Our team was hands-on during the first trimester of 2021, surveying CGIAR colleagues about their experience and views on landscape approaches
Who answered the survey?
122 researchers from the 13 centers where:
86 (70%) conducted research for designing, implementing, monitoring , or measuring the effectiveness of landscape approaches.
36 (30%) reported not currently working on landscape approaches. Nonetheless, most of them (26 participants) believe their research can enable the successful and long-term functioning of landscape approaches to achieve multi functionality and long-term sustainability.
How is the engagement with global efforts fostering a landscape approach – LA?
The 86 researchers working on landscape approaches have conducted, on average, research for around 12.4 years (SE=0.92) on the multiple topics of landscape approaches.
Researchers are engaging with some of the global initiatives. Also, respondents (3) mentioned the African Forest Landscape Restoration Initiative (AFR100) listed. Other initiatives mentioned by at least one respondent include the African Resilience Landscapes Initiative (ARLI) led by NEPAD, the Landscape Learning Networks led by People, Food and Nature, the Landscapes for our Future Initiative (MSSI) let by McGILL, and the Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIAHS) led by FAO. Finally, researchers mentioned the Global Landscapes Forum, Collaborating to Operationalise Landscape Approaches for Nature, Development and Sustainability (COLANDS), Sentinel Landscapes, and the Resilient Landscapes’ Initiative, all led by CIFOR-ICRAF.
What CRPs support research contributing to landscape approaches?
And what type of research and outcomes does CGIAR research contribute to landscape approaches?
The Sanky diagram shows that WLE, CCAFS and FTA are the three CRPs supporting more the system-based research required for supporting landscape approaches. Among the type of research conducted by colleagues, methods for stakeholder engagement, trade-off and synergies assessment and generating evidence for guiding adaptive management are the most common. Overall, the conducted research aims to improve the conservation of natural resources and biodiversity as well as sustainable production (both have the same proportion, 22% of responses). Notably, outcomes contributing to non material human well being is the least frequent one.
We will continue sharing more results, in particular the institutional and local bottlenecks and enablers for conducing research relevant to landscape approaches. Stay tuned….