concept note - bofedales paramos - final 6june2010 gh€¦ · concept note: carbon storing in the...

Concept Note: Carbon storing in the Andean

peatlands of Peru Pilot Project 14 June 2010

Submitted to: The World Bank

Submitted by:International Potato Center (CIP)

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

wb426104

Typewritten Text

69456

wb426104

Typewritten Text

Concept Note: Carbon storing in the Andean peatlands of Peru—Pilot project i

Table of Contents

1. BACKGROUND ..............................................................................................................................................1

2. CONTEXT........................................................................................................................................................1

3. BASELINE .......................................................................................................................................................5

4. ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES ....................................................................................................................6

Setting Up the Social and Institutional Context of Peatlands Management in Peru ...................................6

5. OPPORTUNITY COSTS AND COBENEFITS..........................................................................................8

6. STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSULTATIONS ......................................................................................................9

7. CONSTRAINTS AND RISKS FOR ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES ....................................................9

8. PILOT PROJECT......................................................................................................................................... 10

8.1 Goal..........................................................................................................................................................................10

8.2 Purpose..................................................................................................................................................................10

8.3 Outputs...................................................................................................................................................................10

8.4 Activities................................................................................................................................................................10

9. BUDGET ....................................................................................................................................................... 14

10. REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................................. 14

ANNEX 1. SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT ..............................................................................................A11

ANNEX 2. LOGICAL FRAMEWORK........................................................................................................... A21

ANNEX 3. PILOT PROJECT BUDGET .......................................................................................................... A3

Concept Note: Carbon storing in the Andean peatlands of Peru—Pilot project 1

Concept Note: Carbon storing in the Andean peatlands of Peru—Pilot project

1. BACKGROUND

The International Potato Center (CIP) has been commissioned by the Government of Peru and the World Bank to conduct an assessment of the feasibility of a carbon‐storing, environmental services program in the bofedales and páramos ecosystems in the Peruvian Andes, and propose a concept note for a pilot project for possible funding as part of international efforts to mitigate and adapt to climate change effects. The proposal has been developed by the Production Systems and the Environment Division, at CIP, as a pilot study aimed at drawing lessons, and with a view for possible application at a regional level. This document presents both the results of the assessment and the concept note, as requested by the terms of reference of the assignment. This output has been based on desk research, field visits, previous works (Segnini et al., 2010a,b) and consultations with stakeholders, both in the field and the local scientific and decision‐making communities.

2. CONTEXT

Wetlands constitute around 1% of the global landmass. Soils formed from waterlogged organic matter are known as peats, and contain a high percentage of organic matter. Peatlands are estimated to currently store 224–455 Petagrams (1 Pg = 1015 g) of carbon, equal to 12–30% of the global soil carbon pool (Clymo et al., 1998). The Peruvian highlands encompass large but not properly quantified areas of wetlands, seasonal wet grasslands, and peatlands ecosystems, which are generically and vaguely called páramos and bofedales. These ecosystems provide a number of valuable environmental services, which are not fully understood and appreciated by the society at large. One of the important roles of these ecosystems is water conservation and cycling as they act as water sponges that help regulate water flows from the Andes down to agricultural valleys in the coastal and Amazon regions, preventing water runoff and soil erosion. The páramos and bofedales also provide refuge to a rich biodiversity, both endemic and migratory. Another less evident—although very important—role of these ecosystems relates to the carbon economy and the balance of the flux of carbon from the atmosphere to the plant biomass and the soil, and back to the atmosphere. Many wetlands and seasonal wet grasslands have peat soils that are rich in organic matter, and represent important carbon sinks and deposits that should be properly managed as natural tools of carbon sequestration. However, recent research indicates that current grazing and agricultural practices in the Andes may alter the capacity of páramos and bofedales to retain carbon, and turn them into additional sources of greenhouse gas emissions thus aggravating the current situation. Land‐use change, particularly intensive cultivation, is known to have severe impacts on soil organic carbon content (Podwojewski et al., 2002; Farley et al., 2004). Even aforestation of natural grasslands, which is generally regarded as an environmental and carbon sequestration enhancer, can cause negative biophysical responses that include a net loss of soil carbon, nitrogen, and water retention capacity (Farley, 2007). A reduction of soil organic carbon alters the carbon budget of the ecosystem, leading to a potential carbon release to the atmosphere. Better management of these soils within a program of compensation for


environmental services may enhance carbon sequestration, reduce carbon emissions, and provide small farmers with increased and sustainable sources of income, benefits, and reduced vulnerability, hence addressing climate change on both mitigation and adaptation fronts. Carbon sequestration in plant and soil systems provides an opportunity for agriculture to be incorporated into post‐Kyoto agreements and to contribute to the mitigation of the greenhouse effect. Although the Clean Development Mechanism protocol has prioritized only aboveground carbon sequestration via reforestation and aforestation, the soil, including some agricultural soil, might represent even a larger carbon sink. Chimner and Karberg (2008) have reported that tropical mountain peatlands in Ecuador, dominated by cushion plants, bryophytes, and herbaceous plants, had accumulated 140 kg C m‐2 at a depth of 4 m. The estimated long‐term rate of carbon accumulation is 46 g C m‐2 yr‐1. It is evident that the consideration of Andean páramos and bofedales as important soils and landscapes worthy of inclusion among the major ecosystems contributing to carbon capture and storing is contingent upon the quantification of both the carbon flux/stock per unit area of páramos and bofedales and the extent of land surface covered by those ecosystems. From those valuations, the contribution of páramos and bofedales to the global carbon economy could be ascertained. However, the literature on bofedales generally lacks quantitative assessments on the degree of soil organic matter (SOM) stabilization, data required to understand their role as carbon sinks, which cannot be established by only quantifying total carbon stocks (CS). Waterlogged organic matter breaks down very slowly because the microorganisms necessary for decomposition cannot flourish where there is no oxygen and changes in land and soil use and management affect this pattern. CIP, the Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation (EMBRAPA), and the University of Sao Paulo (USP) have conducted preliminary studies using electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) and portable laser‐induced fluorescence (LIF) spectroscopy to evaluate the SOM in lab and field conditions, respectively. The study aimed to (1) determine CS in the upper layers of seasonal and permanent waterlogged bofedales in the Peruvian Southern Andes; (2) use EPR and LIF spectroscopic techniques to evaluate the organic matter stability of whole soils samples from these bofedales; and (3) test the suitability of the portable LIF for assessing SOM stability in situ.

The study assessed permanent waterlogged and wet grassland (seasonal) bofedales from Huayllapata, Puno, Peru (14º90’08’’S and 69º77’52’’W) at an average altitude of 3,881 masl, selected as representative wetlands of the Peruvian Southern Andes. The mean annual precipitation in the area is 762 mm and the mean annual temperature is 8.1°C (WorldClim, 2008). Frosts occur between March and June with more than 80% frequency. Most areas in the Andes are marked by wet and dry seasons, where the former spans from November to April. Flooding during the wet season results in alluvial deposition in low‐lying areas. The climate of the region is cold and semi‐dry, typical of high plateaus.


Table 1, which presents the carbon contents (CC), soil bulk density, and carbon stocks for different soil layers, shows that CC of the evaluated wetland soils varied from 121.7 to 215.6 g C kg‐1 among layers in the top 30 cm. Higher CC were found, for all depths, in permanent bofedales, when compared to seasonal bofedales (Segnini et al., 2010a). The calculated CS ranged from 228.9 in the permanent bofedales to 301.7 t C ha‐1 in the seasonal bofedales as a total for the 30‐cm soil depth. With respect to the surface layer (0–2.5 cm), soil samples from permanent bofedales presented 64% more carbon than the seasonal ones, indicating a higher introduction of organic matter into the wet soil systems. Table 1. Carbon Contents, Soil Bulk Density, and Carbon Stocks for Different Soil Layers in Seasonal and Permanent Bofedales in the Peruvian Andes

Seasonal Bofedales Permanent Bofedales

Depth (cm)

Carbon Content

(g kg‐1)

Bulk Density

(g cm‐1)

Carbon Stocks

(t ha‐1)

Carbon Content

(g kg‐1)

Bulk Density

(g cm‐1)

Carbon Stocks

(t ha‐1 )

0–2.5 132.9 ± 0.3 0.4 11.9 215.6 ± 0.0 0.4 22.1

2.5–5 128.6 ± 0.2 0.4 11.5 181.6 ± 0.4 0.4 18.6

5–10 123.0 ± 0.9 0.9 53.8 158.2 ± 0.1 0.3 22.3

10–20 121.7 ± 0.8 0.9 116.0 141.9 ± 1.8 0.7 94.3

20–30 128.0 ± 1.4 0.9 108.4 135.0 ± 0.0 0.5 71.5

TOTAL (0–30) 634.2 ± 3.6 — 301.7 832.3 ± 2.3 — 228.9

In spite of its importance, soil carbon sequestration has seldom been quantified in different Peruvian ecosystems. Along with the assessment described above, one of the few systematic studies in this field was conducted recently by CIP, EMBRAPA, and USP. The study, conducted in different agro‐ecosystems in Peru, aimed at estimating soil carbon sequestration and the degree of chemical recalcitrance of the soil organic matter—organic matter resistance to biodegradation—as affected by soil type, altitude, climate, cropping system, and management regimes. Soils were sampled along a transect of approximately 1,000 km from sea level to 4,000 masl and down to 1,300 masl, spanning the coast, the plateau, and the eastern hillsides in Southern Peru. The samplings transect included five major agro‐ecologies: arid coast, arid low altitude inter‐Andean valley, arid high altitude inter‐Andean valley, semi‐arid high plateau, and the tropical rainforest. In the western hillsides of the Andes, samples were taken from soils under irrigated agriculture, which includes crops like maize, olive, alfalfa, potato, grape, and avocado. Further up, the high plateau is the center of origin of potatoes and one of the most important crop domestication centers in the world. Soils from rotational cropping systems, the predominant practice in the area, were sampled in this agro‐ecological zone. On the Amazonian side, soils from a primary rainforest and cultivated shaded coffee were included. In all instances, samples from layers 0–30 cm deep were taken and processed. Carbon contents (CC, in g kg‐1) and total carbon stocks (CS, t ha‐1) were estimated in each layer and throughout the entire profile. Whole soil samples were also characterized by applying state‐of‐the‐art nondestructive analytical methods such as the spectroscopy to assess the carbon stability in the different agro‐ecologies. These techniques provide not only the recalcitrance index but also a more detailed chemical composition present in the humic soil substances.


Using a nested sampling scheme, CC and CS were compared among cropping systems within agro‐ecologies and among agro‐ecologies. The study showed that soils in both the Amazonian and the dry valleys presented higher CS but with lower stability when compared to other agro‐ecologies. As shown in Table 2, the soils supporting shaded coffee (Amazon region) and alfalfa in the high altitude inter‐Andean valleys presented the largest CS in the soil (91 t ha‐1). These cultivated areas had larger CS (75.2 t ha‐1) than the tropical rainforests soils. The lowest CS (38 t ha‐‐1) occurred in the olive orchards in the arid coast. CS in potato and maize systems varied from 42 to 56 t ha‐1, depending on the location. Table 2. Carbon Stocks (t ha1) by Soil Layer and Total Carbon Storage per Soil Site (Data from soils sampled in 2008, in different cropping systems)

Carbon Stocks (t ha‐1)*

Ilo Moquegua Torata San Juan del Oro Puno

Depth (cm) A1 B1 A2 B2 C2 A3 B3 A4 B4 A5

0–2.5 4.4 3.6 5.9 4.7 6.5 7.4 11.9 10.6 8.3 3.7

2.5–5 4.0 3.4 4.9 4.7 6.4 7.6 10.8 9.2 7.0 3.8

5–10 6.8 6.5 7.2 9.0 11.3 14.8 15.9 15.3 11.1 9.8

10–20 13.4 12.8 19.5 18.0 23.3 22.4 28.3 32.2 26.5 17.2

20–30 13.8 11.8 19.2 19.2 17.7 16.0 25.0 24.0 22.3 12.4

TOTAL 42.4 38.1 56.7 55.6 65.2 68.2 91.9 91.3 75.2 46.9

* Carbon stocks = 10 × (C × d × T); C is the carbon content in g kg‐1; T the sample layer thickness in meters and d the soil layer bulk density in g cm‐3.

A1: maize; B1: olive; A2: alfalfa; B2: potato; C2: grape; A3: avocado (intercropping); B3: alfalfa; A4: coffee; B4: original forest; A5: alfalfa – potato – oat rotation.

Our results also showed that soil organic carbon increased with elevation in the arid environments, as evidenced by the fact that when CS was analyzed as a function of altitude for different agro‐ecologies, within the same texture class, a linear relationship (r2 ~ 0.8) was obtained, which coincide with some published reports. As to carbon stability, the soils in the Amazon site presented lower recalcitrance. In all agro‐ecosystems, carbon stability increased with soil depth, due to the presence of recalcitrant carbon, whereas at the surface the presence of labile carbon dominates as a result of the constant input of plant residues. It was observed that organic matter in soils under irrigation and subjected to conventional tillage in the arid ecosystems is more recalcitrant than in soils with less tillage or where tillage is done manually like in the plateau. According to the literature, this is usually related to the decomposition of labile organic matter caused by tillage. It was also worth noting the uniformity in the humification degree (Table 3) across layers in soils under conventional tillage, which is usually associated with the homogeneity imparted by tillage disturbances of the top layers of these soils. Less‐ or no‐tilled soils showed a gradient, attributed to the higher input of recent organic matter by crop residues and plants to the top layer. These findings confirmed trends found in previous research by the team (Segnini et al., 2010b).


