project design document

16-10-2016

Profit for People and Planet through assisted natural regeneration in the semi-arid climates of Burkina Faso

ONDERNEMERS ZONDER GRENZEN

PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT

Ondernemers Zonder Grenzen: Project Design Document 2016

By Lead author: Yaïr Levy Contributing authors: Koen De Smet Filip Tetaert Frans Van Londersele Sil Lanckriet Wouter Viroux Johanna Breyne Freja Dreesen Compton J. Tucker Guy Wouters Additional contributions: Saydou Kalaga Peter Torrekens Maarten De Boever

1 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

Project Design Document PDD Part Executive summary Part A: Aims & Objectives Part B: Site Information Part C: Community & Livelihoods Information Part D: Project Interventions & Activities Part E: Community Participation Part F: Ecosystem Services & Other Project Benefits Part G: Technical Specifications Part H: Risk Management Part I: Project Coordination and Management Part J: Benefit Sharing Part K: Monitoring Annexes

Indicative size 2 pages 1 page 2 pages 2 pages 1 page 2 pages 4 pages 10 pages 1 page 5 pages 1 page 3 pages As required

Table of Contents Figures ........................................................................................................................................................... 7 Tables ............................................................................................................................................................ 9 semi--arid climates of Profit for People and Planet through assisted natural regeneration in the semi Burkina Faso ............................................................................................................................................... 10 Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................... 10 Part A: Aims and objectives ........................................................................................................................ 10 A1 address

Describe the project’s aims and objectives and the problem(s) that the project will 10

Part B: Site Information .............................................................................................................................. 11 B1

Project location and boundaries .............................................................................................. 11

B2

Description of the project area (PV requirement 5.1.1) ......................................................... 11

Geophysical description (climate, ecological conditions, soils, topography etc.) ........................... 11 Presence of endangered species and habitats ................................................................................ 13 Other critical factors affecting project management e.g. roads, infrastructure, climate hazards . 15 B3

Recent changes in land use and environment conditions ..................................................... 15

Describe current land-use practices and their effects ..................................................................... 15 B4

Drivers of degradation .............................................................................................................. 16

Describe the causes of land & ecosystem degradation and/or deforestation and loss of ecosystem services ............................................................................................................................. 16 Part C: Community and Livelihoods Information....................................................................................... 16 C1 7.2.8)

Describe the participating communities/groups (PV requirement 1.1, 7.2.1, 7.2.7, 16

Populations.......................................................................................................................................... 17 Cultural, ethnic and social groups ..................................................................................................... 17 Gender and age equity ....................................................................................................................... 17 C2

Describe the Socio-economic context (PV requirement 7.2.2-7.2.5) ..................................... 18


Livelihoods activities including access to land, natural resources and energy .............................. 18 Cultural and religious context ............................................................................................................ 19 Assets and incomes/poverty status .................................................................................................. 20 C3

Describe land tenure & ownership of carbon rights ................................................................ 21

For smallholders and for community land (PV requirement 1.1) ..................................................... 21 For other land included in the project (PV requirement 1.2) ........................................................... 21 Part D: Project Interventions & Activities ................................................................................................... 22 D1

Summarize the project interventions ....................................................................................... 22

Describe the types of intervention that are included in the project (PV requirements 2.1.1-2.1.4) including those for: ............................................................................................................................. 22 D2

Summarize the project activities for each intervention ........................................................... 23

Complete Table D2 using a new row for each activity, e.g.: ............................................................. 23 D3

Effects of activities on biodiversity and the environment ....................................................... 24

Describe how project activities will affect biodiversity (PV requirement 2.2 & 2.4) ....................... 24 Describe how project activities will affect the environment (soil, water) (PV requirement 2.3) .... 27 Part E: Community participation ................................................................................................................ 29 E1

Participatory project design....................................................................................................... 29

Describe the participatory planning process (PV requirement 4.1)................................................. 29 Describe the identified target group(s) and their involvement in design (PV requirement 4.4) .... 30 Describe how any community groups are governed (PV requirement 4.4) ..................................... 30 Describe how any barriers to participation will be addressed to ensure the involvement of women, socially excluded communities etc. (PV requirement ......................................................... 31 4.2 & 4.3) ............................................................................................................................................ 31 E2

Community-led implementation ................................................................................................ 31

Describe the preparation and registration requirements for plan vivos or management plans (PV requirement 4.5, 4.6 & 4.7) ............................................................................................................... 31 Describe the assessment system for plan vivos for technical, and other criteria. (PV requirement 4.7) ...................................................................................................................................................... 32 Describe the mapping, recording and storage of plan vivos/management plans (PV requirement 4.8 & 4.9) ............................................................................................................................................ 32 Provide GIS version of plan vivos (only if applicable) (PV requirement 4.11) ................................. 32 E3

