19 A natural forest original condition of point A following logging may reach the state of point D. Through ecological
restoration, natural recovery, the site is likely to return to its former condition point A in terms of forest structure and biodiversity. If the logging is poorly managed, this would lead the site to a state of point E, where more species can be lost,
structure further damaged and the site may be dominated by pioneer species. Ecological restoration in the form of natural recovery is likely to occur, but may take longer and the species composition may differ somewhat, but the potential to
return to condition of point A exists. Deforestation can take the forest back to point B, which can result in changes to its structure and species composition. If the site is degraded further by fire or grazing, for example, the condition may lead to
point C where few of the original species are left, and the site is taken over by weeds. A number of restoration approaches are available for returning such degraded sites to productive ones. Reverting back from condition B to A through ecological
restoration would occur through natural regrowth and planting seedlings of the original species. Other options exist, one being monoculture planting of a timber species. This results in a new state point F. If the multispecies plantations
approach is adopted, the forest is likely to reach the condition indicated by point G. The three approaches provide the owner with choices for a forest that can produce goods, ecosystem services or a mixture of both. The time scales differ
as well, with monoculture plantations reaching their objectives fast, while ecological restoration may take much longer, perhaps a century.
3.4Forestrestoration–whatisbeingdone?
Earlier, we briefly examined the early history of forest restoration in the region, some country successes and many of the restoration techniques in common use or which are under development. At this juncture we shall examine what
the countries under review are doing and what conditions are needed for success. The findings from China, Indonesia, Myanmar, Nepal, the Philippines, Thailand and Viet Nam are summarized below.
3.4.1 China
Earlier it was indicated how China recovered from forest loss through massive monoculture plantations. China conducted reforestation projects in the 1950s and promoted intercropping and shelterbelts in the 1960s Hyde 2003. Several topical
reforms were introduced which emulated the success of agricultural reforms. However, the environmental disasters of 1998 precipitated massive changes in China’s forestry development – laws and regulations were revised and forest policies
were given higher attention SFA 2009. The main objectives of the policy changes are outlined in Box 1.
Authority to control forests was devolved to various management bodies of collectives and state-owned forests. Major forestry programmes were initiated; investments in forest establishment and rehabilitation were stepped up; a forest
management classification was introduced; compensation funds for forest ecological services were established; and collective forest ownership systems and clear property rights were introduced. Despite the criticisms the afforestation
programmes have received, some of the policy changes and management practices have clearly proven to be positive in China’s restoration efforts.
Some of the more recent programmes for promoting forest expansion include the Six Major Forestry Programmes Box 2. Among them is the Protection and Conversion of Croplands Programme which is referred to as the ‘Grain-for-Green
Programme’ which resulted in planting trees in marginal agricultural area. Others include afforestation and greening programmes for desertification control, wildlife conservation and development of shelterbelts and plantations. As a result,
forest cover increased at 1.6 percent annually during the period 2000-2010 FAO 2010 a,b.
Box1.MainpolicyobjectivesofChinasince1998
• To improve biodiversity conservation and secure national ecological safety. • To restore key ecosystems.
• To promote sustainable forest management – switching from forest expansion to forest quality. • To clarify forest land tenure and secure farmers’ rights to forest and forest land management.
• To promote forest industry, which favours a balance between production and conservation. • To strengthen international cooperation.
Source: Chen 2008
Box2.ProgrammespromotingChina’splantationexpansion In line with the national forestry strategy, major forestry programmes were initiated. These are referred to as the Six
Major Forestry Programmes:
1. The Natural Forest Protection Programme includes logging bans and afforestation with incentives to forest enterprises.
2. Conversion of Cropland for Forests and Grassland Programme often referred to as the Grain for Green Programme.
20
3.4.2 Indonesia
Indonesia has introduced some 150 official rehabilitation projects in the last 50 years; the number has increased rapidly since the 1990s in tandem with the deforestation rate Box 3. The technical approaches were mainly the taungya system
for conservation of watersheds, single- and multi-species industrial plantations and restoration enrichment planting of degraded lands for community and farm forestry programmes. Several policies were promulgated to support the restoration
work. The main ones included steps to reclassify forests, reforestation funds, a transparent and participatory master plan and a policy focusing on people’s involvement in forest rehabilitation Box 3.
Despite the successful establishment of industrial timber plantations by some corporate growers, efforts to restore forest cover on degraded lands in Indonesia have been much less successful. Nawir and Rumboko 2007 point out that some
US68 million were allocated for rehabilitating 5.5 million ha, but this only achieved restoring 19 percent of the area. Although the cost for rehabilitation was effective, the funds were misused. In some cases, reforestation funds were
siphoned off for non-forestry purposes. Nawir and Rumboko 2007 reviewed the conditions which can strengthen forest restoration Box 4. They relate very strongly to community participation, clarity of ownership issues and encouraging
greater private sector involvement in forest restoration.
Box4.ConditionstostrengthenforestrestorationinIndonesia:
• Reform the funding mechanism policy to avoid project-oriented approaches at the expense of also considering the broader context in which forest restoration is taking place.
• Address the causes of deforestation and degradation in the design of the restoration initiative. • Increase community participation by ensuring both short- and long-term benefits.
• Strengthen institutional arrangements and ensure ownership issues are clear in order to reduce conflict and improve community participation.
• Address the factors that influence community adoption of forestry restoration initiatives e.g. ignorance of the techniques.
• Ensure long-term management planning and sustainability for restoration initiatives. • Use the restoration approach that best fits the local conditions – the status of the forestland, markets and the
population is going to influence the outcome of restoration work. • Make good use of the decentralization policy by getting the local government, which knows the most about
local conditions, to lead the process of designing the most appropriate restoration programmes. • Encourage the private sector to lead restoration programmes with commercial interests, with government-
Box3.MajorforestrestorationpoliciesofIndonesia
• Forest Land Use by Consensus 1984 – targeted for improving rehabilitation in state forests. • Reforestation Funds 1980, 2002 – supported forest plantations and state forest rehabilitation programmes.
• Master Plan for Forest and Land Rehabilitation 2000 – provided the basis for planning rehabilitation programmes that could be integrated, transparent, participatory and based on local regions’ aspirations and
uniqueness. • National Movement for Forest and Land Rehabilitation 2003, 2007 – focused on people’s involvement in
forest and land rehabilitation. • Forest Landscape for Revitalizing Communities 2002, 2009 – included community-based forestry plantations,
community forestry, village forests and ecosystem restoration. • New strategic priorities for 2010-2014 were announced in 2010 – they included establishment of forest area
zoning units, forest rehabilitation and watershed carrying capacity improvement, fire control, biodiversity conservation, revitalization of forest use and forest industry, empowerment of local communities, climate
change mitigation and adaptation, and strengthening forestry institutions.
Source: Nawir et al. see p. 53
3. Sandification Control Programme. 4. Key Shelterbelts Programme.
5. Wildlife Conservation and Nature Reserve Development Programme. 6. Fast Growing and High Yielding Forests Base Construction Programme.
Source: FAO 2010 a,b
