu na místní ekonomiku pomocí LM3. 1. vyd.

Brno, Trast pro ekonomiku a společnost, 93.

Leung, Y.E., Marion, J.L. (2000). Recreation impact and management in wilderness: a state-of-knowledge review. In: USDA Forest Service Proceedings, vol. 15. (pp. 23-48).

Nelson, E., Mendoza, G., Regetz, J., Polasky, S., Tallis, H., Cameron, D. et al. (2009). Modelling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scale.

Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 7(1), 4-11.

Nunes, P.A.L.D. Kumar, P., Dedeurwaerdere, T. (eds.). (2014). Handbook on the Economics of Ecosystem Services and Biodiversity. Edward Elgar.

Sacks, J. (2002). The money trail: measuring your impact on the local economy using LM3. London, New Economics Foundation, 118.

Schägner, J.P., Brander, L., Maes, J., Paracchini, M.L., Hartje, V. (2016). Mapping recreational visits and value of European National Parks by combining statistical modelling and unit value transfer. Journal of Nature Conversation. Available online. Retrieved March 21, 2016. In press. doi:10.1016/j.jnc.2016.03.001.

Seppelt, R., Dormann, C.F., Eppink, F.V., Lautenbach, S., & Schmidt, S. (2011). A quantitative review of ecosystem services studies: approaches, shortcomings and the road ahead. Journal of Applied Ecology, 48(3), 630-636.

Silovská, H. (2015). Sledování a hodnocení místního ekonomického rozvoje se zřetelem na využití lokálního multiplikátoru. Dissertation Thesis. Prague, University of Economics, 147.

TFE. (2015). Training Forest Enterprise Masaryk Forest Křtiny. Retrieved August 13, 2015, from http://www.slpkrtiny.cz.

Verbič, M., Slabe-Erker, R. (2009). An econometric analysis of willingness-to-pay for sustainable development: A case study of the Volčji Potok landscape area. Ecological Economics, 68, 1316-1328.

Page Page 40 40

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

Section C

THE ROLE OF CARBON WITHIN FOREST ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONS AND SERVICES

The Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page 41

ASSESSMENT OF SOIL CARBON SEQUESTRATION SERVICES IN A HILL AND LOWLAND DIPTEROCARP FORESTS IN MALAYSIA Ahmed A. Ch.1, 2; Siwar Ch.1; Shaharuddin M. I.1; Anizan I 3 Institute for Environment and Development, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600 Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia 1

Environmental Management Technology Programme, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University Bauchi, Nigeria 2

Faculty of Science and Technology, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600 Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia 3

E-mail: acabdullahi08@gmail.com

ABSTRACT

The carbon sequestration potential of Malaysian forest soils is largely under studied. This has implication on accurate reporting of the national carbon inventory, limits opportunities in the carbon markets and undermines achievement of national policy priorities. This study investigates carbon sequestration in the soils of two dipterocarp forest, the Berembun (BFR) and Kenaboi Forest Reserves (KFR) located in Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia. Soil samples were collected in the field and analysed in the laboratory for bulk density, soil organic carbon (SOC) and physico-chemical properties using standard methods. Future SOC stock was simulated with the RothC 26.3 carbon simulation model by using projected climate data (temperature, rainfall and evaporation (20132095)) generated using PRECIS HadCM3Q based on the SRES A1B scenario. Carbon sequestration under a hypothetical schemes of forest protection, reforestation and managed plantation was evaluated using the space-for-time substitution method. The results show that the soils exhibit typical characteristics of ultisols; developed from kaolinite-based minerals and granite parent mterials. The predominant textures were sandy clay (in BFR) and silty clay (in KFR). The soils are also well drained, mature and poorly fertile. The average SOC stock, to 1m depth, in BFR is 79.74 (±14.7) t C ha-1 and 60.4 (±22.1) t C ha-1 in KFR. The average SOC, to 1m depth, in all the plots in the study area (i.e. Both BFR and KFR) is 75.87 (±17.0) t C ha-1. The SOC stock in BFR was higher in unlogged forest, followed by logged forests and then rubber plantation. In KFR, the rehabilitated forest contained more SOC than the degraded forest. Modelling results show that SOC stock will slightly increase after 30 years but will decline below the baseline value after the three cutting cycles in both BFR and KFR. SOC will be significantly negatively affected by changes in temperature and rainfall over the simulation period in the study areas. The findings from this study also reveal that a forest protection scheme will lead to a C gain of 8.32 t C ha-1. Similarly, a reforestation scheme will yield a net C gain of 7.50 t C ha-1. However, managed plantation option would lead to a net C loss of 12.88 t C ha-1. The key findings of the study suggest that the soil holds a substantial amount of organic carbon, which would be significantly influenced by changes in climatic variables, forest type and land use in the future. It is predicted that climate change will negatively affect the carbon mitigation potentials of soils in the study area in the future. As a mitigation measure, forest protection seems to sequester more SOC than reforestation while managed plantation will lead to a net C loss in soil. The soil carbon stock in the Malaysian dipterocarp forest is significant and if included in carbon inventory, may increase the forest carbon reported in the periodic national communications to the UNFCC.

Key words: Soil Carbon Sequestration, Forest soils, Tropical Rainforest, Ecosystem services, Hill and Lowland Dipterocarps

The Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page 43

1 Introduction The search for strategies on mitigating accelerated climate change believed by many scientists to be caused by the concentration of greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the atmosphere has stimulated interest in reducing carbon emission and increasing carbon sequestration in terrestrial ecosystems such as forest biomass and soil. Sequestering (storing) carbon in soil and biomass of forest ecosystems can reduce the concentration of carbon dioxide (a key greenhouse gas) in the atmosphere (SCHIMEL, 1995; KIRSCHBAUM, 1995), enhance forest land productivity (JURGENSEN et al. 1997; GRIGAL and VANCE, 2000) and potentially diversify the economic benefits of forest owners. The growing concerns over increased accumulation of human-induced carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere have generated interest in identifying various opportunities of mitigating these gases from the atmosphere. Similarly, reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emission from the terrestrial sector, through forest protection, avoided deforestation and forest degradation, is another key mitigation strategy.

Recently, the contributions of the soil in various ecosystems have become more prominent with the recognition of its role as a carbon sink and the potential of that in reducing the concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2), which is a vital greenhouse gas, from the atmosphere. Conversely, the soil capacity to increase the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere through mineralization of organic matter and respiration from soil microbes is also a source of concern. It has been reported that mineralization of only 10% of the soil organic carbon pool globally would be equivalent to about 30 years of anthropogenic emissions (KIRSCHBAUM, 2000).

Globally, the soil contains a large carbon pool estimated at approximately 1500Gt of organic carbon in the first one meter of the soil profile (JOBBAGY and JACKSON, 2000; GUO and GIFFORD, 2002; STOCKMAN et al. 2013). This is much higher than the 560 Gt of carbon (C) found in the biotic pool (LAL, 2008). By holding this huge carbon stock, the soil is preventing carbon dioxide build up in the atmosphere which will compound the problem of climate change. Considering the fact that only 9 Gt of C is added to the atmosphere yearly through anthropogenic activities from fossil fuels and ecosystem degradation (STOCKMAN et al. 2013), the soil can be counted on as an effective carbon sink that renders vital climate regulation services.

The forest ecosystem covers 4.1 billion hectares of land globally (DIXON and WISNIEWSKI, 1995) and holds 56% of carbon in land use sectors. Forest soils account for 36-40% of carbon in forest ecosystem (FAO, 2001, 2006; DIXON et al. 1994). In Malaysia, SANER et al. (2012) reported that the soil contains 23.5% of the carbon in Malua Forest Reserve, Sabah Malaysian Borneo. NETO et al.

(2012) also reported that the soil contains 17% (at 30cm depth) to 52% (at 3m depth) of total carbon in Ayer Hitam Forest, Selangor, Peninsular Malaysia. A review conducted by ABDULLAHI et al. (2015) found forest soils holds an estimated 40.63% of the total carbon stock in different forest ecosystem.

Despite the substantial amount of carbon stored in the soil, most of previous studies assessing carbon stock and sequestration in Malaysian forests focused on estimating biomass or aboveground carbon only while overlooking contribution of soil carbon. In Malaysia, the forest ecosystem is reported to hold an estimated 23.48 Million tonnes of Carbon (C) (or 86.17M tonnes CO2 equivalent) and have the potential of sequestering 4 tonnes of Carbon ha-1 yr-1 (SHAMSUDIN, et al. 2009). However, this estimate does not include the carbon in soil. The lack of information on the soil carbon stock, sequestration potential and economic value limits the recognition of the important roles of the soil resource amongst forestry scientists, managers and policy makers in Malaysia (ABDULLAHI, et.al.

2015).

Page Page 44 44

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

Soil carbon sequestration is the process of transferring carbon dioxide from the atmosphere into the soil of a land unit through plants, plant residues, and other organic solids, which are stored or retained in the unit as part of the soil organic matter (humus) (OLSON et al. 2014). Sequestered carbon is stored as lignin and other resistant compounds in forest ecosystems. The rate of this sequestration is estimated at 1.7 Pg C/year (LAL, 2005). Carbon is sequestered in forest ecosystems through afforestation, reforestation or by natural forest regeneration in degraded landscapes (LAL, 2008).

Unlogged or primary forest stores carbon in their biomass and secondary forest continue to accumulate carbon as they grow. The forest biomass in Peninsular Malaysia have declined by 43% during 19701996 and the carbon stock has declined from 1.7 billion tonnes in 1970 to 0.9 billion tonnes in 1996 (SHAMSUDIN et al., 2009).

2 Methodology 2.1 Study Area This study was conducted at the Berembun Forest Reserve (BFR) and Kenaboi Forest Reserve (KFR) located in Negeri Sembilan, Peninsular Malaysia. The Berembun Forest Reserve is a hill dipterocarp forest located at the latitude of N.02o 55’ and the longitude of E 101o 46’; 15. It covers a total area of 3,214 ha extending to an altitude of 600 meters above sea level (asl). The reserve has unlogged (compartment 32) and logged components (compartment 31). A portion of compartment 31 was logged twice in 1968 and 1988 and another portion was logged only once in 1968. Compartment 32 still remains unlogged (intact natural or primary forest) to date. The vegetation comprises species such as the Dipterocarpus spp. and Shorea spp., among others. The mean monthly rainfall in BFR is 302.4 mm and the mean daily temperature is 23.5 oC (estimated from data analysed in the present study).

The Kenaboi Forest Reserve (KFR) is located between the latitude of N.02o 57’ and the longitude of E. 102o 04’ in Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia (ISMAIL, et al., 1992). The altitude extends to 300m asl.

KFR is drier and cooler than BFR with an average monthly rainfall of 168.36 mm and mean daily temperature of 23.6 oC (estimated from data analysed in the present study). The vegetation is dominated by hill and lowland dipterocarps species such as the Shorea leprosula, Shorea ovalis and Shorea acuminata. Prior to 1968, the area was the site of one of the largest agricultural ‘taungya’ systems in Malaysia (ISMAIL, et.al. 1992). Taungya system is an agroforestry system where short term crops are planted in the early years of a tree plantation in order to utilize the land, control weeds, reduce costs of establishing the plantation and generate early income to the farmers. The forest reserve was established from 1968 to 1975 to rehabilitate it to natural conditions from the degraded status through taungya method (ISMAIL, et al. 1992). The locations of the two reserves (BFR and KFR) are shown inFigure1.

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 45 45

Figure 1 Map of Malaysia showing the locations of the Berembun and Kenaboi Forest Reserves

2.2 Forest categories (Strata) In order to assess the soil organic carbon stock and sequestration potential, the two forest reserves (i.e.

BFR and KFR, jointly referred to as the study area) were stratified into different categories or strata based on forest type and land use. The strata in BFR include: Unlogged, Logged once, Logged twice and rubber plantation. In KFR, the selected forest strata include rehabilitated and degraded forest areas. The sampling plots were allocated proportionately based on the sizes of each stratum.

The unlogged (primary) forest area (UFA) in compartment 32 of BFR was selected to assess the SOC stock and sequestration under natural (or undisturbed) forest conditions. It covers an area of 344 ha at altitudes ranging from 100 to 600m above sea level (asl). The logged once (LFA1) and logged twice (LFA2) strata, in KFR, were selected to estimate the soil organic carbon loss as a result of logging activities. The area is situated in compartment 31 of BFR and covers an area of 155 ha and altitudes ranging from 100 to 400m asl. One plot each was established for soil sampling in the logged once and logged twice portions of the compartment (31). One plot each was allocated for the rubber plantation, rehabilitated and degraded strata. The rubber plantation is located in a 10 hectare land adjoining BFR. The rehabilitated area is located in a 26.7 hectare area within compartment 107 of the Kenaboi Forest Reserve. The degraded forest plot is located in a 10 hectare area in a land adjoining KFR. 2.3 Soil Sampling Soil samples were collected at both locations from June 2013 to February 2014, at 30cm depth, for the determination of soil organic carbon (SOC). Although, organic carbon is abundant in deeper layers of forest soils (BATJES, 1996), however, according to IPCC (IPCC, 2006) sampling the soil organic carbon stock to 30cm depth is sufficient for national carbon inventory reporting. The two major parameters investigated include soil organic carbon concentration (in %) and bulk density (g cm-3).

The bulk density was measured in order to calculate soil organic carbon per hectare (t C ha-1). The result of the horizontal sampling is also used in soil organic carbon simulation using the RothC model.

The simulation is carried out in order to predict the future carbon sequestration potential of the soil

Page Page 46 46

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

over a three forest cutting cycles (rotation). Table 1 shows the number of strata, plots and samples collected from each site.

Ten composite samples were collected in each of the 8 plots from the 5 strata at 30 cm depth, making a total of 80 samples (240 samples originally collected before compositing). At each sampling position, a 5 cm2 area was cleared of litter before driving a 7.5cm diameter auger to the required depth.

The samples were air-dried, ground (after removing roots, stones and twigs) and passed through a 2 mm sieve. Two sub-samples, 10g each, were put in a labelled polythene bag and taken for total carbon analysis in the laboratory. The total carbon analysis was conducted through dry combustion with a CHN analyser (Thermo Finnigan Flash EA 1112, Elantech, Lakewood, NJ). The result gives total carbon in the soil as percentage by weight comprising both inorganic and organic carbon.

Table 1 Forest Strata and Area; Number of Plots and Samples for Horizontal Sampling

S/N

Forest strata Location*

Area

Number of plots

Size of plots

No. of samples**

1

Unlogged Forest

344 ha

3 (UFA1, UFA2, UFA3)

20m×40m=800m2

Total carbon: 3×10 ×3=90 Bulk Density: 10 × 3 = 30

2

Logged BFR Forest (once)

80 ha

1 (LFA1)

20m×40m=800m2

Total carbon: 3 × 10 × 1 = 30 Bulk Density: 10 × 1= 10

3

Logged Forest (twice)

BFR

75 ha

1 (LFA2)

20m×40m=800m2

Total carbon: 3 × 10 × 1 = 30 Bulk Density: 10 × 1= 10

4

Rubber Plantation

Adjoining BFR

10 ha

1 (RFA)

20m×40m=800m2

Total carbon: 3 × 10 × 1 = 30 Bulk Density: 10 × 1= 10

5

Rehabilitated KFR Forest

26.7 ha

1 (RHA)

20m×40m=800m2

Total carbon: 3 × 10 × 1 = 30 Bulk Density: 10 × 1= 10

6

Degraded Forest

10 ha

1 (DFA)

20m×40m=800m2

Total carbon: 3 × 10 × 1 = 30 Bulk Density: 10 × 1= 10

BFR

Adjoining KFR

*BFR=Berembun Forest Reserve; KFR=Kenaboi Forest Reserve **Number of samples for Total Carbon= 3 samples × 10 positions × 8 plots = 240. Composited to 80 samples **Number of samples for Bulk Density = 10 samples × 8 plots = 80 samples

2.4 Calculation of Bulk Density Bulk density was estimated with a metal cylinder (coring method) as described by ROWELL (1994).

In the laboratory, the capped cylinders, containing the undisturbed soil samples were weighed on a

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 47 47

balance scale. The cylinders were then oven-dried for 24 hours at 105 oC and re-weighed again. The empty cylinder with the cap were also weighed. The following steps summarize the procedures for calculating the bulk density: Obtain mass of cylinder + caps + moist soil Obtain mass of cylinder + caps + oven-dried soil Obtain mass of empty cylinder + caps Calculate the volume of cylinder: V=

L

Where V is the volume of the cylinder (cm3); r is the radius of the cylinder (cm) and L is the length of the cylinder (cm).

The soil bulk density is therefore calculated with the following formula, equation 1.

(1)

Bulk Density (Db ) = 2.5 Analysis of Total Carbon

The CHNS analyser (Thermo Finnigan Flash EA 1112 (CE Elantech, Lakewood, NJ) was used for the determination of soil organic carbon in this study because of its accuracy and simplicity. The results were obtained as concentration of total carbon in the soil as a percentage by weight (comprising both inorganic and organic carbon). These were converted to tonnes per hectare by using the bulk density values, soil depth, and the percentage of carbon of each of the forest categories as shown in equation 2.

(2)

Total Carbon (C) (t/ha) = Pearson et al. (2005) The above equation was used to calculate the total carbon per hectare.

2.6 Modelling of Future Soil Organic Carbon

In this study, future SOC stock was simulated with the RothC 26.3 carbon simulation model to project the SOC likely to be sequestered after 30, 60 and 83 years (felling cycles). The reason for selecting the RothC 26.3 model is its simplicity and less data demand.

Description of The Rothc Model The RothC Model is a process-based multi-compartmental model that simulates the turnover of organic carbon by allowing for the effect of soil type, temperature, moisture and plant cover in the decomposition process (COLEMAN and JENKINSON, 1996; FALLOON and SMITH, 2003). The model calculates total organic carbon (t ha-1), microbial biomass carbon (t ha-1) and ∆14C by using a monthly time step in a year to century’s timescale (COLEMAN and JENKINSON, 1999). The basic structure of the RothC 26.3 model is presented in Figure 2.

Page Page 48 48

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

Figure 2 Structure of the RothC 26.3 Model. (Source: Coleman and Jenkinson, 1996)

a.Data Sources and Input

The data inputs required include: Climate Data (include monthly rainfall (mm), monthly evapotranspiration (mm), and average monthly mean air temperature (oC)); Soil Data (include clay content (%), inert organic matter (IOM), initial soil organic carbon (SOC) stock (t C ha-1) and depth of the soil layer (cm) (COLEMAN and JENKINSON, 1999); Land use and Management data (include soil cover, monthly plant residues input (t C ha-1) or farm yard manure (FYM) input). The soil data are shown in Table 2.

Table 2 Soil Data. (Data obtained in 2013)

Clay

Measured SOC

Bulk Density

(%)

(t C/ha)

(g cm-3)

UFA1

6.46

42.5

1.02

UFA2

44.83

38.1

1.05

UFA3

30.94

28.8

1.02

LFA 1

13.35

27.5

1.02

LFA2

39.43

28.8

1.02

RFA

36.23

23.6

1.02

RHA

36.27

26.6

1.02

DFA

35.14

19.1

1.01

Forest Type

a.Land Use and Land Management Data

In the absence of plant residues input for warm tropical forests (the climate in the study area), plant residue data for temperate warm forests was used to initialize the model (MATHEWS, 1983). The soil cover was set to 1 because the study area is in a forest environment where the soil is covered by the

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 49 49

forest canopy. The FYM was also set to zero because there is no any input of FYM (being a forest ecosystem). The data used are presented in Table 3.

Table 3 Plant Input Data Used to Initialize the Model

Month

Plant residue

FYM

Soil Cover Ratio

January

0.55

0

1

February

0.59

0

1

March

0.54

0

1

April

0.58

0

1

May

0.27

0

1

June

0.35

0

1

July

0.53

0

1

August

0.57

0

1

September

0.56

0

1

October

0.53

0

1

November

0.44

0

1

December

0.49

0

1

c. Model Parameterization

The climate, soil and land management data obtained earlier were used in preparing input files that were imported into the RothC model platform. The weather files require the input of monthly average temperature, total monthly rainfall and total monthly evaporation data. The percentage clay of the soil, as well as soil depth used in sampling, is also required in the weather file. A separate weather file was needed for each land use area, compartment or soil type. Soil depth was set to 30cm. All the land use categories were covered with vegetation throughout the year.