Community-level project governance ....................................................................................... 33

Describe how communities will be involved in decision-making and project management in coordination with the Project Coordinator (PV requirement 4.12) .................................................. 33 Describe the community-based grievance and grievance recording system for the project (PV requirement 4.13 & 4.14) .................................................................................................................. 33 Part F: Ecosystem Services & Other Project Benefits ............................................................................... 33 F1

Carbon benefits.......................................................................................................................... 33

Complete Table F1 to summarise the carbon benefits per ha for each intervention over the project crediting period:...................................................................................................................... 33 F2

Livelihoods benefits ................................................................................................................... 34

Complete Table F2 to describe how the project will affect different livelihoods aspects of the participating groups (use a separate table for each group if necessary) (PV requirement 7.3) .... 34 3 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

Clearly identify any livelihoods aspects that may be negatively affected as well as those that will be positive (PV requirement 7.5) ....................................................................................................... 34 If any possible negative impacts are identified describe mitigation measures to address them (PV requirement 7.5) ................................................................................................................................. 34 F3

Ecosystem & biodiversity benefits ............................................................................................ 36

Complete Table F3 to describe the ecosystem impacts of each project intervention (PV requirement 5.13) .............................................................................................................................. 36 Part G: Technical Specifications ................................................................................................................ 38 G1

Project intervention and activities ............................................................................................ 38

Describe the intervention and show how it meets the applicability conditions (PV requirement 5.1.1) ................................................................................................................................................... 38 Describe all the project activities and inputs for the intervention showing how they are applicable to local geophysical conditions (PV requirement 5.1.2) ................................................................... 38 G2

Additionality and Environmental Integrity................................................................................. 41

Describe relevant laws and regulations for forest and land management demonstrating how project interventions exceed these requirements (PV requirement 5.4.1) ..................................... 41 Demonstrate how financial, social, technical or cultural barriers prevent the interventions from taking place without the project (PV requirement 5.4.2) ................................................................. 41 Provide evidence to show that the project area has not been negatively altered prior to the start of the project for the purposes of claiming payments from ecosystem services (PV requirement 5.8) ...................................................................................................................................................... 41 Give details of other projects or initiatives in the project area and any agreements that are in place to avoid double counting (PV requirement 5.14) .................................................................... 41 G3

Project Period ............................................................................................................................. 42

State the project start date and the period of time over which the climate benefits will be quantified with justification (PV requirement 5.5, 5.6 & 5.17) ........................................................ 42 G4

Baseline scenario ...................................................................................................................... 43

Describe current conditions and trends in the project area (PV requirement 5.12) ...................... 43 Carbon Pools. List the carbon pools and emissions sources that will be accounted for and justify why any others have been excluded. (PV requirement 5.15) .......................................................... 45 Baseline methodology. Quantify the initial carbon stock for each carbon pool and describe how this was assessed (PV requirement 5.18)......................................................................................... 46 Baseline Emissions. Estimate the changes in carbon stocks for each carbon pool under baseline conditions i.e. without project. Refer to any approved approaches that you have used for this. (PV requirement 5.18) .............................................................................................................................. 47 Data Sources. Give details of all data sources, methodologies, default factors and assumptions used and give justifications for their use (PV requirement 5.2) ...................................................... 48 G5

Ecosystem service benefits ....................................................................................................... 49

Climate benefits methodology. For each carbon pool, describe how the expected climate benefits (i.e. with project) were quantified. Refer to any approved approaches used. (PV requirement 5.7, 5.18) .................................................................................................................................................... 49 Expected climate benefits. Estimate the climate benefits (carbon benefits) for each carbon pool showing how these were calculated relative to the baseline (In G4) (PV requirement 5.1.3, 5.7, 5.15 & 5.18)........................................................................................................................................ 52 G6

Leakage & Uncertainty .............................................................................................................. 56

Identify any potential reductions in climate benefits due to leakage. If this is significant, describe how it will be mitigated by the project (PV requirement 5.19 & 5.20) ............................................ 56 4 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

Identify where uncertainty exists in the calculations and how this has been taken into account to give a conservative estimate of climate benefits (PV requirement 5.2) ......................................... 56 Identify and list key assumptions used in these calculations. Describe the................................... 57 approaches that will be used to validate these assumptions over the course of the project (including updating the technical specifications) (PV requirement 5.3 & 5.9.5) ............................ 57 External threats that result from displacement of unsanctioned activities carried out by actors over which the community have no direct control. ........................................................................... 57 Identify where uncertainty exists in the calculations and how this has been taken into account to give a conservative estimate of climate benefits (PV requirement 5.2) ......................................... 58 Part H: Risk Management .......................................................................................................................... 59 H1

