Presentation by James Reed, Center for International Forestry Research, Indonesia & University of Lancaster. Held at the young researchers meeting on multifunctional landscapes, Gothenburg June 7-8, 2016.

1. A rose by any other name?
Assessing landscape approach
effectiveness in the tropics
James Reed, Josh van Vianen, Jos Barlow, Terry Sunderland
SIANI SLU - Young researchers meeting on multifunctional
landscapes. Gothenburg, June 7th 2016

2. Rationale
Landscape
Approach
A
refinement
of prior
approaches
Attempt to
integrate
multiple
stakeholders
A
framework
for policy
and
practiceAn attempt
to reconcile
disciplinary
divides
A tool to
assess
landscape
perf.
A strategy
to align
conflicting
objectives
What do we mean by
“landscape approaches”?

3. Rationale
Are landscape approaches being implemented in the tropics?
Are they effective in reconciling conservation and development?

4. Methods
Evolution of search terms and strategy:
• Internal/external consultation
• Two stakeholder workshops (Nairobi & Cape Tribulation)
• Extensive scoping exercise using Web of Science
• Developed inclusion/exclusion criteria for studies
• Protocol published. See: Reed et al. 2015: What are landscape
approaches and how effectively have they been implemented in the
tropics?
Specialist databases:
Scopus
CAB Direct
ISI Web of Knowledge
PubMed
Internet searches:
Google Scholar
Other:
Grey literature search

5. Screening results
Peer-reviewed literature Grey (or additional)
literature
Initial scoping results in WoK:
26,303 articles
Response to call for grey
literature: 57 documents
Retrieved from specialist
databases: 13,290 articles –
All TITLES screened
Initial web screening:
214 documents
Relevant after title screening:
1,171 articles –
All ABSTRACTS screened
Targeted web screening:
79 documents
Relevant after abstract
screening: 382 articles –
All FULL TEXTS screened
Articles identified by
author group/experts:
56 documents
Final studies of relevance:
82 articles
Articles retrieved from
bibliography screening:
82 articles

6. Landscape approaches are the latest in an evolution of integrated
attempts to reconcile C&D.
1980s 1990s 2000s 2010 -
present
1980s: Integrated
Rural Development 1998: Integrated
Natural Resource
Management (INRM)
1985 onwards:
Integrated
Conservation &
Development projects
(ICDPs)
Contributing Sciences:
Ecosystem
Management
Landscape Ecology
Island biogeography
Conservation rooted
frameworks e.g.
“Ecosystem Approach”
1992: “Landscape Approach” first
documented (Barrett 1992)
(Integrated) Landscape
Approach frameworks

7. Key findings from the “theory”
literature
Optimizing adoption of landscape approaches:
• evaluating progress within a landscape is fundamental to
determining where gains or losses are being made
• hybrid, multi-level and cross-sectoral governance structures
that integrate internal traditional knowledge and external
institutional and financial support are increasingly preferable
• must acknowledge the need for contextualisation and not
subscribe to panaceas
• inclusive, participatory stakeholder negotiation can help
align local socio-cultural and global environmental concerns
• should recognise dynamic processes and perverse outcomes
See: Reed et al. 2016 - Integrated landscape approaches to managing social
and environmental issues in the tropics: learning from the past to guide the
future

8. Where and how are landscape
approaches being implemented?
Peer
reviewed
articles
Grey
literature
(web
screening)
Grey
literature
(document
screening)
Totals
Number of
case studies
24 97 52 173
Number of
countries
represented
16 52 42 61
Number
reported
success
13 46 20 79
Reliable
data
provided
6 8 1 15

9. Geographic distribution

10. “Conservation” impacts

11. “Development” impacts

12. Factors for success

13. Governance effects

14. Key findings from the literature
Current barriers to effective implementation:
• the ongoing development of theory and conceptualization
may be stimulating time lags
• the proliferation of terms associated with landscape
approaches may be impeding policy and practice progress
• operating silos persist at all levels and scales
• engaging multiple stakeholders is all too often seen as
a box-ticking exercise to satisfy project requirements
• monitoring remains the least well developed area of
landscape approach application

15. Conclusions and recommendations
 Landscape approaches remain contentious and under-
theorized
 There is good evidence of “landscape approaches” being
implemented within the tropics but weak evidence of
effectiveness
 Multi-level engagement seems fundamental to success
 Attempts to implement must be contextualized
 Metrics need to continue to develop

16. Thanks for listening!
For further information:
James Reed: j.reed@cgiar.org
Terry Sunderland: t.sunderland@cgiar.org