Weather and land management files were prepared for each of the land use categories. The model was initialized with soil data from the unlogged forest area plot 1 (UFA1) of Berembun Forest Reserve and the temperate warm forest plant input data. The model was run to equilibrium (inverse mode) by iteratively adjusting the carbon input until the modelled soil organic carbon matched the measured value obtained in the unlogged forest area. As a result of lack of radiocarbon measurements and delta value, the Falloon equation was used to estimate the inert organic matter (IOM) (COLEMAN and JENKINSON, 1999). The Falloon equation (equation 3) is given as:

Page Page 50 50

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

IOM= 0.049TOC1.139(3) Where: IOM= Inert Organic Matter (t C ha-1 ) TOC=Total Organic Carbon (t C ha-1 ) (FALLOON et al., 1998) The measured carbon value for UFA1 plot used was 42.5 t C ha-1; IOM content was 3.51 t C ha-1; clay content was 6.46%, and the plant carbon input was 11.68. The modelled soil organic carbon obtained after iteration was 42.5 t C ha-1 (matching the measured value). This procedure was repeated for all the other forest types until the measured SOC matches the modelled SOC. This is shown in Table 4.

Table 4 Data Used For the Model Parameterization (Iteration). Data obtained in 2013

Measured SOC

Modelled SOC

Carbon input

IOM

(t C ha )

42.5

3.51

42.5

11.68

44.83

38.1

3.1

38.1

7.9

Unlogged Forest Plot 3

30.94

28.8

2.25

28.8

6.21

Average for Unlogged Forest Plots

27.41

36.47

2.95

36.47

8.60

Logged Forest Plot 1

13.35

27.5

2.14

27.5

6.82

Logged Forest Plot 2

39.43

28.8

2.25

28.8

6.05

Average for Logged Forest Plots

26.39

28.15

2.20

28.15

6.44

Rubber Plantation Plot

36.23

23.6

1.79

23.6

5.01

Rehabilitated Forest Plot

36.27

26.6

2.06

26.6

5.64

Degraded Forest Plot

35.14

19.1

1.41

19.1

4.08

Forest Type

Clay (%)

Unlogged Forest Plot 1

6.46

Unlogged Forest Plot 2

(t C ha-1)

-1

d. Model Simulation

Having parameterized the model, separate land management files for each forest type were specially created and used to run the model in a short term mode for the future periods from 2013-2042, 20432072 and 2073-2095 (representing 30, 60 and 83 years respectively).

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 51 51

2.5 Evaluation of Soil Carbon Sequestration Potential (Changes) The two approaches for evaluating the carbon sequestration potential of forest soil spatially and temporally is illustratged in Figure 2.

Assessment of SOC Sequestration Potential

Temporal Dimension (RothC Difference)

First Cutting Cycle 30 yrs

and

Spatial Dimension Stock

(SFTS method)

Second Cutting Cycle

Third Cutting Cycle

Forest Protection Option

30 yrs

23 yrs

(UFALFA)

Rubber Plantation Option (RFA-UFA)

Reforest ation Option (RHADFA)

Figure 2 Flowchart on Assessment of SOC Sequestration Potential

a.Temporal Evaluation of SOC Sequestration Potential The carbon ‘stock-difference’ approach was used to estimate the soil carbon sequestration potential.

Under this approach, all the processes that lead to changes in a given carbon pool are considered. The carbon sequestration (or stock change) is obtained by estimating the carbon stock at two different time periods. The carbon stock at time two, is subtracted from that estimated initially at time one and the difference is divided by the number of years separating the two periods. Put simply, the stock difference method derives carbon change or sequestration by obtaining the annual average differences between estimates made at two different time periods (RAVINDRANATH and OSTWALD, 2008).

The following equation (equation 4) is used in calculating carbon change or sequestration under the stock-difference approach:

Page Page 52 52

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

(4)

SOC =

Where: SOC = Annual change in carbon stock in mineral soil (tC ha-1 yr-1) SOCt1 = Soil organic carbon estimated at the beginning of the assessment period t1 (t C ha-1) SOCt2 = Soil organic carbon estimated at the end of the assessment period t2 (t C ha-1) t1 = Initial assessment period t2 = Final assessment period

b.Spatial Evaluation of SOC Sequestration Potential It is generally believed that the SOC stock increases when a degraded land is afforested or a standing forest is left intact. On the other hand, SOC is negatively affected following conversion of natural (primary) forest to other land-uses. Numerous studies suggest that old-growth forests have the capacity to continue to accumulate significant amounts of carbon in the soils (LUYSSAERT et al. 2008). This has informed the choice of afforestation, reforestation and avoided deforestation as climate change mitigation options under the auspices of the IPCC and UNFCCC (IPCC, 2006). Afforestation and reforestation brings about climate change mitigation through carbon sequestration in soil and biomass (sinks). On the other hand, avoided deforestation mitigates climate change by reducing C02 emission from the soil and vegetation (sources).

In order to evaluate the carbon sequestration potential of the forest soils spatially, space-for-time substitution (SFTS) method (also called cross-sectional method) was used to extrapolate the extra carbon sequestered or lost due to conversion from one forest land-use to another (PICKETT, 1989; de BLECOURT et al. 2013; GUILLAUME, et al. 2015). The carbon sequestration potentials of the soil is derived by getting the difference between the carbon stock under baseline and mitigation scenarios.

In this study, sampling plots were established in each of the forest types (namely: unlogged/natural forest, logged forest, rubber plantation, rehabilitated forest, degraded/regenerating forest) and SOC stock sequestration values were obtained in each one of them. Based on the study design, the carbon sequestration potentials of the soil could be evaluated using the three options.

To assess the SOC sequestration potential spatially, using the SFTS method, the current and future carbon stocks for the mitigation scenario is estimated from a land area that have been subjected to similar land-use as the baseline in the past (e.g. forest land converted to tree plantation or logged forest that has been reforested) (RAVINDRANATH, et al. 2006).

The three options considered for this analysis include: Forest protection, rubber plantation plantation (also referred to as managed plantation) and reforestation. a. Forest protection: According to MAKUNDI and SATHAYE (1999), to evaluate carbon sequestration under forest protection option, it is necessary to estimate the carbon stock that might be The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 53 53

stored in the absence of the protection (MAKUNDI and SATHAYE, 1999; SWISHER, 1991). In order to evaluate the forest protection option in the present study, the SOC stock and sequestration values were recorded in the unlogged forest area (the mitigation scenario) is subtracted from that of the logged forest (the baseline scenario). The difference is considered as the carbon gain (if positive) and carbon loss (if negative) resulting from protecting the unlogged forest from logging. In the absence of protection from the forest department, the unlogged compartment in the BFR would have been logged down for timber as it is the case in the logged compartment. The difference in SOC stock between the two forest areas can therefore be effectively used as a proxy for the effect of forest protection based on the space-for-time substitution approach. Under this option therefore, the unlogged forest area is the mitigation scenario while the logged forest area is considered as the baseline scenario as shown in eqution 5.

SOC Sequestration under Forest Protection = UFA SOC – LFA SOC(5) b. Rubber Plantation: Tree plantation is the most common forest land use, after timber, in Malaysia.

There has been a debate on whether managed plantation such as rubber and oil palm can also serve the purpose of carbon mitigation alongside their agricultural benefits. In this study, an attempt is made to investigate this by obtaining the difference in SOC stock in the unlogged forest and the Rubber Plantation. The gain or loss in SOC stock can be considered as a proxy for the effect of converting the unlogged forest to Rubber Plantation. Without the Rubber Plantation, the area would have remained undisturbed primary forest as the unlogged compartment. Therefore, the Rubber Plantation is considered as the mitigation scenario while the unlogged forest is considered as the baseline scenario as shown in equation 6.

SOC Sequestration under Rubber Plantation = RFA SOC –UFA SOC(6) c. Reforestation: In order to evaluate the reforestation option, the degraded forest area adjoining KFR is taken as the baseline scenario while the rehabilitated forest area within KFR is considered as the mitigation scenario as shown in equation 7. The difference in SOC stock between the two forest areas is considered as the carbon sequestered under the reforestation option. This is because without the rehabilitation programme embarked upon by the forest department in 1968 after the ‘taungya’ land use system, the rehabilitated forest compartment of KFR would have remained degraded as like the degraded area adjoining the reserve.

SOC Sequestration under rehabilitation = RHA SOC –DFA SOC(7)

3 Results 3.1 Results of Soil Organic Carbon Stock The results of soil organic carbon (mean and standard deviation) are shown in Table 5. The highest SOC of 42.48 (±17.57) t C ha-1 was recorded in plot 1 of unlogged forest, while the lowest value was recorded in the degraded forest plot with 19.05 (±9.72) tCha-1. Plot 2 in the ‘twice logged’ forest had a higher SOC (28.71±9.23 tCha-1) than the plot in the ‘once logged’ forest (27.62±8.61) tCha-1. The plot

Page Page 54 54

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

in the Rubber plantation had lower SOC (23.52 Âą9.20 tCha-1) than unlogged, logged and rehabilitated plots. This result was used as the SOC input in the RothC carbon simulation in subsequent sections.

Table 5: Results of Soil Organic Carbon Sampling (30cm depth)

Plots*

N

Mean

Std. Deviation

Unlogged Forest Plot1

10

42.48

17.57

Unlogged Forest Plot2

10

38.02

16.24

Unlogged Forest Plot3

10

28.86

16.98

36.45

16.93

Average for Unlogged Forest Plots Logged Forest Plot1

10

27.62

8.61

Logged Forest Plot2

10

28.71

9.23

28.16

8.92

Average for Logged Forest Plots Rubber plantation Plot

10

23.52

9.20

Rehabilitated Forest Plot

10

26.57

10.88

Degraded Forest Plot

10

19.05

9.72

*

Unlogged, logged, and rubber plantation plots are located in BFR while degraded and rehabilitated plots are located in KFR

3.2 Simulation of Future SOC using RothC Model The above results of SOC from field sampling and laboratory analysis of soil carbon was used, together with bulk density and historical climate data obtained from the Malaysian meteorological agency to carry out the carbon simulation with the RothC 26.3 model. The results of simulation (projection) are presented below.

In Berembun Forest Reserve, the results from the RothC simulation of the future SOC stock show that SOC will decrease sharply in UFA1 from 42.5 t C ha-1 to 25.80 t C ha-1, 24.34 t C ha-1 and 22.46 by 30, 60 and 83 years respectively. The situation in UFA2 is different as SOC will first rise slightly in 2043 before declining in 2073 and 2095. In UFA3, there will be a steady decline in SOC from 2013 to 2095. Table 6.

Simulation results show that the average SOC of the unlogged forest plots (i.e UFA1, UFA2 and UFA3) will first increase, from 36.47 t C ha-1 in 2013 to 38.32 t C ha-1 in 2043. The value will then fall to 37.11 t C ha-1 in 2073 before declining further to 35.99 t C ha-1 in 2095. Similarly, SOC stock initially increases in the logged once and twice plots in 2043 before declining relative to the baseline in 2073 and 2095. In the Rubber plantation (RFA), the projected SOC will steadily fall from 23.59 in 2013 to 24.79, 24.01 and 23.29 I 204, 2073 and 2095 respectively. Table 6.

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 55 55

In Kenaboi Forest Reserve, the SOC in the rehabilitated plot would initially increase from 26.60 t C ha-1 at baseline to 26.65 t C ha-1 in 2043, but is predicted to fall to 25.38 t C ha-1 in 2073 and 24.70 t C ha-1 in 2095. Similarly, the SOC in the degraded plot (DFA) will initially increase from 19.10 to 19.13 t C ha-1 in 2043, but will decline to 18.33 t C ha-1 and 17.74 t C ha-1 in 2073 and 2095 respectively.

These results are presented in Table 6. The table also shows the net change of SOC in metric tonnes per hectare per year over the simulation period as well as the relative percentage change in SOC per year from the baseline figure.

Baseline Forest Land Use (Plots)

SOCa (t C ha1 )

Modelled SOCb (t C ha-1)

Net change in SOC (t C ha-1yr-1)

Percentage change in SOC relative to baselinec (%)

2013

2043

2073

2095

2043

2073

2095

2043

2073

2095

UFA1

42.50

25.80

24.34

22.46

-0.557

-0.303

-0.244

-64.73

-74.62

-89.21

UFA2

38.10

39.49

38.26

37.53

0.046

0.003

-0.007

3.50

0.42

-1.52

Table 6 Results of Carbon Simulati on with RothC 26.3 Model

The results from 28.80 30.04 29.13 28.40 0.041 0.006 -0.005 4.13 1.15 -1.39 UFA3 the 36.47 38.32 37.11 35.99 0.062 0.011 -0.006 4.81 1.72 -1.34 AUFA RothC simula 27.50 28.92 27.97 27.11 0.047 0.008 -0.005 4.91 1.67 -1.43 LFA1 tion 28.80 30.04 29.14 28.41 0.041 0.006 -0.005 4.12 1.17 -1.37 LFA2 also 28.16 29.59 28.65 27.78 0.048 0.008 -0.005 4.83 1.72 -1.35 ALFA show that 23.59 24.79 24.01 23.29 0.040 0.007 -0.004 4.82 1.74 -1.32 RFA the net 26.60 26.65 25.38 24.70 0.001 -0.020 -0.023 0.16 -4.82 -7.68 RHA chang e will 19.10 19.13 18.33 17.74 0.001 -0.013 -0.017 0.17 -4.22 -7.65 DFA a be Represents both measured and modeled SOC at Baseline (2013) b Net Change in SOC per year= SOCt2- SOCt1/t2-t1 [Where: SOCt1=SOC at time 1; SOCt2= SOC at drastic time 2; t1= Time 1; t2= Time 2] ally c Percentage change in SOC relative to baseline= [(Modelled SOC-Measured SOC)/Measured SOC Ă— negati 100] ve in plot1 -1 -1 -1 -1 of the unlogged forest where it is projected to be -0.56 t C ha yr in 2043, -0.30 t C ha yr in 2073 and -0.23 t C ha-1 yr-1 in 2095 (Table 4). However, despite the negative change (carbon loss) in plot1, the average net change for the unlogged plots is projected to be positive in 2043 and 2073 by 0.06 t C ha-1 yr-1, 0.01 t C ha-1 yr-1 respectively. Similarly, the net change is projected to be positive (carbon gain) in the logged and Rubber plantation in 2043 and 2073. In the rehabilitated and degraded forests of KFR, the net change is projected to be positive (carbon gain) only in 2043 but will be negative (carbon loss) from 2073. In all the plots (i.e. BFR and KFR), the net change is projected to be negative by the year 2095 (83 years from baseline). This result is presented in Table 6.

Page Page 56 56

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

b. Results of soil carbon sequestration spatially based on SFTS method The results of space-for-time substitution analysis carried out to evaluate the soil carbon sequestration potential spatially is presented in Table 7. The results of the evaluation of the three options considered are described below: Table 7: Spatial Assessment of SOC Sequestration Potential using SFTS Method

Forest Type

Modelled SOC (t C/ha) 2013

2043

2073

2095

UFA SOC

36.47

38.32

37.11

35.99

LFA SOC

28.16

29.59

28.65

27.78

Forest Protection

8.32

8.73

8.46

8.21

RFA SOC

23.59

24.79

24.01

23.29

UFA SOC

36.47

38.32

37.11

35.99

Rubber Plantation

-12.88

-13.53

-13.10

-12.70

RHA SOC

26.60

26.65

25.38

24.70

DFA SOC

19.10

19.13

18.33

17.74

Reforestation

7.50

7.52

7.05

6.96

*: SOC Seq Potential =SOCmit –SOCbaseline

a. Forest Protection Conversion of the unlogged forest to logged forest will lead to a decline in SOC stock by 8.32 tC ha-1 in 2013. This is projected to increase to 8.73 tC ha-1 30 years before it declines to 8.46 tC ha-1 in 60 years and 8.21 tC ha-1 in 83 years following the trend of modelled SOC presented in Table 4.

Therefore, if the unlogged forest is protected (i.e. if logging did not take place), that should have been the SOC that would be preserved due to forest protection. Table 7.

b. Rubber Plantation Conversion of the unlogged forest to Rubber Plantations will reduce the SOC stock by -12.88 tC ha-1 in the base year of 2013. This will increase to -13.53 tC ha-1 after 30 years, decline to -13.10 tC ha-1 after 60 years and fall to 12.70 tC ha-1 by the 83rd year. Table 7.

c. Reforestation Rehabilitating or reforesting degraded forest is another land-use change that is believed to increase the SOC stock and economic value in forest soil (LENG et al. 2009). In the present study, rehabilitating the degraded forest in KFR has increased the SOC stock by 7.50 tC ha-1 in the base year (2013). This will slightly increase to 7.52 tC ha-1 in 30 years, decline to 7.05 tC ha-1 in 60 years and further fall to 6.96 tC ha-1 by the 83rd year. Tables 7.

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 57 57

4 Discussion Comparative analysis of soil carbon under various forest types and land use systems showed that the unlogged or primary forest contained more soil carbon stock per hectare followed by the logged forest.

Similarly, within the logged area, logged once plot had a higher SOC stock than the logged twice plot.

It appears from the results of this assessment forest conversion through logging activities have a tendency of lowering the SOC stock. The SOC measured in the Rubber Plantation plot, was lower than the values obtained in all the five unlogged plots in BFR as well as logged once plot. The mean SOC in the rubber forest was, however, higher than the value obtained in the logged twice plot.

Rehabilitating a degraded forest seems to restore the soil carbon stock as attested by the higher SOC stock in the rehabilitated forest (26.57 ±10.9 t C ha-1) compared with the degraded forest (19.05±9.7 t C ha-1) (both plots located in KFR). The degraded forest had the lowest soil carbon stock among all the plots investigated.

SOC stock in the different plots and forest types indicate that the soil stores significant, but variable amounts of organic carbon that could reduce the total forest carbon stock if omitted from measurement and inventories. Persistent logging has a negative effect on soil carbon stock as depicted by the results obtained between ‘logged once’ and ‘logged twice’ forest in compartment 31 of BFR which shows a higher carbon stock in the former than the latter. The lower carbon content found in the rubber plantation compared to the unlogged forest suggests that conversion of intact forest to plantation agriculture reduces the soil carbon stock. The stark contrast in soil carbon stock in the rehabilitated forest and the adjoining degraded forest indicate that rehabilitation of a hitherto degraded area, is a useful way of restoring lost soil carbon status and forest productivity.

Soil organic carbon (SOC) is mainly influenced by certain factors that include climate (temperature, rainfall and evaporation), soil (clay percentage) and land use and management (plant inputs).

Simulation results show that SOC stock will decline by 0.63 tC ha-1 in BFR but will increase by 1.93 tC ha-1in KFR by 2094. The temperature will fall by 0.93 oC in BFR and by 0.85 oC in KFR by 2094.

However, rainfall will increase by 3.29% in both locations during the same period. SOC will be significantly and negatively affected by changes in temperature and rainfall over the simulation period in the study areas (i.e. BFR and KFR).

The main finding here is that SOC will initially increase in the first 30 years, but will decline below the baseline in the future (after 83 years). The implication of this finding is that temperature will exert more influence on projected SOC than rainfall and evaporation in both BFR and KFR. This study reveals that forest protection option will lead to a sequestration (C gain) of 8.32 t C ha-1 and reforestation option will yield a net C gain of 7.50 t C ha-1 . However, rubber plantation option would lead to a net C loss (emission) of -12.88 t C ha-1. Climate change will negatively affect the carbon sequestration potentials of soils in the study area in the future as the SOC stock is projected to decline in the next 3 felling cycles (83 years).

5 Conclusion The SOC stock in the different plots and forest types indicate that the soil stores significant, but variable amounts of organic carbon, which is capable of reducing the total forest carbon stock if omitted from measurement and inventories. Persistent logging of primary forest seems to have a negative effect on soil carbon stock. The lower carbon content found in the rubber plantation compared to the unlogged forest suggests that conversion of intact forest to plantation agriculture reduces the soil carbon stock. The stark contrast in soil carbon stock in the rehabilitated forest and the

Page Page 58 58

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

adjoining degraded forest indicate that rehabilitation of a hitherto degraded area, can be a useful way of restoring lost soil carbon status and forest productivity eventually.

Modelling of SOC in three cutting cycles in the future reveals that SOC will initially increase in the forest in the first 30 years, but will decline below the baseline in the future (after 83 years).

Temperature will exert more influence on projected SOC than rainfall and evaporation in both BFR and KFR. This study also reveals that forest protection option will lead to a sequestration (C gain) of 8.32 t C ha1 and reforestation option will yield a sequestration of 7.50 t C ha-1. However, rubber plantation option would lead to a net C loss (emission) of -12.88 t C ha-1. It is predicted that climate change will negatively affect the carbon sequestration potentials of soils in the study area in the future as the SOC stock is projected to decline in the next 3 felling cycles (83 years).

The soil carbon stock is significant and may increase the forest carbon reported in the national carbon inventory. The findings from this study may foster greater recognition to the forest soil, which may lead to more protection by forest managers and policy makers.

Acknowledgement The authors wish to acknowledge the support received from National University of Malaysia (UKM) through grant number UKM-AP-2014-017 and also ERGS/1/2013/SS07/UKM/01/1.