Identification of risk areas......................................................................................................... 59

Identify the risk areas, risk levels and actions to be taken mitigate risks (including the frequency of reassessing risks). Present this in the form of a table. (PV requirements 6.1 & 6.2) ................ 59 H2

Risk buffer .................................................................................................................................. 60

State the risk buffer % for each technical specification (minimum is 10%) with justification (PV requirements 6.3 & 6.4) ..................................................................................................................... 60 Part I: Project Coordination & Management ............................................................................................. 60 I1

Project Organisational Structure ............................................................................................... 60 Project coordinator and legal status (PV requirements 3.1 & 3.5).................................................. 60 Describe the organisational structure for the project and the roles of each organisation involved (use diagrams and tables if necessary) (PV requirement 3.2)......................................................... 61 Capacity and experience of each organisation involved (PV requirement 3.4) .............................. 62 Stakeholder analysis (diagram) (PV requirement 3.6) ..................................................................... 62

I2

Relationships to national organisations ................................................................................... 62 Describe how the project coordinates and communicates with national organisations (especially government) ........................................................................................................................................ 62 Describe (if any) linkages between the project and other government schemes or projects ........ 63

I3

Legal compliance ....................................................................................................................... 63 Describe how the project will meet any legal requirements of the country. Include any written approval from government for the project if required. (PV requirements 3.7 & 3.8) ..................... 63 Outline the policies of the project coordinator to ensure equal opportunities for employment and any other legal compliance (PV requirements 3.13-3.15) ............................................................... 63

I4

Project management ................................................................................................................. 63 Give a timeline (approximate) for project establishment, piloting, scaling up and monitoring ..... 63 Describe the project record keeping system (PV requirements 3.11 & 3.12) ................................ 64 Describe who will be in charge of business development, sales and managing transactions on the Markit environmental registry (Markit) .............................................................................................. 64

I5

Project financial management .................................................................................................. 64 Describe the mechanisms for disbursement of PES funds (PV requirement 3.9).......................... 64 Show the project budget and financial plan (PV requirement 3.10) ............................................... 64 Describe whether the project is seeking, or has obtained, co-financing from partner organisations for the operational phase of the project, e.g. for expansion, ongoing technical work, tree planting activities, etc. ...................................................................................................................................... 65

I6

Marketing ................................................................................................................................... 65


Describe how Plan Vivo certificates will be marketed by the project coordinator .......................... 65 Describe the process for preparing a marketing plan for the project ............................................. 65 I7

Technical Support ...................................................................................................................... 65 Describe how continued technical support and capacity development will be provided for project participants ......................................................................................................................................... 65

Part J: Benefit sharing ................................................................................................................................ 66 J1

PES agreements......................................................................................................................... 66 Describe the procedures for entering into PES agreements (PV requirements 8.1 & 8.2)............ 66 Describe how the project coordinator will ensure that obligations are met (PV requirement 8.5 & 8.7) ...................................................................................................................................................... 66 Identify any risks and associated mitigation measures regarding PES agreements (PV requirements 8.3, 8.4 & 8.6) ............................................................................................................. 67

J2

Payments & Benefit Sharing ..................................................................................................... 67 Describe how payments will be disbursed to participants and how they are linked to performance. Describe the conditions under which payments will be withheld............................. 67 Describe the measures that will be taken to ensure equitable and transparent benefit sharing by the project (PV requirements 8.8-8.13)............................................................................................. 67

Part K: Monitoring ....................................................................................................................................... 68 K1

Ecosystem services benefits ..................................................................................................... 68

Describe the monitoring plan for each project intervention. (PV requirement 5.9)........................ 68 Describe how communities will be involved in monitoring activities ............................................... 68 Describe the indicators that will be monitored; the frequency (annually, after every 5 years etc.); who will carry out the monitoring and how the results will be used and shared with participants (PV requirement 5.9) .......................................................................................................................... 68 K2

Socio-economic impacts............................................................................................................ 69

Describe the socio-economic monitoring plan (PV requirement 7.3) .............................................. 69 Identify the selected socio-economic monitoring indicators and describe how they will be regularly monitored in a participatory way focusing on target groups (PV requirement 7.4)......... 69 K3

Environmental and biodiversity impacts .................................................................................. 70

Describe environmental and biodiversity indicators that will be monitored ................................... 70 Describe how each indicator will be assessed; the frequency and who will carry out the monitoring ........................................................................................................................................... 70 K4

Other monitoring ........................................................................................................................ 71

Describe any other monitoring and indicators including (i) indicators of drivers of degradation (ii) institutional indicators (iii) governance indicators ............................................................................ 71 Annexes ....................................................................................................................................................... 72 Annex 1.

