Explore the vast range of titles available.

Globally, there is no single universally agreed‐upon definition of Indigenous Peoples, yet specific criteria are typically used to define whether someone is Indigenous or not, namely self‐identification, historical continuity, linkage to ancestral land and distinctive social, cultural and economic systems. This paper argues that the current definition criteria only act as guiding principles to explain the situation of Indigenous Peoples and does not embrace all Indigenous Peoples. We use three colonial contexts, i.e., countries where colonisers left, settled permanently, and where colonisation did not occur, to explain the current Indigenous Peoples' situation. By drawing the insights from selected cases, we found that either one or two of these criteria, such as cultural and self‐identification, are commonly applied to identify Indigenous Peoples. The cases also showed that recognising rights of Indigenous Peoples to land has been found to offer a positive outcome for conservation and creating socio‐cultural and economic opportunities for the people (e.g., biodiversity conservation, greenhouse gas abatement). We emphasise that not only the definition, but the legal recognition of land rights and involvement of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities would be of the utmost importance to continue cultural practices attached to their ancestral lands, allowing them to be involved with natural resource management and biodiversity conservation decision‐making, that eventually relates to self‐determination, equity and social and economic justice. This paper presents how common definitional criteria for Indigenous Peoples – such as self‐identification and cultural distinctiveness – are often used selectively and fall short of recognising their collective land rights. Drawing on case studies, our paper argues that legal recognition of Indigenous land rights is essential for effective biodiversity conservation, continuity of cultural practices and the pursuit of equity, social and economic justice. Recognising Indigenous knowledge systems embedded with cultural and land rights can contribute to conservation science and practices.

This study examines the determinants of forest and tree-product uses in rural households across three sites of different proximity to roads and forests in the Chittagong Hill Tracts region in Bangladesh. A structured questionnaire survey was conducted with 300 households of different ethnic groups, located in three different locations (remote, intermediate, on-road), to collect information on their forest and tree use during 2015-2016. We gathered information on household socioeconomic characteristics (family size, education level of head of household, size of farmland), location (three sites), and ethnic affiliation. By conducting a series of logistic regression modeling, we analyzed the key determinants that would explain the variations in forest use in the households. We recorded twelve different forest and tree products used in the households, primarily for subsistence purposes and cash income. Fuelwood, vegetables, and fish were recorded as the most important forest-sourced products used by people, regardless of socioeconomic condition, location context, and ethnic affiliation. Household land/farm size, location, and ethnic background explained significant variations in the use of forest and tree products (mainly timber, fodder for livestock). The greater the size of the landholding, the more likely timber was used for both subsistence and cash income, but the less the reliance on other products (fuelwood, thatch grass, vegetables). Our findings suggest that the location and ethnic characteristics of the rural households are important for understanding the diverse needs for forest and tree use, and should be factored into the site-specific management and sustainable use of forest and tree resources in Bangladesh and other tropical developing countries.

IntroductionForests support crucial ecosystem services globally, and contribute to the livelihoods of millions of people, but are threatened by agricultural expansion and intensification. Yet the relationship between forest cover and agricultural intensification, and how it mediates people’s access to and use of resources has been seldom studied globally.MethodsUsing remote sensing imagery and household surveys, we analyzed the effects of forest cover change on forest access (visitation) and household use of resources along a gradient from lower to higher land use intensification across seven tropical landscapes in low and middle income countries.ResultsWe find that increased agricultural intensification lowered forest visitation in the high intensification zone compared to the low to medium intensification zones. Forest types and changes, such as stable forests, forest gains and edge density, positively impacted household use of forest-sourced food and construction materials and visitation, highlighting the importance of sustainable forest management.DiscussionOur results complement the evidence of forest cover change by looking at agricultural intensification zones, which reveal the site-specific trends of forest types, ownership and household demand for ecosystem services. We recommend integrated landscape approaches with context and site-specific solutions to address the variability of forest types and multiple management goals that can be achieved with agricultural production and equitable access to provisioning goods and services in complex multi-functional landscapes.

We focused on key aspects of forest governance for biodiversity conservation in implementing new climate change policies. The national forest institutions must be adaptive to identify the existing pitfalls of prior conservation policies to take advantage of new climate change policies. Strengthening roles and technical capacity of national institutions for systematic biodiversity monitoring and carbon stock assessment is required in developing and least developed countries. Community participation needs careful analysis to ensure equitable access of particular social groups to local decision-making processes and to sustain optional livelihoods. The livelihood options around forest reserves or protected areas must be taken into account to enhance forest-based adaptation.