References Abdullahi, A.C, Siwar, C, Shaharuddin, M.I. and Anizan, I. (2015): A Review on Carbon Sequestration in Malaysian Forest Soils. International Journal of Soil Science. 10 (1):17-27.

Available: http://scialert.net/current.php?issn=1816-4978 Batjes, N.H. (1999): Management options for reducing CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere by increasing carbon sequestration in the soil. NRP Report No. 410-200-031, Dutch National Research Programme on Global Air Pollution and Climate Change and Technical Paper 30, International Soil Reference and Information Centre, Wageningen, The Netherlands. http://www.isric.org/isric/webdocs/docs/NRP410200031.pdf.

Coleman, K. and Jenkinson, D.S. (1996): RothC-26.3 – A model for the turnover of carbon in soil. In: Powlson, D.S., Smith, P., Smith, J.U. (Eds.), Evaluation of Soil Organic Matter Models Using Existing Long-Term Datasets. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, pp. 237–246.

Coleman, K. and Jenkinson, D.S. (1999): RothC-26.3, A Model for the Turnover of Carbon in Soil: Model Description and User’s Guide. Lawes Agricultural Trust, Harpenden, UK. Available online: http://www.rothamsted.ac.uk/aen/carbon/rothc.htm (Retrieved: August 2013).

De Blécourt, M., Rainer B., Jianchu X., Marife D. C. and Edzo V. (2013): “Soil Carbon Stocks Decrease Following Conversion of Secondary Forests to Rubber (Hevea Brasiliensis) Plantations.” PLoS ONE 8 (7). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0069357.

Dixon R.K., Brown, S., Houghton, R.A., Solomon, A.M., Trexler, M.C. and Wisniewski, J. (1994): Carbon pools and flux of global forest ecosystems. Science 263:185–190 Dixon, R.K. and Wisniewski, J. (1995): Global forest systems: An uncertain response to atmospheric pollutants and global climate change? In Water, Air, and Soil Pollution. 85: 101–110.

FAO. (2001): Production Yearbook. Food & Agric. Organization, Rome, Italy.

FAO. (2006): Global Forest Resources Assessment 2005: Progress towards Sustainable Forest

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 59 59

Management. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome, Italy, ISBN-13: 9789251054819, Pages: 320.

Falloon, P. and Smith, P. (2002): Simulating SOC changes in long-term experiments with RothC and CENTURY: model evaluation for a regional scale application. Soil Use and Management 18:101–111.

Available at: <Go to ISI>://CABI:20023082034.

Grigal, D.F. and Vance, E.D. (2000): Influence of soil organic matter on forest productivity. New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science 30: 169–205.

Guillaume, T., Damris M., and Yakov K. (2015): “Losses of Soil Carbon by Converting Tropical Forest to Plantations: Erosion and Decomposition Estimated by δ(13) C.” Global Change Biology, DOI: 10.1111/gcb.12907. doi:10.1111/gcb.12907.

Guo, L.B. and Gifford, R.M. (2002): Soil carbon stocks and land use change: A meta analysis. Global Change Biology, 8: 345–360.

Ismail, S.M., Hamzah, M.B. and Salleh, S. (1992): An envaluation of a 19 year-old Taungya Planting in Nigeria Sembilan, DarulKhusus. The Malaysian Forester. 55 (1).

IPCC. (2006): Guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories. Vol.4, Agriculturem forestry and other land use (AFOLU). Institute for Global EnvironmentalnStrategies. Hayama, Japan.

Jobbágy, E.G. and Jackson, R.B. (2000): The vertical distribution of soil organic carbon and its relation to climate and vegetation. Ecological Applications, 10 (2): 423–436.

Jurgensen, M.F., Harvey, A.E., Graham, R.T., Page-Dumroese, D.S., Tonn, J.R., Larsen, M.J. and Jain, T.B. (1997): Impacts of timber harvesting on soil organic matter, nitrogen, productivity, and health of Inland Northwest forests. Forest Science 43: 234–251.

Kirschbaum, M.U.F. (2000): Will changes in soil organic carbon act as a positive or negative feedback on global warming? Biogeochemistry 48: 21-51.

Kirschbaum, M.U.F., Carter, J.O. and Grace, P.R. (2001): Brief description of several ecosystem models for simulating net ecosystem exchange in Australia. In: Kirschbaum, M.U.F., Mueller, R. (Eds.), Net Ecosystem Exchange. Workshop Proceedings. CRC for Greenhouse Accounting, pp. 8–29.

Lal, R. (2005): Forest soils and carbon sequestration. Forest Ecology and Management, 220 (1-3): 242–258.

Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0378112705004834 [Accessed July 11, 2014].

Lal, R. (2008): Carbon sequestration. Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences 363: 815–830.

Leng, L.Y., Ahmed O.H., Ab Majid, N.M and Jalloh, M.B. (2009): Organic Matter , Carbon and Humic Acids in Rehabilitated and Secondary Forest Soils. American Journal of Applied Sciences. 6 (5): 824–828.

Luyssaert, S., E-Detlef, S., Annett, B., Alexander, K., Dominik, H., Beverly, E.L., Philippe, C., and John G. (2008). “Old-Growth Forests as Global Carbon Sinks.” Nature 455: 213–15. doi:10.1038/nature07276.

Makundi, W. and Sathaye, J. (1999): Comprehensive mitigation assessment process (COMAP)-Description and instruction manual. Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Matthews, E. (1983): Global vegetation and land use: New high-resolution data bases for climate studies.

Journal of Climate and Applied Meteorology 22: 474-487.

Neto, V., Ahmad Ainuddin, N.,Wong M.Y. and Ting, H.L. (2012): Contributions of forest biomass and organic matter to above- and below ground carbon contents at ayer hitam forest reserve, Malaysia. Journal of Tropical Forest Science 24: 217-230.

Olson, K.R. (2013): Soil organic carbon sequestration, storage, retention and loss in U.S. croplands: Issues paper for protocol development. Geoderma, 195-196, pp.201–206. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2012.12.004

Page Page 60 60

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

Pearson, T., Walker, S., and Brown, S. (2005): Sourcebook for land use, land-use change and forestry projects, Winrock International, Arlington, VA. Pickett, S.T.A. (1989): “Space-for-Time Substitution as an Alternative to Long-Term Studies.” In Long-Term Studies in Ecology, 110–35. doi:10.1007/978-1-4615-7358-6_5.

Ravindranath, N. H., Murthy, I. K., Sudha, P., Ramprasad, V., Nagendra, M. D. V., Sahana, C. A and Srivathsa, K. G.. (2006): Methodological issues in forestry mitigation projects: a case study of Kolar district.

Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 12(6), 1077–1098. doi:10.1007/s11027-006-9065-2 Rowell, D.L. (1994): Soil Science: Methods and Applications. Longman Group. U.K Saner, P., Loh, Y.Y., Ong, R.C. and Hector, A. (2012): Carbon stocks and fluxes in tropical lowland dipterocarp rainforests in Sabah, Malaysian Borneo. PloS one, 7(1), p.e29642. Available at: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=3250468&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract [Accessed November 25, 2014].

Schimel, D.S. (1995): Terrestrial ecosystems and the carbon cycle. Global Change Biology, 1:77–91.

Available at: <Go to ISI>://WOS:A1995TF58800008.

Shamsudin, O., Ismail, P. and Fletcher, S.C. (2009): The Role of FRIM in Addressing Climate Change Issues.

Research Pamphlet No. 128. Forestry Research Institute of Malaysia Stockmann, U., Adams, M., Crawford, J.W., Field, D.J., Henakaarchchia, N., Jenkins, M., Minasnya, B., McBratneya, A.B., de Courcelles, V.D., Singha, K., Wheeler, I., Abbott, L., Angers, D.A., Baldock, J., Birde, M., Brookes, P.C., Chenug, C., Jastrow, J.D., Lal, R., Lehmann, J., O’Donnell, A.G., Parton, W., Whitehead, D. and Zimmermann, M. (2013): The knowns, known unknowns and unknowns of sequestration of soil organic carbon. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 164 (2013) 80-90 Swisher, J.N. (1991): Cost and performance of CO2 storage in forestry projects. Biomass and Bioenergy 1 (6): 317-328.

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 61 61

Section D

THE SOCIAL ASPECTS OF FOREST ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONS AND SERVICES

COMMUNITY FORESTRY IN SRI LANKA: POLICY ADOPTION, POPULAR PARTICIPATION, CLIMATE ADAPTATION AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT De Zoysa M.1 , Inoue M.2 1

University of Ruhuna, Kamburupitiya, Sri Lanka

2 The

University of Tokyo, Japan

E-mail: mangalaxyz@yahoo.com ABSTRACT

Sri Lanka has a paradigm shift in forest resource management refocusing decisions to more decentralized level of governance and moves toward a community based approach. The forestry sector of the country has developed climate change adaptation strategies to improve the forest resources in view of its ecological and socio-economic importance. Climate changes impacts are linked to deterioration of forest resources and worsening rural economy. Climate change combined with unsustainable land use has aggravated serious ecological losses due to lack of legislative and institutional capacity, and rural development efforts for effective management of forest resources. Climate change impacts in Sri Lanka have a significant threat to the agriculture and forestry sectors of the rural economy. Many people in Sri Lanka still depend on forests for subsistence and commercial use of forest resources. Climate change adaptation raises the importance of supporting agriculture, forestry and rural development. One of the main objectives of the Community Forestry Project and Participatory Forest Project were the establishment of farmers’ woodlots on degraded government land, using agro-forestry approach for both promoting wood supply and improving their livelihoods. Farmers’ Woodlot Development Programs have become critical for the integration of climate change adaptation through participatory rural development strategies depend on the household economy and production systems, while strengthening ecological systems. Farmers’ woodlot management representing a low-cost and low-technology is relatively an easy way to adapt climate change as well as to promote rural development strategies. The paper reviews the related literature and analyzes the Farmers’ Woodlot Development Programs in Sri Lanka in terms of policy adoption; popular participation of community; adaptation for climate change; and contribution for rural development. Climate change policy issues; forest policy and institutional setting; and Farmers’ Woodlot Development Programs are discussed under the policy adoption. Farmers’ organization and community participation; empowerment of women and disadvantaged communities; partnership development; supporting services and capacity building are discussed under popular participation of community through Farmers’ Woodlot Development Programs. The main strategies for climate change adaptations by farmers’ woodlots are revealed as: increased area and connectivity of vegetation; conserved and enhanced soil, water and environment; and maintained bio-diversity and forest health. Farmers’ woodlots contribute for rural development through: supply of forest and agricultural products, and services; increase farmers’ incomes; income distribution and poverty alleviation; promote rural services, diversify rural economies and improve rural livelihoods. The study makes the conclusion that the farmers’ woodlots in Sri Lanka play an important role for rural development as well as adaptation of climate change by bringing the active participation of community under favorable policy environment.

Key words: Farmer Woodlots, Forest Policy, Climate Change, Rural Livelihood Development

The Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page 65

Background Climate changes impacts undermine are linked to three domains: future development strategies; worsening rural economy; and deterioration of natural environment. Climate change is one major global outcome and serious issue of the degradation of land resources because economic activities continue to severely damage the natural resource base on which human well-being ultimately depends (IPCC Climate Change, 2007). Millennium Ecosystem Assessment found that 60% of ecosystem services are used unsustainably and continue to be degraded at an alarming rate despite the critical importance in addressing the poverty and hunger eradication (UNDP, 2007), According to the UNDP, worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s 2.6 billion poorest people who have been hit the hardest on the front lines of climate change that will exacerbate existing economic, political and humanitarian stresses. In Asia and Pacific region where more than 1 billion people and 60% of the world poor are living, is vulnerable to climate change as they depend on the productivity of climate-sensitive ecosystems for their livelihoods. They are often lack the knowledge and resources to adequately adapt to growing climate-related risks (Lebel, et al., 2012). Climate change could affect almost every sector in society from the livelihoods based on agriculture and forestry. Both forest and agricultural systems are affected by climate change in the form of changing environmental conditions. Reduction in rainfall and increase in temperature as the climate change impacts lead to retardation of forest growth, degradation, and changes in ecological zones in the forestry sector.

Most of the human activities produce greenhouse gases (GHGs), primarily carbon dioxide (CO2) contribute to climate change. Destruction and degradation of forestland are accounts for about 12 % of global GHG emissions. Removal of trees from forested land generates GHGs where mature forests, absorb CO2 from the atmosphere while growing, and store carbon in wood, leaves, and soil (Montagnini, 2012). About 20% of the global greenhouse gas emissions and particularly 62 % emissions of the developing countries are caused by deforestation (GCCA, 2012). Forest destruction and degradation lose their natural connectivity with fragmented landscapes. Maintain biodiversity among isolated patches of forest is very difficult and often impossible. Climate change produced serious ecological losses combined with unsustainable land use, which have been aggravated by lack of institutional, legislative and fiscal capacity for the effective management of natural resources (http://ccdare.org/). Lack of rural development efforts, legislative and institutional capacity and unsustainable management of forest resources combined with climate change has adversely affected the forest ecosystems. The role of institutions in forest management is being increasingly recognized in the context of climate change. Climate change adaptation considerations raise the importance of supporting many sectors including agriculture, forestry and rural development. Adjusting institutional structures and arrangements including defining adequate national policy and legislative frameworks, and assigning and coordinating responsibilities within the governance structures are required for the Adaptation to climate change (FAO, 2008), Climate change adaptation, poverty reduction and rural development are all strongly linked, as agriculture and forestry are highly climate-sensitive. IPCC (2007) estimates that afforestation/reforestation (A/R) activities, and reducing deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) activities, have the potential to a reduction of up to 2.7 gigatons (Gt) of CO2-eq emissions per year by 2030. Adaptation to climate change in developing countries will need US$75100 billion extra cost per year over the period 2010-2050. The cost in the agriculture, forestry and fisheries sectors would range from US$7.3 billion to US$7.6 billion per year (World Bank, 2009). The project or program level is critical for the integration of adaptation considerations, and the project cycle can be used as a framework for the analysis and prioritization of adaptation options (OECD, 2009). The impacts of participatory rural development projects depend on the household economy, stakeholder objectives, livelihood choices, constraints, production systems, temporal and gender Page Page 66 66

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

variation, as well as estimates of labor inputs and other costs (Richards, et al., 2003). The current speed and intensity outpacing the capacity of the small farmers to adapt climate change. Improving land management and farming along with forestry, can play a key role in tackling climate change (Jones, …) Strengthening of social-ecological systems is an important part of climate change adaptation and has the potential to align closely with rural development objectives (Lebel, et al., 2012). UNCED in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 agreed to revise concept of Sustainable Forest Management ensuring the continued availability of wood, non-wood forest products (NWFPs), and provisions of environmental, social and cultural services, which forests and ecosystems provide. Although it was a traditional practice the development of a ‘social’ approach to forestry, the “social forestry” encouraging communities to utilize patches of degraded forest land to produce a range of subsistence products, has been documented in the late 1970s. Community mobilization, participatory tools and technical prescriptions were focused in implementing those social forestry programs. The programs eventually recognized the ability of local people to contribute more conceptually to forest management and acknowledged their right to participate in many forest-related decisions (Arnold, 2001). Based on a specific meaning and associated with particular programs, many alternative approaches have been recognized in terms of: social forestry, community forestry, rural development forestry, joint forest management (JFM), shared forest management, co-management, participatory forest management etc., (Ingles et al. 1999). Many participatory forestry approaches instead of government initiatives have become popular due its approach to the widespread poverty of the rural people and the scarcity of their livelihood opportunities Most developing countries, including Sri Lanka, remain vulnerable to ecological, economic and social impacts of climate change. Climate change impacts in Sri Lanka could include: decreases in agricultural crop yields, and increased soil erosion and forest degradation that have a significant threat to the agriculture and forestry sectors of the rural economy. Forests are the source of wide range of timber and non -timber products and many people in Sri Lanka still depend on forests for subsistence and commercial use of products (Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources, 2007). The forestry sector has developed climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies to protect the existing natural forest resources as well as afforestation, reforestation, Farmer woodlots (FWLs) and homestead development in view of its biological, hydrological, ecological and socio-economic importance. There has been a paradigm shift in natural resource management in the late 1980s all over the world and Sri Lanka in particular by refocusing of management decisions to a more decentralized level of governance and moves toward a participatory and community based approach since the introduction of scientific forest management. Many of the forestry initiatives of Sri Lanka after the National Forest Policy in 1980 called for a participatory approach (Skutsch, 1990). There is an inequitable socioeconomic development poses and wide regional disparity in incomes and poverty levels in Sri Lanka despite the decrease in overall poverty levels with the growth in per capita incomes over the last decades (Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources, 2007). Forestry activities are important options not only in any climate change adaptation strategy but also in any rural development strategy.

Existing strategies, policies and programs on rural development and forest resources management relate closely to, or directly overlap with climate change adaptation measures. The traditional trees and tree-based systems were means of meeting people's survival strategy, and conservation of resources including biodiversity, land management and development, and timber production (Wickramasinghe, 1997). One of the main objectives of the Community Forestry Project (CFP) introduced in 1982 and Participatory Forest Project (PFP) launched in 1992 was the establishment of FWLs on degraded government land, using agroforestry approach for both promoting a wood supply and improving their livelihoods (ADB 2003c). Farmers’ woodlot management representing a low-cost, low-technology, is

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 67 67

relatively an easy way to adapt climate change, carbon sequestration and storage as well as the promotion of rural development strategies. Adaptation refers to changes in processes, practices, and structures in ecological, social, or economic systems to moderate potential damages or to benefit from opportunities associated with climate change. Hence, the paper analyze the farmers’ woodlot programs in Sri Lanka in terms of on policy perspective; the adaptation of climate change impacts, acceleration of rural development strategies and improvement of the local institutional setting for sustainable development. The evaluation of how farmers’ woodlot programs have been developed in terms of: the policy perspective; adaptation of climate change; rural development and; institutional setting provide a basis for learning, revising and scaling up real-life demonstrations.

The policy perspective Climate Change Policy Issues Climate change issues not a new trend but implies new conditions for forestry and rural livelihoods in Sri Lanka. It is therefore worth to identify the opportunities that could be brought by integrating climate change policies in the objectives of forestry and rural development. National development strategies encompass not only sustainable development strategies but also sectoral strategies directly refer to climate change (King, 2010). By adopting the main instruments agreed at the UNCED and WSSD, and by ratifying the Millennium Declaration, Sri Lanka made commitments to environmental protection and sustainable development. Sri Lanka is a party to several multilateral environmental agreements: International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC); Convention on Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar Convention); Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES); Vienna Convention for the protection of the ozone layer; and the Montreal Protocol.

Sri Lank a ratified the UN Conventions on Biological Diversity in 1993, Climate Change in 1994, and the Convention to Combat Desertification in 1998.Sri Lanka is also a party to the Kyoto Protocol under the Framework Convention on Climate Change, and the Biosafety Protocol under the Biodiversity Convention. The government has Institutional arrangements for coordination of actions were set up, and many activities and programs have been launched in this regard since UNCED in 1992 (Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources, 2007). Sri Lanka prepared a National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP) in 1992 as the first country in Asia and further updated in 1998 and 2003. Deforestation and degradation of biodiversity, and soil erosion were identified as priority environmental issues, from a poverty perspective TEARFUND (2006). The National Environmental Policy in 2002 was developed with the vision “to achieve a healthy and pleasant environment sustaining nature for the well being of people and the economy” balancing environmental conservation and economic development (Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources, 2007). The National Environmental Policy in 2003 provides the direction for the necessary measures to conserve and manage Sri Lanka’s environment within a framework of sustainable development (Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources, 2007).

United Nation's (UN's) World Meteorological Organization (WMO) organized the First World Climate Conference in 1979 which gave considerable political and legislative attention for the climate change. The UN (WMO and UNEP) established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 1988 at a global level. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was agreed at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. The Kyoto Protocol of 1997 which in force

Page Page 68 68

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

from 2005 set GHG emission limits. Integrating Climate Change Adaptation at the Local Level under the OECD Declaration on Integrating Climate Adaptation into Development Co-operation in 2006 examines the specific challenges and opportunities arising from climate change also in rural contexts and discusses how to incorporate adaptation considerations within community-level processes (OECD, 2009). REDD Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation was evolved through UNFCCC agenda in 1995 to support the forest conservation, sustainable management of forests, and the enhancement of forest carbon stocks. REDD mechanism was developed and included REDD-plus as a climate change mitigation option after the UNFCCC COP 15 held in Copenhagen in 2009 (UNFCCC 2009). At the 2009 Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen (COP 15), positive effect on the conservation of associated biological diversity and ecosystem services, and the livelihoods of forest-dependent communities through a better management of forests were included in the definition of REDD, which was renamed to REDD+. Rural development and the conservation of biodiversity and vital ecosystem services are the other issues important to be considered under REDD+.