List of key people involved with contact information .............................................................. 72

Annex 2.

Information about funding sources .......................................................................................... 73

Annex 3.

Producer/group agreement template....................................................................................... 74

Annex 4.

Database template .................................................................................................................... 79

Ecologic template................................................................................................................................ 79 Socio-economic templates ................................................................................................................. 83 Annex 5.

Biomass estimations data ......................................................................................................... 90


Annex 6.

Example forest management plans/plan vivos ....................................................................... 94

Annex 7.

Project/quantification/crediting/payment periods................................................................ 107

Annex 8.

Permits and legal documentation ........................................................................................... 109

Annex 9.

Evidence of community participation ..................................................................................... 127

Annex 10.

Cartography .............................................................................................................................. 138

Annex 11.

Sites’ physical context ............................................................................................................. 152

Annex 12.

Socio-economic figures ........................................................................................................... 155

Annex 13.

Acronyms / abbreviations ....................................................................................................... 165

Annex 14.

Bibliography.............................................................................................................................. 165

Figures Figure 1 – Regions of near future sites regeneration activities .................................................................. 11 Figure 2 – Burkina Faso isohyets migration between 1951 and 2000 ................................................... 14 Figure 3 – Cartographic comparison between OZG sites at Gorom-Gorom and remote sensing soil moisture ............................................................................................................................................................................. 28 Figure 4 – Site preparation deploying the Delfino plough ............................................................................. 39 Figure 5 – 13 Climatic Regions ................................................................................................................................ 44 Figure 6 – Smoothed rainfall and air temperature time series for east and west Burkina Faso and mean rainfall and temperature based on the 1920–69 time period. ...................................................... 45 Figure 7 – Illustration of half-moons sample area size ................................................................................... 50 Figure 8 – Internal structure of OZG....................................................................................................................... 61 Figure 9 – Land restoration agreement with the commune of Gorom-Gorom ...................................... 75 Figure 10 – Detailed cooperation protocol with Gorom-Gorom commune, September 2013 ........ 77 Figure 11 – Cooperation protocol with Gorom-Gorom commune and Lilengo village, September 2013.................................................................................................................................................................................... 78 Figure 12 – Ecologic monitoring campaign notebook, February 2015. ................................................... 80 Figure 13 – EX-ACT simulation page 1 of 2 ......................................................................................................... 90 Figure 14 – EX-ACT simulation page 2 of 2 ......................................................................................................... 91 Figure 15 – Report of project implementation and consultation of 2010's activities in Lilingo, Gorom-Gorom ................................................................................................................................................................ 106 Figure 16 – French translation OZG foundation act for the Burkinabe authorities ........................... 116 Figure 17 – OZG foundation act as published in the journal of Belgium (Original Dutch version) ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 121 Figure 18 – Publication of OZG in the official Journal of Burkina Faso as NPO operating locally 124 Figure 19 – Receipt certificate of official intervention demand to the Burkinabe territorial administration, decentralisation and security ministry ................................................................................. 125 Figure 20 – Certificate of COA decision of bank account opening in Burkina Faso .......................... 126 Figure 21 – Details of official Burkinabe bank account ............................................................................... 126 Figure 22 – Local chiefs reunion during a consultation proces on land prospection mission in the Sanmantenga Province, 5/12/2014 ................................................................................................................... 128