Researchers increasingly investigate ecosystem services to assess their role in supporting livelihoods, well-being and economic value in order to inform decision-making. Many studies have explored links between ecosystem services and community-based livelihoods, with a very narrow focus on the importance of land use to well-being. We evaluated the value of ecosystem services from various land uses supporting livelihoods and the overall well-being of local communities in the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT) of Bangladesh. By applying a participatory habitat valuation approach with the ethnic communities from eight villages, we explored their preferences for, and perceptions of, ecosystem services and their sources in a multi-functional landscape under different land use, i.e., forest, swidden and low-land agriculture, fruit orchard and water bodies, and three land ownership contexts (state, private and mixed ownership on forest lands). Our findings revealed that community land use preference for ecosystem services supports ten different well-being needs. Among others, forests were valued land used for two-thirds of well-being needs, including the provision of shelter, nutrition, primary health care, an adequate supply of potable water, a lower level of ecological stress (i.e., protection from associated landslide soil erosion), cultural and spiritual benefits and livestock foraging. People commonly valued the food, income and nutrition contributions of all land uses. However, different forest and land ownership contexts and rights within the landscape influence people’s preference for ecosystem services from land use in supporting their well-being. People with secure ownership (i.e., private and private-community) showed a broad and positive appreciation for ecosystem services to meet their well-being needs. Our study highlights that local and ethnic people’s land-use preferences and ownership contexts are critical factors in assessing well-being in the context of multifunctional landscapes. We recommend that ecosystem services be considered in future decision-making related to forest and land use to support human well-being.

Context Increasing agricultural production shapes the flow of ecosystem services (ES), including provisioning services that support the livelihoods and nutrition of people in tropical developing countries. Although our broad understanding of the social-ecological consequences of agricultural intensification is growing, how it impacts provisioning ES is still unknown. Objectives We examined the household use of provisioning ES across a gradient of increasing agricultural production in seven tropical countries (Bangladesh, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Nicaragua and Zambia). We answered two overarching questions: (1) does the use of provisioning ES differ along gradients of agriculture production ranging from zones of subsistence to moderate and to high agriculture production? and (2) are there synergies and/or trade-offs within and among groups of ES within these zones? Methods Using structured surveys, we asked 1900 households about their assets, livestock, crops, and collection of forest products. These questions allowed us to assess the number of provisioning ES households used, and whether the ES used are functionally substitutable (i.e., used similarly for nutrition, material, and energy). Finally, we explored synergies and trade-offs among household use of provisioning ES. Results As agricultural production increased, provisioning ES declined both in total number and in different functional groups used. We found more severe decreases in ES for relatively poorer households. Within the functional groups of ES, synergistic relationships were more often found than trade-offs in all zones, including significant synergies among livestock products (dairy, eggs, meat) and fruits. Conclusions Considering landscape context provides opportunities to enhance synergies among provisioning services for households, supporting resilient food systems and human well-being.

Coastal ecosystems generate diverse services, such as protection, production of food, climate regulation and recreation across the globe. These services are vital for extremely vulnerable coastal areas for enhancing present and future adaptation capacity under changing climate. Bangladesh has long coastline which provides opportunities to large population for multiple resource uses; and threats from extreme natural disasters. The CBACC-Coastal Afforestation is the priority initiative of Bangladesh NAPA that has come in actions under first LDCF adaptation project. The project has focused to reduce climatic vulnerability through enhancing resilience of coastal forests and adaptive capacity of communities. With a total of 6, 100 ha of new mangrove plantation and introducing 10 important mangrove species in existing monoculture areas, the project increased protective and carbon rich forest coverage, and also functional capacity of coastal vegetation to adapt to current and future climatic shocks. Concurrently, the project developed cobenefit regime for community based adaptation through innovating integrated land uses for livelihoods of adjacent households. A new land use model (Forest, Fish and Fruit-Triple F) has been implemented to restore fallow coastal lands into community based livelihood adaptation practices. The Triple F practice has reduced inundation and salinity risks and freshwater scarcity in cultivation of agricultural crops and fish. The rational land uses improved household adaptation capacity of landless households through short-, mid-and long-term income generation. The project lesson has further focus to justify the land use innovation for harnessing potential opportunities of ecosystem based adaptation in coastal Bangladesh.