Afforestation and reforestation adopted by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) as a part of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) under the Kyoto Protocol (KP). Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation “REDD+” conservation was subsequently adopted.

REDD+ mechanism provide financial incentives to reduce emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation as well as for sustainable management of forests to enhance forest carbon stocks. UNREDD Program awarded observer status to Sri Lanka to the UN-REDD Program Policy Board in October 2009 (UN REDD Program, 2009). Nearly 44 countries including Sri Lanka have prepared a National Adaptation Program of Action (NAPA) with Global Environment Facility (GEF)-funding and submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Secretariat (King, 2010). Forest Department (FD), under the Ministry of Environment (MoE) is the UNFCCC national focal point, coordinating REDD activities in Sri Lanka. Forest Department has conducted three Workshops in 2011 on UN-REDD Program in Sri Lanka to discuss the draft document of Sri Lanka REDD+ Readiness Preparation Proposal with relevant stakeholders including civil Society, academic experts, researchers, senior officials from various government agencies, private sector etc., (Forest Department, 2011). Climate Change Secretariat (CCS) of the Forest Department serves as a node for the implementation of UNFCCC decisions and as the Designated National Authority (DNA) for the CDM under the Kyoto Protocol (UN REDD Program, 2009).

The integration of policies and measures to address climate change into ongoing sectoral planning and management refers “mainstreaming” ensure the long-term viability and sustainability of sectoral and development investments. The decision makers through “mainstreaming plus” attempt to address all of the drivers of vulnerability, and reducing poverty and other non-climatic stressors (Klein 2009).

“Mainstreaming” incorporate climate change considerations into established or on-going development programs, policies, management strategies, rather than developing adaptation and mitigation initiatives separately. Mainstreaming the mitigation and adaptation responded to the climate change challenges several countries have enacted through existing laws or by formulating new laws (King, 2010). The environment tends to be unvalued, unpriced, unmonitored by major mainstream institutions such as treasuries, planning departments and corporations and their decisions. They treat environment as a free good and not generally recognized the environmental underpinnings of development (King, 2010).

‘Mainstreaming Climate Change for Sustainable Development: Towards a National Agenda for Action was published by Institute of Policy Studies, Sri Lanka in December 14, 2009. The proposed agenda

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 69 69

has highlighted a national vision on climate change, a national policy on climate change, a strategic action plan (national strategy), a coordinating mechanism, a climate change information system and a mechanism for resource mobilization which aimed at mainstreaming climate change issues (IPS, 2009).

ADB initiated a technical assistance (TA) project titled "Strengthening Capacity for Climate Change Adaptation" in 2009 with the aim of increasing Sri Lanka’s resilience to climate change impacts, while pursuing sustainable economic development and natural environment conservation (ADB, 2012).

National Action Plan for Haritha Lanka Program of the National Council for Sustainable Development in 2009 aims at addressing the environmental issues in Sri Lanka including meeting the challenges in climate change, saving fauna, flora and ecosystems, sustainable use of coastal belt, land resources and waste management and environmental friendly choices for industries (Ministry of Finance and Planning Sri Lanka, 2012). National Climate Change Adaptation Strategy for Sri Lanka (2011-2016) in 2010 highlights the strategies for climate change mitigation, technology transfer, financing and investment mechanism, education, training and awareness, monitoring, assessment and management of impact risks due to climate change (Ministry of Finance and Planning Sri Lanka, 2012). National Climate Change Adaptation Strategy for 2011–2016 consisting with five main components: 1.

Mainstreaming CCA into national planning and development; 2. Enabling climate-resilient and healthy human settlements; 3. Minimizing the impact of climate change on food security; 4. Improving the climate resilience of key economic drivers, including tourism, transport, and power; 5.

Safeguarding natural resources and biodiversity from climate change impacts (Sterrett , 2011). The World Food Program in Sri Lanka in 2011 assisted “Food for Work” for the participating communities on forestry interventions, distributing 20,300 seedlings and food rations worth of about Rs. 4.0 million for 16,240 work days, with the objective of “mitigation and adaptation of the climate change by increasing tree cover though community participation (Forest Department, 2011). National Climate Change Policy of Sri Lanka in 2012 provides guidance and directions for all stakeholders to address the impacts of climate change issues (Ministry of Finance and Planning Sri Lanka, 2012)

Forest Policy and Institutional Development National Forest Policy of Sri Lanka in 1980 has promoted the modern concept of community forestry followed as a promising strategy about local control over and enjoyment of the monetary and nonmonetary benefits offered by local forest resources, leading to sustainable rural development (De Zoysa, and Inoue, 2008). Community-based forest management was emerged to share benefits, authority and even forest ownership with local people in order to sustain forest resources. The Participatory Forestry Project commenced in 1982 under ADB funds was implemented in 18 of 25 districts I Sri Lanka. The project intended to 1. Increase tree planting and rehabilitate environmentally degraded areas; 2. Create employment opportunities and income and reduce poverty in rural areas; 3.

Strengthen the institutional capability of the Forest Department for non-forest tree planting, adaptive research, extension delivery systems, and privately operated village nurseries (ADB 2003a). National Forest Policy statements in Sri Lanka expanded with “Social Forestry” to involve the local community in the development of private woodlots and forestry farms (Carter, et al., 1994). Social forestry has been further supported by over six Integrated Rural Development Projects (IRDPs) (Skutsch 1990).

Forest policy of Sri Lanka in 1995 was aimed at the establishment of a protected area network, creation of permanent forest estates, encouraging agro-forestry systems and building of rural industries

Page Page 70 70

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

based on non-timber forest resources as commercial ventures with partnerships from community based organizations and the private sector (Tiwari, 2004).

FWLs Management Programs Participatory Forest Management (PFM) activities have attracted international interest, a large amount of donor funding, and dissemination of lessons learned from PFM initiatives around the world over the last three decades. FWLs a model developed by Community Forestry Project (CFP) introduced in 1982 and Participatory Forest Project (PFP) launched in 1992 expected to provide food, timber and income, while providing environmental services (Nanayakkara, 2001). Environmental rehabilitation by creating woodlots in marginal state lands with the participation of local people, and socio-economic upliftment of the rural poor were the major duel concern of the farmers' woodlot component of the PFP (Dissanayake, 1998). The farmers’ woodlot program selected farmers and allocated them with about 0.2-0.4 hectares of degraded government forest lands on a 25-year lease agreement. The program had distributed 420 ha among 1861 farm households by the end of 1992 (Wickramasinghe, 1997). The project had paid special consideration for the site arability as an important site character in selecting the lands for farmers’ woodlot program. Further, selection of the most suitable tree species for the project's location, planting design and spacing based on participant's preference for intercropping, location specific weeding and maintenance regime, adequate measures for protection were used as the different plantation establishment techniques of the program. The incentives including issue of free tree seedlings, food aid coupons, lease agreements, and the provision of technical assistance at the initial stage of the program were given, considering as important site specific needs (Dissanayake, 1998). FWLs component under both the Participatory Forestry Project (PFP) and Forest Resources Management Project (FRMP) during 1993-1999 was established where small blocks of state land is given on a 25- year period lease to the local farmers to plant both forest trees and cash crops (Jørgensen and Vivekanandan, 2003). The project selected lower income groups of farmers and given them lands under a lease agreement for a period of 25 years to establish the FWLs. They were also given incentives such as food coupons, seedlings, fertilizer, right of intercropping in the given land and technical assistance, and also the right to harvest timber after the rotation age of 25 years. They had to manage Woodlots by using their labor, time and knowledge.

According to the reforestation plans, the forest department determines proper species for planting, thinning cycles, and the right timing for a final harvest cut. The Forest Department provided the farmers with free seedlings, fertilizers and technical guidance on establishment and management of the wood lots as incentives. The farmers were expected to plant timber trees together with their agricultural crops at the establishments of FWLs. FWLs in 15,500 ha have been established in 19 districts of Sri Lanka under the Participatory Forestry Project implemented during 1993-1999. Teak (Tectona grandis) Neem (Azadirachta indica), Eucalypts (Eucalyptus species) and Khaya (Khaya senegelensis) were used as main tree species planted as monocultures and mixed-cultures. Forest Policy in Sri Lanka was amended in 1995 to provide the necessary policy and legal framework for the private sector to participate in forest plantation development (Jørgensen and Vivekanandan, 2003)

Adaptation of climate change Increase Area and Connectivity of Vegetation

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 71 71

Agroforestry linkages with climate change have been identified as contribution to climate change emissions; impacted by climate change; and, contribute to climate change mitigation through both CO2 substitution and sequestration (Best, 2003). The carbon sequestration in trees and soils by agroforests bring social and economic advantages to the farmer through increasing productivity of biodiversity friendly forest system as well as the systems contribute to climate change mitigation and adaptation (Montagnini, 2012). Forest land degradation and excessive land exploitation caused by high rural population density and lack of off-farm livelihood opportunities have become a serious environmental problem in Sri Lanka. The FWLs programs have a major component need for agriculture and forestry for the rural populations to adapt to climate change impacts. FWLs contribute for significant improvements in the conservation of trees, vegetation area and density of forest cover.

The farmers’ woodlot programs have provided financial and material incentives at the establishment of woodlots in degraded forest lands due to long-term shifting cultivation. The program pursues smallscale farmers to maintain their woodlots successfully and not to involve directly or indirectly on the deforestation in the protected forest resources. The silvicultural techniques provided by forest officials are used by the farmers to rehabilitate degraded woodlots and it will preserve the forest cover and also increase the land value to smallholder farmers.

Participatory Forestry Project in Sri Lanka was rated successful on the basis that it greatly exceeded its planting targets (ADB 2003a). Predominant wood tree species in different agro-climatic zones were selected for FWLs. Teak (Tectona grandis) only or teak / margosa (Azadirachta indica) mixed stand have been cultivated in dry zone. Teak only stands have been introduced in intermediate zone and eucalyptus or teak models are used in wet zone areas (ADB, 2003b). The farmers had developed 420 ha of lands as FWLs under CFP in 1992 and 15,500 ha of FWLs under PFP even exceeding the expected target (ADB 2003b).

Conserve and enhance soil, water and environment Forests play a vital role in conserving soil and regulating water flow. Farms’ woodlots act as reservoirs of trees, carbon sinks and a source of clean water. As windbreaks and shelterbelts Farms’ woodlots help to increase crop yields, and promote soil and water conservation. FWLs protect soil from wind and water erosion, contribute to cleansing, filtering and stabilizing wetlands and water bodies and provide habitat for a wide range of plant species, and contribute to clean air and provide a place to commune with nature. Forestry sector priorities in Sri Lanka have shifted from timber production to environmental conservation during the last decade (Bandaratillake, 2011). FWLs help enhance soil and water conservation in the degraded forest lands. FWLs are more important over time in controlling farm runoff preventing flooding farm lands and soil erosion. In some areas FWLs become more important in controlling farm runoff as well as serve to filter agricultural chemicals from the soil preventing contamination of the water resources. FWLs which are often the only forest in inhabited rural areas are important for their environmental and recreational values, and as a source of many specialty products. In some areas the farmers have high value timber species but the process of land degradation is apparent due to little management, even after many years of farmers’ woodlot program.

Climate change alters forest and agricultural site conditions and the competitive balance between species that has existed in the past. Trees in FWLs can contribute to adaptation to climate warming.

The trees planted in farmer woodlot adapted to warmer temperatures, less rainfall, and other extreme Page Page 72 72

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

weather events. Compared to temperatures measured in the open, temperatures in many agroforestry systems are 2-5 0C lower under the tree canopy (Montagnini, 2012). Climate change not only alter the local site conditions experiencing warmer temperatures, less rainfall, and more extreme weather events, but also the competitive balance between species, changing behaviors of native insects and diseases, and spread of invasive plants of the forests resources. FWLs cope with the changing ranges and behaviors of native insects and diseases damaging agricultural systems.

Using as a community investment process, FWLs have already made several investments aimed at proving concepts for generating carbon offsets within rural supply chain in order to adapt climate change. This is a significant step towards further environmental accountability and transparency in product value chain of the FWLs. Maintain bio-diversity and forest health Sri Lanka is richly endowed with biological resources manifested in a wide range of forest ecosystems. Sri Lanka one of the global biodiversity hotspots has lost its bio-diversity due to environmental degradation and destruction of natural resources as a result of population pressure and developmental activities (Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources, 2007). FWLs maintain forest health and diversity to enable forests to survive under the conditions of climate change. Healthy forests are more resistant to pests and climate-induced stresses such as drought. In many FWLs consisting predominant wood trees in monoculture or mixed stand with two tree species make extremely less contribution for biodiversity conservation. Dominant trees in the FWLs completely suppress even the undergrowth of agricultural crops and regeneration of other plant species. Keeping a mix of age classes and tree species; controlling undesirable and invasive plant species; maintaining the genetic diversity within the woodlot; increasing the size of the forested areas; and removing seriously diseased trees improving forest health and species diversity within the woodlot. Despite the extensive knowledge of the farmers on their trees and environment, with the rapidly changing conditions created

by FWLs, they urgently need innovations especially to conserve the ecosystems in the traditional land use systems. Maintaining health resistant to pests and climate stresses and species diversity of the FWLss is the most important approach to enable forests to survive sustainably.

Contribution for rural development Supply of Forest and Agricultural Products, and Services FWLs (FWLs) was designed for farmers to grow trees on shifting cultivation lands, for promoting a wood supply and improving their livelihoods through sustainable forest management (Kallesoe and De Alvis, 2004). The owners of FWLs have to improve their management so as to boost timber production. Many farmers are poorly maintaining the woodlots after initial stage ignoring the longterm benefit which is timber due to lack of knowledge and inadequate monitoring and assistance of Forest Department. Most farmers don't fully manage their woodlot operations to reach the potential timber growth and spaced adequately to maintain good form and quality. Their timber growth generally reaches only 50 to 60 percent of potential. Although the FWLs has contributed to increase the tree cover, growth rates in most FWLs are poor. Per tree average volume is 38% with regards to provincial yield table values mainly due to mismatching of species and sites, water shortage etc., (Wijewarnasuriya, 2009). The wood produce on FWLs are not only good to sell to timber merchants, but the timber can also be useful on the farm to build fences, barns, or other buildings. Some farmers grow specialized woodlots that are used for a specific purpose. Many farmers who have grown lowThe Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 73 73

valued trees such as Neem, Eucalyptus and Pine have converted all their woodlots to pasture or shortterm field crops such as Green grams.

The farmers were participated for FWLs Programs and maintained Woodlots during the first 3-4 years successfully due to early incentives given by the government. They have adopted agroforestry intercropping system planted and harvested agricultural crops during the first 3-4 years of the FWLs program (Sathurusinghe 1998). Policy responses to climate change driven by debates among scientists have largely neglected the insights of poor farmers living on the frontline. They have less concerned about the impact of climate change on agriculture and food security. Some of the farmers have already drop or limited in crop production due to frequent flooding and droughts. It is recommended to plant of Nitrogen Fixing Trees in vacant places after thinning operations, and extending the rotation period for existing woodlots. Consideration of site-species compatibility, use of fast growing species and use of a better monitoring plan are recommended for newly establishing woodlots (Wijewarnasuriya, 2009).It is imperative to take multi-sectoral approach at the community level with the smallholder farmers who are directly affected by climate change in addressing adaptation challenges. These farmers need knowledge and skills and incentives for addressing short- and long-term needs of diversifying crops and trees.

FWLs favor not only the production of wood and other goods and services such as fuel-wood, forage, water, esthetics, and recreation and also help with fire protection. The social responsibility of FWLs programs could be assessed standards of wood supply chain covers various environmental aspects linked to climate change, including energy conservation, soil and water conservation, and biodiversity.

FWLs provide dead trees and small branches for fuel wood, and bring about a great deal of cash income. Clearing of village forest to establish FWLs have created short supply of wood and other forest products for immediate local needs. Lack of common forest land in villages after establishment of FWLs lead to cutting down reserve forests by the rural community in order to extract firewood and other forest products and for animal grazing Forestry officials have to prepare more detailed plans, educate the farmers and oversee their proper execution for improvement of immediate and long-term commercial potential of woodlots. There is no any publication or book that woodlot farmers can consult.

Increase Farmers Incomes Climate variability and change crops production failed tremendously threaten food security and the wellbeing of rural people. Farmers responded positively to farmersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; woodlot programs due to unfavorable climatic conditions and poor soils in degraded forest lands from shifting cultivation that contributed to poor agricultural crop production. Despite the threatening of food security and the wellbeing of rural people in short-term the farmers have established woodlots as an alternative source of household income. From the thinning of trees in their FWLs in 8 and 15 years interval the farmers have already earned average Rs. 24,500 (US$ 318) and Rs. 66,000 (US$ 858) per hectare income respectively, contributing to a greater economic value to the rural community. The farmers have understood the importance of trees in FWLs as they contribute highly to the economy of individual households in long run. The farmers are expecting greater yield of timber from their final harvest of forest trees at the end of 25 years lease agreement (ADB 2003). Improving smallholder livelihoods through woodlots management would empower the local communities to mitigate the risks and adapt the climate change poses to development rural development. Expanding climate change adaptation

Page Page 74 74

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

measures through establishment of FWLs improve rural livelihoods and the economy as a whole.

Species diversity may have little monetary value but an important to adapt the climate change. Diverse species may even pay off in cash and a relatively low-value species may become valued because of shifting market demand. Diversity in the population relates to the sizes and ages of trees enhance the value of the timber Instead of removing all trees of a marketable size, the harvested volume on market demand will increase along with the value of individual trees. Push for the recognition of farmers’ woodlot management as a carbon mitigation option on climate change represents a potential for farmers to receive benefits from carbon sequestration. The community investment process in FWLs would generate carbon offsets within the wood supply chain of the country. There would be a potential for obtaining additional income from carbon credits by enlarging the size of managed woodlots in order to become self-sufficient in wood. A number of challenges exist to engaging farmers’ woodlot owners in carbon-oriented management such as the low price of carbon and high cost of market entry; meet requirements of management plans and certification; and managing for carbon in consistent with the other forest management goals.

Income Distribution and Poverty Alleviation There was a considerable potential for tree cultivation by farmers, both on private land and on former government land on a lease or more permanent basis. It was suggested a form of people-oriented forestry tailored to the Sri Lankan situation focuses on individual farmers or small, cohesive groups of farmers, rather than on villages and `community' organizations (Carter, et al., 1994). The rights for individual lands of FWLs are held by single individuals other than commonly, being the case in different ‘community forests’ but also describe as the term ‘private forest’. The FWLs program selected only few lower income groups of farmers where majority of the farmers are grouped as “poor” in the rural areas. They were given lands under a lease agreement for a period of 25 years to establish the FWLs while their fellow farmers still continue their poverty ridden subsistence farming.

In some cases, participatory Forestry was a top-down project and experienced poor community participation due to lack of secure tenure for FWLs (ADB 2003a), A considerable level of forest encroachment and conversion in Sri Lanka is still continue at the current rate of 1.5% a year due to widespread rural poverty and landlessness (www.cmsdata.iucn.org/ downloads/sri_lanka.pdf access February, 2009). Climate change poses to development efforts improves smallholder livelihoods through woodlots management. For the establishment and maintenance of farmers’ woodlot at the initial stage farmers were provided with food ration in addition to other incentives mainly required inputs (FAO, 1997). The farmers have disappointed about the FWLs a kind of forestry as a means of rural poverty alleviation (Nanayakkara, 2001). During the early stage of FWLs program farmers generated short-term income through inter-cultivation of agricultural crops. According to a trend analysis by the ADB (2003a), after three years, the farmers had lost the regular income and have to wait for longer periods about 25-year to obtain the income from final harvest of trees in FWLs. The economic potential of harvesting trees from FWLs is determined by the land base, the species of trees, log size, volume, quality of logs, as well as the capital, labor and management applied to the enterprise. The farmers have the very high expectation that most woodlots will provide income for individuals to achieve their long-term desired livelihood.

Promote Rural Services, Diversify Rural Economies and Improve Rural Livelihoods Farmer woodlot not only provides direct benefits to individual but the village community and the government at large receive benefits indirectly through community development activities. Farmer The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 75 75

woodlot allowed not only for producers to increase their incomes, it increase the revenue for forest department through collection of royalties from timber sales. Farmer woodlot can contribute to infrastructure, public facilities, and credit service through its cash income. This income is devoted to improving the village community, and in same cases used for public facilities such as improvement of roads, electricity supply, and construction of a meeting place for the village. Repair and construction of schools, temples, and public meeting places; construction of small irrigation systems; and reinvestment in tree planting could be identified as how cash benefits earned are used for community development related activities in villages. Environment, social and economic considerations of the FWLs are an important influence on carbon market participation by woodlot owners. The farmers who have carbon-oriented management of woodlots have an opportunity to obtain a new source of income, and have environmental co-benefits.