Table 3. Humification Degree (HLIF) of Soil in Different Peruvian Sites, Obtained through LIF Spectroscopy at Soil Layers of 0–2.5, 2.5–5, 5–10, 10–20, and 20–30 cm

Depth (cm)

Site Crop 0–2.5 2.5–5 5–10 10–20 20–30

A1 21.5 1.4 24.4 0.1 24.6 1.3 23.8 1.2 24.6 1.8 Ilo

B1 27.6 0.2 28.3 0 28.4 0.0 29.0 0.3 32.0 0.3

A2 18.9 0.1 22.6 0.1 21.1 0.1 23.3 0.2 22.4 0.8

B2 23.5 0.2 23.8 0.0 24.5 0.1 24.1 0.1 22.5 0.1 Moquegua

C2 19.4 0.1 19.5 0.1 21.4 0.0 23.6 0.0 30.2 0.1

Torata A3 18.6 0.2 19.9 0.2 19.2 0.5 29.7 0.3 37.4 0.2

B3 10.5 0.0 11.5 0.1 15.9 0.2 18.6 0.1 19.2 0.1

A4 7.6 01 8.8 0.0 10.6 0.1 12.1 0.2 18.1 0.1 San Juan del Oro B4 8.7 0.2 10.2 0.0 11.3 0.1 13.38 0 19.3 0.1

HLIF (a.u.)

Puno A5 16.5 0.1 16.8 0.2 17.7 0.08 21.0 0.8 24.6 0.1 A1: maize; B1: olive; A2: alfalfa; B2: potato; C2: grape; A3: avocado (intercropping); B3: alfalfa; A4: coffee; B4: original forest; A5: alfalfa – potato – avena rotation.

The study also included a successful preliminary evaluation of portable optical techniques for future agricultural applications in soil characterization. The portable LIF (optical sensor) might evaluate the soil organic matter in the field, connected to a Global Positioning System (GPS) for producing soil quality maps. A portable laser‐induced breakdown spectroscopy (LIBS) system is also promissory equipment. LIBS can carry out quantitative field analysis of carbon contents and other elements in the soil. With these new tools, soil carbon sequestration studies can be implemented in the field without (or minimal) sample preparation.

As a corollary of our own preliminary studies described above, the data shows that when CS values from bofedales are compared to soils from other Peruvian agroecologies, carbon accumulation in bofedales is substantially higher. This comparison includes primary forests, which are generally regarded as a standard for carbon sequestration.

3. BASELINE

Owing to the fact that required data at the appropriate spatial resolution are scarce, estimating a baseline or reference scenario that describes the CC, fluxes, and stocks situation in the whole Peruvian Andes is not an accurate exercise and the error margin could be quite substantial. However, we know that the Peruvian dry Andes (known as the Sierra region, which excludes the rainforest mountains in the Eastern Peruvian Andes) represents 30% of the total land area of the country. Out of these 40 million ha, natural grasslands cover 15 million ha whereas annual crops utilize 1.5 million ha and wetlands cover 250,000 ha. Our data suggest that soils under natural rangelands could have a stock of 1.35 Pg of carbon and soils under different annual crops could store an average of 0.09 Pg of carbon. On the other hand, carbon stocks in wetlands could amount to 0.05 Pg. All together, the CS sequestered by the Peruvian dry Andes would amount to 1.49 Pg. This is equivalent to 0.1% of total carbon stored in soils the world over. As to carbon emissions per hectare, again, no data are available. However, there is evidence that increased temperatures due to climate change are leading to the expansion of potato cropping systems into higher land. This is particularly evident for native potato, as shown by De Haan and Juárez (2010). This expansion of croplands into rangelands and wetlands would lead to a reduction in CS, the difference being emitted to the atmosphere. It would also reduce the rate of carbon sequestration. On the basis of the scant data, a “back‐of‐the‐envelope” calculation shows that


changes in land‐use systems (from permanent grasslands to cropland) could cause the net loss of 30 t C ha‐1 whereas the change of use from bofedales to cropland would bring about a net loss of 140 t C ha‐1, emitted to the atmosphere. Evidently, the total emissions over a period of time will depend on the rate and extent of land‐use change, the management of the alternative cropping systems, and the rate of emission of stored carbon. Those are, precisely, areas were novel research is needed. A recent paper (Bond‐Lamberty and Thomson, 2010) shows that soils around the globe have increased their emissions of carbon dioxide over the past few decades. The findings match predictions that increasing temperatures will cause a net release of carbon dioxide from soils by triggering microbes to speed up their consumption of plant debris and other organic matter. Their research found that soil respiration had increased by about 0.1% per year between 1989 and 2008. What is noteworthy is that in 2008, the global total carbon emitted by soils reached roughly 98 billion tons—about 10 times more carbon than humans are now putting into the atmosphere each year. The extra soil emissions could come from two types of sources: microbes and plants. If plant roots are emitting more carbon dioxide, the additional flux could be balanced by increasing rates of photosynthesis, resulting in no net increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide. In contrast, warming soils could prompt microbes to break down old sources of carbon that have been locked away for a long time. This would cause a net increase in the atmosphere’s store of carbon dioxide. This study motivates further work on the response of the carbon cycle to a warmer world.

4. ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES

Hard data on carbon fluxes under different land‐use systems and climate conditions are required for the modeling of alternative strategies and scenarios. The proposed pilot project will estimate the baseline, measure and estimate carbon fluxes, and assess changes in carbon fluxes caused by land‐use changes and climate variability. Thus, the alternative strategies for improved land‐use systems that may help preserve, restore, or increase carbon sequestration and retention capacity of bofedales and other soil types in the Andes will be one of the outputs of the pilot project proposed below. However, under the current approximations to the issue at hand, based on preliminary data, it appears that the best option is to maintain and protect wetlands and natural rangelands, precluding their conversion to annual crops. Unfortunately, this conversion is being driven by climate change, population growth, lack of a clear legal framework on land tenure, cropping, land degradation, and lack of formal incentives for conservation. Several of these aspects call for social and institutional changes, described in the following paragraphs.

Setting Up the Social and Institutional Context of Peatlands Management in Peru

According to the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands List (2010), Peru has 13 major peatland areas included in over 6.7 million ha. Among them are:

Lago Titicaca basin (Puno)

Reserve of Los Pantanos de Villa (Lima)

National Reserve of Junín (Junin)

Santuario Nacional Lagunas de Mejía


Bofedales y Laguna de Salinas and Laguna del Indio‐Dique Los Españoles (Arequipa)

National Reserve of Paracas (Ica)

Humedal Lucre‐Huacarpay (Cusco)

Laguna Las Arreviatadas (Cajamarca)

National Reserve Pacaya Samiria and Complejo de Humedales del Abanico del Río Pastaza (Loreto)

Santuario Nacional los Manglares de Tumbes and Manglares de San Pedro de Vice (Piura).

Aside from these areas, there are several minor peatlands located in the Peruvian coast and Andes (INRENA, 1997). Despite their natural and social value, peatlands in Peru are currently characterized by several challenges. Among them are the reduction of its natural area, contamination due to mining, agricultural and industrial residues, changes in water sources, overgrazing, and others. As part of the effort to overcome these conditions, the literature has pointed out some relevant socioeconomic and cultural aspects associated to peatlands’ erosion that result from their current use and management in Peru (CIUP, 2004; Torres and Parra, 2005). Although climate change‐related events are a major cause of peatlands’ degradation, the current configuration of communities’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices do play a key role in their inadequate (or lack of) management. Additionally, institutional aspects have major influence as well. Each of these issues is briefly examined below. In terms of climate change‐related events, experts indicate that several peatland areas in Peru are in the process of deterioration as a result of the creeks originating during the rainy season. This is associated to the increase of current flows, changes in rivers’ courses, and gaps between river beds and sources of water. Moreover, in many cases, peatland areas become over‐flooded, leading to potential contamination (Millones, 1995). However, the erosion of the peatlands has also increased as a consequence of the loss of indigenous knowledge. As known, this kind of knowledge refers to the cumulative, unique experience‐based wisdom existing within and developed around the specific conditions of communities in a particular geographic setting (Grenier, 1998). In regard to peatlands, this loss has accentuated environmental degradation and the depletion of its biodiversity. The importance of indigenous knowledge has decreased, among other factors, as a result of the official formal education discourse, predominance of market‐oriented values, and “modern” emphasis of conventional rural development‐related practices. As a result of the above, communities have no access to complementary information about the importance of peatlands. Hence, their motivation and interest towards their conservation are minimal. Despite the fact that there are Andean communities that implement actions to conserve peatlands and grasslands, the literature stresses the current lack of community‐level strategies around the management of these resources (Flores, 1991; Rodríguez, 1996).


On the institutional front, Peru has made some progress in regard to the conservation of peatlands. In practical terms, the institutional guidelines for peatlands management are the responsibility of different governmental agencies. Among these, the National Institute for Natural Resources (known by its Spanish acronym INRENA) has the role of approving the plans of protected areas. Regional and local governments play a role as well, but they have no direct competencies over natural resources management. In terms of institutional commitments, Peru signed the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands in 1991. A decade later, the country has 11 registered peatlands, a National Peat Land Strategy approved by the Government, and the background of a National Program for the Conservation and Sustainable Development of Peat lands in Peru, which was a coalition of governmental and nongovernmental organizations. However, despite advances in policy and legislative matters, the real impact of these efforts has not yet achieved the expected results. This might be attributable to insufficient or lack of standards’ implementation and to the institutional shortcomings to address the main issues that threaten peatlands.

5. OPPORTUNITY COSTS AND COBENEFITS

The opportunity cost of a resource (the cost of using a resource in a particular way) is defined by the value of what it could be used for instead as the next‐highest‐valued alternative use of that resource. One important output of the proposed project will be the quantification of the opportunity costs of land and soil utilization by rural communities and the benefits derived from the environmental services provided by the Andean Highlands. For the determination of opportunity costs, land and soil uses and their products of economic value—including CS—have to be thoroughly identified and quantified. This assessment is a requirement for the design of a system of payment for environmental services that maximizes in a sustainable way the economic and environmental benefits for local, regional, and global stakeholders. Main stakeholders of environmental services provided by the Peruvian Highlands are as diverse as the environmental services themselves. As a general approximation to the identification of stakeholders, two major categories could be established. One is composed of the direct land stewards, chiefly rural communities and farmers, whose actual and potential livelihoods depend entirely on the complex set of environmental services provided by agricultural land. This set of environmental services includes crop and wildlife biodiversity, water production, food production, and soil carbon storage. The other category of stakeholders includes all the beneficiaries of the externalities associated with the same environmental services, such as water production, carbon sequestration, biodiversity conservation, landscape quality, and so on. These stakeholders are not directly involved in land stewardships or in the transaction costs of managing the resource. A key element in the design of a program of compensation for environmental services will be the identification of mechanisms for the internalization of costs and benefits associated with environmental services. One central issue to be considered in the project is the contribution of


stakeholders to the funding of the financial incentives required to actively involve rural communities and farmers in a program of environmental services other than direct food production. Valuation of a full portfolio of environmental services and mechanisms for compensation to efficient land stewards will be one of the cornerstones of the pilot project.

6. STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSULTATIONS

As part of the preparation of this Concept Note, several community consultations were carried out. In these exercises first‐hand information was gathered on the current situation of peatlands and the configuration of knowledge, attitudes, and practices about their use and management. In addition, consultations explored the potential interest in an incentive scheme for environmental services related to CS. The research work was based on a participatory approach in which community representatives played an active role. An initial consultation to validate research instruments was carried out in the rural community of Hanchipacha, district of Pitumarca, province of Canchis, in Cusco. Two consultations followed: one in Puno, with participation of representatives of six communities, and the other in the community of Ondores in the Junín Region. Additionally, an expert consultation was carried out to explore the state of affairs regarding the management of páramos in Northern Peru. The full report of the consultations is provided in Annex I. In terms of consultation results, relevant aspects were identified and/or reinforced. Community representatives declared that the amount, extension, and quality of peatlands are all diminishing. According to their opinion, factors associated with this diminishment include climate change‐related events (i.e., rain, snow, hail, and frost are more unpredictable and intense as compared to five years ago), overgrazing by camelids, pollution, and lack of management. In terms of knowledge, communities basically identify “peatlands” with “water storage for their camelids”; there is no awareness about their environmental potential as carbon deposits. In terms of current conservation practices, several of them were identified by the communities as being beneficial (i.e., cleaning, fencing, rotation, water management). However, only a few of them are being systematically implemented. Finally, communities expressed high interest in exploring incentive schemes that could allow them to conserve their resources.

