Deforestation and forest degradation in southern Burkina Faso: Understanding the drivers of change and options for revegetation
Table Of Contents
<p> <b>TABLE OF CONTENTS </b></p><p>ABSTRACT .......................................................................................................................................3 </p><p>PREFACE ..........................................................................................................................................5 </p><p>LIST OF ORIGINAL PAPERS ...........................................................................................................6 </p><p>TABLE OF CONTENTS ....................................................................................................................8 </p><p>
Chapter ONE
<b></b></p><p>1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 10 </p><p>1.1. Land use, land-use and forestry (LULUCF) ....................................................................... 10 </p><p>1.2. Tropical deforestation ........................................................................................................ 12 </p><p>1.3. Deforestation and forest degradation in sub-Saharan Africa and the Sahel .......................... 13 </p><p>1.4. Deforestation and forest degradation in Burkina Faso ........................................................ 15 </p><p>1.5. Activities and factors influencing revegetation/regrowth in Burkina Faso .......................... 16 </p><p>1.6. Study aims and objectives ................................................................................................. 17 </p><p><b>
Chapter TWO
</b><br></p><p>2. Theoretical framework ............................................................................................................ 19 </p><p>2.1. General ................................................................................................................................... 19 </p><p>2.2. Review of approaches repelling deforestation ..................................................................... 23 </p><p>2.3. Forest transition theory ....................................................................................................... 26 </p><p>2.4. Overall study framework .................................................................................................... 28 </p><p><b>
Chapter THREE
</b><br></p><p>3. Materials and methods.............................................................................................................. 30 </p><p>3.1. Study sites .......................................................................................................................... 30 </p><p>3.2. Methods ............................................................................................................................. 32 </p><p>3.2.1. The effects of tenure insecurity and household assets on deforestation (study I) ............. 32 </p><p>3.2.2. Poverty and environmental degradation (study II) ......................................................... 33 </p><p>3.2.3. Smallholder tree planting activity (study III) ................................................................. 35 </p><p>3.2.4. Relative importance of trees for livelihoods and their potentials for environmental
protection (study IV) ................................................................................................................. 35 </p><p><b>
Chapter FOUR
</b><br></p><p>4. Results ..................................................................................................................................... 38 </p><p>4.1. The role of tenure insecurity and asset holdings on deforestation (I) ...................................... 38 </p><p>4.2. Poverty and environmental degradation: is there a link? (II) ................................................. 40 </p><p>4.3. Smallholder tree planting activity (III) ................................................................................. 43 </p><p>4.4. Relative importance of trees for livelihood values and environmental protection (IV) ......... 46 </p><p><b>
Chapter FIVE
</b><br></p><p>5. Discussion ................................................................................................................................ 49 </p><p>5.1. Review of the study approach .............................................................................................. 49 </p><p>5.1.1. Limitations of the forest transition theory ...................................................................... 52</p><p>5.2. Drivers of deforestation and forest degradation ................................................................... 53 </p><p>5.3. Poverty and environmental degradation .............................................................................. 55 </p><p>5.4. Smallholder tree plantations and assisted natural regeneration activity ................................ 56 </p><p>5.5. Tree knowledge for livelihood values and environmental protection ................................... 57 </p><p><b>CHAPTER SIX</b><br></p><p>6. Conclusions and Recommendations ........................................................................................... 59 </p><p>References ........................................................................................................................................ 63
<br></p>
Project Abstract
<p> <b>ABSTRACT</b> </p><p>Tropical deforestation and forest degradation (DD) contribute approximately 15% of the
annual global anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. However, they are considered
the main emissions sources in most developing countries. Despite the potentials of forest and
tree plantations to mitigate the effects of climate change through carbon sequestration, DD
still remains a challenge in Africa. Globally, the forests of Africa are the most depleted of all
tropical regions, with only 30% of historical forest area still remaining. In addition, Africa’s
complexity in terms of its geography, politics, socioculture, economy, institutions etc. is an
indication of why Africa has defied all simple solutions in addressing DD a phenomenon
considered location- and situation-specific.
The biophysical setting of Burkina Faso exposes the central and northern region to drought
and desertification. Such conditions have caused human migration to the southwestern
regions, which offer better opportunities for rain-fed agriculture, but also experiences the
highest rates of deforestation. On the other hand, the ongoing regreening process in the Sahel
through tree planting and assisted natural regeneration of indigenous tree species is a signal
for regrowth and revegetation. This study contributes to understanding the drivers of DD in
four adjacent village communities in the Ziro province, southern Burkina Faso in the light of
the forest transition theory. Specifically, this study assesses the drivers of DD at the
farm/forest level and also identifies options for regrowth/revegetation. This dissertation
consists of four articles (studies I, II, III, and IV). Studies I and II refer to stage two of the
forest transition curve (forest frontier) while studies III and IV refer to stage four of the curve
(forest/plantations/agricultural mosaics).
Various methods were used during data collection, including interviews with key informants,
focus group discussions (FGDs), two hundred household interviews (studies I, II, and III),
gathering a list of local botanical knowledge from 48 participants (study IV), and a field
survey. Qualitative and quantitative methods were used in analyzing the data.
Low agricultural production expressed in the sizes (areas) and ages of farms together with
land tenure insecurity were found to lead to increased deforestation. Results suggested that a
10% increase in farm size would result in a 4% increase in annual deforestation (study I).
Furthermore, results in study II indicated that non-poor and fairly poor farmers contributed
more towards activities considered environmentally degrading, such as deforestation,
overgrazing etc., than the poorest farmers. On the other hand, the adoption of sustainable land
management practices was relatively low among the poorest farmers.
Tree planters were mainly farmers who held large and old farm areas, were literate and
relatively wealthy, held favorable attitudes towards tree planting, and had participated in a
farmers’ group for several years (study III). Local knowledge of tree species was found to be
unevenly distributed in relation to gender, age, ethnic group, and location. Plant species
assigned relatively high use-values for livelihood include Adansonia digitata, Parkia
biglobosa, Vitellaria paradoxa, and Balanites aegyptiaca. On the other hand, Adansonia
digitata, Tamarindus indica, and Ficus thonningii were considered more important for
environmental protection (study IV).
The dissertation concludes that tenure insecurity and low agricultural production contribute to
DD at the farm/forest level on the one hand while tree plantations, land management
practices, such as fallow, zai pits (a traditional soil and water conservation technique), and
assisted natural regeneration of indigenous tree species are important activities promoting
regrowth/revegetation. </p><p> <b><i>Key words Tenure insecurity, land management, smallholder farmers, field expansion,
poverty, Burkina Faso
</i></b>
<br></p>
Project Overview