FWLs create new sources of income as well as income for the government collecting royalties from timber sales by the farmers. The governments increase the investment in expanding climate change adaptation measures and improve rural livelihoods (http://ccdare.org/). Timber harvest in FWLs is one-time income sources which provide significant amounts of timber to the forest economy and these harvests are not managed on a sustainable basis. The value of FWLs could be increased by improving farmers’ ability to produce forest products and services, and stimulating rural economies by creating or diversifying business activity and employment. They are interested in developing their silvicultural techniques to improve their woodlot management and secure the future supply of timber for their rural industries. The timber can also be useful on the farm to build fences, other buildings as well as to promote wood based furniture and other cottage industries as rural development strategies. Some farmers are interested in converting their woodlots as a savings account. If they are given permission, when they need some extra money for other income generating activities, they can always cut down some trees and sell them to a timber company. Forests and forest product-based small scale enterprises need to be emerged as important players in the rural development sector providing employment in production and processing. The potential of NTFPs to contribute to rural economies is immense and not yet fully realized under the farmers’ woodlot programs. Management of Non Timber Forest Products (NTFPs) which have vital importance for sustainable forest management and rural development is not included in any of the existing farmers’ woodlot management regimes. Producing NTFPs in the FWLs implies modernization may sometimes change the relevance of natural production factors drastically, and usually entail temporary or permanent changes to the quality of natural sites.

Ecotourism is also one among the potential forest-based industries promising sources of direct and indirect employment related to FWLs. FWLs programs implemented in Sri Lanka have made fewer attempts for the process of expanding the capabilities of the farmers as an important strategy of rural development. Designing rural development forestry project interventions and policies which improve the incentives for participatory forestry needs the assessment of costs and benefits of alternative livelihood and land use options (Richards, et al., 2003).

Institutional setting Farmers’ Organization and Community Participation The roles of local institutions contribute significantly to causing and confronting climate changes cannot be ignored. It is necessary to understand of the role of local institutions in climate change and build capacity of local communities to adapt to these changes. Rural development programs aim at climate change adaptation are succeed if communities are empowered with the knowledge, skills, resources, and authority. Institutional factors mainly well-established participatory culture and general

Page Page 76 76

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

policy, and legal environment support participation are among the key determinants of the success of participatory forest management. Positive institutional, policy, and legal environments are preconditions to ensure that processes are understood and accepted for effective participation of stakeholders in forest management. Combined with the allocation of forest tenure, participatory forest management can reduce the potential for illegal logging (ADB, 2003). Participatory forest management would have positive impacts on sustainable resource use, sustainable resource conservation, and benefit-sharing equity, specifically regarding their impact on poverty reduction and resource sustainability. The process of participatory forest management requires greater stakeholder involvement in all project stages, from identification through planning, design, implementation, and operation and maintenance, with clear allocation of responsibilities. Participatory approaches can add value to forest management project design, implementation, and operation. Participatory forest management generally promotes good governance and transparency and accountability. Community participation cannot be taken for granted without clear mechanisms for participatory social mobilization and organization development and the establishment of workable mechanisms for realizing, distributing, and reinvesting the benefits of the investments according to the participatory project purpose (ADB, 2003). Community based organizations through its community-based operations empower local communities to make transparent, collective decisions and improve accountability at the local level. In most of the countries the governments grant and defined rights to the registered community based local groups such as Community Based Organizations (CBOs), trusts and associations with devolved forest management responsibilities. Community based organizations recognize the importance of sustainable forest management and respect forest management rules when they are empowered with responsibilities and rights for the forest management and receive benefits.

Participation of community in participatory forestry projects depends on the level of contribution of the project to reduce the risk of non permanence land tenure and adequate carbon benefit sharing (Yamanoshita, and Amano, 2012). Traditional institutions can be a boon or a curse their networks linking them are the hub for local grassroots development and socio-cultural traits enjoy more political legitimacy at the local level (Kayambazinthu et al., 2003).

The Small Farmer Group Development Unit (SFGDU) of the Ministry of Agriculture, Lands and Forestry (MALF), Sri Lanka was established in 1994 for working out a strategy for strengthening the Farmers Organizations involving in forestry development programs (Reyes, 1997). The government of Sri Lanka still settles for participation rather than devolution, decongestion of power to districts forest office control the FWLs rather than devolution to local community organizations. A package of incentives, including free seedlings and food aid under the World Food Program was given to the farmers to establish woodlots. Farmers considered the food incentives as payments for their labor and participated for the sake of the incentives without any commitment to the program (Wickramasinghe, 1997). Participatory forest management should involve primary stakeholders in most, if not all stages of decision making. Although the forest official took the initial decisions such as selection of project's location, land distribution, planting design of the FWLs, local farmers were involved with taking decisions related to the selection of participants and species. The officials further impose main operational decisions such as, weeding and maintenance regime, application of fertilizers while the farmers take decisions related to intercropping. (Dissanayake, 1998). Building capacity of the farmers and other stakeholders to adapt to climate change of their FWLss through capacity building programs should be designed by learning from management systems of the stakeholders and their dynamics.

Although the farmers have realized the production and service benefits of their woodlots, required level of technical assistance is not available for improvement of their woodlots to a sustainable level.

Forest professionals have paid little attention to the farmersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; woodlot management. Their research has

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 77 77

not been particularly relevant for these small farmers' woodlot situations. Farmers and community leaders and community-based organization officials have to review participatory forestry processes with the aim of workable mechanisms for realizing, distributing, and reinvesting the benefits of the investments generated through FWLs.

Empowerment of Women and Disadvantaged Communities It is a common argument that, the forest policies and designing of participatory forestry project interventions are rarely based on understanding of decision-making criteria of rural poor who are highly depend on forests for their livelihoods (Richards, et al., 2003). Participatory approach in forest management can make a significant contribution to poverty reduction. Participation includes the poor and other disadvantaged groups in decision-making and promotes their inclusion in project activities to improve their situation and reduce their sense of hopelessness (ADB, 2003). Traditional social forestry in Sri Lanka shows that both men and women are equipped with knowledge and experience in procuring planting materials, raising nurseries, and planting and managing trees and tree-based agricultural systems. The men who make up the majority of village forestry organizations women's gender specific priorities have been ignored in the farmersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; woodlot development programs (Wickramasinghe, 1997). Collection of firewood can be contextualized as a woman's practical gender need as it is usually performed by women. The farmer's woodlot program in Sri Lanka which was aimed at solving rural wood energy problems had simply assumed that it would directly benefit women. The FWLs planted with Eucalyptus had no opportunity for the women to make decisions who usually aim for multiple outputs and service functions of trees from traditional social forests. Although the men dug holes for planting the seedlings the labor intensive tasks of the FWLs such as planting, weeding and construction of stone bunds for soil conservation, have been performed by women. Legal ownership of the FWLs was not the concern of women, as the family-focused program it would provide equal opportunities for women (Wickramasinghe, 1997). Women and disadvantaged communities need to be empowered to involve in work related to woodland management and the marketing of wood products.

Partnership Development Participation of local stakeholders, including local governments, communities, civil society and businesses are main enabling conditions for the successful integration of climate change adaptation into rural development processes (OECD, 2009). Strengthen multi-stakeholders participation and partnerships mobilizing national and international institutions, civil society, policy and research community and local communities encourage the farmers to adopt practices that would restore, maintain and enhance ecosystem services. The governments in collaboration with development partners, local communities and civil society should implement programs to enable rural communities to engage in income generating activities, while minimizing vulnerability and risk posed by climate change (United Nations - Commission on Sustainable Development, 2010).

Current arrangement of forest use rights and responsibility to shift into ownership responsibility and authority reframe the forest management of Sri Lanka into a government-community partnership, in which the government supports the effort of the people rather than the people supporting the effort of the government (Brown, 1999). Strong partnership linking extensive network of stakeholders and diverse interests of FWLs has become a critical need for a nationwide effort to build rural community Page Page 78 78

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

capacity for delivering agricultural, forest and other ecological goods and services including water quality and quantity; biodiversity; pollination services; carbon sequestration; and, landscape aesthetics.

Partnership development brings the range of required expertise, community power and funding to promote the Farmers’ woodlot program as a strategy for rural development as well for the adaptation of climate change. Partnerships with farmers in raising FWLs on a long-term lease basis were established by the forest department in 1980s. The farmers were consulted by the FWL program officials during the planning process concerning the site selection, species selection and planting design deviating from the traditional reforestation model. Seedlings of forest and crop species and technical advice to the farmers were provided by the forest department under the FWLs program.

Usufruct rights of the FWLs were transferred to the farmers to harvest the trees upon maturity (FAO, 1998). The farmers do not maximizing the potential benefits from their woodlots as they do not aware of the value of the products, services and potential income that may derive from their woodlot, and they may not be familiar with the management of small scale forestry operations as a commercial enterprise. Partnerships between farmers and private companies secure access to forest product as industrial raw materials from FWLs. The partnerships may improve the image of the companies and they can provide farmers with new income-earning opportunities and access to skills, technologies, raw materials and markets they would otherwise find hard to secure. With the maturity of trees for final harvest of FWLs, close cooperation and partnership with forest industries is very encouraging raise the raw material needed for meeting their requirements. Increased income from FWLs initiate the setting-up of community savings and credit societies that provide financial credits to community members using their woodlots as collaterals to finance income-generating activities (http://ccdare.org/). Effective partnerships with government and other stakeholders are required to meet the increasing demand for timber, recreation and other products, including non-commercial services such as clean water and attractive landscapes through farmers’ woodlot program. Weak technical support network to transfer education and knowledge on woodlot management for farmers remains a major challenge to sustainable development of woodlots. The program would reduce costs and optimizes the social, economic and environmental benefits by leveraging the strength of various partners. Active participation of all the interest groups such as researchers, policy and decision makers as well as farmers, industrialists in their multiple roles are need to be actively involved to deal with these woodlot management problems of not only ecological and technological but also roots in social and political problems. Sharing of views, resource management and benefits between the all the stakeholders of farmers’ woodlot program is inevitable for successful partnerships and participatory management. Neither communities nor forest authorities and corporate entities are in a position to successfully manage multiple-use forest resources which are invariably numerous, diverse and potentially conflicting (Carter and Gronow, 2005). Cooperative nature of the partnership provides benefits by the large pool of diverse resources and expertise which is the key to the success of Farmers’ woodlot program. Collaborative forest management (CFM) is a working partnership between the key stakeholders of forest management including local forest users and state forest departments, as well as parties such as local governments, civic groups and nongovernmental organizations, and the private sector (Carter and Gronow, 2005). Collaborative forest management (CFM) combining the strengths of different players is a rational response to the challenges of modern sustainable forest management particularly for people-centered forestry as a tool for poverty alleviation, better governance and social change (Carter and Gronow, 2005).

Supporting Services and Capacity Building Forest Ordinance in Sri Lanka in 1995 amended with the legal provisions for leasehold forestry as an effective form of partnerships. The tenure arrangements of FWLs have reinstated the usufruct rights enjoyed by farmers for their traditional shifting cultivation lands in Sri Lanka. The farmers preferred

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 79 79

individual blocks of land allocated to each family to enable them to reap undivided benefits through FWLs programs. In some cases, the government-led individual leased land tenure policy for FWLs diluted the customary rights enjoyed by farmers for their traditional shifting cultivation lands. Success of implementing FWLs has affected to some extend by the insecure land tenure without any legal assurance and the history of mistrust between farmers and the Forest Department (Carter at al. 1994).

REDD presents a danger of customary rights violations and carbon finance may increase social conflicts without clear land and carbon rights (Eliasch, 2008).

Over-harvesting of woodlots and conversion to agricultural use and crop production are major concerns of the government to act decisively to improve the overall level of farmers’ woodlot management and also about sustainability of natural resources and rural landscapes. Proportion of well-managed woodlots could be increased through sustainable forest management certification and establishment of respect individual farmer' rights. Forest certification improve the quality of forest management and provide marketing advantages for production from sustainably managed resources to local communities, thereby enhancing the role of forests in rural livelihoods.

Research and development effort is essential and an urgent task to tackle areas of knowledge where research can add value for greater innovation on an issue and problem driven approach. Even though the farmers produce high value timber species, the degradation of woodlots are still continuing in many farmers’ woodlot programs. They urgently need for innovations in FWLss, especially to conserve forests as ecosystems. Effective policies are also a major challenge lies with incentives that would make environmental and other non-timber investments in FWLs economically feasible. Climate change adaptation measures and disaster risk reduction strategies in farmers’ woodlot programs requires transfer and diffusion of new technologies to decrease vulnerability to climate change. Lack of information about harvesting and silviculture levels, delays in updating resource inventories, for FWLs make difficulties in estimating and managing for sustainable yields. This has become a major obstacle to develop landscape management strategies and to move toward sustainable ecosystem management through FWLs. The role of institutions at local, national, regional and global level in natural resource management is being increasingly recognized in the context of climate change. Institutions and decision- making must remain flexible for dealing with uncertainties of potential climate change impacts (FAO, 2008).

Resilience to the adverse impacts of climate change should be addressed through continuation of work on farmers’ woodlot management programs and adaptation programs. Training and capacity building to enhance capability of foresters and local community is required for up-scaling the farmers’ woodlot practices covering modern resource management systems, management of income generating activities and enterprise development. In many cases, the participants of farmers’ woodlot programs are involved in forest management according to defined work plans while forest officers play a facilitating role and provide technical backstopping in planning, surveying and moderate conflicts between participants. Forest department and other institutions are seriously lacking in basic human capacities and skills needed to develop and put in place appropriate tools, methods and approaches for the development of FWLs. Involvement of local communities in the development of technologies has been a general failure in the absence of clear knowledge on tree/forest performance and associated interactions between biophysical, socioeconomic and environmental factors.

Financing is usually a prerequisite for countries to implement climate change adaptation activities effectively (FAO, 2008). Although Sri Lanka has developed national climate change strategies and action plan “the National Climate Change Adaptation for Sri Lanka 2011-2016”, only a limited amount of resource have been committed to make a significant adaptation efforts (Sterrett , 2011).

Weak economic incentives and poor understanding of these incentives has hampered the participation

Page Page 80 80

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

by local forest users and other stakeholders in rural development forestry projects and policy design of participatory forestry (Richards, et al., 2003). Integrating climate change into annual budgets has become vital importance to ensure that adequate resources are allocated to high priority mitigation and adaptation measures. Department of National Budget, Ministry of Finance & Planning in Sri Lanka invested funds for establishment of 280 ha of farmer’s woodlots by 556 farmers providing seedlings and technical assistance, and also maintaining 462 old woodlots (Department of National Budget, 2011; and Forest Department, 2011). Department of National Budget, Ministry of Finance & Planning in Sri Lanka invested Rs. 2,540.9 million for environment sector institutes in 2011 for implementing policies aiming at conserving and preserving the environment mainly to reforest in 872.73 ha of harvested plantations, carry out silvicultural operations in 2,407.74 ha in selected forest plantations, establish 761 ha of woodlots, and 205 ha of farmer’s woodlots, develop 4,684 nos. of Home Gardens by providing seedlings and technical assistance, and produce 973,102 seedlings in nurseries of the Forest Department (Department of National Budget, 2011). Incorporating climate change adaptation measures related to FWLs programs on macro-economic basis, budget policy outline, preparation of revenue and expenditure targets, and submission of related sector plans within those ceilings should be the main stages in budget formulation.

Conclusions and policy implications In addition to a supplement to afforestation and reforestation strategies making contributions to the climate change mitigation, FWLs as an alternative source of household income is essentially a climate change adaptation strategy. Although the farmers’ woodlot as small scale-scale forestry programs do not completely adapt to the impacts of climate change and promote the rural development it can adapt some impacts and take advantage of opportunities to achieve positive outcomes. Incorporate climate change adaptation into forestry and rural development policies rather than creating separate climate change policies would be the most efficient and effective way to achieve adaptive and resilient FWLs forestry systems and rural development. Strong partnership is needed to create innovative local institutions based on adaptive management and a more equitable and inclusive decision-making process for the promotion of FWLs to make significant contribution to the climate change adaptation and rural development. Specific measures such as diversified subsistence crops and increased diversity of woodlots, sustainable practices and new economic opportunities incorporated with FWLs are required for the adaptation of climate change and rural development.

Diversity of species is an important tool in light of climate change and the farmers should be encouraged to grow species diversity of forest trees and agricultural crops including species that have some monetary value. Current national forestry and rural development strategies and priority proposals should be reexamined and determine the need for changes to incorporate climate change impacts. Farmers’ woodlot programs that do not integrate into broader rural development plans will run the risk of creating future new problems. The programs has to be carefully designed, otherwise, it would result in the leakage or negative welfare implications of the poor. There is an urgent need for mutual learning and advancement of rural development, environmental stewardship and sustainability objectives across sectors by bringing the stakeholders interested in farmers’ woodlot development.

The knowledge gained the evaluation of how farmers’ woodlot programs supporting adaptation of climate change impacts and promotion of rural development strategies provide a basis for learning, revising and scaling up real-life demonstrations.

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 81 81

References Arnold, J.E.M. 2001 Forests and people: 25 years of community forestry. FAO, Rome.

Asian Development Bank (ADB) (2012), Strengthening Policies, Governance, and Capacities. Asian Development Bank , Manila, Philippines Asian Development Bank (ADB); (2003a), Special evaluation study on participatory approaches in forest and water resource operations in selected developing member countries, December 2003 Bangkok, sst: reg 200332 Asian Development Bank (ADB); (2003b) Project performance audit report On the participatory forestry project (Loan 1183-SRI[SF]) in Sri Lanka, ADB, Philippine.

ADB (2003c). Project performance audit report on the participatory forestry project (Loan 1183-SRI[SF]) in Sri Lanka. Manila, Philippines: ADB. BANDARATILLAKE, H.M. 2011. UN-REDD National Programme Document Sri Lanka – Draft.

Best, G. (2003), Food Security, Climate Change and Sustainable Development. Proceedings of the IPCC Expert Meeting held in Colombo, Sri Lanka 5-7 March 2003, Munasinghe Institute for Development (MIND) Colombo, Sri Lanka Brown, D., 1999. Principles and practice of forest co-management. Evidence from West-Central Africa.

European Union Tropical Forestry Paper No 2. ODI, London. Brussels.

Carter, J., Connelly, S. and Wilson, N. (1994); Participatory forestry in Sri Lanka: Why so limited? Change on the horizon, Network Paper 17b, Rural Development Forestry Network, ODI, London Carter, J and Gronow, J. (2005), Recent Experience in Collaborative Forest Management: A Review Paper.

Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia Department of National Budget (2011), Performance Report – 2011, Ministry of Finance & Planning, Sri Lanka De Zoysa, M. and Makoto, M. (2008), forest governance and community based forest management in Sri Lanka: Past, present and future perspectives International Journal of Social Forestry, Volume 1, Number 1, June 2008 Dissanayake, M. W. M. W. T. B. (1998). Evaluation of the farmers' woodlot component of the participatory forestry project in Sri Lanka, Forestry symposium 1998, Department of Forestry and Environmental Science, University of Sri Jayewardenepura,Sri Lanka.

Eliasch, J. 2008. Climate Change: Financing Global Forests. The Eliasch Review, Office of Climate Change.

London,UK FAO (2008), Institutions, policies and financing to strengthen capacities for adaptation. FAO Framework Program on Climate Change Adaptation, FAO Rome FAO (1998), Woodfuel in Sri Lanka - Production and marketing; FAO of The United Nations, Bangkok FAO (1997), State of Forest Genetic Resources Conservation and Management in Sri Lanka; People and Forests Community Forestry at FAO, FAO, Rome Forest Department (2011), Performance Report – 2011, Forest Department, Ministry of Environment, Sri Lanka Global Climate Change Alliance (GCCA) (2012). Building an alliance with developing countries to tackle poverty and climate change. European Commission IPCC (2007) Climate change 2007: Working group III: mitigation of climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Page Page 82 82

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

Ingles, A.W., Munsch, A. and Qwist-Hoffmann, H. 1999 The participatory process for supporting collaborative management of natural resources: an overview. FAO, Rome.

Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) (2009), IPS News, IPS, Sri Lanka, 14th December, 2009 Jones, E. G. Climate change: building smallholder resilience Climate change: building smallholder resilience. Resilient Ecosystems for Lasting Poverty Reduction Environment and Climate Division, IFAD (International Fund for Agricultural Development), Rome Jørgensen, I. and Vivekanandan, K. (2003), Private forestry based on Paulownia in Sri Lanka: an appraisal of the out grower scheme presented by Paulownia Plantations LTD, Noragric Report No. 12, Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway, Norway.