7. CONSTRAINTS AND RISKS FOR ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES

Constraints, risks, and key conditions for success of the proposed approach, including monitoring and verification, will be identified. Preliminarily, from the community consultations carried out as part of this study, it seems that the lack of awareness of the full set of environmental services rendered by peatlands and other valuable land resources is a major constraint for the success of any conservation program. A scheme of compensation for environmental services should be preceded by an intensive educational and information campaign, which should offer compelling evidence of potential gains and benefits for the direct land stewards and the society at large. Also important will be the implementation of an effective and reliable monitoring system, able to systematically quantify the gains and losses of the resource for which the direct stakeholders will be compensated.


8. PILOT PROJECT

This section describes the proposal, which is based on and justified by all the information provided in the preceding sections. A logical framework of the proposed pilot project is provided in Annex II.

8.1 Goal

Contribute to climate change mitigation and adaptation, soil conservation, agricultural productivity, and improved livelihoods of rural communities in the Andean region.

8.2 Purpose

Andean smallholder farming communities are engaged in climate change mitigation and adaptation through an effective system of peatlands and humid grasslands stewardship aimed at carbon sequestration, soil conservation, and income generation.

8.3 Outputs

1. The magnitude of labile and recalcitrant CC and CS in peatlands and wet grasslands in the Peruvian Andes assessed.

2. The capacity of carbon sequestration of different land‐use systems in the Andes assessed.

3. The flux of carbon under different land‐use systems in the Andes determined.

4. The effect of climate change on land‐use systems in the Andes determined.

5. The capacity of carbon sequestration of the Andean region under different scenarios of land‐use and climate change scenarios assessed.

6. Cost of opportunity of different land‐use systems assessed.

7. A scheme of payment for environmental services based on carbon sequestration developed and tested in pilot sites.

8. Action research on peatlands conservation through advocacy coalitions conducted.

9. Enabling policies and institutional frameworks to support a scheme of payment for environmental services developed.

8.4 Activities

Activity 1.1 Insitu analyses of carbon content and stocks in selected sampling sites

This field activity will be carried out in collaboration with EMBRAPA. Soil carbon content (CC, g kg‐1) and stock (CS, t ha‐1) will be determined in processed soil samples using a total carbon analyzer (LECO model CR 412). Carbon stocks (CS, t ha‐1) will be determined using the equation Carbon stocks = 10 × (C × d × T), where C is the carbon content in g kg‐1; T the sample layer thickness in meters, and d the soil layer bulk density in g cm‐3. Additionally, humification index of organic matter present in whole soil samples will be estimated using a portable LIF spectroscopy apparatus, as described by Milori et al. (2006). Samples will be taken in selected locations representing both wetlands and general land‐use systems and agro‐ecologies in the Andes, from 500 masl up. For wetlands, representative locations for samplings will be selected in different areas of the country along an altitude and precipitation gradient. For general land‐use and cropping systems, samples will be taken along three sampling transects in Northern, Central, and Southern Peru. Seasonal


variation will be covered by conducting the field study during two periods: end of the dry season and end of the rainy season. The sampling transects and sites will cover most soil and vegetation types prevalent in the Andes and current land uses. Activity 2.1 Classification and mapping of land use and soil types based on soil carbon content and stocks

This activity will construct maps of georeferenced soil CC and CS as related to soil and vegetation types and current land‐use systems. The exercise will start by the elaboration of land cover and land‐use base maps based on satellite imagery and available cartography. These base maps will be ground‐truthed through field visits to sample locations. The information generated by Activity 1.1 will be mapped. Activity 2.2 Estimation of total carbon content and stocks in the Peruvian Andes based on data for and area of each land use and soil type

From the information generated by Activities 1.1 and 2.1, the total CC and CS in the Peruvian Andes will be estimated. A regional scale assessment of soil CS and their spatial and temporal variations are critical for the understanding of the responses of different agro‐ecologies to land‐use changes under scenarios of climate change. Soil carbon models such as the GEFSOC soil carbon modeling system (described by Easter et al., 2007) will be used to estimate regional‐scale soil carbon (C) inventories. This model allows the assessment of the effects of land‐use change on soil CS and the potential for soil C sequestration as determined by land‐use systems. This model, which is freely available, incorporates three widely used models for estimating soil C dynamics: (1) the Century ecosystem model, (2) the RothC soil C decomposition model, and (3) the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change method for assessing soil C at regional scales. The tool interacts with a Soil and Terrain Digital Database built for the specific country or region the user intends to model. Activity 3.1 Experimental determination of carbon fluxes under different landuse systems in representative locations

Field experiments will be conducted in the sampling areas corresponding to Activity 1.1 for the determination of carbon fluxes (capture by the plant biomass, transference to the soil, carbon stability and recalcitrance, carbon emissions) under different land‐use and cropping systems. Activity 4.1 Mapping of a time series of changes in land use determined by climate change

Climate change, added to demographic pressures and land tenancy issues, is causing a progressive shift and upland movement of cropping areas in the Andes as an adaptation to rising mean temperature and the resultant increase in pests and diseases pressures in lower altitude areas. This shift means that current areas covered by natural rangeland and peatlands will be incorporated as new cropping lands, affecting the carbon fluxes and tipping the balance toward reduced sequestration and increased carbon emissions. This activity will map future scenarios of land‐use changes resulting from climate change and the corresponding soil carbon balance as determined by land‐use and cropping systems.


Activity 5.1 Integration of results from the previous activities

Results from all previous activities will be analyzed and integrated as required evidence for the design of a pilot program of compensation for environmental services. Activity 6.1 Analysis of the opportunity costs of different land and soil use systems

Opportunity costs of different land‐ and soil‐use systems in the Highlands will be determined. The methodology for the analysis will be defined by experts incorporated in the project team. Activity 7.1 Design of a scheme of payment for environmental services, based on results from the previous activities and the identification of positive externalities

An evidence‐based program of compensation for environmental services oriented to increase and maintain CS in the soil will be designed, based on the results from the previous activities and the identification of positive externalities. The program will include a financing system for which the determination of national and regional carbon emissions by potential clients and the contribution of society at large is a requirement. The designed program will include the land, soil, farming, and cropping management systems required to maximize carbon sequestration and stocking by the Andean soils, in a way compatible with improved food security and poverty reduction in the rural communities. Activity 7.2 Exante analysis of the scheme of payment for environmental services

The proposed program of payment for environmental services will be submitted to ex‐ante economic analysis to assess its viability as compared to land‐uses options available to smallholders and rural communities in the context of climate change and the influence of traditional livelihood strategies. The ex‐ante analysis will include the opportunity cost data and the assessment of the proposed financing system. Activity 7.3 Consultations with external beneficiaries of environmental services

The effective and sustainable operation of a program of compensation for environmental services is contingent on the identification and contribution of external beneficiaries of those services. Beneficiaries will be identified and the actual and potential benefits they accrue will be quantified. A representative sample of beneficiaries will be submitted to a structured consultation on the compensation program. Activity 7.4 Local consultations at selected rural communities on the scheme of payment for environmental services

The validity and acceptance of the scheme of compensation for environmental services will be systematically assessed through a process of structured consultation conducted in selected rural communities in different areas of the Andes.


Activity 7.5 Pilot test of the scheme of payment for environmental services at selected rural communities

The proposed program of payment for environmental services will be tested in four selected communities in the Andes. The test will be extended for four consecutive years and a carbon monitoring procedure will be in place. Physical, biological, social, and economic indicators will be used for the monitoring and assessment of the program. The concept of “additionality” will be tested by comparing the impacts of the project with the no‐project situation. Activity 8.1 Presentation of proposed research and cocreation of research methodology with communities

Target communities will be engaged from the start. First, contact will be established with communities’ key actors. The project will be introduced to the communities in a workshop as a first step to stimulate their engagement in the research process. Once the basic aspects are agreed upon, the following step will be to work with the communities in the identification of one or two relevant issues regarding peatlands management. Activity 8.2 Design of data gathering protocol

This activity will involve two tasks: baseline survey of participating communities and the identification of local research groups. Community members will elect three or four people to represent them throughout the process. They will be in charge of interviewing actors, documenting the work, and disseminating results among community and authorities. The local research group will be trained as to how to conduct interviews and design a data‐gathering protocol. The protocol will allow data collection. Activity 8.3 Socialoriented fieldwork

Once the protocol is in place, the process will include a baseline survey, interviews with relevant actors in decision‐making positions within key institutions, collection of secondary information on the selected issues, feedback and negotiation workshops, creation and strengthening of coalitions, and a final participatory evaluation. Activity 8.4 Social data processing and analysis

Qualitative and quantitative methodologies will be used to analyze results of the advocacy coalition process. To this end, NVivo and SPSS will be used. Activity 8.5 Documentation, dissemination, and outcome monitoring with communities

Research results will be shared by local research groups with the community. Discussion results and decisions made by the community will also be documented and shared with potential allies. At the end of the research, a final survey, coupled with some focus groups, will be applied to assess the impact of the exercise and the sustainability of the process.


Activity 9.1 Design of policies and institutional frameworks to support the scheme of payment for environmental services in collaboration with policymakers

Policies and institutional frameworks required for countrywide implementation of a program of payment for environmental services provided by Andean soils will be analyzed, designed, and discussed with policy and decision makers. Activity 9.2 Promote the uptake of policies and institutional frameworks by national and regional governments

Agreed policies and institutional frameworks supporting the program of payment for environmental services will be actively disseminated to government and legislature bodies in order to obtain their incorporation into the national and regional legal frameworks.

9. BUDGET

The total estimated budget of the five‐year pilot project is US $3,833,820.00 (see Annex III). The budget has two components—research and compensation for environmental services. The first component (research), which represents 72% of the total budget, would be fully administered and conducted by CIP. However, the budget for this component includes US $350,000 (9% of the total budget) for the acquisition of specialized lab and field equipment that will be donated to and located in the Soils Laboratory of the Universidad Nacional Agraria de La Molina, a critical partner in the project. It is necessary to stress that the proposed equipment is absolutely required for the intended work. As CIP has tax exoneration privileges, it is convenient to have it buy the equipment. The implementation of this equipment will be an important contribution to the analytical capabilities of a national institution. CIP will actively train the local staff in the operation and maintenance of the equipment. The second component (28% of the budget) would be administered and conducted by the Peru’s Ministerio del Ambiente (MINAM).

10. REFERENCES

Bond‐Lamberty, B., and Thomson, A. 2010. Temperature‐associated increases in the global soil respiration record. Nature, 464(7288) : 579–582.

Centro de Investigación de la Universidad del Pacífico (CIUP). 2004. Humedales: Fuentes de vida y aprovechamiento. In: Boletín del Área de Economía de los Recursos Naturales y del Ambiente IV (34). Lima: CIUP.

Chimner, R.A., and Karberg, J.M. 2008. Long‐term carbon accumulation in two tropical mountains peatlands, Andes Mountains, Ecuador. Mires and Peat, 3(04) : 1–10.

Clymo, R.S., Turunen, J., and Tolonen, K. 1998. Carbon accumulation in peatland. Oikos, 81 : 368–388.

De Haan, S., and Juarez, H. 2010. Land use and potato genetic resources in Huancavelica, Central Peru. Submitted to: Journal of Land Use Science.

Easter, M., Paustian, K., Killian, K., Williams, S., Feng, T., Al‐Adamat, R., Batjes, N.H., Bernoux, M., Bhattacharyya, T., Cerri, C.C., Cerri, C.E.P., Coleman, K., Falloon, P., Feller, C., Gicheru, P., Kamoni, P., Milne, E., Pal, D.K., Powlson, D.S., Rawajfih, Z., Sessay, M., and Wokabi, S. 2007. The GEFSOC soil


carbon modelling system: A tool for conducting regional‐scale soil carbon inventories and assessing the impacts of land use change on soil carbon. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 122(1) : 13–25.

Farley, K.A. 2007. Grasslands to Tree Plantations: Forest Transition in the Andes of Ecuador. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 97(4) : 755–771.

Farley, K.A., Kelly, E.F., and Hofstede, R.G.M. 2004. Soil Organic Carbon and Water Retention after Conversion of Grasslands to Pine Plantations in the Ecuadorian Andes. Ecosystems, 7 : 729–739.

Flores, E.R. 1991. Manejo y utilización de pastizales. En: S. Fernandez Baca (ed.) Avances y perspectivas del conocimiento de los camélidos Sud Americanos. Santiago de Chile: Oficina Regional de la FAO para América Latina y el Caribe, pp. 191–211.

Grenier, L. 1998. Working with indigenous knowledge. A guide for researchers. International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Ottawa, Canada.

Instituto Nacional de Recursos Naturales (INRENA). 1997. Estudio Nacional de la Diversidad Biológica. Diagnóstico Nacional. Vol. I. INRENA, Lima.

Millones, E. 1995. En defensa de los bofedales andinos. Revista Agroeconomía : 43–45. Universidad Nacional de Ingeniería, Lima, Perú.

Milori, D.M.P.B., Galeti, H.V.A., Martin‐Neto, L., Diekow, J., González‐Peréz, M., Bayer, C., and Salton, J. 2006. Organic matter study of whole soil samples using laser‐induced fluorescence spectroscopy. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 70(1) : 57–63.

