In the face of climate change managing water resources is becoming more difficult. In an effort to manage increased water variability, there is a competing discourse on the need for more built infrastructure (e.g. dams, canals and levees) to store and regulate water in order to support social and economic development and facilitate adaptation to climate change.
Something interesting is happening in Kenya – something that, if successful, could reverberate through Africa and transform the continent’s landscape management. Formerly all-powerful state agencies are handing over day-to-day control of key resources like forests, rivers and wildlife to local communities.
In a recent review of the SDGs, the goal on food security, improved nutrition and sustainable agriculture is a vast improvement over the MDGs, which did not consider agriculture at all. But, the SDGs fail to address important complementarities and tradeoffs among goals and their targets.
We’d like to present you with a summary of what’s been in scientific and popular literature this month on the theme of Ecosystem Services and Resilience.
Just one week before World Wetlands Day, at a meeting in Myanmar, Environment Ministers of the Greater Mekong Subregion reaffirmed their commitment to “green” economic growth. The challenge they recognized is ensuring not only sustainable growth but also inclusive and shared growth.
It seems obvious: if it’s called the Dry Zone it must be dry. Right? Located in a central plain, sandwiched by highlands to the east and west, the Dry Zone of Myanmar is the driest part of the country. But is lack of water really the problem?
What is the best way to navigate through the mountain of publications that emerged from 2014 to find the gems that should absolutely be on your reading list? For those looking to brush up on their knowledge on ecosystem services and resilience, we’re sharing the top ten reads as identified by a polling of the ESR Working Group.
What do you do with a landscape when it has been overwhelmed by a tsunami? When the coastline is altered beyond recognition, the paddy fields filled with salt, the trees flattened, the villages washed away and the population decimated?
What did you think of the posts from this past month? What does the future hold for large-scale land initiatives? Leave your thoughts and opinions in the comment area below!
Would you like to know the future? More specifically, the future of the Mekong River Basin? You could go to a fortune teller, or, assuming you would prefer something rather a bit more realistic and reliable, you could read Smajgl and Ward’s excellent compilation of recent research on Mekong futures.
Large scale agricultural expansion is a controversial topic in current development debates. Investments in land for agricultural production can potentially bring important economic and social benefits. Yet, increasing the agricultural areal often happens at the expense of forests, resulting in biodiversity losses and greenhouse gas emissions.
It looks like the triple bottom line might be gaining headway in the development sector. Despite the long-standing schism between Wall Street investors and environmental or social activists, the two sides are starting to find common ground at the increasingly popular landscape intersection.
When we talk about large-scale landscape initiatives, one of the biggest risks is losing out on the detail. How do we continue to take into account the intricate dynamics between people and nature as we go bigger and bigger?
The new battle cry uniting climate campaigners, environmentalists, agriculturalists and advocates of a landscape approach to planning is for the restoration of former forest land. But what do we mean by “restoration”? Restoration to what? And for whom?
Fruit trees are the cornerstone of Central Asian agriculture. They grow well in water-scarce environments, help restore soils and are an important source of food and nutrition. It appears now that these trees may also hold the key to restoring degraded lands in the region’s mountains.
Who are the stakeholders in landscape initiatives in South and Southeast Asia? Recent study finds that the private sector is the least involved actor. What are the incentives for a true multi-stakeholder approach?