Kallesoe, M. and De Alvis, D. (2004), Review of Developments of Environmental Services Markets in Sri Lanka; World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF), Indonesia Kate Schreckenberg, Anna Lawrence, Cathy Mackenzie, Jane Bryden, Cecilia Luttrell and Helen O'Connor, (2002) Overseas Development Institute (ODI), London Final report, 29 November 2002 Kayambazinthu, D. et al., 2003. Institutional arrangements governing natural resource management of the Miombo woodland. In Kowero, G., B.M. Campbell and U.R. Sumulia (eds.): Policies and governance structures in woodlands of southern Africa. CIFOR, Bogor.

King, P. N. (2010) Mainstreaming Climate Change – a Guidance Manual for the Pacific Islands Countries and Territories Klein, R. (2009) Impacts, adaptation, vulnerability and development: Key insights and challenges. Stockholm Environment Institute.

Lebel, L., Li, L. Krittasudthacheewa, C., Muanpong Juntopas, M., Vijitpan, T., Uchiyama, T. and Krawanchid, D., (2012), Mainstreaming climate change adaptation into development planning. Stockholm Environment Institute, Asia Centre, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (2007). Sri Lanka Strategy for Sustainable Development.

Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources, Colombo, Sri Lanka Ministry of Finance and Planning Sri Lanka (2012) Public Expenditure and Policy Review, Annual Report 2011, Ministry of Finance and Planning Sri Lanka, Colombo Montagnini, F. (2012), Guest Blog: Forests and Climate Change. Yale University, School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, USA Nanayakkara, V.R. (2001), Regional study on forest policy and institutional reforms: Final report of the Sri Lanka case study; Asian Development Bank, Colombo, Sri Lanka OECD (Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development) (2009), Integrating Climate Change Adaptation into Development Co-Operation: Policy Guidance. OECD Publishing, France www.oecd.org/publishing/corrigenda Reyes, B. D. R. (1997), Progress in strengthening small farmer group development in Sri Lanka: Report of a review mission. Sustainable Development Department, FAO. Richards, M., Davies, J. and Gil Yaron, G. (2003), Economic Stakeholder Analysis’ for Participatory Forest Management. (Edi) Goldberg, L. Odi Forestry Briefing, UK Department for International Development (DFID), Number 4, May 2003 Sathurusinghe, S .A. (1998), Community participation in the production of fuelwood; in FAO (1998) Woodfuel in Sri Lanka - Production and marketing; FAO of The United Nations, Bangkok Skutsch, M M, (1990), Social Forestry in Integrated Rural Development Planning Sri Lanka,

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 83 83

Field Document No. 24, FAO Regional Wood Energy Development Programme in Asia GCP/RAS/131/NET Bangkok, Thailand, November.

Sterrett , C. (2011). Review of Climate Change Adaptation Practices in South Asia, Oxfam Research Report, November 2011, Oxfam, Melbourne, Australia TEARFUND (2006), Overcoming the barriers: Mainstreaming climate change adaptation in developing countries. TEARFUND Climate Change Briefing Paper 1 Tiwari, M. (2004), Lessons learnt from Sustainable Forest Management initiatives in Asia. New Delhi, India UNDP (2007), MDG-F Thematic Window Terms of Reference â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Environment and Climate Change Environment and Climate Change, UNDP-Spain MDG Achievement Fund UNFCCC 2009. Decision -/CP.15, Copenhagen Accord. UNFCCC (2010) Report of the Conference of the Parties on its sixteenth session, held in Cancun from 29 November to 10 December 2010.

FCCC/CP/2010/7/Add.1 United Nations - Commission on Sustainable Development (2010), Multi-stakeholder dialogue on implementating sustainable development. Synthesis of Csd-17 Decisions UN, New , New York UN REDD Program (2009). Third Policy Board Press Release. [Online] Available http://www.unredd.org/NewsCentre/ThirdPolicyBoardPressRelease/tabid/2032/language/enUS/Default.aspx [Accessed May 15, 2013]

from:

Yamanoshita, M. Y. and Amano, M. (2012), Capability development of local communities for project sustainability in afforestation/reforestation clean development mechanism, Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, April 2012, Volume 17, Issue 4, pp 425-440 http://ccdare.org/UNEP/UNDP initiative Climate Change, Development and Adaptation Programme (CC DARE); Success Stories Woodlot Management in Tanzania http://ccdare.org/ Accessed April 26, 2013 Wickramasinghe, A. (1997) Women and Social Forestry in Sri Lanka. ENERGIA News 2, April 1997 Wijewarnasuriya, A. (2009), Establishment of FWLs in Sri Lanka. Research Studies on Forest Management in Sri Lanka, University of Sri Jayawardenapura, Sri Lanka World Bank (2009), Economics of Adaptation to Climate Change. Washington, D.C.

Page Page 84 84

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

Section F

SPECIAL PURPOSES - URBAN FORESTS AND NATURE CONSERVATION

The Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page 85

CULTURAL AND HISTORICAL ASPECTS OF FORESTS QUALITY IN THE TOWN OF ZVOLEN Slámová M., Jančura P. Department of Landscape Planning and Design, Faculty of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, Technical University in Zvolen, T.G.Masaryka 24, 96053 Zvolen, Slovakia E-mail: martina.slamova@tuzvo.sk ABSTRACT

The town of Zvolen lies on river terraces and flood plains of the Zvolenská Kotlina basin.

Decidual forests spread in the southern and the western part of the cadastral area in the Kremnické Vrchy Mts. and Javorie Mts. At present, the rivers Hron, Neresnica and Slatina leave the Zvolenská Kotlina basin through major landforms - antecedent valleys between the Deserted Castle hill and the Veľká Stráž hill to the south and west from the town. The old town called ‘Old Zvolen’ was located on the Deserted Castle hill above the confluence of the rivers. A natural barrier deteriorated medieval trade communication, but protected historic royal town. The historical county town of Zvolen was founded in 13th century on historic trade route Via Magna connecting Budapest and Krakow and it was surrounded by forests historically known as Silva de Zolum.

The contribution focuses on a comprehensive evaluation of relations between town and forests emphasizing historic and ecological context. It resulted into the delimitation of forests management units (JPRL) bearing cultural functions recognized within forest ecosystem services (CICES, 2016). Outputs of this work could be implemented into forest management plans and further into territorial plans as proposals of bike trails and thematic education trails.

An important input for the forest assessment was the Landscape-ecological Plan of the Zvolen (Jančura, et al., 2002) where landscape values and greenways are presented. Geostatistical analyses were done in QGIS and maps from public web map servers were used.

The first group of results deals with the assessment of recreational infrastructure of the cadastral area. We compared current land cover with potential natural vegetation on the contact zone of the town and countryside (up to 250 m out of the town) and we evaluated the degree of naturalness. Further we evaluated accessibility of the contact zone (town-forests) from urban zones respecting natural and anthropic barriers. New bike trails were proposed after reevaluation of greenways and current touristic trails.

The second group of results consists of the quality evaluation of forests based on decisions gained from a multi-criteria matrix. Natural quality was assessed by the presence of European and national protected areas, biotopes, elements of territorial system of ecological stability and interesting natural monuments. Cultural and historical quality was assessed by the presence of cultural sites protected by law, archaeological sites and other interesting cultural and historical objects that authors observed in the field (Slámová et al., 2014). Outputs were interpreted within JPRLs in relation to forest management categories and forest owners.

We demonstrate benefits of cultural functions to the recreational development of the territory on the proposal of a touristic route in surroundings of the Deserted Castle. The proposal contributes not only to quantitative possibilities for the bike trails development but also brings qualitative aspects for understanding of landscapes values. Thus, tourists would understand a context of historic objects with natural conditions within important historical area around the well-known cultural site of the castle.

Key words: cultural heritage, tourism, forests, ecosystem services, greenways The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 87 87

ECOLOGICAL-STABILISATION FOREST FUNCTION OF SMALL-SCALE PROTECTED AREAS ON TFE MASARYK’S FOREST KRTINY Schneider J. , Vyskot I. Department of Environmental Studies and Natural Resources, Faculty of Regional Development and International Studies, mendel University in Brno, Czech Republic E-mail: jiri.schneider@mendelu.cz ABSTRACT

Forest ecosystems in specially protected areas producing forest functions based on same mechanisms as forests with no declared nature protection. Ecological processes occur at the same natural principles. Man influence it intentionally and spontaneously by its economic decisions in terms of quantity and quality. Human Society, declaring their interests, clearly identifies the ecosystem services depending on the value of ecosystem functions. The structure – Ecosystem → Ecosystem functions → Ecosystem services → Benefits for human well-being simply illustrates the widely quoted (Vačkář 2010 Hladůvková, 2016 and others) cascade graph (Haines-Young & Potschin, 2009). (Forest) ecosystem functions have clearly defined place in this system. Method Vyskot et al. 2003 (adjusted by Vyskot, Schneider et al., 2013) is a system of evaluation, working with ecosystem characteristics such criteria and indicators of the ability of forest ecosystems to produce functions of forests. The method was used to assess the ecologicalstabilisation function of small-scale protected areas in forests of Mendel University in Brno, managed by Training forest enterprise Masaryk’s Forest Křtiny. Biodiversity and the degree of naturalness of forests were used as indicators for determining the value of eco-stabilizing function. 157 stand types were found on the assessed 22 small specially protected areas. A mixture of trees are mostly broadleaves woods of native species composition, such as beech Fagus sylvatica, Quercus petraea oak, hornbeam Carpinus betulus, maple Acer pseudoplatanus and others. Spruce Picea abies is the main tree of forest stands with low degree of naturalness. A large majority stands in the monitored protected areas has a maximum or very high degree of naturalness (degree 5 or 6). Forest stands with functionally unsuitable degree (degree 0) appear rarely. Diversity of species composition is classified as medium and low (degree 2 or 3). The resulting real potential environmental stabilization function is very high or high. This shows the appropriate conservation management of these sites.

Key words: forest ecosystem services; forest functions; degree of naturalness; ecological stability; protected areas; beech stands

Page Page 88 88

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

EXPERT-BASED APPROACH ON ASSESSING ECOSYSTEM SERVICES DEMAND AND SUPPLY IN PROTECTED AREA Kamlun K. U.1, 2, Bürger-Arndt R.1 Department of Nature Conservation and Landscape Planning, Faculty of Forest Sciences and Forest Ecology, Georg-August University of Goettingen, Germany 1

2

Faculty of Science and Natural Resources, Universiti Malaysia Sabah

E-mail: unikamlun@gmail.com ABSTRACT

The concept of ecosystem services was introduced into global policy in order to interconnect the discourse between biodiversity and sustainable development for the benefit of human wellbeing and to encourage conservation and land use planners to imply sustainable management by considering both, ecological and social aspects. Ecosystems provide multiple services which rely on biodiversity and ecosystem functioning and which are necessary for the livelihoods and wellbeing of people. Mapping demands and supply of ecosystem services is necessary for continuous monitoring of such services for the sustainable management of natural resources to support decision-making. However, the main challenges are to establish standardized, comprehensible and practicable approaches. Therefore, this study presents a multifaceted methodological framework for mapping ecosystem services demand and supply surrounding a protected area.

We integrate non-monetary ‘Matrix Model’ assessment with expert driven approach in assessing the ecosystem services demand and supply in a holistic perspective. Experts and stakeholders deal with Likert-scale to weight multiple land cover supply and demand services by indicator constructed. The results of our study exhibit that using an integrated approach in mapping ecosystem services not only reduces uncertainties but also important for the evaluation of ecosystem services. The integration process can also be an interactive process between scientist and stakeholders in improving the mutual understanding in resource management. The selected services and land cover data can be an effective medium to visually exhibit forest function and services of a protected area. It can subsidize as a scheming tools that can contribute to an effective policy measurement for the sustainable of conserving the protected areas.

Key words: Ecosystem services matrix, ecosystem function, ecosystem services indicator

Introduction

At the beginning of this century, the concept of ecosystem services received substantial attention from both scientists and policy makers as a guideline for sustainable management of the landscape and natural ecosystems (Braat and de Groot, 2012; Schaefer et al., 2015). Scholars have long acknowledged the function of the ecosystem in maintaining biodiversity and human well-being (Costanza et al., 1997; Daily, 1997; de Groot, 1992), but only after a decade has Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (Millenium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005) commercialized the concept and framework of ‘ecosystem services’ in order to interconnect the discourse between biodiversity conservation and sustainable development for the benefit of human well-being and to encourage conservation and land use planners toward sustainable management by considering both the ecological and social aspects of development (Andersson et al., 2015; Tallis et al., 2008). This contributed to other major initiatives, including The Economics of Ecosystem and Biodiversity (TEEB) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES).

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 89 89

Ecosystems provide multiple services, which rely on biodiversity and ecosystem functioning and are necessary for the livelihoods and well-being of people. Mapping, monitoring, and balancing supply and demand for ecosystem services is vital to support decision-making with respect to sustainable natural resources management (Ayanu et al., 2012). The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment did not provide detail or a guideline on how to use the concepts and framework that were developed (Seppelt and Dormann, 2011). This generated an immense amount of scientific argument, which addressed the scarcity of the ecosystem services assessment framework (Fisher et al., 2009; Schröter et al., 2014).

The main challenges are to establish standardized, comprehensible, and practicable approaches to be used by scientists and policy makers (Crossman et al., 2013; Elliff and Kikuchi, 2015). The key to a feasible application of the ecosystem services concept is to develop a holistic approach to evaluate the interrelations between human demands for goods and services and the capacities of the ecosystem concerned to provide those goods and services, without mutual impairments and on a sustained basis.

The lack of consistent and standard methods makes it difficult for scientists to give recommendations to policy makers for ecosystem services governance (Rasmussen et al., 2016). Therefore, urgent action is needed to develop a practical approach than can be used by experts and researchers.

A wide-ranging series of methods has been proposed to assess the potential supply and demand of provisioning services using landscape scale assessment (Bagstad et al., 2013; Burkhard et al., 2014, 2012; Maes et al., 2012). The application of using land use/ land cover and geographic information system (GIS) data has been widely used for ecosystem services availability (Burkhard et al., 2015; Paudyal et al., 2014; Sohel et al., 2015). It is not only necessarily needed to identify the ecosystem services function and potential supply, but also to capture the important regarding the needs of people and whether they actually use and demand the services. Therefore, it is important to integrate socialecological approaches that can define people’s actual use of the ecosystem services (Guerry and Polasky, 2015; Meijaard et al., 2013). The most frequently used assessment methodologies of provisioning ecosystem services was assessed by Rasmussen et al. (2016) and include: (1) ecological surveys, such as plot monitoring; (2) quantitative methods, such as questionnaires on people’s actual use on provisioning services; (3) qualitative methods, such as semi-structured interviews or group interviews to acquire in-depth understanding of people’s behaviour; and (4) participant observation in the research area. He illutrated that combinations of methods appears to be advantageous to assess experts’ and people’s use of and needs for provisioning services.

Another challenge that exists in most approaches, particularly monetary assessment, is that certain ecosystem services can be difficult to measure directly. Therefore Müller and Burkhard (2012), developed a comprehensive non-monetary approach, using sets of indicators that clearly link the cause and effect between indicators and listed useful criteria for improving the quality of the ecosystem services indicator. This approach, known as ecosystem services ‘Matrix Models’, have been widely established in the literature (Burkhard et al., 2015, 2014, 2012; Paudyal et al., 2014). This approach provides data on landscapes’ capacities to provide ecosystem services based on land use/land cover data with expert-based estimation. It consists of matrix assessment with ecosystem services as columns and geospatial units as rows. The ‘Matrix Model’ has the advantage of being intuitively clear, reasonable easy to apply, well established, and recognized by many scientists and policy makers.

However, more transparent improvement is needed for the perfection of this assessment (Jacobs et al., 2015). The relationship between the land use/land cover, ecosystem services functions, and people’s demand remains untested in many regions of the world (Nelson et al., 2009), particularly Southeast Asia (Wolff et al., 2015). Additionally, no comparable study has specifically assessed Malaysia.

Holistic assessments of provisioning potential supply and demand, with particular attention to protected forest areas, are either absent or inadequate. For that reason, we wanted to fill these gaps and map on a landscape scale in the tropical forests of Southeast Asia. Thus, the main purposes of the

Page Page 90 90

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

present study were: (1) to identify the potential supply of multiple provisioning ecosystem services surrounding a protected area, (2) to determine local peoples’ demand for relevant provisioning ecosystem services, and (3) to quantify the supply/demand budget of provisioning services surrounding the protected area within the past 28 years.

Materials and methods Study area Our study areas were the Binsuluk Forest Reserve (12,106ha) and the Klias Forest Reserve (3,620ha) located in the Klias Peninsula of Sabah, Malaysia (Fig. 1). These two portions of pristine peat swamp forest were gazetted in 1984 as Class 11 protected forest to conserve the remaining peat swamp forest in Sabah. Both forest reserves are dominated by Dryobalonops rappa, Dactylocladus stenostachys, Shorea platycarpa, and Gonystylus bancanus (Phua et al., 2008). An endemic proboscis monkey species, known as Nasalis larvatus, is primarily found in the forest reserve (Sha et al., 2008). The periphery within the reserved forest was formerly extensive peatland; however, most of the surrounding areas were converted to agriculture plantations (Abdullah, 2004). The soils of the peat swamp forest are naturally waterlogged, so the risk of catching fire should be avoidable (UNDP, 2006). However, the agricultural drainage canals system that was previously introduced into this area is hampering the capacity of the peat swamp forest to provide its important function; the excess drainage of freshwater from the peat forest may disturb the balance. In addition to that, the drainage of the peat soils is causing the dry peat to press downwards onto the softer inner layer of the soil. This causes the topsoil and vegetation to dry up quickly during the dry season, making it highly combustible. As a result, massive fires frequently took place in the forest reserve since 1997 up until 2010 (Kamlun and Phua., 2010).

In relation to agriculture, there is increased pressure for the state lands to be converted to human settlements (MDA Report, 2003). There are numerous villages that are located in the adjacent area of the protected forest and some have been known to encroach onto the nearby boundaries. An anthropogenic activity that is taking place in the area is spreading unsustainably, increasing the threat of forest fires during the dry season. This can cause further damage to the existing protected area and therefore makes it very difficult to preserve the forest ecosystem and safeguard the essential services flows for the benefit of the local community.

Framework for the ecosystem services assessment The integrated concept that was used in our framework explicitly related landscape data to evaluate provisioning ecosystem services’ potential supply and demand capacities in a spatial scheme (Burkhard et al., 2015, 2014, 2012, 2009; Paudyal et al., 2014; Sohel et al., 2015). To begin with, available GIS and land use/land cover data were prepared to define the ecosystem services. Expert judgement (literatures, interviews, statistics, etc.) on different land cover types’ capacities to supply various ecosystem services and the demanded services were defined and linked with the available land use/land cover data. Ecosystem services evaluation based on the identification of appropriate sets of indicators were identified and selected based on the relevance to the local scale assessment (Burkhard et al., 2014; Müller and Burkhard, 2012; Müller, 2005). The ecosystem services supply and demand mapping approach has been presented in a holistic manner in Burkhard et al., 2012, 2014. Tab.1

1

Sabah's forest lands are divided into various classes of forest reserves ranging from I to VII. Class I protected area defined as forest that is conserved for the protection of watershed and to maintain the stability of essential climatic and other environmental factors, as well as restricting any logging activities.

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 91 91

presents the definition of potential supply and demand as a guideline for the conceptual background of our approach.

Fig. 1 Location of Klias Peninsula, Sabah, Malaysia (after Pianzin, 2004)

Tab.1 Terminology of Potential Supply and Demand Use in This Study

Terms Potential supply

Demand

Definitions

Authors

The hypothetical maximum yield of (selected) ecosystem services that can be used or gained from a specific extent and quality of ecosystems (Ecosystem condition).

Burkhard et al., 2012

The need for specific ecosystem services by society, particular stakeholder groups or individuals.

Ecosystem service demand is specific in time and space, with some demand existing globally (e.g. for greenhouse gas mitigation) and other demand existing locally (e.g. for recreation opportunities).

Albert et al., 2015

Land use/ land cover (LULC) data preparation As the first step of ecosystem services assessment, we produced a multi temporal land cover change map in the Klias Peninsula between 1985 and 2013. The time series of freely available Landsat satellite images was acquired from United States Geological Survey (USGS) (Path/Row: 118/56). The satellite images used in this study were obtained from the Landsat Multispectral Scanner (MSS), taken on June 29, 1985 and the Landsat 8 OLI_TIRS, taken on April 23, 2013. The temporal changes of supervised classification used the maximum likelihood classification rule to observe the changes in the area. All the selected images support the important events that occurred in the protected area. The time Page Page 92 92

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

series analysis in this research: 1985 (after the forest reserves were gazetted in 1984) and 2013 (for recent update on the land cover status). All the images were gathered under clear atmospheric conditions, when the weather showed only slight clouding or was cloud-free. Selection of the overall image quality had to be determined by the degree of clouding (with a maximum threshold of 15%) to achieve the best results (Bodart et al., 2011).