Podwojewski, P., Poulenard, J., Zambrana, T., and Hofstede, R. 2002. Overgrazing effects on vegetation cover and properties of volcanic ash soil in the páramo of Llangahua and La Esperanza (Tungurahua, Ecuador). Soil Use and Management, 18(1) : 45–55.

Ramsar Convention on Wetlands. 2010. The List of Wetlands of International Importance. (Website: http://www.ramsar.org/pdf/sitelist.pdf)

Rodríguez, Y. 1996. Tecnología andina en la producción de Camélidos. Tesis de Licenciatura. Universidad Nacional de Cajamarca.

Segnini, A., Posadas, A., Quiroz, R., Milori, D.M.B.P., Vaz, C.M.P., and Martin Neto, L. 2010a. Characterization of Peatland Soils from the High Andes by 13C NMR Spectroscopy. Submitted to: International Humic Substances Society.

Segnini, A., Posadas, A., Quiroz, R., Milori, D.M.B.P., Saab, S.C., Martin Neto, L., and Vaz, C.M.P. 2010b. Spectroscopic Assessment of soil organic matter in Wetlands from the high Andes. Submitted to: Soil Science Society of America Journal.

Torres, J., and Parra, F. 2005. De los “sachas,” las chacras y la vida silvestre en los Andes del Perú. LEISA Revista de Agroecología, 20(4) : 24–26.

WorldClim. 2008. Database version 1.4. Available in: <http://www.worldclim.org>. Accessed November 2008.

Concept Note: Carbon storing in the Andean peatlands of Peru—Pilot project A11

Annex I. Carbon storing in the Andean peatlands of Peru—Social assessment report

1. INTRODUCTION

Imminent climate change‐related events call for the identification of mitigation strategies. As part of these efforts, the Government of Peru, the World Bank, and the International Potato Center (CIP) agreed upon the elaboration of a concept note for a potential pilot project to assess the feasibility of a carbon storing‐based environmental service program in the Andean peatlands of Peru. As part of this concept note, a complementary social assessment was required. This report, presented here as Annex I to the concept note, is the output of that exercise. The overall goal of this social assessment was to explore the point of view of relevant stakeholders. The assessment—through expert and community consultations—aimed to gather first‐hand information on the current situation of Andean peatlands as well as on the configuration of knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) about their use and management. In addition, these consultations explored their interest around the potential implementation of carbon storing‐based environmental services. The assessment had three specific goals: (1) to gather field‐based information through the aid of participatory methodologies, (2) to identify major strengths and gaps in knowledge and practices around Andean peatlands, and (3) to formulate specific recommendations for further research. Conceptually, the assessment was based on the World Bank’s Revised Operational Policy and Procedure on Indigenous Peoples. Prior to the assessment, a literature review was conducted. As a result, it became apparent that some of the key factors currently affecting Andean peatlands are strongly related to social and cultural aspects. To adequately address these issues, the conceptual framework for the assessment was based on the KASAP approach, which focuses on the synergies among Knowledge, Attitudes, Skills, Aspirations, and Practices. Methodologically, the research work was based on a participatory approach in which stakeholders and community representatives played an active role. An initial consultation to validate research instruments was carried out in the rural community of Hanchipacha, district of Pitumarca, province of Canchis, in Cusco. Two consultations followed: one in Puno, with participation of representatives of six communities, and the other in the community of Ondores, in the Junín Region. Additionally, an experts’ consultation was carried out to explore the state‐of‐art about the management of paramos in Northern Peru. This report is organized into five sections:

Introduction Section 2—Describes the conceptual underpinnings of the social assessment Section 3—Presents the methodological procedures followed with emphasis on research stages,

sites description, instruments used, and informants Section 4—Analysis of results Section 5—Main conclusions and recommendations.


2. CONCEPTUAL BACKGROUND

As explained above, this assessment was based on a conceptual framework that integrated the World Bank’s revised Policy on Indigenous Peoples (i.e., with emphasis on baseline information gathering, stakeholders’ identification, and participatory consultations with local communities), the evidence of current characteristics and factors affecting Andean peatlands in Peru and the KASAP approach. At the end of the research process, the integration of these three perspectives allowed a holistic idea about the socioeconomic and cultural dynamics of Andean peatlands. Each of the perspectives is described below.

2.1 About the Rationale of Social Assessments

During the past several years, the World Bank has become increasingly concerned about the collateral effects of the development‐related operations it funds on indigenous peoples. To this end, the Bank has committed to promote the well‐being of indigenous peoples through ensuring the respect for their dignity and human rights. In May 2005, the Executive Directors approved a revised policy on indigenous peoples. The overall strategy proposed in this document is a five‐step procedure that includes the following sequence: Screening, social assessment, consultation with potentially affected communities, preparation of work plan, and disclosure. In particular, according to Bank standards, a social assessment might include the following elements:

A review of the legal and institutional framework applicable to indigenous peoples Baseline information on demographic, socioeconomic, cultural, and political characteristics of

potentially affected indigenous communities Identification of key stakeholders and the elaboration of a culturally appropriate process for

consulting indigenous communities at each stage of project preparation and implementation Assessment conducted with indigenous communities (i.e., with emphasis on potential adverse

and positive effects of the operation) Participatory identification of measures to minimize, mitigate, or compensate for potential

adverse effects. As part of the social assessment on Andean peatlands of Peru, four of the above‐mentioned aspects were prioritized: Gathering preliminary baseline information on potentially affected communities, identification of stakeholders, assessment with communities, and participatory identification of measures to minimize adverse effects. As a result, highly relevant information was gathered about the dynamics of indigenous communities settled near peatlands in the Andes, with emphasis on how decisions are currently being made about their use and management.

2.2 About Socioeconomic and Cultural Aspects of Peatlands in Peru

Despite their natural and social value, peatlands are currently characterized by several challenges. The most striking ones refer to the reduction of its natural area; contamination due to mining and agricultural and industrial residues; changes in water sources; overgrazing; and the like. Thus, the literature has pointed out some relevant socioeconomic and cultural aspects associated with peatlands’ erosion and loss that result from their current use and management in Peru (CIUP, 2004; Torres and Parra, 2005). As such, although climate change‐related events are a major cause of


peatlands’ degradation, the current configuration of communities’ KAP do play a key role in their inadequate (or lack of) management. Additionally, institutional aspects have a major influence as well. Evidence suggests that the erosion of the peatlands has also increased as a consequence of indigenous knowledge loss. As known, this kind of knowledge refers to the cumulative, unique experience‐based wisdom existing within and developed around the specific conditions of communities in a particular geographic setting (Grenier, 1998). As per peatlands, this loss has accentuated environmental degradation and the depletion of its biodiversity. The importance of indigenous knowledge has decreased, among other factors, as a result of the official formal education discourse, predominance of market‐oriented values, and “modern” emphasis on conventional rural development‐related practices. Moreover, communities have no access to complementary information about the importance of peatlands. Hence, their motivation and interest towards their conservation is minimal. Despite the fact that there are Andean communities that implement actions to conserve peatlands and grasslands, the literature stresses the current lack of community‐level strategies around the management of these resources (Flores, 1991; Rodríguez, 1996). On the institutional front, Peru has made progress regarding the conservation of peatlands. However, despite advances in policy and legislative matters, the real impact of these efforts has not yet achieved the expected results. This might be associated with the institutional shortcomings to address the main issues that threaten peatlands.

2.3 About the KASAP Approach

This approach was developed by the Institute of Sustainable Rural Livelihoods of the National Agrarian University, La Molina, under the project "Adapting to Change in the Andean Highlands: Practices and Strategies to Address Climate and Market Risks in Vulnerable Agro‐ecosystems,” funded by USAID (Vargas, 2006). Conceptually, the KASAP approach consists of a systematic data‐gathering research exercise based on the collection of “subjective” information on a given topic. KASAP aims to describe, analyze, and infer the determinants of an event or process subject to change. As such, KASAP includes knowledge (i.e., information access, availability and management), attitudes (i.e., ways in which ideas are structured based on feelings, values, or beliefs), skills (i.e., specific abilities based on talent, training, and/or practice), aspirations (i.e., desires about the future based on certain information and experience), and practices (i.e., ways of doing, as well as of interacting under certain conditions). Operationally, the KASAP approach is implemented through the use of inter‐learning participatory processes rooted in action‐oriented research. Aside from gathering information, these processes seek to provide all involved actors’ with new information and analytical tools and promote a conscious change in attitudes and practices on natural resource management. On the basis of the above, in addition to the general objective, a KASAP approach‐based study has three interrelated advantages (see Fig. A1):

Increases the knowledge base and facilitates the establishment of rapport with communities through the use of participatory research techniques.


Gathers baseline data to serve project design and provides inputs for monitoring and evaluation (M&E).

Generates inter‐learning conditions within and among communities and researchers useful for decision making.

In sum, the integration of these three perspectives—World Bank’s revised policy on indigenous peoples, evidence of current characteristics, and factors affecting Andean peatlands in Peru and the KASAP approach—allowed a rich understanding of the dynamics in course.

3. METHODOLOGY

This section describes the methodological criteria that guided the social assessment: Research stages, study sites, and population and data‐gathering instruments.

3.1 Research Stages

The research work was organized in four stages (see Fig. A2). These included planning, design, and validation of research tools, field work, and systematization and analysis. Each of these stages consisted of a set of specific activities.

3.1.1 Planning

The objective of this phase was to define the research contents and organize the sequence of steps to be followed as part of the assessment. Among others, it included the following activities: technical meetings with staff of the Ministry of the Environment and the World Bank, revision of secondary information sources, preliminary visits, and coordination with stakeholders and planning of field operations.

KNOWLEDGE SKILLS

ATTITUDES

PRACTICES ASPIRATIONS

K

A

S

A

P

The KASAP approach is…An inter-learning participatory process rooted in action-oriented research

The KASAP supports..• Knowledge- base increase• Project design • Decision making

Figure A1. KASAP approach: Definition and advantages.

2. Design and validation of

research tools

4.

Systematization and analysis

1. Planning

3. Field work

Figure A2. Research stages.


3.1.2 Design and validation of tools

This stage was focused on the design of the data‐gathering instruments and analytical matrixes to be used as part of the assessment (see Annexes A1.1, A1.2, and A1.3). The former included a guide for key informant interviews and a protocol for focus groups. Prior to fieldwork, a validation exercise took place in a community of the province of Canchis (Cusco) in February 2010. The validation allowed testing the pertinence of questions being asked, as well as its timing and language. On the basis of the results obtained in Cusco, instruments were readjusted prior to the final application. 3.1.3 Field work

As part of this stage, the site selection criteria—defined as part of the planning stage—were readjusted based on complementary information. Moreover, this stage consisted of the actual conduct of visits and consultations at the field level. Key informant interviews, focus groups, and ethnographic work were the main tools used to gather first‐hand information. Finally, the analytical criteria for information processing was identified at this stage. 3.1.4 Systematization and analysis

This stage included the organization of field‐gathered information, as well as the preparation of this final report.

3.2 Study Sites and Population

As discussed above, the social assessment focused on communities settled near major Andean peatlands. As such, four of the areas in which these are highly concentrated were selected: Cusco, Puno, Junín, and Piura (see Annex A1.4). A validation exercise was conducted in Cusco, direct consultations were implemented in Puno and Junín, and an experts’ consultation was carried out on the current state of paramos located in the highlands of Piura. The selection of communities for this assessment was done based on the following criteria: (1) location within relevant Andean peatlands areas, (2) availability of satellite information, and (3) preliminary expression of interest. A total of eight communities were visited (see Table A1). Table A1. List of Selected Communities

Communities Region

Hanchipaccha Cusco

Apopata Puno

Ayllupalca 1/5 Puno

Casana Puno

Chichillapi Puno

Lacotuyo Puno

Muchuna Puno

Ondores Junín


In terms of the characteristics of the population involved in this assessment, the selected areas included rural communities above 4,000 masl. These communities are composed of small landholding producers whose economy relies on livestock (i.e., cattle, sheep, and camelids) and minor subsistence farming. Although these communities are not totally excluded from market circuits, they are characterized by limited trade and scarce technology. Furthermore, in terms of organization, these communities have promoted spaces that allow them to exchange views and make decisions regarding the management of their natural resources. These include, among others, community councils, associations of livestock producers, and irrigation councils. On the other hand, in terms of social services, these communities have access to health and educational facilities with minimal infrastructure and equipment. In terms of basic services, most of them still have no electricity, running water, sewage, or telephone.