Figure 23 – Local chiefs reunion during a consultation proces on land prospection in the Guibaré commune, 06/12/2014 ........................................................................................................................................... 128 Figure 24 – Land prospection in the commune of Mané, 06/12/2014 ............................................... 129 Figure 25 – Concerted land prospection with Mamadou Oumara, president of the Village Development Council of Mentao, 25/07/2015 .............................................................................................. 129 Figure 26 - Signing agreement protocol with Petelkotia village's community ...................................... 130 Figure 27 – Women and children of Mouroukouboulé walking towards site during sowing activities, 04/06/2015.............................................................................................................................................. 131 Figure 28 – 2016 seeds purchase bill from local environmental organization “MANG-WEOGO”132 Figure 29 – Report of development council reunion of Aribinda of 21/02/2016 with participant list ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 137 Figure 30 – Map of sites #2010BF/1-3 ............................................................................................................. 138 Figure 31 – Map of site #2012BF/1 .................................................................................................................... 139 Figure 32 – Map of sites #2013BF/1, 2 ............................................................................................................ 140 Figure 33 – Map of sites #2014BF/1-3 ............................................................................................................. 141 Figure 34 – Map of site #2014BF/4 .................................................................................................................... 142 Figure 35 – Map of site #2014BF/5 .................................................................................................................... 143 Figure 36 – Map of sites #2014BF/6-9 ............................................................................................................. 144 Figure 37 – Map of sites #2015BF/1-2 ............................................................................................................. 145 Figure 38 – Map of sites #2015BF/3-7, 12-13 .............................................................................................. 146 Figure 39 – Map of sites #2015BF/10-11 ........................................................................................................ 147 Figure 40 – Map of site #2015BF/12 ................................................................................................................. 148 Figure 41 – Map of site #2016BF/8 .................................................................................................................... 149 Figure 42 – Map of site #2016BF/9 .................................................................................................................... 149 Figure 43 – Map of site #2016BF/10 ................................................................................................................. 149 Figure 44 – Map of site #2016BF/14 ................................................................................................................. 150 Figure 45 – Map of site #2016BF/18 ................................................................................................................. 150 Figure 46 – Map of site #2016BF/19 ................................................................................................................. 151 Figure 47 – Economic activities proportion by village ................................................................................... 157 Figure 48 – Cattle ownership by gender in Lilingo-Zoungwaye in 2010 ................................................ 157 Figure 49 – Agricultural product by gender in Lilingo-Zoungwaye in 2009 .......................................... 158 Figure 50 – Sales in LZ in 2009............................................................................................................................. 158 Figure 51 – Lilingo-Zoungwaye 2009 incomes per gender......................................................................... 159 Figure 52 – Sales per inhabitant in Lilingo-Zoungwaye in 2014 .............................................................. 160 Figure 53 – Sales per inhabitant in Bossey in 2014 ..................................................................................... 160 Figure 54 – Sales per inhabitant in Belehede in 2014 ................................................................................ 161 Figure 55 – Men incomes in Lilingo-Zoungwaye in 2014 ............................................................................ 161 Figure 56 – Women incomes in Lilingo-Zoungwaye in 2014 ..................................................................... 162 Figure 57 – Men incomes in Bossey in 2014 ................................................................................................... 162 Figure 58 – Women incomes in Bossey in 2014 ............................................................................................ 163 Figure 59 – Men incomes in Belehede in 2014 .............................................................................................. 163 Figure 60 – Women incomes in Belehede in 2014 ....................................................................................... 164


Tables Table 1 – Main sown woody species ...................................................................................................................... 22 Table 2 – D2 – Description of activities ................................................................................................................ 23 Table 3 – Sown seeds quantities per specie ...................................................................................................... 24 Table 4 – Animal species observed in 2012-2014 .......................................................................................... 25 Table 5 – F1 – Carbon benefits................................................................................................................................ 33 Table 6 – F2 – Livelihoods benefits (Sedentary, semi-nomadic and nomadic populations ............ 34 Table 7 – F3 – Ecosystem impacts ......................................................................................................................... 36 Table 8 – Sown woody species and their utilities ............................................................................................. 40 Table 9 – Roles of project developer and local communities in the technical activities................... 40 Table 10 – Barriers preventing interventions from taking place without the project ......................... 41 Table 11 – Carbon pools measured ....................................................................................................................... 45 Table 12 – Carbon pools baselines ........................................................................................................................ 46 Table 13 – Null baseline accounting conditions ............................................................................................... 46 Table 14 – Indicators of carbon emissions under baseline conditions.................................................... 48 Table 15 – Monitoring activities............................................................................................................................... 49 Table 16 – Excerpt out of sample assay results list......................................................................................... 52 Table 17 – SOC pool based on sampling analysis results ............................................................................. 53 Table 18 – regional SOC offset estimation .......................................................................................................... 53 Table 19 – Project total CO2 offset summary .................................................................................................... 54 Table 20 – Sustainable grazing aspects and actions ...................................................................................... 58 Table 21 – Risk areas, levels and mitigation actions ...................................................................................... 60 Table 22 – Monitoring summary .............................................................................................................................. 68 Table 23 – Tree heights and BHD logbook templates .................................................................................... 80 Table 24 – Tree counts and species monitoring ............................................................................................... 81 Table 25 - Logbooks synthesis table ...................................................................................................................... 82 Table 26 – Trees biomass logbook template...................................................................................................... 82 Table 27 – Fauna observation logbook template ............................................................................................. 83 Table 28 – Demographic monitoring logbook template ................................................................................. 83 Table 29 – Age distribution monitoring logbook template ............................................................................ 83 Table 30 – Education monitoring logbook template ........................................................................................ 83 Table 31 – Economic activities monitoring logbook template ..................................................................... 84 Table 32 – Market prices monitoring logbook template ................................................................................ 85 Table 33 – Revenus monitoring logbook template .......................................................................................... 85 Table 34 – Incomes monitoring logbook template ........................................................................................... 86 Table 35 – Households surveys logbooks templates ...................................................................................... 87 Table 36 – Revenus and expenses logbooks templates................................................................................ 89 Table 37 – UNFCCC CDM SOC tool 1 of 2 ............................................................................................................ 92 Table 38 – UNFCCC CDM SOC tool 2 of 2 ............................................................................................................ 93 Table 39 – Project quantification/crediting and payment periods .......................................................... 107 Table 40 – Sites' geology .......................................................................................................................................... 152 Table 41 – Mapped sites' soil types ..................................................................................................................... 153 Tabel 42– Population evolution at the various scales throughout the project (2009-2014) ........ 155 Tabel 43 – Worker / sector relative to village population in LZ in 2010 ............................................... 155 Tabel 44 – Worker / sector relative to village population in LZ in 2014 ............................................... 155 9 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