There are 9 land cover classifications used for the study area. The classifications were defined as: (1) peat swamp forest, (2) forest land, (3) mangrove, (4) shrubland, (5) grassland, (6) oil palm plantation, (7) rubber plantation, (8) barren land, and (9) water bodies. These land use types were used to identify the potential subservices and indicators for the ecosystem services potential supply and demand assessment of the study area. Among all the land use classes, “barren land” is the most complex class; it includes all the combinations of exposed soil, non-vegetative, and built-up areas, which have similar spectral values. This condition made it impossible to distinguish the differences between the classes for the classification processes.

The temporal changes of supervised classification, using the maximum likelihood classification rule were used to observe the changes in the area. Nearest-neighbour resampling was applied to all images in order to standardize the resolution to 30-metre pixels for classification analysis. The supervised classification approach generated statistics (mean, variance/covariance) from training samples for classification. The Bayesian probability function was calculated from the established inputs for the classes (MacAlister and Mahaxay, 2009). Each pixel was then clustered into the class to which it most probably belongs. Then, post-processing was applied to reduce salt and pepper effects in the image classification and majority statistical filtering, using 3X3 filtering, was used to reduce misclassification from the land cover classification. The overall accuracy for both images was greater than 87%.

Identification of relevant subservices and indicators The selection of suitable subservices and indicators for the assessment of the individual land use and land cover of ecosystem functions and ecosystem services’ supply capacities is an important phase in order to know what needs to be evaluated. We applied a transparent derivation strategy using sets of indicators from Müller and Burkhard (2012). There has been a wide range of explicit subservices and indicators identified that were relatively significant for our study area. Various researchers defined the categories of provisioning services, regulating services and cultural services (UNEP-WCMC, 2010; Burkhard et al., 2012; Crossman et al., 2013; Krasny et al., 2013). Concerning our selection for the definitions of each subservices and indicators for provisioning, we propose ecosystem subservices classifications and indicators introduced by the ecosystem services pioneers, which are gradually extracted and reduced based on the relevant use for the study area and expert interview opinion (Costanza et al., 1997; Daily, 1999; MEA, 2005; De Groot et al., 2010; Burkhard et al., 2012, Szücs et al., 2015 and Petter et al., 2013). We presented the list of subservices definitions, which was extracted from the literature and validated by site-based expert’s approach (Tab. 2).

Site-based expert interview for potential supply and local people demand assessment We conducted semi-structured site-based expert interviews using the snowball sampling method to assess the potential supply of provisioning ecosystem services in Klias Peninsula. Seventeen (17) local experts were selected based on their familiarity with the area and adequate background on ecological aspects in the study area (Islam Sohel., 2014). Selected experts included ecologists, wildlife ecologists, hydrologists, protected area managers, nature conservationists, and local forest managements. Before starting the interview, a description catalogue was prepared, which consisted of the explanation of the location and boundaries of the assessed study area, the definition of the each

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 93 93

relevant subservice and indicator on provisioning ecosystem services’ potential supply, and pictures of all 9 relevant land cover types used in our mapping system. The interviews were conducted individually to minimize any influence from other experts on the information provided. During the semi-structured interviews, participants were asked to comment about the relevant of using the subservices that were extracted from comprehensive thematic grouping of literature for our indicator catalogue. Specifically, the experts were asked open-ended questions regarding the relevant of using the indicators and also allowed to suggest other indicators that can be used to assess the potential supply subservices. The information from the semi-structured interviews were analysed for content by identifying themes in the responses. The list of phrases generated for the indicator was obtained through item reduction for redundancy and irrelevant for local scale assessment in the study area.

The next phase was to ask the expert to provide their expert opinion on another perspective of provisioning of ecosystem services’ potential supply assessment. The experts were instructed to complete a questionnaire, ranking each item as to how relevant each subservices was to potentially supply their respective services, based on each land cover type in the Klias Peninsula. Fourteen items were developed and evaluated by using six-point Likert-type scale that were scored as follows: “no relevant capacity’ (0), ‘low relevant capacity’ (1), ‘relevant capacity’ (2), ‘medium relevant capacity’ (3), ‘high relevant capacity’(4), and ‘very high relevant capacity’ (5) (after Burkhard et al., 2012).

In line with the potential supply assessment, we initially interviewed the local people to identify the need (demand) for each subservices based on the land cover type functions. We used the land use map provided by Department of Survey and Mapping Malaysia (JUPEM), which included Beaufort (Sheet T735), Kimanis (Sheet 41), Kuala Penyu (Sheet 40), Labuan (Sheet 54), and also Weston (Sheet 55), and concentric circle sampling to calculate the villages sampled. We mapped the localities using GIS (ArcGIS 10.1). This was done by using the boundaries of the two main protected areas in Klias Peninsula (Klias forest reserve and Binsuluk forest reserve), which are located in the north and south parts of the study area. We then used a buffer tool to calculate the concentric circles (buffers) (Meijaard et al., 2013) of 500 Meter, 1000 Meter, 1500 Meter from both protected areas. The three meter radius was used to account for the immediate land cover type surrounding the protected areas to identify villages that are close to the area. In this study, we selected 10 villages that were located near the protected area.

Specifically, the Likert-type scale questionnaire and interview were conducted with the total of 281 respondents through cluster sampling in order to ascertain local people’ needs for various ecosystem services and relate them to the most suitable land cover types. In this assessment, we focussed on the ecosystem services that were demanded by the local community, from the perspective of supporting their livelihoods, and land use factors. To detail the perspectives, the demand of local community on the services excluded the information on services that were obtained from outside the local scale assessment. This is due to the lack of detailed land use information that can be derived from Landsat imagery. There are 11 items that were developed and seem relevant for the localisation for the study area; we used using six-point Likert-type scale: ‘no relevant capacity’ (0), ‘low relevant demand’ (1), ‘relevant demand’ (2), ‘medium relevant demand’ (3), ‘high relevant demand’ (4), and ‘very high relevant demand’ (5) (after Burkhard et al., 2012). Individuals were also asked the type of demand for each services and the amount that is needed for each time frame to support their needs. Then, themes identification with coding frequency analysis was conducted to extract the relevant indicator that would assess local demand of ecosystem services.

Corresponding to the matrix of the ecosystem services budgets, for analysing the source-sink each field in the matrix was calculated based on the corresponding information scales ranges from potential

Page Page 94 94

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

supply and demand matrix. The information in the matrixes are merged to create the oversupply, undersupply or neutral of provisioning services in the area (Fig.2).

Mapping supply and demand for ecosystem services Concerning the ecosystem services’ potential supply and demand mapping, we followed the approach of Burkhard et al. (2015, 2014, 2012 & 2009), who developed a concept of non-monetary evaluation of the “Matrix Model”, which quantifies a broad range of ecosystem services supply and demand assessments. The approach uses ecosystem services features, which are plotted on the x-axis, and the different type of land cover/ land use, plotted on the y-axis. It provides qualitative and further quantitative matrix assessment of potential supply, combining the land cover types with subservices categories, according to their respective relevant scale. The Likert-type scale of matrix values (0-5) is used for this purpose. The values in the supply indicate; ‘no relevant capacity’ (0), ‘low relevant capacity’ (1), ‘relevant capacity’ (2), ‘medium relevant capacity’ (3), ‘high relevant capacity’ (4), and ‘very high relevant capacity’ (5). The demand scale indicates: no relevant capacity’ (0), ‘low relevant capacity’ (1), ‘relevant capacity’ (2), ‘medium relevant capacity’ (3), ‘high relevant capacity’ (4), and ‘very high relevant capacity’ (5) (Burkhard et al., 2014, 2012). The final identified values were then transferred directly into located ecosystem services demand using spatial analyst in ArcGIS 10.1. The mapping of source-sink dynamics of the area that were merge from potential supply and demand presented a new budget matrix information. The budget scale indicates; (5) ‘demand exceeds supply significantly’, represent strong undersupply, (0) ‘demand equals to supply, equals to neutral balance; and (5) ‘supply exceeds the demand significantly’, represent strong oversupply (after Burkhard et al., 2014, 2012).

Tab. 2 List of Provisioning Ecosystem services’ Potential Supply and Demand Subservices Descriptions.

Categories/ Subcategories Provisioning services

Descriptions/ Rationales/ Functions Provision of natural resources

Crops

Presence of cultivation of edible plants or used for livelihood activities.

Materials that can be consumed for energy and nutrition.

Livestock

Presence and keeping edible animals or used for livelihood activities. Materials that can be consumed for energy and nutrition.

Capture fisheries

Presence and catch of commercially interesting fish species, which are accessible for fishermen. Materials that can be consumed for energy and nutrition.

Aquaculture products

Presence of marine life kept in terrestrial aquaculture area. Materials that can be consumed for energy and nutrition.

Wild foods

Presence and harvest of, e.g. vegetables, mushrooms, and wild life hunting.

Materials that can be consumed for energy and nutrition.

Timber

Biomass that use for other purposes other than food. Presence of trees or plants with potential use for timber or wood product.

Fuel wood

Biomass that use for other purposes other than food. Presence of trees or plants with potential use as fuel wood.

Energy

Biomass that use for other purposes other than food. Presence of trees or plants with potential use as energy source

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 95 95

Medicinal resources

Natural materials with potential use to maintain, restore or improve health.

Genetic resources

Measurable at species, molecular and sub molecular levels. Presence of species with (potentially) useful genetic material

Fresh water

The role of ecosystems in providing water through sediment trapping, infiltration, dissolution, precipitation and diffusion. Presence of freshwater and water reservoirs

Results and Discussion Qualification and validation of provisioning indicators based on data sources As described above, the extraction of our sets of indicators was collected by various scholars in the fields of ecosystem services. Tab. 3 provides the final list of indicators that was validated, suggested, excluded and reviewed by site-based experts and stakeholders in the Klias Peninsula. Finding the appropriate indicators related to specific services-providing units is important to provide spatial connectivity between the neighbouring land use types. In our list of rubrics, each indicator was represented by units and quantification. In the table below, ‘++’ represents relevant assessment for both potential supply and demand, ‘+’ represents relevant indicators that can only assess potential supply, ‘±’ represent an indicator for demand, and ‘-‘ represents something that was not relevant for the subservices. Each mark was analysed according to the presence of local assessment in the Klias Peninsula and the sources for analysis for potential supply, demand and supply/demand budget.

Exhibit in the table below are the indicators of: total average stock per hectare, harvested amount of products per hectare, selling price of product per month, and product consumption per month, which can be used to assess almost all the subservices in provisioning services, except for energy and genetic resources. Demand for genetic resources is limited by many local communities. In some cases, traditional knowledge focuses on wild foods with potential resources for commercial value. As a result, the benefits of using the genetic resources always comes from companies or research institutions (Swiderska, 2001). In our case, there are no data on genetic resources that were provided by the local people and such services are hardly demanded.

The proper indicators related to each spatial unit with different landscape scenario are still unknown (Hermann et al., 2011). Currently, landscape services indicators are still limited, insufficient and minimal availability (Layke, 2009). Quantifying the relationships of landscapes and indicators could provide input for more reliable and accurate mapping, modelling, and valuing of ecosystem services (Benjamin Burkhard et al., 2012; Syrbe and Walz, 2012). Some available lists of indicators are relatively inadequate in characterizing the diversity and complexity of services provided by the landscape functions. By collecting the appropriate indicators, several issues can be minimized, especially the relationship between the services and scales (Hermann et al., 2011). Therefore, the collection of our indicators provides relevant sets that can be used to assess multiple provisioning services at a local scale of tropical wetlands protected forest and its surrounding areas.

Tab. 3 Catalogue of Indicators List for the Analysis of Provisioning Subservices

Page Page 96 96

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

* ++: relevant indicators for both potential supply and demand; +: relevant indicators for potential supply; ±: relevant

Indicators Total average stock per hectare Harvested amount of products per hectare Selling price of product per month Product consumption per month Number of species type per hectare Type of harveting method Weather patterns and seasonal changes Plant biomass per hectare Total biomass per hectare Structures and functions of resources Biological indicators

Provisioning Subservices Categorize Capture Aquaculture Wild Fuel Medicinal Genetic Fresh Crops Livestock Timber Energy fisheries products foods wood resources resources water ++

++

++

++

++

++

++

-

++

+

++

++

++

++

++

++

++

++

-

++

-

++

++

++

++

++

++

++

++

±

++

-

-

++

++

++

++

++

++

++

++

++

-

++

-

-

-

±

+

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

++

++

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

+

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

+

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

+

+

+

-

±

-

-

-

-

-

-

±

±

-

++

-

±

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

+

indicat ors for deman d; - not relevan t for the subser vices.

Budgets of provisioning ecosystem services’ potential supply and demand Fig.2 shows the provisioning services’ potential supply, demand and the supply/demand budget that were distributed inside and surrounding the peat swamp forest protected area. The forest land appeared to supply the highest natural resources of timber, fuel wood and genetic resources; the water bodies supplied the higher amounts of fisheries and freshwater resources. Tropical forest ecosystems are remarkably rich and special reservoirs for biodiversity on Earth (Sodhi et al., 2004) and Malaysian forests, which have the greatest species richness and natural resources (Wan Izatul et al., 2012).

Regarding the supply of freshwater resources, Malaysia’s high humidity, high temperature, high rainfall, and abundant of forest cover contribute significantly to the supply of freshwater resources in the river flow. The Sabah coastline has 37 rivers that supply about 97% of the country's total water needs, while ground water accounts for the rest (Ho, 1996). The table also shows that relatively high crop supply potential was found, especially for the oil palm plantation land cover type. This provisioning of man-made oil palm created an immense modification of the natural landscape to human modified landscape, creating a loss of natural forest and its resources. The increasing rate due to exploitation of natural forest area destroys the ecosystem and generates various types degradation, soil loss and serious threats to the water resources, particularly in the peat swamp forest area (Carlson et al., 2014; Posa et al., 2011; Yule, 2010). Thus, overexploitation of oil palm plantations generates a crisis in conserving the natural forest, which will contribute to the loss of numerous provisioning ecosystem services.

Contrary to the input scale in the demand tables, the result demonstrates that local people demand smaller amounts of services in natural ecosystem except for the need for freshwater resources in water bodies’ landscape. Energy is demanded in barren land, which in detail represents the built-up areas where the energy is imported from outside the study area boundaries. Malaysia is endowed with conventional energy resources, such as oil and gas, in 2008, gas production was 198.8 million cubic metres per day and domestic consumption was 26.7 billion cubic metres and most of the domestic oil production occurred offshore (Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation, 2011). In quantifying ecosystem services’ supply and demand, a boundary of a local assessment must be specifically defined and some services might be imported from outside the boundaries (Benjamin Burkhard et al., 2012). The energy resources are a perfect example of a service that is demanded by local people but needs to be substituted in the local area. Crops were also given higher scores for demand, especially for oil palm The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 97 97

plantation, with the scale of ‘4’. In early 1976, the Sabah State Government had designated most of the lands as a potential agriculture areas to be given for private ownership and at the same time establish a permanent forest estate that was roughly 50% of the land area (Reynolds et al., 2011). Thus, this foundation, in long term, fabricated forest loss in Sabah within 20 years. Demand for palm oil increased due to its profitable cultivation. The total area planted for oil palm plantation increased fivefold in 2010, directly replacing the natural forest (Reynolds et al., 2011). Again, the demand for such services of human-modified landscape must be critically investigated regarding their impact on the other services, not only provisioning but also regulating and cultural services. Further study is needed to access the full overview of the holistic ecosystem services of supporting services, regulating services, provisioning services, and cultural services to ascertain the impact of changing the land cover into human modified landscape.

The overall provisioning services’ potential supply-demand budget maps indicate dynamics with respect to source-sink patterns. This is due to the single assessment of stakeholders, which consist of the local people that live near the protected area. It shows a varied of demographic profile (Tab.4), which need further investigation on the relationship of the demand of the services and the demographic factors that contribute to the results. The potential supply/demand budget demonstrates that the natural forest ecosystem is oversupplied. This is related to the fact that most of the forest area in the Klias Peninsula is a protected area and there is a restriction of entering the area due to land use policy (MDA report, 2003). This, in turn, created changes in the demand scenario of local people for the resources in the forest area. Again, for the energy resources budget, it shows ‘-5’ on the scale, which indicates a significant undersupply in barren land. This result proves that the energy resources are mostly imported elsewhere to fulfil the demand of such resources in the study area.

Fig.2 Ecosystem Services Assessment Matrix Illustrating the Capacities of Different Land Cover Types in Terms of Potential Supply, the Demand of Provisioning Services by Local People, and the Potential Supply/Demand Budget of Provisioning Services in the Klias Peninsula Area.

Potential Supply

Land Cover Type

Peat Swamp Forest Mangrove Forest Land Shrubland Grassland Oil Palm Plantation Rubber Plantation Barren Land Water Bodies

Demand

Potential Supply/Demand Budget

Provisioning services Crops Livestock Fodder Capture fisheries Aquaculture products Wild foods Timber Fuel Wood Energy Resources Medicinal resources Genetic resources Fresh Water Resources Provisioning services Crops Livestock Fodder Capture fisheries Aquaculture products Wild foods Timber Fuel Wood Energy Resources Medicinal resources Genetic resources Fresh Water Resources Provisioning services Crops Livestock Fodder Capture fisheries Aquaculture products Wild foods Timber Fuel Wood Energy Resources Medicinal resources Genetic resources Fresh Water Resources

Assessment

0 0 0 0 0 5 4 0 0

1 0 2 3 3 3 3 2 1

1 0 1 2 3 2 1 0 0

2 4 1 1 1 1 1 0 5

2 4 1 1 1 0 0 1 4

3 4 4 2 2 3 2 1 3

4 4 5 2 0 1 4 0 0

4 4 5 3 0 1 3 0 0

4 4 4 3 1 3 3 0 0

3 3 4 2 2 2 1 0 2

4 4 5 3 2 1 1 0 3

4 2 4 3 2 1 2 1 5

0 0 0 0 1 4 2 0 0

0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1

0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1

2 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1

1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0

1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5

0 0 0 0 -1 1 2 0 0

1 0 2 3 2 2 3 1 0

1 0 1 2 3 1 1 0 0

2 4 1 1 1 1 1 0 3

1 4 1 1 1 0 0 0 3

1 4 3 1 2 2 1 1 2

3 4 4 1 0 1 3 0 0

3 3 4 2 0 1 2 0 0

4 4 4 3 1 3 3 -5 0

2 3 4 2 2 2 1 0 2

4 4 5 3 2 1 1 0 3

4 2 4 3 2 1 2 1 0

*

Potential Supply (Scale from 0/rosy = no relevant potential capacity; 1/grey green = low relevant potential capacity; 2/light green = relevant potential capacity; 3/yellow green = medium relevant potential capacity; 4/blue green = high relevant potential capacity; and 5/dark green = very high (maximum) relevant potential capacity), Demand (Scale from 0/rosy = no relevant demand; 0.01-1.00/dark rosy = low relevant demand; 1.01-2.00/light red = relevant demand; 2.01-3.00/red = medium relevant demand; 3.01-4.00/dark red = high relevant demand; and 4.01-5.00/brown red = very high relevant demand), and Budget (Scale from −5/brown red = demand exceeds supply significantly = undersupply; via 0/rosy = demand = supply = neutral balance; to 5/dark green = supply exceeds the demand significantly = oversupply. Empty fields indicate neither relevant supply of nor relevant demand for the particular ecosystem service (Schematic system was adopted from Burkhard et al. 2012, 2014)

Page Page 98 98

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

Tab.4 Sociodemographic Profile of Local People in the Klias Peninsula Sociodemographic variable Gender Male

Percentage 64.1 35.9

Female Age 51 years and above

48.8

46-50 years

10.0

41-45 years

19.9

36-40 years

10.0

31-35 years

6.0

26-30 years

2.5

20-25 years

2.8

Education Level No Formal Education

27.8

Primary education

16.4

Lower secondary education

23.8

Upper secondary education

22.1

Post-secondary non-tertiary education

4.3

First stage of tertiary education

5.7

Source of income Farming

44.8

Government Servant

18.9

Labor Work

15.3

Fishery Self employed

6.8 12.5

Livestock Farmers

0.7

Self employed

1.1

Mapping budgets of ecosystem servicesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; supply and demand (e.g., energy resources) Further visual interpretation of provisioning servicesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; potential supply/demand budget is shown in Fig. 3. We exhibit energy resources as an example for the mapping of the provisioning budget because it shows clear, dynamic changes with the supply and demand of this subservices within 28 years of the study period. The top row of the map shows the distribution and land cover changes in the Klias Peninsula within 28 years. The results for this analysis, as reported by Kamlun et al. (under review), and the overall result indicated that the study area had undergone drastic land cover changes as a result of agricultural expansion. As for the potential supply map, there are some caveats that accompany our findings, which clearly show that the energy resources decreased in terms of spatial distribution, which represents the natural forest area. Natural forest can potentially supply energy resources in terms of biomass. Malaysia uses renewable energy sources, such as hydro and biomass, but these technologies are in their infancy (Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation, 2011). The map for demand displays an increase in the energy supply demand from 1985 to 2013. The increase in the population of the study area contributed to this dynamic change of the energy demand pattern represented in spatial distribution. According to Burkhard et al. (2012), the energy demand per hectare of an urbanized area depends on the population density, where it was the highest in the city center area. The respective map below (Fig.3) shows the widespread energy resources demand is concentrated in the urbanization area.