In terms of the informants, direct consultations in the field included producers, local authorities, and relevant stakeholders. The latter included practitioners and technical staff of governmental agencies. A total of 41 people participated in the assessment (see Table A2 and Annex A1.5 for detailed lists of participants). Table A2. Synthesis of Consultations by Number of Participants

Type of Consultation No. of Participants

1. Community consultation in Cusco (validation) 6

2. Community consultation in Puno 20

3. Community consultation in Junín 11

4. Experts’ consultation on paramos 4

TOTAL 41

3.3 DataGathering Instruments

Researchers who promote the qualitative perspective in social sciences argue that it allows, as opposed to the quantitative one, a deeper understanding about the context in which events take place (Bednarz, 1985). Qualitative methods provide the opportunity to include the perspective of the population under study (Gillespie and Sinclair, 2000). Thus, taking into account this assessment’s main objective, its design departed from a qualitative perspective. On the basis of the KASAP approach, three data collection instruments were developed: focus groups, key informant interviews, and ethnographic work. 3.3.1 Focus groups

This is a data‐gathering strategy to obtain detailed and in‐depth information about a specific topic of interest. This is achieved through the interaction among a small number of individuals (usually 8–10) with the aid of a facilitator. Participants are previously identified and selected according to criteria relevant to the investigation. Unlike other data collection procedures, focus groups allow one to collect information on attitudes and perceptions and explore the gap between what is being


said and what is being done. Thus, focus groups are helpful to confront opposite points of view on a given topic (Morgan, 1997; Aigneren, 2002). Nonetheless, given the nature of this assessment, focus groups were actually implemented as “focal workshops”—that is, they combined the characteristics of focus groups with those of participatory workshops. As part of their design, among others, three key aspects were privileged: (1) verification of current state of peatlands; (2) exploration of existing knowledge about the use, importance, and benefits of peatlands; and (3) identification of current practices associated with peatland conservation. Focus groups/workshops information was processed through the aid of analytical matrices that allowed the identification of common patterns. In practice, these exercises took from 4 to 8 hours. Active participation of attendees was promoted throughout. 3.3.2 Key informant interviews

Interviews are instruments for collecting information based on the social interaction between the interviewee and interviewer. Unlike surveys, interviews allow for greater flexibility as they allow the possibility to replicate and cross‐examine the obtained answers. Interviews can be structured or semi‐structured depending on the level of detail and requirements of the checklist used. On the other hand, interviews vary according to selected information units. These can be a large group of people or be focused on a small group people according to predetermined criteria. The latter are known as “key informant interviews.” This type of interview is conducted with people who, according to the position they occupy and/or their level of knowledge or expertise on a given subject, are expected to have relevant perceptions and opinions (Bourke and Luloff, 1995; Krannich and Humphrey, 1986). For this assessment, these interviews were used to collect additional qualitative information about the current state of Andean peatlands. Key informant interviews were conducted with community leaders and professionals. The information provided through interviews added information to that obtained during focus groups/workshops. 3.3.3 Ethnographic work

In addition to focus groups/workshops and interviews, the social assessment included a series of field observations (ethnographies). These were extremely useful at the beginning and during the fieldwork as they helped “finding the definitions, perceptions and categories that people themselves use” (Fitchen, 1990). For this assessment, the ethnographic work was conducted through visits to the communities and registered through the aid of digital images.

4. RESULTS

This section presents the analysis of field findings. It is structured as follows: After a brief synthesis on the validation exercise in Cusco, a discussion of Puno and Junín consultations’ findings follows. It is organized into five main areas: (1) current state of peatlands, (2) knowledge, (3) attitudes, (4)


skills and aspirations, and (5) practices. At the end of this section, a summary on the current state of paramos in the highlands of Piura is presented.

4.1 Consultation in Cusco (Validation)

The consultation in the community of Hanchipaccha, district of Pitumarca, province of Canchis (Cusco) was aimed at testing the instruments to be used in field consultations. Aside from its methodological value, which was translated in the readjustment of research guides and protocols, the consultation allowed the gathering of preliminary information about knowledge and practices on Andean peatlands. Participants identified that peatlands are currently deteriorating and are an important resource due to their role in water and pasture “storage” in benefit of camelids. This is particularly relevant during the arid season. They have particular interest in building canals for water management (see Fig. A3). None of the participants was aware of the importance of peatlands for carbon storage.

Local explaining the “water cycle” Traditional water canal

Figure A3. Consultation in Cusco.

4.2 Consultations in Puno and Junín

This subsection addresses results of field consultations. 4.2.1 Current state of Andean peatlands

As part of field consultations, participants were asked several introductory questions about the current condition of peatlands in their communities. Among them were aspects such as location, size, current condition, explanatory factors, and changes overtime. Satellite images were used to motivate the discussion on such aspects. Participants were asked to draw and complement images in a way that they could identify their main resources. The discussion that followed departed from this exercise (see Fig. A4).


Consultation in Puno Consultation in Junín

Figure A4. Consultation in Puno and Junín: Use of satellite images.

As part of the introductory analysis, participants estimated some relevant figures (i.e., total community area, total peatlands area, number of families, number of major water sources available, and camelid‐family ratio). In the case of Puno, despite all participant communities being settled in the same province and possibly sharing common characteristics, they vary considerably in terms of extension, water availability, and demographic density (see Table A3). Apopata and Muchuma are the largest, Ayupalca and Lacotuyo are the smallest. These differences, though not huge, might become relevant during the design of a carbon storing‐based environmental service program. Thus, for it to be successful, it might need to take some of these differences into consideration.

Table A3. Consultation in Puno: Basics Community Figures

Community Area (ha) Peatlands (ha) No. Families Water Sources Camelid‐Family Ratio

1. Apopata 8,000 280 235 16 150–200

2. Ayupalca 1/5 1,150 20 15 2 120–150

3. Casana 3,000 200 30 6 100–120

4. Chichillapi 1,800 200 500 3 120

5. Lacotuyo 1,200 70 80 2 50

6. Muchuma 5,000 250 30 3 160–200

In addition, participants were asked to provide an overall assessment of the current condition of their peatlands. Differences were apparent in this regard as well. Table A4 presents a “risk semaphore” based on what community representatives indicated (i.e., red = high risk, yellow = moderate risk, green = low risk). As can be seen, the majority of representatives considered their peatland risk to be moderate. Nonetheless, since this assessment was declarative, it might need to be validated in the field through complementary measurement exercises prior to the design of further interventions.


Table A4. Consultation in Puno: Overall Risk Assessment

Community Overall Risk Assessment Observations

1. Apopata “Peatlands that are nearer to water sources are better off than those that are far away.”

2. Ayupalca “Peatlands are scarce. The little we have we do not manage it adequately.”

3. Casana “Peatlands have increased and improved. Before we did not have many.”

4. Chichillapi “As rain frequency and intensity have diminished, peatlands are drying out.”

5. Lacotuyo “Peatlands are at stake due to the decrease in water availability. Pastures have decreased so they feed fewer animals.”

6. Muchuma “Peatlands are affected because of lack of water management. Upper areas have too much, lower areas have very little …”

Following the overall assessment, participants were asked to express their own views about the explanatory factors and effects associated with peatlands loss (Fig. A5). Among the major factors, they highlighted a series of both natural and human‐related. The latter, however, were considerably most severe than the former. As per the associated effects, participants stressed that peatlands loss creates new challenges related to the availability and quality of the natural resources they are most heavily dependent upon pastures and camelids.

Figure A5. Consultation in Puno: Major factors and effects of peatlands loss.

As per the current condition of peatlands in Junín, participants agreed with those of Cusco and Puno—that is, this resource is facing a severe deterioration process. Among the major natural factors, participants recognized the insufficiency or lack of rain. Among the human‐related factors,

Soil

erosion

Less/lack

of water

Under‐

nourished

cattle/

camelids

Thin

pastures

MAJOR

EFFECTS

OF

PEATLAND

Less rain & snow; more hail & frost

Lack of

water

management

Native species

deforestation (tola & queñua)

Over‐grazing/

pasture degradation

Air and water

pollution

MAJOR FACTORS OF PEATLANDS

LOSS

Legend: Blue bubbles: Human‐related factors, orange bubbles: Natural factors.


they mentioned the excessive pressure on pastures, lack of water management strategies, and pollution. Bio‐indicators such as the presence of native fish and frog species were used to exemplify this loss. In sum, all consulted communities agreed on the fact that peatlands are currently at stake. Explanatory factors include natural causes with emphasis on climate change‐related events, but most importantly they deal, according their own views, with human‐related ones. In this sense, if an environmental service program is to be designed, it would necessarily need to address these aspects. 4.2.2 Knowledge on Andean peatlands

As part of the consultations, a knowledge matrix was specifically designed to gather information on how much participants already knew about their natural resources—pastures, camelids, soil, water, and peatlands (see Fig. A6). In addition, they were asked to rate the overtime quantity/quality variation of each of these resources. As per their resources, all community representatives in Puno were able to identify pasture and camelid species with no difficulty. Among pastures, they mentioned thola, chilligua, iru, cculy, chejlla, tiña, and so on. Among camelids, they indicated huacaya and suri. In addition, they were able to identify major diseases and/or pests associated to them (i.e., wild rabbits; enterotoxemy). It is apparent they have a good level of knowledge of the resources they have available. Nonetheless, in terms of their rating, the representatives of each of the six communities agreed on the fact that the quantity and quality of most of their natural resources had decreased overtime. On the other hand, community representatives in Junín were also able to identify species. Among pastures, they mentioned both native (ichu, chillwar, trébol) and introduced species (avena, rye grass). As opposed to communities in Puno, Ondores (Junín community) possesses mixed livestock: cattle, sheep, and camelids. They were able to identify their associated diseases with no difficulty. In terms of the quantity/quality natural resources rating, they indicated that pastures, cattle/sheep/ camelids, and soils had either improved or maintained as compared to the past 10 years. In particular, representatives of both Puno and Junín distinguished permanent and seasonal peatlands. Participants of both regions indicated that the quality of their peatlands was moderate.

Figure A6. Consultation in Puno: Natural resource knowledge matrix (example).


However, differences appeared when they rated their quantity. While in Puno they indicated it had diminished, in Junín they mentioned it was about the same as compared to the past 10 years. Finally, when asked about pasture load capacity, participants expressed they were aware of the need to manage the resources (i.e., camelid/peatland area ratio), but were not certain as to how to proceed. They indicated that related estimations and decisions are made “by eye.” The consultation also explored the current knowledge communities had about peatlands as carbon storing repositories. No representative, either in Puno or Junín, was aware about this (see Fig. A7).

Consultation in Puno Consultation in Junín

Figure A7. Consultations in Puno and Junín: example of knowledge matrices.

4.2.3 Attitudes on Andean peatlands

Complementary information was gathered on attitudes towards natural resources. Special attention was given to the perceptions about tradition and rituals as they relate to their productive activities. Community representatives of Puno and Junín agreed that the most important rituals they currently practice are the so‐called fiestas patronales (i.e., carnavales, anniversaries). In Puno, some additional practices contemplate pago a la tierra (i.e., payment to the land), wilancha (i.e., camelid sacrifice to obtain a good year), and marcachi (i.e., camelid “wedding” ceremony). Participants indicated that rituals had been handed down through their ancestors. However, they all agree that they are currently being displaced by new ideas. The systematic abandonment of these traditions is associated with the perception that they are becoming decreasingly “effective” as compared to previous years. Explanatory factors include, once again, natural and human‐related ones. 4.2.4 Skills and aspirations about Andean peatlands

In addition to the above, skills and aspirations were also explored as part of the consultations. These were addressed through three different angles: (1) stakeholders’ maps, (2) route map for further interventions, and (3) “incentive schemes.” Stakeholders’ maps were used to identify current and potential key actors that might contribute to the conservation and management of community natural resources. A route map was elaborated to delineate next steps towards the attainment of


conservation goals, particularly as they relate to peatlands. Finally, participants were asked about their opinion about “incentive schemes” to identify potential community interest on them. As per stakeholders’ maps, each of the sites, Puno and Junín, developed their own (Fig. A8). Both highlighted the role of regional and local governments, as well as that of communities. Participants in Puno stressed the role of producers’ associations and nongovernmental organizations with whom they are currently working. On the other side, participants in Junín added the role of SERNANP and the Peace Corps from which they are currently receiving external support for the implementation of environmental education‐related activities.

Figure A8. Consultations in Puno and Junín: Stakeholders’ maps.

As a corollary, stakeholders’ maps are useful to highlight the importance of external aid for promoting opportunities at the community level. However, in order for these efforts to be successful, no isolated interventions should be promoted. Instead, planning and coordination among them should be strengthened. This process should be based on the participatory identification and prioritization of needs in close collaboration with partner communities.

As per the route map, participants were asked to identify further steps in order to attain peatlands’ conservation‐related goals. In synthesis, as a result of consultation meetings in Puno and Junín, five steps were suggested:

1. Gather precise and complete information. Given that there is currently insufficient information about the availability, condition, and management of peatlands, participants stressed the need to gather and/or generate precise data. This would allow formulating adequate strategies and promoting timely decision making about this resource.

2. Provide technical assistance for project elaboration. In addition to the need for information, community representatives highlighted the importance of receiving technical and methodological support to elaborate projects according to the current national standards and regulations.

Map of actors, Puno Map of actors, Junín

Local Gov.

SERNANP

Communities

Peace Corps

Regional Government

PEATLANDS

‐ JUNÍN

Local Gov.

Producers Associations

Communities

NGOs

Regional

Government PEATLANDS ‐ PUNO


3. Promote innovative leadership and organization. Information and technical assistance, however, might not be able to address alone the current challenges related to peatlands conservation. In that regard, participants mentioned that one of the main challenges they foresee is the lack of organization that characterizes their communities nowadays. To this end, promoting innovative leadership and enhancing organization are central steps for achieving successful results.

