ENVIRONMENTAL AND FINANCIAL SYNERGIES ON AFFORESTATION OF DEGRADED LANDS V. Blujdea – Forest Research and Management Institute Bucharest I. Abrudan – Transilvania University of Brasov

Romania Climate: mild continental Temperature: o C Precipitation: 385 mm (L) and >1000 mm (H) West/East: 700/ 400 mm Relief: balanced among plains\hills\mountains

A place like any other ….

but vulnerable to …

Drought intensity areas in Romania (according to palfay index corrected by soil properties, relief and ground water)

Hazards in Romania OVERALL, ALL ARRABLE AGRICULTURAL LAND OF THE COUNTRY IS AFFECTED BY DROUGHT and HALF OF THE COUNTRY AREA IS AFFECTED BY DIFFERENT LAND DEGRADATION TYPE

NAP/UNCCD: Drought and Land Degradation and their combat …. Monitoring, warning, prevention of drought Rehabilitation and improvement of the irrigation system Improve land use and balance at local/regional scale (afforestation, …) Improvement of hydrological regime of the rivers Improvement of land use practices Promotion of drought tolerant crops Promotion of close to nature ecosystems management Water management systems

Afforestation of bad lands in Romania Tradition, Experience, Continuity, Necessity Financing of afforestation works Dedicated sources (special funds: Degraded Lands Afforestation Fund, own companies effort) EU funds (SAPARD and structural) Joint Implementation approach (under Kyoto Protocol)

What is synergy ? A mutually advantageous conjunction of distinct elements (a common dictionary definition) Hunt three rabbits with one single bullet ? Share one piece of …. to three lions ?

Land degradation / desertification Climate change Biological Diversity Multiple partners Financial synergies Environmental synergies Long term commitment Sustainable development KPs JI/CDM approach in afforestation of degraded lands

How we practically deal with …? Afforestation activity / project cycle: A.Development of partnership B.Land availability and land use C.Type of structure to be created D.Technology to be used E.Chosen of species to be planted F.Incentives G.Ensure sustainability of the forest/ administration/ management type / local integration H.Units of C transfer

A. Partners interested … Communities ?Communities ? Private owners ?Private owners ? State forests administrator ?State forests administrator ? Issues: uncertain land property, financial, uncertain will, long negotiations, weak/ lack of capacity of administration, technical solutions at command, communication problems

B. Type of structures to be created … Ecological restorationEcological restoration Plantations / tree cropsPlantations / tree crops AgroforestryAgroforestry Energy plantationsEnergy plantations Plantations with socio-economical purposesPlantations with socio-economical purposes Pioneer/ transitory plantationsPioneer/ transitory plantations Issues: targeted function of the new forest, local needs, local threats, local vulnerability, land status, former land use

C. Land availability and actual land use … Ownership on the land Land use category and real land use Land status Aggregation of lands Issues: cadastral situation, ownership (clear ?), land use correlate with vegetation type, land status (chemical, physical and biological degradation), legislation on land use, procedures on LUC, EIA (?), land consolidation (total area, shape of the contour), conservation approaches, institutional communication, limited capacity of negotiations of the different stakeholders or decision makers

D. Technology to be used … Land preparation Soil preparation Planting technology Issues: former land use, intensivity of the works (terracing, deep ploughing vs. strips preparation), complexity of the plantations works

E. Chosen of species to be planted … A high request of fast growing and dense wood species In degraded lands combat is a request of species that quickly halt the erosional processes and soon provide services Management objectives of the plantations Issues: Multitude of options regarding species - exotic vs. native; legal restrictions regarding use of species (Golden Law of Local Provenance); rate of C sequestration vs. C offsets income; owner wish; endeavored functions of the new stand; availability of the seedling on recommended species, collateral problems (genetic introgression, invasion, management, non-permanence, vulnerability), assess risks related to species used

SpeciesArea (ha) Indigenous species Fraxinus communis, Fraxinus ornus, Fraxinus pallisae178 Populus alba, Populus nigra1455 Salix sp.310 Pinus nigra30 Pyrus pyraster, Prunus cerasifera, Ulmus laevis, Crataegus monogyna, Juglans regia, Morus alba19 Quercus patraea, Quercus robur, Acer campestre, Acer tataricum, Acer platanoides, Cerasus avium, Alnus incana, Carpinus betulus 157 Quercus cerris, Tilia cordata, Tilia argentea136 Quercus pedunculiflora1009 Rosa cannina, Ligustrum vulgare19 Total indigenous species3313 (55 %) Exotic species Elaeaganus angustifolia, Ailantus altissima739 Gleditschia triachantos274 Quercus rubra4 Robinia pseudacacia1688 Ulmus turkmeniaca, Prunus mahaleb15 Total exotic species2720 (45 %) TOTAL afforested area in project6033 (100 %) Area on species and groups of species (according technical afforestations plans)

Pattern of C sequestration in tree plantations Species (tC/ha) Total biomass Woody biomass Soil (incl. litter) Quercus sp Populus sp Robinia sp

C accumulation projection and validation

F. Incentives for … Who afford what ? (big administrators vs. small land owners) Local species planting may/should be an incentive for additional payment by the C offsets buyer? It is a subject of negotiation Free services for local people (no charge for forest fruits or medicinal, bees keeping)

G. Ensure sustainability of the new forest/ administration/ management type / local integration Management plansManagement plans Protection against illegal cut, grazing, insects outbreaks, forest firesProtection against illegal cut, grazing, insects outbreaks, forest fires Awareness and compensation programmeAwareness and compensation programme Issues: long term forest management; decentralization is just happening in Romania; addressing grass roots problems of the communities - compensation measures; limited knowledge on cross sectoral or integrated management

Accumulated CO 2 M1M1 M2M2 M3M3 5 years balance Re - parametyzing the model H. Carbon and biodiversity monitoring

Conclusions Options & Trade-offs: Options & Trade-offs: Which step ? Scientific soundness is needed every step Afforestation activity (of degraded lands) could be financially supported via sequestered carbon transactions C financing may act as incentive in the mobilizing national/other partner resources Plantations of degraded lands creates multi-benefits for local population and environment