The energy resources provisioning servicesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; potential supply/budget maps indicate dynamics in the respective source-sink patterns (Burkhard et al., 2012). In our case, the energy resource budget map shows a clear undersupply of energy resources, particularly in the barren land area. Malaysia is still well endowed with energy resources, such as oil and gas (Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation, 2011), which are located outside the local scale assessment. As a result, Burkhard et al., (2014), integrated an additional input in their framework to clarify the increase of ecosystem services flows in order to meet the increased demand, which must be imported from elsewhere (Burkhard, 2014).

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016 Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 99 99

Fig.5 Land Cover Classification Maps 1985 (top left) and 2013 (top right); Maps of Energy Resources Potential Supply (2nd top left: 1985, 2nd top right: 2013); Map of Energy Resources Demand (3rd top left: 1985, 3rd top right: 2013); and Budget Map of Energy Resources for the Klias Peninsula (bottom left: 1985, bottom top right: 2013).

Page Page 100 100

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

Conclusions Roughly half of the world’s tropical forest ecosystem has been converted to different land uses. The substantial amount of conversion is mostly to agricultural land uses, which in turn negatively impact biodiversity. Oil palm is one of the most rapidly expanding crops in this region. Therefore, protecting tropical forest has become a core mission of international institute, including the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the Global Environment Facility (GEF), and the UN Collaborative Program on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries (REDD). The Malaysian tropical forest has been characterized in the past as the most biodiverse ecosystem, with enormous amounts of endemic species, particularly in Sabah. However, the demand to convert the land to oil palm plantation is increasingly accelerating. Therefore, a better approach to determine the importance of ecosystem services in the country can be helpful.

The main principal of applying integrated methodology and ecosystem services framework in this paper is to explore the potential supply of multiple provisioning services and local people’ demand associated with the source-sink of both assessment. By considering the land use characteristics and components in the study area that provide certain services, this approach offers a systematic structure to compare the potential supply and demand of ecosystem services in a non-monetary way. The application of using a ‘Matrix Model’ approach highlights the importance of certain areas using mapping and complex indicators from the site-based experts’ and local people’ perspectives. The ‘Matrix Model’ assessment, integrated with social-ecological approach, is an effective way to depict the importance of different land cover types’ potential supply and demand from multiple ecosystem services. However, the limitation of a data-poor region prevented access to high-resolution data. In our case, the medium-resolution satellite images provided a scarce result in presenting details regarding land use that would specify the ecosystem services function. Nevertheless, it is shown to be a costeffective process that is particularly useful for developing and data-poor countries to present a holistic mapping of relevant ecosystem services to illustrate the functions and demand of local people on certain services, which can be presented to policy and decision makers for the purpose of sustainable land use management. The results of matrix approach and maps show that the relevant supply of services in Malaysia is derived mostly from the natural forest ecosystem. Therefore, balancing the protection of the natural forest area is required for the services to be delivered for direct or indirect utilization.

Acknowledgement We would like to acknowledge the project RaFA team (Faculty of Regional Development and International Studies and Training Forest Enterprise Masaryk Forest Křtiny, Mendel University in Brno) for giving us the opportunity to present this framework and the findings in the international scientific conference of ‘The Role of Forest Functions within Ecosystem Services’.

References Abdulah, K.Z. (2003): Report Developing an Environmental Education Programme Targeted at Pulaimanang and Bukau Communities in Klias Peninsula. Conservation and Sustainable Use of Tropical Peat Swamp Forests and Associated Wetland Ecosystems. UNDP/GEF Funded Project. MAL/99/G31.

Andersson, E., Nykvist, B., Malinga, R., Jaramillo, F., Lindborg, R. (2015): A social-ecological analysis of ecosystem services in two different farming systems. Ambio, 44: 102–12. doi:10.1007/s13280-014-0603-y

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem 2016 Role of Forest Functions withinServices Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 101 101

Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation, 2011. Peer Review on Energy Efficiency in Malaysia [WWW Document]. URL http://www.ewg.apec.org/documents/9b_Malaysia PREE Report_Final Draft.pdf (accessed 3.20.16).

Ayanu, Y.Z., Conrad, C., Nauss, T., Wegmann, M., Koellner, T. (2012): Quantifying and Mapping Ecosystem Services Supplies and Demands: A Review of Remote Sensing Applications. Environ. Sci. Technol., 46: 8529–8541. doi:10.1021/es300157u Bagstad, K.J., Johnson, G.W., Voigt, B., Villa, F. (2013): Spatial dynamics of ecosystem service flows: A comprehensive approach to quantifying actual services. Ecosyst. Serv., 4: 117–125. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.07.012 Bodart, C., Eva, H., Beuchle, R., Raši, R., Simonetti, D., Stibig, H.-J., Brink, A., Lindquist, E. Achard, F. (2011) Pre-processing of a sample of multi-scene and multi-date Landsat imagery used to monitor forest cover changes over the tropics. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 66(5): 555–563. doi:10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2011.03.003 Braat, L.C., de Groot, R. (2012): The ecosystem services agenda:bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy. Ecosyst. Serv., 1: 4–15. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.07.011 Burkhard, B., Kandziora, M., Hou, Y., Müller, F. (2014): Ecosystem service potentials, flows and demandsconcepts for spatial localisation, indication and quantification. Landsc. Online, 34: 1–32. doi:10.3097/LO.201434 Burkhard, B., Kroll, F., Nedkov, S., Müller, F. (2012). Mapping ecosystem service supply, demand and budgets. Ecol. Indic., 21: 17–29. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.06.019 Burkhard, B., Mueller, A., Mueller, F., Grescho, V., Anh, Q., Arida, G., Bustamante, J.V. (Jappan), Chien, H. Van, Heong, K.L., Escalada, M., Marquez, L., Truong, D.T., Villareal, S. (Bong), Settele, J. (2015): Land cover-based ecosystem service assessment of irrigated rice cropping systems in southeast Asia An explorative study. Ecosyst. Serv., 14: 76–87. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.05.005 Burkhard, B., Kroll, F., Müller, F., Windhorst, W. (2009): Landscapes’ capacities to provide ecosystem services - A concept for land-cover based assessments. Landsc. Online, 15: 1–22. doi:10.3097/LO.200915 Carlson, K.M., Curran, L.M., Ponette-Gonzalez, A.G., Ratnasari, D., Ruspita, Lisnawati, N., Purwanto, Y., Brauman, K.A., Raymond, P.A. (2014): Influence of watershed-climate interactions on stream temperature, sediment yield, and metabolism along a land use intensity gradient in Indonesian Borneo. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosciences, 119: 1110–1128. doi:10.1002/2013JG002516 Costanza, R., D’Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O’Neill, R. V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R.G., Sutton, P., van den Belt, M. (1997): The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, 387: 253–260. doi:10.1038/387253a0 Costanza, R., Arge, R., Groot, R. De, Farberk, S., Grasso, M., HaDe vnnon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O’Neill, R.V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R.G., Sutton, P. and Belt, M.V.D. (1997). The value of the World’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, 387(May): 253–260. doi:10.1038/387253a0 Crossman, N.D., Burkhard, B., Nedkov, S., Willemen, L., Petz, K., Palomo, I., Drakou, E.G., Martín-Lopez, B., McPhearson, T., Boyanova, K., Alkemade, R., Egoh, B., Dunbar, M.B., Maes, J. (2013): A blueprint for mapping and modelling ecosystem services. Ecosyst. Serv. 4: 4–14. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2013.02.001 Daily, G.C. (1999), “Developing a scientific basis for managing Earth’s life support systems”,Conservation Ecology, 3(2): 14.

Daily, G.C. (1997): Nature’s Services: Societal Dependence On Natural Ecosystems, Island Press.

Washington, DC. De Groot, R. (1992): Functions of Nature: Evaluation of Nature in Environmental Planning, Management and Decision Making. Polar Rec. (Gr. Brit)., 29: xvii–315. doi:10.1017/S0032247400023779

Page Page 102 102

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

De Groot, R. S., Alkemade, R., Braat, L., Hein, L. and Willemen, L. (2010): Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision-making.

Ecological Complexity, 7(3): 260–272. doi:10.1016/j.ecocom.2009.10.006 Elliff, C.I., Kikuchi, R.K.P. (2015): Natureza & Conservação Essays and Perspectives as a tool for integrated coastal management. Nat. Conserv., 1–7. doi:10.1016/j.ncon.2015.10.001 Fisher, B., Turner, R.K., Morling, P. (2009): Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecol. Econ., 68: 643–653. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.09.014 De Groot, R., Fisher, B., Christie, M., Aronson, J., Braat, L., Gowdy, J., Haines-young, R., Maltby, E., Neuville, A., Polasky, S., Portela, R., Ring, I. (2010): Integrating the ecological and economic dimensions in biodiversity and ecosystem service valuation. Econ. Ecosyst. Biodivers. Ecol. Econ. Found., 1–40. doi:10.4324/9781849775489 Guerry, A., Polasky, S. (2015): Natural capital and ecosystem services informing decisions: From promise to practice. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA ,112 (24): 7348–7355.

Hermann, A., Schleifer, S., Wrbka, T. (2011): The Concept of Ecosystem Services Regarding Landscape Research : A Review. Living Rev. Landscape. Res., 5: 1–37. doi:10.1177/0170840609104565 Ho, S.C. (1996): Vision 2020: Towards an environmentally sound and sustainable development of freshwater resources in Malaysia. GeoJournal, 40: 73–84. doi:10.1007/BF00222534 Jacobs, S., Burkhard, B., Van Daele, T., Staes, J., Schneiders, A., Daele, T. V. (2015): `The Matrix Reloaded’: A review of expert knowledge use for mapping ecosystem services. Ecol. Modell., 295: 21–30. doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2014.08.024 Kamlun, U.K., Phua, M.-H. (2010): Assessing wetland vegetation fragmentation in Beaufort, Sabah using multitemporal satellite remote sensing. Proceedings of the Mrss 6th International Remote Sensing & GIS Conference and Exhibition. 28 & 29 April 2010. Kuala Lumpur. Malaysia: Putra World Trade Centre.

Krasny, M.E., Lundholm, C., Shava, S., Lee, E., Kobori, H. (2013): Urbanization, Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services: Challenges and Opportunities, in: Elmqvist, T., Fragkias, M., Goodness, J., Güneralp, B., Marcotullio, P.J., McDonald, R.I., Parnell, S., Schewenius, M., Sendstad, M., Seto, K.C., Wilkinson, C. (Eds.), . Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, pp. 629–664.

Layke, C. (2009): Measuring Nature’s Benefits: A Preliminary Roadmap for Improving Ecosystem Service Indicators. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC. Maes, J., Egoh, B., Willemen, L., Liquete, C. (2012): Mapping ecosystem services for policy support and decision making in the European Union. Ecosyst. Serv., 1: 31–39. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.06.004 MacAlister, C., Mahaxay, M. (2009): Mapping wetlands in the Lower Mekong Basin for wetland resource and conservation management using Landsat ETM images and field survey data. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(7): 2130–7. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.06.031 Meijaard, E., Abram, N.K., Wells, J.A., Pellier, A.S., Ancrenaz, M., Gaveau, D.L.A., Runting, R.K., Mengersen, K. (2013): People’s Perceptions about the Importance of Forests on Borneo. PLoS One, 8 (9): e73008. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0073008 Multidiciplinary (MDA) Report. (2003): Multi-Disciplinary Assessment for Klias Forest Reserve, Klias Peninsula (Sabah). Conservation and Sustainable Use of Tropical Peat Swamp Forests and Associated Wetland Ecosystems. UNDP/GEF Funded Project. MAL/99/G31.

Millenium Ecosystem Assessment. (2005): Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis, Island Press.

Washington, DC. doi:10.1196/annals.1439.003 Müller, F., Burkhard, B. (2012): The indicator side of ecosystem services. Ecosyst. Serv. 1: 26–30. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.06.001

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem 2016 Role of Forest Functions withinServices Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 103 103

Müller, F. (2005): Indicating ecosystem and landscape organisation. Ecol. Indic., 5: 280–294. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2005.03.017 Nelson, E., Mendoza, G., Regetz, J., Polasky, S., Tallis, H., Cameron, D.R., Chan, K.M.A., Daily, G.C., Goldstein, J., Kareiva, P.M., Lonsdorf, E., Naidoo, R., Ricketts, T.H., Shaw, M.R. (2009): Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales.

Front. Ecol. Environ. 7:4–11. doi:10.1890/080023 Paudyal, K., Baral, H., Burkhard, B., Bhandari, S.P., Keenan, R.J. (2014). Participatory assessment and mapping of ecosystem services in a data-poor region: Case study of community-managed forests in central Nepal. Ecosyst. Serv., 13: 81–92. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.01.007 Petter, M., Mooney, S., Maynard, S.M., Davidson, A., Cox, M., Horosak, I. (2013): A methodology to map ecosystem functions to support ecosystem services assessments. Ecol. Soc., 18. doi:10.5751/ES-05260180131 Phua, M.H., Conrad, O., Kamlisa, U.K., Fischer, M., Böhner, J. (2008): Multitemporal fragmentation analysis of peat swamp forest in the Klias Peninsula, Sabah, Malaysia using GIS and remote sensing techniques, in: Böhner, J., Blaschke, T., Montanarella, L. (Eds.), Beiträge Zur Physischen Geographie Und Landschaftsökologie. Universität Hamburg Institut für Geographie, Hamburg, pp. 81–90.

Pianzin, T.M., (2004): Preliminary Land Use Analysis and Zonation in The Klias Peninsula. UNDP/GEF Funded Project. Conservation and Sustainable Use of Tropical Peat Swamp Forests and Associated Wetland Ecosystems. UNDP/GEF Funded Project. MAL/99/G31 MAL/99/G31.

Posa, M.R.., Wijedasa, L.., Corlett, R. (2011): Biodiversity and Conservation of Tropical Peat Swamp Forests. Bioscience 61: 49–57. doi:10.1525/bio.2011.61.1.10 Rasmussen, L.V., Mertz, O., Christensen, A.E., Danielsen, F., Dawson, N., Xaydongvanh, P. (2016). A combination of methods needed to assess the actual use of provisioning ecosystem services. Ecosyst. Serv., 17: 75–86. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.11.005 Schaefer, M., Goldman, E., Bartuska, A.M., Sutton-Grier, A., Lubchenco, J. (2015): Nature as capital: Advancing and incorporating ecosystem services in United States federal policies and programs. Proc. Natl.

Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 112: 7383–9. doi:10.1073/pnas.1420500112 Schröter, M., van der Zanden, E.H., van Oudenhoven, A.P.E., Remme, R.P., Serna-Chavez, H.M., de Groot, R.S., Opdam, P. (2014): Ecosystem Services as a Contested Concept: A Synthesis of Critique and CounterArguments. Conserv. Lett. 7: 514–523. doi:10.1111/conl.12091 Seppelt, R., Dormann, C. (2011): A quantitative review of ecosystem service studies: approaches, shortcomings and the road ahead. J. Appl. Ecol., 48: 630–636. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01952.x Sha, J., Bernard, H., Nathan, S. (2008): Status and conservation of proboscis monkeys (Nasalis larvatus) in Sabah, East Malaysia. Primate Conserv. 23: 107–120. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1896/052.023.0112 Sodhi, N.S., Koh, L.P., Brook, B.W., Ng, P.K.L. (2004): Southeast Asian biodiversity: An impending disaster. Trends Ecol. Evol., 19: 654–660. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2004.09.006 Sohel, M., Mukul, S., Burkhard, B. (2015): Landscape‫ ׳‬s capacities to supply ecosystem services in Bangladesh: A mapping assessment for Lawachara National Park. Ecosyst. Serv., 12: 128–135. doi:doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.11.015 Swiderska, K. (2001): Stakeholder Participation in Policy on Access to Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Benefit-Sharing: Case Studies and Recommendations. Russell Press.

Syrbe, R.-U., Walz, U. (2012): Spatial indicators for the assessment of ecosystem services: Providing, benefiting and connecting areas and landscape metrics. Ecol. Indic., 21: 80–88. doi:10.1016/ j.ecolind.2012.02.013

Page Page 104 104

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

Szücs, L., Anders, U., Bürger-arndt, R. (2015): Assessment and illustration of cultural ecosystem services at the local scale – A retrospective trend analysis. Ecol. Indic. 50: 120–134. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.09.015 Tallis, H., Kareiva, P., Marvier, M., Chang¶, A. (2008): An ecosystem services framework to support both practical conservation and economic development. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 105: 9457–9464. doi:10.1073/pnas.0809894105 UNDP/GEF. (2006): Malaysia’s Peat Swamp Forests: Conservation and Sustainable. UNDP. Malaysia.

United Nations Environment Programme-World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC. (2010): Developing and mainstreaming ecosystem service indicators for human wellbeing: Gaps, opportunities, and next steps. Report from the workshop on Ecosystem Service Indicators. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK. Wan Izatul, A.W.T., Norhayati Mohd, T., Mohd Lokman, H. (2012): Sustainable management of forest biodiversity and the present Malaysian policy and legal framework. J. Sustain. Dev., 5: 76–83. doi:10.5539/ jsd.v5n3p76 Wolff, S., Schulp, C.J.E., Verburg, P.H. (2015): Mapping ecosystem services demand: A review of current research and future perspectives. Ecol. Indic., 55: 159–171. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.03.016 Yule, C.M. (2010): Loss of biodiversity and ecosystem functioning in Indo-Malayan peat swamp forests.

Biodivers. Conserv., 19: 393–409. doi:10.1007/s10531-008-9510-5

The Role of ForestThe Functions within Ecosystem 2016 Role of Forest Functions withinServices Ecosystem Services 2016

Page Page 105 105

EVALUATION OF PREFERENCES OF DIFFERENT FORMS OF FORESTS BY PUBLIC ON THE EXAMPLE OF TRAINING FOREST ENTERPRISE MASARYK FOREST KŘTINY (THE CZECH REPUBLIC) Konečný Ondřej, Schneider Jiří, Lorencová Helena Faculty of Regional Development and International Studies, Mendel University in Brno, Czech Republic E-mail: ondrej.konecny@mendelu.cz ABSTRACT

Themost of the Czech public do not create an image of the condition of Czech forests and forestry on the basis of their practical experience and stay in the forest, but rather indirectly. For example, on the basis of information from the media, opinions of friends, colleagues and opinion makers respectively on the basis of one or two visits of forest per year. The degree to which an individuals or group prefer a situation, condition or function compared to another situation, status or function ( Sheppard and Meitner 2005). Public preferences of species composition strongly depend on the context of factors (e.g.): •transmittance and visibility ,

•the amount of light in the forest, •its structure, as well as

•kind of forest that people use

Public preferences of forests based on literature research are also described by these facts:

•Neither tourists in rural areas nor vacationers in the suburban do not like dead wood and stumps.

•Visitors prefer forests with views of the surrounding area, because people tend to appreciate the visibility (transparency) in the forest .

•Trails, campgrounds and some construction for recreation purposes do not decrease the public impression of the forest.

•Visitors of the forest consider as the ideal slightly modified forest trails for walking, although the most forest visitors walk along paved forest roads.

There are a wide range of methods (survey, examining photographs, interviews), some of which are trying to capture the preferences directly at a particular place so that the results are not distorted by image quality, verbal possibilities and different perceptions of respondents. This paper provides an overview of current findings presented in the literature and in particular shows the results of the field survey implemented in the forests of Training Forest Enterprise Masaryk’s Forest Křtiny where groups of respondents (students with knowledge of Environmentalistic and Regional Development) evaluated a predefined forest habitats in a particular location.

Key words: Field research, Forestry, Public perception, Field survey

Page Page 106 106

The Role Role of of Forest Forest Functions Functions within within Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Services 2016 2016 The

Title

Proceedings from THE ROLE OF FOREST FUNCTIONS WITHIN ECOSYSTEM SERVICES

Name of authors

Composite authors

Publisher

Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic

Published editon

First edition, 2016

Quantity

100 pcs

Number of pages

108

Print

ASTRON studio CZ, a.s., Veselská 699, 199 00 Praha 9

ISBN

978-80-7509-464-3