4. Facilitate basic infrastructure. During the course of the consultations, one of the major short‐term concerns participants expressed was the lack and/or insufficient infrastructure they have available in order to conserve their resources. In particular, they claimed for support to improve water management practices, fence their peatlands, and build reservoirs.

5. Increase awareness through effective communication. Aside from the steps mentioned above, participants indicated that creating awareness among local communities and authorities about the importance and use of natural resources with emphasis on peatlands is still an important need. They recommended that these processes be promoted based on a communication strategy that focuses on key messages that use oral, rather than written, means of dissemination and that targets main decision makers.

If examined closely, all five steps would easily fit into a capacity‐building framework with emphasis on managerial skills. Thus, this might need to be considered as part of any further attempt to implement an environmental service program in the Andes. In addition, it would be important to bear in mind that—although each of these steps is important on its own—it is strategic to guarantee their simultaneous implementation. To this end, the advocacy coalitions framework (ACF) is an important methodological tool that could help enhance these efforts. As known, this is a useful community participation‐based approach that allows identifying relevant issues, alternative solutions and strategies, improving family’s capacity for innovation and experimentation, revitalizing Andean knowledge and culture, facilitating exchange and diffusion of knowledge and experience generated during the process, and supporting communities to increase their negotiation capacities (Flora et al., 2000). Besides, the implementation of this “route map” should be understood as a process. This means that it implies a sequence of accumulative activities that affect each other as part of a “cycle” (see Fig. A9).


Figure A9. Consultations in Puno and Junín: Route map for further interventions.

Finally, in terms of the participants’ interest in a potential “incentive scheme” for environmental services, they expressed a high predisposition towards exploring these new venues. Aside from the economic benefits it might bring to the communities, they identified some advantages associated to this alternative. For instance, they indicated it could promote new alliances with potential stakeholders and that, at the end, local organizations would become stronger as part of the process. To this end, they mentioned the need to access complementary information about the types of “incentive schemes” available, as well as their procedures and requirements. Additionally, they suggested it would be important to identify the institutional arrangements needed for their field implementation. In turn, community representatives of Puno and Junín guaranteed their political support and commitment in terms of, for instance, labor force provision and social surveillance throughout the process. 4.2.5 Practices related to Andean peatlands

This subsection analyzes the ways in which communities actually manage – or do not – their natural resources. Practices are particularly important in this context because they synthesize the other components of the KASAP approach (i.e., knowledge, attitudes, aspirations and skills). To this end, identifying and contrasting actual and “ideal” practices allows to identify the gap that exists among them and that remains to be closed through strategies like the ones exposed above. In particular, when discussing peatland management, practices would need to be carefully analyzed in order to identify trends among different regions (see Fig. A10). The expectation would be that

5. Awareness

4. Infrastructure

3. Organization &

leadership

2. Technical

assistance

1. Data gathering


the analysis renders sufficient information in order to design environmental policy to promote the conservation of these eco‐regions.

Consultation in Puno Current practices, Junín

Figure A10. Consultations in Puno and Junín: Example of peatland conservationrelated practices.

Thus, as part of the consultations conducted in Puno and Junín, a participatory inventory about “ideal” peatland conservation‐related practices was elaborated:

Peatland load control Manure management Canal cleaning Pasture transplant Peatland fencing Native pasture reserve Pasture cultivation Cattle/camelid rotation Construction of canals and intakes Peatlands expansion Reservoirs construction Tree plantation Slash‐and‐burn control Although the list was lengthy, reality shows a different panorama. On the basis of the practices they had identified, participants selected those that they usually implement and indicated the frequency at which each they do them. Among these practices, six were selected as the most frequent ones: canals cleaning, natural pastures reserve, cattle/camelid rotation, peatland fencing, canals construction, and manure management. Thus, results showed that not all practices participants mentioned are actually put into place and of those that are, they are not implemented at the frequency they should.


A radial diagram was used to graphically show the frequency differences at which peatland conservation‐related practices are implemented in Puno and Junín (see Fig. A11). Although there was coincidence in terms of the practices that are most commonly implemented (i.e., rotation, cleaning, fencing, and constructing), declared proportions varied considerably. A major explanation for these differences might be associated with the risk people perceive about peatland degradation and loss, as well as about the potential consequences that this might have on water availability and access in the near future. While community representatives in Junín are moderately concerned about the near‐future effects of peatland loss, the ones in Puno perceive it as a current threat to pastures and camelids and they are dealing with it at present.

Figure 4.4. Consultations in Puno and Junín: Most frequent land peatrelated conservation practices

Figure A11. Consultations in Puno and Junín: Most frequent peatland conservationrelated conservation practices.

In sum, peatland conservation‐related practices are currently being implemented at both sites, but, more frequently in Puno than in Junín. For further reference, it is worth noting that, since these results are based on “declarative proportions” (i.e., have not been directly tested in the field), it would be advisable to validate these figures through the aid of specific measurement tools.

4.3 Experts Consultation on Paramos As part of this assessment, aside from peatlands, paramos were also considered as a potential setting to implement a carbon storing‐based environmental service program. As known, paramos are an ecoregion located between 3,000 and 4,500 masl that covers approximately 35,000 km2 of the Tropical Andes of Ecuador, Colombia, Peru, and Venezuela (FEDEPAZ, 2009). In Peru, they can be found in Piura and northern Cajamarca. Given their climatologically characteristics (i.e., humidity, cloudiness, and low temperature), paramos are a major water source in which important rivers are originated (Quiroz, Chira, Huancabamba, Piura, and Chinchipe). In addition, they are extremely rich in terms of biodiversity. Among other aspects, paramos are highly relevant for the environment on account of the role they play in hydric regulation. In addition, their soils are important carbon retainers (FEDEPAZ, 2009).

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%Canals cleaning

Natural pastures reserve

Cattle/camelids rotation

Peat lands fencing

Canals construction

Manure management

Puno

Junin


One of the most important initiatives for the conservation and sustainable use of paramos is the

Andean Paramo Project (APP).1 The APP is an initiative funded by the Global Environment Facility through the United Nations Program for Environment, led by the Consortium for Sustainable Development of the Andean Ecoregion (CONDESAN), executed by the Institute of Environmental Science and Ecology of the Universidad de los Andes (Venezuela), the Alexander von Humboldt Institute (Colombia), Ecociencia (Ecuador), and the Mountain Institute (Peru). The APP emphasizes five components: management plans, policy, training, education and communication, and institutional response to improve the quality of life of communities. To date, the APP has contributed to improving the information base on paramos through the documentation and quantification of experiences and has also promoted the discussion about their importance towards policy formulation. As per the present condition of paramos in Northern Peru, experts indicated that they are currently at stake due to natural and human‐related factors. On the one hand, global warming is affecting glaciers and, as a result, water sources are diminishing. On the other hand, severe threats are being imposed by large‐scale mining that has settled in nearby areas and is affecting the ecoregion’s environmental equilibrium. Moreover, despite research efforts, a subject‐related knowledge base has not yet been systematized and/or disseminated. As per the implementation of a potential “incentive scheme” for environmental services, experts considered that, aside from the aspects mentioned above, these proposals might need to take into account factors such as cultural aspects, leadership and managerial styles and current institutional agendas. In sum, paramos are a promising resource currently at stake. Further research is needed to generate evidence and enable the identification of alternative strategies. These exercises, aside from ensuring the compliance of scientific standards, might also need to integrate local knowledge on natural resources management and conservation‐related practices.

5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This section summarizes major research conclusions and recommendations for further assessments. Both are rooted in the KASAP approach that oriented this work.

5.1 Conclusions

5.1.1 Current state of peatlands and paramos

Consulted communities and experts agreed upon the fact that peatlands and paramos are currently at stake. Overall, they have diminished their quantity and quality over the past 10 years. Explanatory factors include natural causes with emphasis on climate change‐related events. However, most importantly, they deal with human‐related ones: Lack of resource conservation and managerial strategies, air and water pollution, mining, and others. In this regard, if an environmental service program is to be designed, it would necessarily need to consider these aspects.

1 For further details, please refer to http://www.condesan.org/ppa/sitio.shtml.


5.1.2 Knowledge on peatlands

Community participants in the consultations conducted in Puno and Junín indicated that the quality of their peatlands was moderate. However, differences appeared when they rated their quantity: while in Puno they indicated it had diminished, in Junín they mentioned it was about the same as compared to the past 10 years. Moreover, when asked about the importance of pasture load capacity, participants expressed they were aware of the need to manage the resources (i.e., camelid/peatland area ratio) but were not certain as to how to proceed. They indicated that related estimations and decisions are made “by eye.” Consultations also explored the current knowledge communities had about peatlands as carbon storing repositories. No representative, in Cusco, Puno, or Junín, was aware of this. Experts on paramos reported that communities in Northern Peru were not familiar with this advantage either. 5.1.3 Attitudes about peatlands

This assessment gathered complementary information on attitudes towards natural resources. Special attention was given to the perceptions about tradition and rituals as they relate to their productive activities. Participants recognized their importance, value, and use. However, they agreed that these rituals and traditions are currently being displaced by new ideas. The systematic abandonment of these traditions is associated with the perception that they are becoming decreasingly “effective” as compared to previous years. Explanatory factors include natural and human‐related ones. 5.1.4 Skills and aspirations about peatlands

These two KASAP dimensions (i.e., skills and aspirations) were addressed through stakeholders’ maps, a route map for further interventions, and perceptions about potential “incentive schemes.” As per stakeholders’ maps, each of the sites highlighted the role of regional and local governments, as well as that of communities. They stressed the need for inter‐institutional coordination. As per the route map, participants suggested five steps related to capacity building: Gather precise and complete information, provide technical assistance for project elaboration, promote innovative leadership and organization, facilitate basic infrastructure, and increase awareness through effective communication. Finally, participants expressed their interest and predisposition in exploring “incentive schemes” in favor of environmental conservation. 5.1.5 Practices about peatlands

Peatland conservation‐related practices are currently being implemented in Cusco, Puno, and Junín. The most common ones are canals cleaning, natural pastures reserve, cattle/camelid rotation, peatland fencing, canals construction, and manure management. These practices are more frequent


in Puno than in Junín. These differences might be associated with the risk communities perceive about peatland degradation and loss, as well as about the potential consequences this might have on water availability and access in the near future.

5.2 Recommendations

5.2.1 Promoting carbon storingbased environmental service programs from an intercultural approach

Although this approach is currently part of the public discourse, some conceptual work is needed prior to its implementation. For instance, it is necessary to understand what it is and who is involved. Conceptually, the intercultural approach can be understood as a process of interaction, recognition, and value of various expressions, discourses, and cultural identities in a given space and time. Thus, intercultural communication refers to the set of strategies through which the approach is expressed and disseminated. It is worth noting that, generally, when speaking of the intercultural approach only target populations are prioritized. However, the approach also involves institutional staff (e.g., NGOs, government, and private sector). The intercultural approach can be operationalized into five stages: basic knowledge, recognition, tolerance, appreciation, and incorporation. Attaining each of these stages implies the use of specific criteria and tools. 5.2.2 Implementing Carbon storingbased environmental service programs using a gradual

strategy

Strategies need to be tested before being expanded. The implementation of a carbon storing‐based program will need to work at three levels—validation, evaluation, and expansion. Validation involves small‐scale pilot testing to identify an experience’s operational aspects in practice. Evaluation is the analysis of the validation results to identify “bottlenecks” and make the necessary adjustments. Finally, expansion is the process of scaling‐up the intervention once its assumptions and methodology have been tested and reviewed. 5.2.3 Strengthening measurement systems and indicators

To implement a sustainable carbon storing‐based environmental service, it would be highly advisable that its implementation be measured and monitored throughout. In that sense, indicators are a crucial tool to learn about the progress that is being made to attain goals and targets. Indicators should be formulated using the “S.M.A.R.T.” criteria (i.e., specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time‐bound). In addition, given that results‐based management is currently being promoted, it is advisable that the indicators matrix includes the “IPRI” indicators: input, output, outcome, and impact. 5.2.4 Using effective communication tools throughout the implementation of carbon

storingbased environmental service programs

An intervention might be technically sound; however, if it does not count on an adequate communication strategy, there is a high risk it might not achieve its goals. In that sense, the way in which the relationship “sender‐message‐receiver” is established would be important during the design, implementation, and monitoring stages.


5.2.5 Applying the advocacy coalitions framework to carryout carbon storingbased environmental service programs

On the basis of available information, it is advisable to develop a working plan that articulates the experience of other institutions that could collaborate and cooperate in the implementation of the program. This strategy can contribute to implement cost‐effective interventions, avoid duplicating mistakes and improve success in the area. As known, the advocacy coalition framework is a useful community participation‐based approach that allows identifying alternative solutions and strategies, revitalizing knowledge and culture, facilitating exchange and diffusion of knowledge, and supporting communities to increase their negotiation capacities. To this end, it could facilitate the implementation of the “route map” associated to carbon‐storing environmental service programs described above. Finally, as a general summary, it is worth emphasizing that these five recommendations could be understood as a “system”—that is, they are interdependent (see Fig. A12). The fulfillment of one of these recommendations alone does not guarantee success. Thus, if possible, they should be implemented simultaneously.