Tabel 45 – Worker / sector relative to village population in Bossey in 2014...................................... 155 Tabel 46 – Worker / sector relative to village population in Belehede in 2014................................. 156 Tabel 47 – Activities distribution by gender in Lilingo-Zoungwaye in 2009 ......................................... 159

Profit for People and Planet through assisted natural regeneration in the semisemi-arid climates of Burkina Faso Executive Summary

Part A: Aims and objectives A1 Describe the project’s aims and objectives and the problem(s) that the project will address The project’s objective is to restore sustainable livelihoods in the Sahel of Burkina Faso at the basis of local economy through the financial implication of stakeholders from developed countries. This, all the while regenerating ecosystems and their related services. The project addresses many environmental and socio-economic problems simultaneously through the regeneration of an ecosystem on entirely degraded land. The project consists shortly in applying the Vallerani system ploughing encrusted soils with a Delfino plough to restore soils capacity to store water. This effort is coupled with the direct sowing of trees, herbs and grass combined. Which restoration system has a proven track of reforesting large extents of desert territory against low operational costs. Desertification and its impacts drive every aspect of daily life to its utter limits in some of the most adverse climates of the planet. Its direct consequences such as drought, temperature rise and fertile land loss cause biodiversity erosion, global warming, food shortage, plummeting incomes and forced migrations. Meanwhile climate change threatens the very basis of all the planet’s ecosystems worsening the current anthropogenic biodiversity extinction driven by shifting land occupation and uses. Prospects which are even more dire for some of the most marginalized populations of the world economy. Whom experience climate change’s impact first hand. Increasing poverty or unbalanced wealth accumulation due to unsustainable resources exploitation let education recede in favor of child work, gender discrimination, rural exodus and social conflict. In the Sahel, Entrepreneurs Without Frontiers (OZG)’s regeneration project aims at restoring the opportunities which the former balance of the region offered to its traditionally resilient and ethnically diversified cultures. In developed nations, the involvement of investors backed by the Clean Development Mechanism’s carbon credit markets does fund restoration efforts sustainably because charity driven development assistance schemes are substituted by win-win investments. Agro-sylvo-pastoralism practices rich of ancient agricultural traditions are invited back where these belong, restituting rural micro-economies at the very basis of the global chain of added-values. Meanwhile, greenhouse-gas emissions which can’t be reduced by technology implementation in developed nations or by production reduction get compensated at the least cost globally mitigating climate change. Water harvesting optimizes the scarce yet vital resource’s management. Degraded soil restoration returns fertile conditions apt for grass and woody species’ regrowth. Replenished vegetal ecosystems revive fauna diversity. Investors compensate unavoidable greenhouse-gas emissions either driven by compulsory governmental schemes or by voluntary initiatives. In short, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is embraced. In a context of growing environmental and social public awareness, improving client 10 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

satisfaction in order to increase or secure sales is favored by environment related CSR efforts such as green branding. Which vision is plainly and simply based on the professional awareness that returns do get secured on the long-term when investing into sustainable development (cooperation) schemes.

Part B: Site Information B1

Project location and boundaries

The project is located in the semi-arid climatic zone of Burkina Faso. It extends from as far North as the continental nation’s frontiers with Mali and Niger all the way to about 100 km North from Burkina Faso’s centred capital, Ouagadougou. An extensive cartography illustrates the location of the sites currently mapped in Annex 10. Upcoming sites are projected to be realized in the same administrative regions of Sahel and Centre Nord, as illustrated by following map in Figure 1 – Regions of near future sites regeneration activities .

