8/4/2019 Adewole Olagoke_Current Issues in Forestry Poster
1/1
Forests are valued for multiple purposes at local, national and
global levels; offering benefits such as carbon sequestration,
andmaking significant contributions to national and local
livelihoods, particularly in developing countries. The potential of
protected
areas (PAs) in meeting the criteria for implementation of the
schemes for reduced emissions from deforestation and forest
degradation plus forest enhancement (REDD+) in developing
countries have been identified (Coad et al2008).
Protected areas provide case study for REDD, from which lessons
can be learnt from experience on their success or otherwise in
reducing deforestation and support for local livelihoods, as
influenced by various management strategies (Campbell etal, 2008)
.
OBJECTIVE
RECONCILING BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION, CARBON STORAGE ANDLOCAL
LIVELIHOODS IN PROTECTED AREAS:
prospects for REDD+ in Nigeria
Adewole OLAGOKESchool of the Environment, Natural Resources and
Geography, Bangor University, UK
METHODS
CONCLUSIONS
DISCUSSION
RESULTS
REFERENCESFigure 6. % determination of development projects
SUMMARY
CONTACT
Adewole OLAGOKE
Bangor University, United KingdomEmail: [email protected]
Phone: 07554306640
The study evaluated the
contributions of Nigerian Protected
Areas (PAs) to biodiversity
conservation, carbon storage, and
the link between their long-term
management and rural livelihoods
to inform necessary management
strategies, which could help in
designing appropriate REDD
mechanism.
Nigeria falls within the West African biodiversity
hotspot (Figure 1), with some species endemic to its
boundary (Figure 2). Biodiversity is conserved within
972 protected areas into IUCN categories (figure 3).
Local support, or resentment, for PAs is
generally influenced by the perceived costs
and benefits of PAs to communities (Ite 1996).
Peoples resentment for existing management
practices, and PAs managers laxity lessen the
effectiveness of PAs in reducing deforestation.
Trade-off to allow sustainable use and
management of resources is the key.
Collaborative planning and management with
communities could offer a better solution.
Information were extracted from:
Review of published literature
Extract from local media press release
Local experts opinion
personal experience.
Treating local livelihood issues with care,
rather than heavy restrictions on local
peoples activities, and improve governance
are plausible to enhance the effectiveness of
PAs in avoiding deforestation; making them
suitable for REDD funding.
1.Campbell et al(2008) Tropical Conservancy Biodiversity
9 (3 & 4): 117-121.
2.Coad et al (2008) Working Paper. UNEP-WCMC, UK. pp45
3.Ezebilo (2010) Int. J. Environ. Res., 4(3):501- 506
4.Ite (1996) EnvironmentalConservation 23 (4): 351 - 357
5.Ite and Adams (2000)J. Int. Dev.12, 325- 342
6.Ravilious et al(2010) Preliminary Report .UNEP-WCMC,UK.
pp12
Figure 1. Biodiversity in Nigeria
Figure 4. Carbon distribution in Nigerian PAs
To examine how the relationship among
biodiversity conservation, carbon storage
and local livelihoods influence the
effectiveness on Nigerian PAs.
4715
274
889
154 109
684
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
Number of Known species
119
27
92 0 2
Threatened species
Figure 2. Endemic sclater's monkey
45.60%
13.54%
40.86%Catergories I & II
Categories III, IV &V
Category VI & others
Figure 3: Classification of the 972 designated protected
areas
RESULTS (cont.)
Livelihood benefits of PAs include infrastructural
development, employment opportunity, alternative
income sources like ecotourism, etc (Ite and Adams 2000;
Ezebilo 2010), but not evenly distributed, and acceptable
to all (Figure 5 & 6).
The costs on communities range from resource use
restrictions, loss of tenure right to displacement. Inreaction,
people have continued with resource utilization
within the PAs illegally.
BACKGROUND
34.4
65.6
0
20
4060
80
100
Yes NoIte(1997);Ite&Ada
ms(2000)
%r
espond
ents
Figure 5. Conservation benefits distribution
0 20 40 60 80
Park only
Park & Community
Community only
NGOs
Adetoro et al(2011)
1.11 Gt (15%) of the total
7.5 Gt Carbon in biomass
and soils are found in the
PAs, and ca. 20% of total
carbon are in high
density zones (Figure 4;
Ravilious etal2010).