Figure A12. Carbon storingbased environmental service programs: Synthesis of concluding remarks.

1. Promoting interventions

from an intercultural approach

5. Applying the Advocacy Coalitions Framework

4. Using effective

communication tools

3. Strengthening measurement systems and indicators

2. Implementing

gradual strategies

Carbon storing‐based

environmental service

programs


6. REFERENCES

Aigneren, M. 2002. La técnica de recolección de información mediante los grupos focales. Revista Electrónica Centro de Estudios de Opinión 7.

Bednarz, D. 1985. Quantity and quality in evaluation research: A divergent view. Evaluation and Program Planning, 8(4) : 289–306.

Bourke, L., and Luloff, A.E. 1995. Leaders’ perspectives on rural tourism: Case studies in Pennsylvania. Journal of Community Development Society, 26(2) : 224–239.

Centro de Investigación de la Universidad del Pacífico (CIUP). 2004. Humedales: Fuentes de vida y aprovechamiento. Boletín del Área de Economía de los Recursos Naturales y del Ambiente, CIUP, VI (34), Lima.

Fitchen, J. 1990. How do you know what to ask if you haven’t listened first?: Using anthropological methods to prepare for survey research. The Rural Sociologist, 10(2) : 15–22.

Flora, C.B., Flora, J.L., Campana, F., and Fernández‐Baca, E. 2000. The advocacy coalition framework: A theoretical frame for SANREM to address political change and learning. In: Cason, K. (Ed.), Cultivating Community Capital for Sustainable Natural Resource Management: Experiences from the SANREM CRSP. Watkinsville, GA: SANREM CRSP, pp. 47–51.

Flores, E. R. 1991. Manejo y utilización de pastizales. En: S. Fernández Baca (Ed.) Avances y perspectivas del conocimiento de los camélidos Sud Americanos. Santiago de Chile: Oficina Regional de la FAO para América Latina y el Caribe, pp. 191–211.

Fundación Ecuménica para el Desarrollo y la Paz (FEDEPAZ). 2009. El milagro del agua en Piura. Lima: FEDEPAZ.

Gillespie Jr., G.W., and Sinclair, P.R. 2000. Shelves and bins: Varieties of qualitative sociology in rural studies. Rural Sociology 65(2) : 180–193.

Grenier, L. 1998. Working with indigenous knowledge. A guide for researchers. International Development Research Centre, Ottawa, Canada, 100 p.

Krannich, R.S., and Humphrey, C.R. 1986. Using key informant data in comparative community research: An empirical assessment. Sociological Methods and Research, 14(4) : 473–493.

Morgan, D.L. 1997. Focus Groups as Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, SAGE Publications Inc., 88 p.

Rodríguez, Y. 1996. Tecnología andina en la producción de Camélidos. Tesis de Licenciatura. Universidad Nacional de Cajamarca.

Torres, J., and Parra, F. 2005. De los “sachas,” las chacras y la vida silvestre en los Andes del Perú. Lima, Perú, LEISA Revista de Agroecología, 20(4) : 24–26.

Vargas, S. 2006. KASAP assessment—Rationale and methodological protocol. Working paper. Lima: Instituto para la Pequeña Producción Sustentable—Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina.


Annex A1.1—Operationalization Matrix

Almacenamiento de carbono en humedales altoandinos (bofedales) de los Andes peruanos

Matriz de operacionalización (variables e indicadores)

Aspecto Indicador

1.1 Grado de conocimiento sobre características de los bofedales 1.2 Grado de conocimiento sobre importancia de los bofedales 1.3 Grado de conocimiento sobre uso de los bofedales 1.4 Nivel de reconocimiento de bofedales en la zona (ubicación, tamaño) 1.5 Agente que le enseñó a reconocer bofedales 1.6 Grado de conocimiento sobre estado actual de bofedales en la zona 1.7 Grado de conocimiento sobre factores naturales que afectan a los bofedales 1.8 Grado de conocimiento sobre los factores antrópicos que afectan a los bofedales

1. Conocimiento sobre bofedales

1.9 Prácticas de conservación de bofedales que conoce

2.1 Cambios percibidos en la cantidad de bofedales en los últimos 2, 5 y 10 años 2.2 Cambios percibidos en la calidad de bofedales en los últimos 2, 5 y 10 años 2.3 Grado de preocupación respecto a cambios ocurridos en cantidad/calidad de bofedales 2.4 Grado de preocupación sobre estado actual de bofedales en la zona

2. Actitud respecto a los bofedales recurso

suelo

2.5 Predisposición a tomar acción sobre situación actual de bofedales

3.1 Mayor uso tradicional de bofedales en la comunidad 3.2 Mayor uso actual de bofedales en la comunidad 3.3 Frecuencia actual de uso de bofedales en la comunidad 3.4 Intensidad de uso de bofedales en la comunidad 3.5 Prácticas actuales que se implementan para manejo de bofedales

3. Prácticas respecto al manejo de

bofedales

3.6 Prácticas tradicionales para el manejo de bofedales


Annex A1.2—DataGathering Instruments Almacenamiento de carbono en humedales altoandinos (bofedales) de los Andes peruanos

Guía de entrevista a informantes clave

Información general de la entrevista 1. Comunidad 4. Lugar de la entrevista 2. Nombre del entrevistado 5. Fecha de la entrevista 3. Cargo en la comunidad 6. Nombre del entrevistador

Pregunta introductoria: ¿Cuál es la situación de la comunidad en relación a otras vecinas? (i.e., disponibilidad recursos, patrón de actividades productivas, organización y liderazgo, acceso a oportunidades)

I. Sobre los recursos naturales I.1 Disponibilidad, acceso y uso – nivel comunitario. ¿Cuáles son los principales recursos naturales con los que cuenta la comunidad? ¿todos los comuneros acceden a todos los recursos por igual? ¿quiénes o cómo se toman decisiones respecto a dicho acceso? Actualmente, ¿cómo se utilizan estos recursos a lo largo del año? ¿cuáles son las prácticas más frecuentes? ¿existen acciones específicas para conservarlos? I.2 Variación en la disponibilidad, acceso y uso – nivel comunitario. En relación a hace cinco o diez años, ¿la disponibilidad, acceso o uso de esos recursos ha cambiado? ¿en qué sentido? ¿qué reacciones/acciones provoca eso? I.3 Disponibilidad, acceso y uso – nivel individual. En promedio, ¿con qué recursos cuenta un productor de esta comunidad? (tamaño y modalidad de tenencia de unidad productiva, tipo y área cultivos, tipo y cantidad ganado, bienes de capital) II. Sobre los bofedales/humedales II.1 Situación actual. ¿Cuál es la situación actual de los bofedales en la zona? ¿en dónde están ubicados? ¿qué tamaño tienen? ¿se dispone de información al respecto? ¿quién/es la provee/n? II.2 Conocimiento. ¿La mayoría de comuneros está al tanto de la disponibilidad de bofedales en la zona? ¿saben acerca de sus características, importancia y uso? ¿sobre los factores que los afectan? ¿sobre su situación actual? ¿cómo se transmite ese conocimiento? II.3 Actitud. En los últimos 5 años, ¿ha habido cambios en la cantidad/calidad de los bofedales en la zona? ¿cómo percibe la comunidad estos cambios? ¿hay predisposición a hacer algo frente al tema?


II.4 Prácticas. ¿Qué uso/s se les da a los bofedales actualmente? ¿existen prácticas de manejo de los mismos? ¿se utilizan? III. Sobre intervenciones y alternativas III.1 Intervenciones. ¿Qué instituciones o agencias (externas) trabajan en la comunidad en torno al tema de recursos naturales? ¿qué tipo de trabajo realizan? ¿qué opinión tiene la comunidad sobre ellas, el trabajo que realizan y los resultados que obtienen? ¿qué otras intervenciones podrían realizarse (temas, productos, tiempos)? III.2 Alternativas. ¿Qué alternativas está manejando la comunidad para conservar sus recursos? ¿cuáles prevé utilizar en el corto/mediano plazo? ¿cuáles sería deseable utilizar en el largo plazo? ¿qué se requiere para que esto ocurra?


Protocolo para grupos focales

Objetivo: Generar un espacio de levantamiento de información relevante a partir del uso de técnicas participativas que generen confianza entre los asistentes y los animen a conversar. Número de participantes: 10 - 20 Duración: 4 horas Materiales: Imágenes satelitales, cartulinas, papelógrafos, plumones, masking-tape, cámara fotográfica Programa:

Actividad Objetivo Técnica Tiempo

0 “Rompehielo” Identificar nivel básico sobre qué son y para qué sirven los bofedales

Tarjetas individuales y plenaria

20’

1 Análisis de imágenes satelitales

Complementar información georeferenciada y motivar discusión sobre estado actual de bofedales

Discusión a partir de imágenes

40’

2 Elaboración de matrices de conocimiento sobre recursos naturales en la zona

Sistematizar información sobre recursos y evaluar cambios en su cantidad/calidad a través del tiempo

Matrices parlantes

60’


Actividad Objetivo Técnica Tiempo

3 Identificación de prácticas actuales en relación a los bofedales

Identificar las principales actividades y su uso/frecuencia actual

Lluvia de ideas y matrices parlantes

60’

4 Mapa de actores y ruta a seguir

Indagar acerca de aliados actuales y potenciales e identificar próximos pasos

Diagrama (actores, temas y enlaces prediseñados)

60’


Annex A1.3—Analytical Matrixes


Matriz de conocimientos

Recursos Diversidad

“Enfermedades” o “problemas”

nuevos Cantidad

Variación cantidad/calidad

(ult. 10 años) Calificación

actual 1. Pastos

2. Alpacas

3. Suelo

4. Agua

5. Bofedales



Matriz de prácticas

Tipo de práctica Se realiza (Indicar:

si/no)

Proporción de familias

(Indicar: Todas, la mayoría, la mitad, la tercera parte, pocas)

Frecuencia (Indicar: Siempre,

regular, poco) 1. Control de carga

2. Manejo de estiércol

3. Limpieza de canales

4. Transplante de pasto

5. Cercado de bofedales

6. Reserva de pasto natural

7.Cultivo de pastos

8. Rotación del ganado

9. Transplante de cebadilla

10. Construcción de canales y bocatomas

11. Ampliación de bofedales

12. Construcción de reservorios

13. Manejo de agua y bocatomas

14. …

15. …

16. …


Annex 1.4—Study Sites Map

Legend:

Pitumarca, Cusco

Ilave, Puno

Ondores, Junín

Huancabamba/Ayabaca, Piura

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4


Annex A1.5—List of Participants

Consultation in Cusco (validation) Nombre Institución/Comunidad Cargo

1 Javier Llacsa CEPROSI Equipo técnico 2 Cleto Torres IMAGEN Coordinador proyecto 3 Gerardo Castellanos Programa BioAndes – Cusco Coordinador 4 Walter Condori Comunidad Pampachiri – Sector

Hanchipacha, Pitumarca Productor

5 Isidora Quispe Comunidad Pampachiri – Sector Hanchipacha, Pitumarca

Productor

6 Hilario Condori Comunidad Pampachiri – Sector Hanchipacha, Pitumarca

Productor

Consultation in Puno

Nombre Edad Comunidad Cargo 1 Francisco Chamba 42 Apopata Delegado 2 Plácido Acero 52 Casana Presidente de Comité

de Agua 3 Luis Cupari 49 Apopata Teniente gobernador 4 Justo Pastor 55 Apopata Presidente de la

Comunidad 5 Eduardo Pataca Nina 49 Apopata Vice-presidente

Comision Regantes 6 Toribio Shambilla 53 Chichillapi Presidente Comisión

Usuarios de Agua – Farullo Cuipa Cuipa

7 Andrés Quispe 45 Chichillapi Presidente de la Comunidad

8 Felicitas Shambilla 52 Chichillapi Teniente gobernadora 9 Julio Cesar Coaquira 30 Chichillapi Teniente gobernador

10 Ismael Silva 34 Aylupalca 1/5 Teniente gobernador 11 Eduardo Gonzáles 66 Parcialidad de

Lacotuyo Presidente de la parcialidad

12 Paulino Torres 51 Parcialidad de Muchuma

Comité de Regantes

13 Santiago Huanta 36 Parcialidad de Lacotuyo

Teniente gobernador

14 Edilberto Arias Tarquino

83 Parcialidad Muchuma Representante/Secretario de la Junta Directiva

15 Julio Parisaca Escobar

37 Chichillapi Teniente gobernador

16 Serapio Callisaya 50 Chichillapi Representante


17 Moisés Rogelio 36 Chichillapi Secretario del Comité Manejo de Vicuña

18 Eulalia Zapana 50 Lacotuyo Productora Líder 19 Miriam Mandamiento 32 Chichillapi Delegada 20 Paulina Cauna 32 Lacotuyo Tesorera Consultation in Junín

Nombre Edad Comunidad Cargo 1 Felimón Echevarría 77 Ondores Ganadero 2 Timoteo Guadalupe 40 Ondores Ganadero 3 Elio Serrano 25 Ondores Gobernador 4 Krista Latta 23 Ondores Voluntaria del Cuerpo de Paz 5 Margarita Valerio 51 Ondores Ganadera 6 Obed Huamán 25 Ondores Personal de servicio 7 Ramón Lázaro 41 Ondores Obrero 8 Víctor Solórzano 38 Ondores Gerente de Desarrollo Social 9 Darío Valerio 50 Ondores Alcalde 10 Laureano López 60 Ondores Voluntario 11 Rusbel Valerio 27 Ondores Agente comunitario de salud

Consultation on paramos Nombre Institución Cargo

1 Bert De Bièvre Proyecto Páramo Andino Coordinador Regional 2 Gabriela López Proyecto Páramo Andino Coordinadora Nacional 3 Fidel Torres AGRORED NORTE Coordinador 4 Edith Fernández Baca CONDESAN Oficial Regional

Silvana Vargas W., PhD April 2010


Annex II. Pilot Project: Carbon storing in the Andean peatlands of Peru

Narrative Summary Verifiable Indicators Means of Verification Important Assumptions

Goal: Contribute to climate change mitigation and adaptation, soil conservation, agricultural productivity, and improved livelihoods of rural communities in the Andean region.