Figure 1 – Regions of near future sites regeneration activities

B2 5.1.1)

Description of the project area (PV requirement

Geophysical description (climate, ecological conditions, soils, topography etc.) Climate The project’s located in the semi-arid climate of Burkina Faso (BF). The project spreads over the Sahelian and Sudano-Sahelian climatic zones of the nation. The inland situation of Burkina Faso cares for a typically continental semi-arid climate. From November to March, the annual so-called “Harmattan” continental trade winds blow the whole project’s territory with Sahara sediments forcing men and women to wear veils for sake of protection. 11 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

This anticyclonic pressure driven phenomenon dries the air below 10% of relative humidity pushing the intertropical-front as far southwards as the Gulf of Guinea. Which avoids any possible precipitation whatsoever during the tropical winter. Another component of the Sahel precipitation trend is the continental regime in which rains are mostly produced by convective systems embedded in the easterly circulation (Lebel & Ali, 2009; Lebel, 2003; Nicholson, 2013) Respective regional average yearly precipitations are of 300 and 600 mm. Precipitation patterns are typically erratic. Standard deviations are quite high with winter storm clouds bursting so locally that a few hundred meters may isolate dry soils for more than a year. Over the Sahel climate, average high temperatures range between 36 and 42°C meanwhile average lows still stand high at 26 to 31°C. Temperatures also contrast greatly diurnally and throughout the year with occasional local daily maxima reaching far in the higher 40°C in April and lowest night temperatures possibly occasionally plummeting under 10°C in December. Geology and geomorphology Most of the project’s area features a plain topography such as is the case for the whole of Burkina Faso in general. Such elevations ranging between 250 and 300 meters result in the North and NorhtWest of the Sahel from the flattening of a surface older than the Precambrien A’s sedimentary rocks. At the extreme North-West, continental tertiary deposits cover the Precambrien A(“Géologie du Burkina Faso,” 2007). Appalachian crests, remnants from the middle Precambrian or Paleoproterozoic, break the monotonous landscape occasionally. These dominantly ferromagnesian minerals rich rocks are amongst others composed of diorites, amphibolite and gabbro’s. Occasional landforms stand out with granitic inselbergs dominating the landscape from around 400 meters. The most northern areas of the Sahel are covered with East-West wind induced dunes. These cover dolomitic calcar, quarzitic sandstone, shales and conglomerates from the same Precambrian A bedrock. Laterites cover vast plateaus, mounds and lateritic crusts over the majority of the nation and are particularly developed in the Sahel climatic zone. Soils Drylands, which cover 41 percent of the earth’s land surface and are home to 2 billion people, are widely affected by desertification, biodiversity loss, poverty and food insecurity. 30% of the Earth’s land surface sees the degradation of drylands through a combination of natural and anthropogenic causes such as climate change and demographic growth.(Kohler, Mala, Mwangi, & Wagner, 2015) About 12 million hectares are lost yearly worldwide to land degradation with rates increasing. Soil carbon accounts for more than that of the atmosphere and terrestrial vegetation combined and accounts for 80% of the carbon of all terrestrial ecosystems. (Ontl, Todd A. (Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, Iowa State University, Ames & Schulte, Lisa A. (Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, Iowa State University, Ames, 2012) Soil erosion and degradation cause a significant release of CO2 to the atmosphere. Up to 20% of the world’s drylands are degraded and people living there are often locked in a vicious circle of poverty, destructive practices and environmental degradation (Berrahmouni, Regato, & Parfondry, 2015). The project sites soils are very degraded and have lost a lot of carbon next to fertility. This degradation has been going on for several decades because of droughts and overexploitation. The project activities enhance carbon sequestration (CS) in these soils, next to bringing back fertility. Most of Burkina Faso’s soils feature poor phosphorous contents yielding relatively weak agricultural productivities. However, some soil types allow for agroforestry activity. Such as vertisols, tropical ferruginous ferralitic and hydromorphic soils. (Ganaba, 2011a) 12 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