Forest and trees provide a range of benefits (i.e. ecosystem services) which are particularly important in supporting livelihoods of rural communities in tropical developing countries. However sustaining forest benefits and their future provision remains challenging due to various factors including forest loss driven by agriculture conversion, ineffective national policies for forest management and competing land uses. There is a need to understand forest cover changes and land use impacts on livelihoods and identify ways their benefits can be sustained.This thesis investigates the relationships between forests and livelihoods by examining the forest benefits used and perceived by rural communities, and how changing forest and land uses impact the benefits in different landscape contexts (i.e. remote, intermediate and on-road zones) of the Chittagong Hill Tracts region (CHT) region in Bangladesh. The research addressed 4 key objectives: (1) to examine the relative importance of forest ecosystem services in rural households; (2) to examine the trends and impacts of recent forest cover change on ecosystem services that support rural livelihoods; (3) to analyse the current land use patterns of households and association between forest and tree covers with livelihood outcomes (i.e. food production, income) along three zones and (4) to review forest related policies in Bangladesh to examine how the ecosystem services are represented in supporting rural livelihoods with particular reference to the CHT region. The research applied a mixed method approach using household and farm surveys, analysis of forest-cover change using remote sensing images, focus group discussions using participatory rural appraisal tools, and key informant interviews. A wealth classification of rural households (i.e. low, middle and high) was applied to differentiate the use and perceived forest ecosystem services. To understand forest cover change both satellite imagery analysis and community perceptions were considered. Land use surveys were conducted including tree areas at households and the relative livelihood outcomes of forests and trees to other land uses across 3 zones. This research found that more households used forest provisioning ecosystem services for subsistence purposes than for cash income. Subsistence uses were higher within the low-wealth households. Although satellite image analysis showed a net gain of forest areas during 1989-2003, most household respondents observed a decline in provisioning ecosystem services (i.e. fuel wood, construction materials, wild foods, and fresh water) due to forest cover loss over the last 30 years. Although there was a small gain of forest (mainly planted forest), the respondents perceived an overall loss of forest due to a decline of natural forests. The land use surveys revealed a transition of land uses from swidden farming to planted tree areas including fruit orchards and cash crop agriculture in the regions’ households. In particular households used large areas of land for plantation trees to enhance annual income from timber in the on-road and intermediate zone. In contrast, households used more diverse land uses including crop lands, fallow lands and natural forests for food sources and cash income in the remote zone, but owned smaller areas of tree covered lands than in the other zones. Finally, the study found that forest related policies in Bangladesh do not explicitly recognise ecosystem service-based forest and tree management to maintain multiple benefits in supporting rural livelihoods.This research recommends ecosystem service-based forest and tree management policy approaches may assist in maintaining a range of forest and tree benefits which have both local and global importance. Efforts to increase tree-based land uses and their benefits in rural livelihoods of Bangladesh and tropical developing countries requires landscape level interventions.

The horticulture sector in northern Australia, covering north of Western Australia (WA), Northern Territory (NT), and north Queensland (QLD), contributes $1.6 billion/year to the Australian economy by supplying diverse food commodities to meet domestic and international demand. To date, the Australian Government has funded several studies on developing the north’s agriculture sector, but these primarily focused on land and water resources and omitted an integrated, on-ground feasibility analysis for including farmers’/growers’ perspectives. This study is the first of its kind in the north for offering a detailed integrated assessment, highlighting farmers’ perspectives on the current state of the north’s horticulture sector, and related challenges and opportunities. For this, we applied a bottom-up approach to inform future agriculture development in the region, involving a detailed literature review and conducting several focus group workshops with growers and experts from government organisations, growers’ associations, and regional development agencies. We identified several key local issues pertaining to crop production, availability of, and secure access to, land and water resources, and workforce and marketing arrangements (i.e., transport or processing facilities, export opportunities, biosecurity protocols, and the role of the retailers/supermarkets) that affect the economic viability and future expansion of the sector across the region. For example, the availability of the workforce (skilled and general) has been a challenge across the north since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Similarly, long-distance travel for farm produce due to a lack of processing and export facilities in the north restricts future farm developments. Any major investment should be aligned with growers’ interests. This research highlights the importance of understanding and incorporating local growers’ and researchers’ perspectives, applying a bottom-up approach, when planning policies and programs for future development, especially for the horticulture sector in northern Australia and other similar regions across the globe where policy makers’ perspectives may differ from farmers.