137
Some specific solutions can be explained by the choices of international research
institutions, international NGOs, and private sector actors to invest in programs that
aim to meet global conservation and restoration aims and secure international valuechains by increasing benefit streams to local residents of SEPLS. The subsidies,
payments, and rewards solutions in Southeast Asia may reflect such international
investments in the intensive piloting and promotion of payment for ecosystems services (PES) schemes in countries such as Indonesia, Cambodia, and the Philippines
(see for instance Amaruzaman et al. 2018; Costello and Vorsak 2011).
7.4.2 Meeting the New Challenges for Sustainable Use
and Management of SEPLS
IPSI’s experiences in revitalizing sustainable use and management of SEPLS do
demonstrate strong efforts across Asia to find solutions through inclusion, which
have in some cases strengthened multi-level governance of SEPLS. Place-based
solutions emphasize institutional and governance solution types as the most selected
solution type, and especially solutions for inclusion, that aim to bring in more collaborative decision-making modes or more equitable benefit sharing of ecosystem
services. For instance, inclusion of local people in defining rights to land use can
lead to strengthening regulatory systems and institutions governing customary law,
connecting local institutions with national forest policy (Shohibuddin and
Aoyama 2009).
Moreover, because place-based solutions are already based in collaborative
decision- making processes by coalitions of societal actors, these solutions add value
to best available knowledge of conservation and restoration solutions and what
works across multiple scales. Indeed, existing private sector engagement and
a successful model of the community forestry management system, which is
well known for promoting sustainable management and restoration of the forest. Improving forest-based livelihoods depends on community-based forest
management. The system relies on community-based governance through
beneficial linkages with concerned stakeholders such as the District Forest
Office (DFO), the Federation of Community Forestry User Groups Nepal
(FECOFUN), the Department of Forestry (DOF), national and village development committees, and community groups of women, youth and cooperatives. These networks of stakeholders actively work together to provide
capacity building to local communities to implement the management schemes
(Adhikari 2011). Traditional knowledge is encouraged in meetings, planning,
and decision-making processes from the community to the district level forum.
Box 7.1 (continued)
7 Place-Based Solutions for Conservation and Restoration of Social-Ecological…
Some specific solutions can be explained by the choices of international research
institutions, international NGOs, and private sector actors to invest in programs that
aim to meet global conservation and restoration aims and secure international valuechains by increasing benefit streams to local residents of SEPLS. The subsidies,
payments, and rewards solutions in Southeast Asia may reflect such international
investments in the intensive piloting and promotion of payment for ecosystems services (PES) schemes in countries such as Indonesia, Cambodia, and the Philippines
(see for instance Amaruzaman et al. 2018; Costello and Vorsak 2011).
7.4.2 Meeting the New Challenges for Sustainable Use
and Management of SEPLS
IPSI’s experiences in revitalizing sustainable use and management of SEPLS do
demonstrate strong efforts across Asia to find solutions through inclusion, which
have in some cases strengthened multi-level governance of SEPLS. Place-based
solutions emphasize institutional and governance solution types as the most selected
solution type, and especially solutions for inclusion, that aim to bring in more collaborative decision-making modes or more equitable benefit sharing of ecosystem
services. For instance, inclusion of local people in defining rights to land use can
lead to strengthening regulatory systems and institutions governing customary law,
connecting local institutions with national forest policy (Shohibuddin and
Aoyama 2009).
Moreover, because place-based solutions are already based in collaborative
decision- making processes by coalitions of societal actors, these solutions add value
to best available knowledge of conservation and restoration solutions and what
works across multiple scales. Indeed, existing private sector engagement and
a successful model of the community forestry management system, which is
well known for promoting sustainable management and restoration of the forest. Improving forest-based livelihoods depends on community-based forest
management. The system relies on community-based governance through
beneficial linkages with concerned stakeholders such as the District Forest
Office (DFO), the Federation of Community Forestry User Groups Nepal
(FECOFUN), the Department of Forestry (DOF), national and village development committees, and community groups of women, youth and cooperatives. These networks of stakeholders actively work together to provide
capacity building to local communities to implement the management schemes
(Adhikari 2011). Traditional knowledge is encouraged in meetings, planning,
and decision-making processes from the community to the district level forum.
Box 7.1 (continued)
7 Place-Based Solutions for Conservation and Restoration of Social-Ecological…