Growing global interest in tree planting as a climate solution has prompted an influx of inexperienced organizations with opaque strategies, leading to numerous failures and unintended negative consequences. Awareness of this issue has inspired many reforestation organizations to follow best practices to ensure tree-planting initiatives achieve their goals. Still, far fewer report in detail the measures used to track progress and results achieved. These are the core findings from a study authored by researchers from the University of California, Santa Cruz, who reviewed data from the websites of 99 international organizations that promote and fund reforestation projects. The study, published in Conservation Letters, revealed that although 70% of organizations had monitoring plans, only 41% reported tree survival rates and only 25% had time-bound objectives. And while most organizations cited potential benefits to local communities, only 38% reported measures of these outcomes. “We were heartened that a number of organizations acknowledged best practices for tree growing, such as engaging communities and monitoring outcomes,” said study co-author Karen Holl, professor in the Department of Environmental Studies at UC Santa Cruz. “However, many address these issues vaguely, and the next step is to publicly report outcomes.” Building a ‘best practices’ index The analysis focused on “intermediary organizations,” private institutions that promote and fund tree-growing or forest landscape restoration projects implemented by local organizations across multiple regions. These organizations were selected through a literature review and web research. The researchers examined information available on the organizations’ websites, focusing on criteria that previous research shows…This article was originally published on Mongabay
The post Across reforestation organizations, best practices claims abound, but details are scarce first appeared on EnviroLink Network.