Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) Toolbox

Social Protection and Forestry

This module is intended for governments, development organizations and civil society working and advocating for expanding social protection systems for all, including forest-dependent people (FDP) and forest-dependent communities (FDC). This module provides basic and in-depth information on the rationale and approaches for extending social protection systems to forest-dependent people and forest-dependent communities to achieve social (e.g. access to health care), economic (e.g. better income security) and environmental objectives (e.g. sustainable management of forests).

Publications

Agevi, H., Mwendwa, K.A., Koros, H., Mulinya, C., Kawawa, R.C., Kimutai, D.K., Wabusya, M., Khanyufu, M. & Jawuoro, S. 2016. PELIS forestry programme as a strategy for increasing forest cover and improving community livelihoods: case of Malava Forest, Western Kenya. American Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 4(5): 128–135.  

Alix-Garcia, J. & Wolff, H. 2014. Payment for ecosystem services from forests. Annual Review of Resource Economics, 6(1): 361–380. The link is available 

Béné, C., Cannon, T., Davies, M., Newsham, A. & Tanner, T. 2014. Social protection and climate change. OECD Development Co-operation Working Paper No. 16. Paris, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

Börner, J., Wunder, S., Reimer, F., Bakkegaard, R.K., Viana, V., Tezza, J., Pinto, T., Lima, L. & Marostica, S. 2013. Promoting forest stewardship in the Bolsa Floresta Programme: local livelihood strategies and preliminary impacts. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Fundação Amazonas Sustentável & Zentrum für Entwicklungsforschung, University of Bonn. 

Clements, T. & Milner-Gulland, E.J. 2015. Impact of payments for environmental services and protected areas on local livelihoods and forest conservation in northern Cambodia. Conservation Biology, 29(1): 78–87.

Dreze, J., & Khera, R. 2011. The battle for employment guarantee. Economic and Political Weekly, 46(30), 34-43.

Ferraro, P.J. & Simorangkir, R. 2020. Conditional cash transfers to alleviate poverty also reduced deforestation in Indonesia. Sci Adv. 2020. 6(24): eaaz1298. 

ILO. 2019.  Extending social security to workers in the informal economy. Lessons from international experience. 

Kuriakose, A.T., Heltberg, R., Wiseman, W., Costella, C., Cipryk, R. & Cornelius, S. 2013. Climate‐responsive social protection. Development Policy Review, 31(s2): o19–o34. 

Li, J., Feldman, M.W., Li, S. & Daily, G.C. 2011. Rural household income and inequality under the Sloping Land Conversion Programme in western China. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108(19): 7721–7726.

Lippe, R.S., Schweinle, J., Cui, S., Gurbuzer, Y., Katajamäki, W., Villarreal-Fuentes, M. & Walter, S. 2022. Contribution of the forest sector to total employment in national economies - Estimating the number of people employed in the forest sector. Rome and Geneva, FAO and ILO. 

Liu, C. & Wu, B. 2010. Grain for Green programme in China: policy making and implementation. Policy Briefing Series No. 60. Nottingham, UK, University of Nottingham, China Policy Institute.

Pagiola, S., Arcenas, A. & Platais, G. 2005. Can payments for environmental services help reduce poverty? An exploration of the issues and the evidence to date from Latin America. World Development, 33(2): 237–253. 

Persson, U.M. & Alpizar, F. 2013. Conditional cash transfers and payments for environmental services: a conceptual framework for explaining and judging differences in outcomes. World Development 43:124–137.  

Pires, G., Corral, L., & Brito, B. 2017. Bolsa Verde Program: The Importance of Cash Transfers for Environmental Conservation in Brazil. In Handbook of Research on Entrepreneurial Success and its Impact on Regional Development (pp. 91-109). IGI Global.

Rodríguez, L.C., Pascual, U., Muradian, R., Pazmino, N. & Whitten, S. 2011. Towards a unified scheme for environmental and social protection: learning from PES and CCT experiences in developing countries. Ecological Economics, 70(11): 2163–2174. 

Rosa, H. 2014. Conditional cash transfers in the context of social welfare and environmental incentive-based public policies. Bonn, Germany, Centre for Development Research, University of Bonn. 

Sitko, N., Knowles, M. & Bhalla, G. 2023. Should climate funds be used for social security? Global Food Journal. Climate and Resources. 

Tacconi, L. 2019. Community-based forest fire prevention in Southeast Asia: Insights from six cases in Indonesia. Environmental Management, 64(4), 457-469.

Wong, G. 2014. The experience of conditional cash transfers – lessons for REDD+ benefit sharing. CIFOR Policy Brief No. 97. Bogor, Indonesia.

Wunder, S. 2008. Payments for environmental services and the poor: concepts and preliminary evidence. Environment and Development Economics, 13(3): 279–297. 

Xie, C., Zhao, J., Liang, D., Bennett, J., Zhang, L., Dai, G. & Wang, X. 2006. Livelihood impacts of the conversion of cropland to forest and grassland programme. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 49(4): 555–570.

Xie, C. 2017. Links between social protection and forestry policies: lessons from China. Social Protection and Forestry Working Paper No. 4. Rome, FAO.

Yao, S., Guo, Y. & Huo, X. 2009. An empirical analysis of the effects of China’s land conversion program on farmers’ income growth and labour transfer. In R. Yin, ed. An integrated assessment of China’s ecological restoration programmes, pp. 159–173. The Hague, the Netherlands, Springer.

Events

FAO. 2019. Sub-regional workshop on social protection for forest-dependent communities in East Africa held in Dar es Salaam. Rome. The event attracted the participation of governmental authorities responsible for forestry policy/programmes, social protection policy/programmes, and forest producer organizations from Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, Mozambique, Rwanda, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia. Representatives from international and regional organizations, and from FAO headquarters, regional and sub-regional offices also attended. 

FAO. 2021. Producer organizations have a key role to play in improving social protection coverage in Africa FAO shares knowledge on extending social protection to rural households, including FDP. The aim of the webinar was to share emerging good practices on working with producer organizations to expand social protection to reduce vulnerability, especially considering the deepening economic and food crises that are unfolding because of or compounded by the COVID-19 pandemic. The event facilitated an exchange of experiences among African countries, and encouraged broader South-South exchange by sharing innovations from China. 

FAO. 2022. Social protection focal points in FAO shared experiences during a regional training and strategic planning meeting in Nairobi, July 2022. A three-day workshop bringing together people from 35 African countries has charted the way forward for social protection initiatives in Africa, and established a network of focal points to enhance FAO’s social protection work in agrifood systems and Africa’s agricultural transformation.  

FAO. 2022. Sweden and Kenya highlight North-South partnership inspiring collective action for forest farmers At  a one-day event ahead of Stockholm, in June 2022, the experience of a forest farmer association in Kenya inspired by Swedish foresters’ experience and supported by Swedish aid organizations was hailed  

Obiga, R. 2020. Social protection measures in response to COVID-19 in Kenya and opportunities of expanding social protection coverage for forest-dependent communities for building resilience. Rome, FAO. Richard Obiga, Senior Programme Officer, National Social Protection Secretariat of the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection of Kenya, presented the webinar on the opportunities for expanding social protection coverage for FDCs for building resilience