Carbon sequestration/emissions Soil condition Agricultural productivity Poverty level in the Andes

Experimental data

National statistics

Funding, policies, and institutional frameworks for the scheme of payment for environmental services are effectively in place.

Purpose: Andean smallholder farming communities are engaged in climate change mitigation and adaptation through an effective system of peatlands and humid grasslands stewardship aimed at carbon sequestration, soil conservation, and income generation.

An official scheme of payment for environmental services to benefit rural communities is in place.

Levels of carbon sequestration/emissions

Involved rural families’ income

Stakeholders involvement and opinions

Rural communities’ reduced vulnerability

Experimental data

National statistics

Evidence gathered by independent evaluation and monitoring

Funding, policies, and institutional frameworks for the scheme of payment for environmental services are effectively in place.

Rural communities’ involvement.

Political will to support the program.

Outputs: 1. The magnitude of labile and recalcitrant carbon content and stocks in peatlands and wet grasslands in the Peruvian Andes assessed.

2. The capacity of carbon sequestration of different land‐use systems in the Andes assessed.

3. The flux of carbon under different land‐use systems in the Andes determined.

4. The effect of climate change on land‐use systems in the Andes determined.

5. The capacity of carbon sequestration of the Andean region under different scenarios of land‐use and climate change scenarios assessed.

6. Cost of opportunity of different land‐use systems assessed.

1. Hard data produced by the project (end of project).

2. Hard data and maps produced by the project (end of project).




6. Economic data produced by the project (end of project).

7. A program for payment for environmental services agreed with stakeholders and government officials (outcome).

Project reports

Experimental results published in peer reviewed journals.

Independent evaluation by the funding agency

Political support of the project.

Involvement of rural communities.

Funding is available.



7. A scheme of payment for environmental services based on carbon sequestration developed and tested in pilot sites.

8. Action research on peatlands conservation through advocacy coalitions conducted.

9. Enabling policies and institutional frameworks to support a scheme of payment for environmental services developed.

8. Policies and institutions implemented (outcome).

Activities:

Activity 1.1 In‐situ analyses of carbon content and stocks in selected sampling sites.

Activity 2.1 Classification and mapping of land use and soil types based on carbon content and stock.

Activity 2.2 Estimation of total carbon content and stocks in the Peruvian Andes based on data for and area of each land use and soil type.

Activity 3.1 Experimental determination of carbon fluxes under different land‐use systems in representative locations.

Activity 4.1 Mapping of a time series of changes in land use determined by climate change.

Activity 5.1 Integration of results from the previous activities.

Activity 6.1 Analysis of the opportunity costs of the different land‐ and soil‐use systems.

Activity 7.1 Design of a scheme of payment for environmental services, based on results from the previous activities and the identification of positive externalities.

Activity 7.2 Ex‐ante analysis of the scheme of payment for environmental services.

Activity 7.3 Consultations with external beneficiaries of environmental services.

Activity 7.4 Local consultations at selected rural communities on the scheme of payment for environmental services.


2. Hard data and maps produced by the project (end of project).




6. Economic data produced by the project (end of project).

7. A program for payment for environmental services agreed with stakeholders and government officials (outcome).

8. Social data produced by the project (end of project).

9. Policies and institutions implemented (outcome).

Project reports

Experimental results published in peer reviewed journals.

Independent evaluation by the funding agency

Political support to the project

Involvement of rural communities

Funding is available



Activity 7.5 Pilot test of the scheme of payment for environmental services at selected rural communities.

Activity 8.1 Presentation of proposed research and co‐creation of research methodology with communities.

Activity 8.2 Design of data‐gathering protocol.

Activity 8.3 Social‐oriented fieldwork.

Activity 8.4 Social data processing and analysis.

Activity 8.5 Documentation, dissemination, and outcome monitoring with communities.

Activity 9.1 Design of policies and institutional frameworks to support the scheme of payment for environmental services in collaboration with policymakers.

Activity 9.2 Promote the uptake of policies and institutional frameworks by national and regional governments.

ItemYear 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Donor Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 CIP Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 MINAM Total

Personnel 140000 140000 140000 140000 140000 700000 140000 140000 140000 140000 140000 700000 75000 75000 75000 75000 75000 375000 1775000International 50000 50000 50000 50000 50000 250000 100000 100000 100000 100000 100000 500000 0 0 0 0 0 0National 90000 90000 90000 90000 90000 450000 40000 40000 40000 40000 40000 200000 75000 75000 75000 75000 75000 375000Travel 60000 80000 80000 80000 60000 360000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 360000Local 40000 50000 50000 50000 40000 230000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0International 20000 30000 30000 30000 20000 130000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Supplies 97000 42000 96000 46000 94000 375000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 375000Maps and images 50000 0 50000 0 50000 150000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Office supplies 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 50000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Computer supplies 4000 4000 4000 4000 4000 20000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0ArcGIS licenses 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 10000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0ENVI license 10000 0 0 0 0 10000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Field supplies 5000 10000 10000 10000 8000 43000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Vehicle operation 16000 16000 20000 20000 20000 92000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Services 198000 277000 287000 293000 262000 1317000 14000 14000 14000 14000 14000 70000 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 35000 1422000Workshops 20000 40000 50000 50000 50000 210000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Professional fees 40000 40000 40000 40000 40000 200000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Training 60000 60000 60000 60000 60000 300000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Pilot funding 30000 50000 50000 50000 50000 230000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Communications 4000 4000 4000 4000 4000 20000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Publications 0 3000 3000 4000 4000 14000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Samples shipment 5000 6000 6000 6000 5000 28000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Facilities 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 30000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 30000 3000 3000 3000 3000 3000 15000Utilities 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 30000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 30000 3000 3000 3000 3000 3000 15000ITU 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 10000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 10000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 5000Equip. maintenance 5000 10000 10000 15000 15000 55000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Lab services 20000 50000 50000 50000 20000 190000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Equipment 277000 110000 110000 0 0 497000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 497000GIS Workstation 8000 0 0 0 0 8000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Plotter 13000 0 0 0 0 13000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Data server 12000 0 0 0 0 12000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Computers 12000 0 0 0 0 12000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Scanner A0 20000 0 0 0 0 20000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Laser 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Altimeter 2000 0 0 0 0 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Lab equipment 100000 50000 50000 0 0 200000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Field equipment 60000 60000 60000 0 0 180000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Vehicle 50000 0 0 0 0 50000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Total direct 772000 649000 713000 559000 556000 3249000 154000 154000 154000 154000 154000 770000 82000 82000 82000 82000 82000 410000 4429000Administration 18% 138960 116820 128340 100620 100080 584820TOTAL 910960 765820 841340 659620 656080 3833820 154000 154000 154000 154000 154000 770000 82000 82000 82000 82000 82000 410000 5013820Installments to MINAM 910960 765820 841340 659620 656080 3833820Outsourced to CIP 703280 545160 612420 442500 453120 2756480

Annex III. Budget

Pilot Project: Carbon storing in the Andean peat lands of Peru. Budget in USDDonor contribution CIP contribution MINAM contribution

ItemYear 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Donor Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 CIP Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 MINAM

Personnel 95000 95000 95000 95000 95000 475000 140000 140000 140000 140000 140000 700000 25000 25000 25000 25000 25000 125000International 50000 50000 50000 50000 50000 250000 100000 100000 100000 100000 100000 500000 0National 45000 45000 45000 45000 45000 225000 40000 40000 40000 40000 40000 200000 25000 25000 25000 25000 25000 125000Travel 30000 40000 40000 40000 30000 180000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Local 20000 25000 25000 25000 20000 115000 0 0International 10000 15000 15000 15000 10000 65000 0 0Supplies 80000 22000 74000 24000 74000 274000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Maps and images 50000 50000 50000 150000 0 0Office supplies 5000 5000 5000 5000 5000 25000 0 0Computer supplies 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 10000 0 0ArcGIS licenses 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 10000 0 0ENVI license 10000 10000 0 0Field supplies 3000 5000 5000 5000 5000 23000 0 0Vehicle operation 8000 8000 10000 10000 10000 46000 0 0Services 156000 205000 210000 216000 185000 972000 14000 14000 14000 14000 14000 70000 0 0 0 0 0 0Workshops 10000 20000 25000 25000 25000 105000 0 0Professional fees 40000 40000 40000 40000 40000 200000 0 0Training 60000 60000 60000 60000 60000 300000 0 0Pilot funding 0 0 0Communications 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 10000 0 0Publications 3000 3000 4000 4000 14000 0 0Samples shipment 5000 6000 6000 6000 5000 28000 0 0Facilities 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 30000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 30000 0Utilities 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 30000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 30000 0ITU 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 10000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 10000 0Equip. maintenance 5000 10000 10000 15000 15000 55000 0 0Lab services 20000 50000 50000 50000 20000 190000 0 0Equipment 235000 100000 100000 0 0 435000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0GIS Workstation 8000 8000 0 0Plotter 13000 13000 0 0Data server 12000 12000 0 0Computers 6000 6000 0 0Scanner A0 20000 20000 0 0LaserAltimeter 1000 1000 0 0Lab equipment 100000 50000 50000 200000 0 0Field equipment 50000 50000 50000 150000 0 0Vehicle 25000 25000 0 0Total direct 596000 462000 519000 375000 384000 2336000 154000 154000 154000 154000 154000 770000 25000 25000 25000 25000 25000 125000Administration 18% 107280 83160 93420 67500 69120 420480TOTAL 703280 545160 612420 442500 453120 2756480 154000 154000 154000 154000 154000 770000 25000 25000 25000 25000 25000 125000

Pilot Project: Carbon storing in the Andean peat lands of Peru. Budget in USD Reseach CIPDonor contribution CIP contribution MINAM contribution

ItemYear 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Donor Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 CIP Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 MINAM

Personnel 45000 45000 45000 45000 45000 225000 0 0 0 0 0 0 50000 50000 50000 50000 50000 250000International 0 0 0National 45000 45000 45000 45000 45000 225000 0 50000 50000 50000 50000 50000 250000Travel 30000 40000 40000 40000 30000 180000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Local 20000 25000 25000 25000 20000 115000 0 0International 10000 15000 15000 15000 10000 65000 0 0Supplies 17000 20000 22000 22000 20000 101000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Maps and images 0 0 0Office supplies 5000 5000 5000 5000 5000 25000 0 0Computer supplies 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 10000 0 0ArcGIS licenses 0 0 0ENVI license 0 0 0Field supplies 2000 5000 5000 5000 3000 20000 0 0Vehicle operation 8000 8000 10000 10000 10000 46000 0 0Services 42000 72000 77000 77000 77000 345000 0 0 0 0 0 0 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 35000Workshops 10000 20000 25000 25000 25000 105000 0 0Professional fees 0 0 0Training 0 0 0Pilot funding 30000 50000 50000 50000 50000 230000 0 0Communications 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 10000 0 0Publications 0 0 0Samples shipment 0 0 0Facilities 0 0 3000 3000 3000 3000 3000 15000Utilities 0 0 3000 3000 3000 3000 3000 15000ITU 0 0 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 5000Equip. maintenance 0 0 0Lab services 0 0 0Equipment 42000 10000 10000 0 0 62000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0GIS Workstation 0 0 0Plotter 0 0 0Data server 0 0 0Computers 6000 6000 0 0Scanner A0 0 0 0LaserAltimeter 1000 1000 0 0Lab equipment 0 0 0Field equipment 10000 10000 10000 30000 0 0Vehicle 25000 25000 0 0Total direct 176000 187000 194000 184000 172000 913000 0 0 0 0 0 0 57000 57000 57000 57000 57000 285000Administration 18% 31680 33660 34920 33120 30960 164340TOTAL 207680 220660 228920 217120 202960 1077340 0 0 0 0 0 0 57000 57000 57000 57000 57000 285000

Pilot Project: Carbon storing in the Andean peat lands of Peru. Budget in USD Payment ES MINAMDonor contribution CIP contribution MINAM contribution

concept note - bofedales paramos - final 6june2010 gh€¦ · concept note: carbon storing in the...

Documents