Abstract
Many countries have adopted large-scale tree planting programmes as a climate mitigation strategy and to support local livelihoods. We evaluate a series of large-scale tree planting programmes using data collected from historical Landsat imagery in the state of Himachal Pradesh in Northern India. Using this panel dataset, we use an event study design to estimate the socioeconomic and biophysical impacts over decades of these programmes. We find that tree plantings have not, on average, increased the proportion of forest canopy cover and have modestly shifted forest composition away from the broadleaf varieties valued by local people. Further cross-sectional analysis, from a household livelihood survey, shows that tree planting supports little direct use by local people. We conclude that decades of expensive tree planting programmes in this region have not proved effective. This result suggests that large-scale tree planting may sometimes fail to achieve its climate mitigation and livelihood goals.
Highlights
Further cross-sectional analysis, from a household livelihood survey, shows that tree planting supports little direct use by local people
Restoration ecologists have cautioned that tree planting should not be equated with forest restoration, but instead countries should consider diverse restoration strategies in diverse ecosystems[7]
Forest restoration commitments made under international agreements like the Bonn Challenge and UNFCCC Paris
Summary
Further cross-sectional analysis, from a household livelihood survey, shows that tree planting supports little direct use by local people. We conclude that decades of expensive tree planting programs in this region have not proved effective This result shows that large-scale tree planting may sometimes fail to achieve its climate mitigation and livelihood goals. Many countries have begun adopting large-scale tree-planting programs based on the potential of forests to absorb carbon and support local livelihoods[1,2,3]. We still lack rigorous quantitative studies that directly evaluate the performance of tree planting, in such a political environment, along multiple dimensions[12,13,14] This evidence gap stems from the difficulty of obtaining long-term outcome data on forest cover and rural livelihoods, and counterfactual research designs that credibly link these outcomes to policy. The first result implies that tree planting has not contributed to climate-change mitigation, and the second implies that tree planting has not improved the availability of trees that support rural livelihoods
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