Soils from the Sahel region are quite diverse in that aspect. The eastern part where the project had started in 2009 shows many halomorphic soils with degraded structures of leached alkali on clay and sand mixed material originating from granitic formations. Also isohumic soils with saturated complexes. More in particular brown sub-arid vertic soils. As the project extends to the West of the Sahel, soils keep featuring many of the same halomorphic features only are these progressively associated with gravelly soils. In the extreme North of the Burkinabe Sahel, either less evolved soils of erosive origin appear on gravelly material or isohumic sub-arid brown soils. Hydrology The hydric regime of the ecosystem restored is key to assess the impact of the project on its biotic components. Water resources of the project’s area are entirely tributary of the Niger river to which all the local hydrographic network converges due to the impermeability of surfacing rock formations. Such tributaries like the Béli river may locally constitute ponds of seasonally variable proportions. These are themselves in turn fed by smaller inland rivers crossing the project areas such as the Gountouré in the Oudalan. In Gorom-Gorom, the Goudébo and the Felleol feed the Gorouol which ends in the Niger. After storm bursts, swelling of their streamflow isolates the project’s beneficiary villages for days on end. The Yali is a final example of an inland river sourcing in the Séno province, one of those observing agroforestry regeneration by the OZG project. The regimes of those tributaries are mostly wadi like with sudden flooding occurring during the rainy season. During rainy season, ponds multiply only to progressively dry out during dry season, forcing many pastoral migrations to the vicinity of the few permanent ponds of the Sahel. Soils water reserves increase with rainfall at the onset of rainy seasons anywhere between May and mid-July according to erratic rainfall patterns. It is interesting to note that, paradoxically, agricultural crops actually require irrigation the most at the end of the rainy season, period corresponding to the highest evapotranspiration potential (ETP) and decreasing precipitations combined (Abdel-Rahman, G. (Desert Research Center, Matariya, Cairo, Egypt) Seidhom, S. H. & Leopold S. (Institut De L’environnement Et De Recherches Agricoles (INERA), 2010). Critics of dryland afforestation argument local water balance may be disrupted since planted cultures may absorb most of the precipitation in disfavor of downstream ecosystems and preventing aquifer from filling up (World Rainforest Movement 2003, Farley et al. 2005 as cited in (Mol & Sternberg, 2012)). Gamma distributions are those best describing precipitation patterns in drylands (Ben-Gai et al. 1998 as cited in (Mol & Sternberg, 2012)). Tables of the physical situation of the restoring sites are presented in Annex 11 of this report.

Presence of endangered species and habitats Biodiversity During the 1970’s, huge droughts striking the Sahel of Burkina Faso saw the disappearance of forests which used to cover continuous vast portions of the region. However rainfall recovered in the Central Sahel since the end of the 1990s (Lebel & Ali, 2009) did local precipitation patterns recede over the course of those decennia, with isohyets migrating ever more southwards(“Direction Générale de la météorologie du Burkina,” 2016).


Figure 2 – Burkina Faso isohyets migration between 1951 and 2000

OZG’s project acting before half a century has passed after stands’ disappearance constitutes a reforestation effort as such. Not only that of a degraded and fragile ecosystem but also of a continuously degrading one(Ganaba, 2011b) due to adverse environmental trends such as retreating precipitations. Some species of that ecosystem stand at the brink of extinction (“IUCN Red List,” 2016). Sowing diversified endemic and naturalized tree and grass, the project also restores the spatial patterns of the original Sahel forest fragments while recreating its original landscapes. So no native species is out-competed by the agro-forests generated by the project. On the contrary, these are favoured by it through the improved conditions and resources statuses which healthy ecosystems yield. Flora On the global scale, biodiversity erosion is such that current trends are already deemed by the scientific community to be fostering the latest massive extinction of natural history. Namely an anthropogenic one. In the geophysical context of accelerated climate change through global warming, the negative effects of this trend are exacerbated beyond critical points in many ecosystems of the planet. Forests being the most biodiverse continental ecosystems and the most diverse ones after coral reefs, they’re the theater of disastrous losses and the focus of most promising environmental resilience.

Recent literature shows that global deforestation’s been slowing down with diverse local trends. One most promising trend is that forests in protected land areas or protected by conservation schemes are very likely to survive the impacts of human development(Chazdon et al., 2016; Lund, 2000; Romijn et al., 2015) Tropical secondary forests show some of the highest carbon uptakes with about 11 times those of mature forests(Poorter et al., 2016; Silver, Ostertag, & Lugo, 2000) This shouldn’t eclipse the fact that recent science also demonstrated that mature forests also do keep offsetting carbon next to being of invaluable ecologic/economic importance.(reference) Afforestation, reforestation and agricultural soil carbon sequestration are considered the best alternative negative emissions technologies (NETs) available for implementation by 2050(Caldecott, Lomax, & Workman, 2015). The entire Sahel region’s project area is located within the boundaries of a national Burkinabe reserve. Which ensures top-down administrative 14 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

conditions prone to secure the sustainability of local scale restoration efforts. Such as those resulting of the OZG project. The foremost woody specie of the project has so far undoubtedly been Acacia raddiana which’s been preselected for sowing given its widely published pioneer role in Sahel woody growth (Gidske & Krzywinski1, 2007; Houérou, n.d.; Jaouadi, Hamrouni, Souayeh, & Khouja, 2010; Stavi, Shem-Tov, Shlomi, Bel, & Yizhaq, 2015) Tolerance to salinity, water scarcity, fast growth and early productivity stand out to epitomize the specie as the ideal one for degraded land regeneration through direct sowing(De Smet, 2013, 2014) Soil quality is more often a limiting factor for woody species growth than hydric shortages as trees adapted to semi-arid conditions thrive throughout the Sahel. High seedlings survival rates are targeted by over sowing seeds in function of the various species’ known mortalities. Fauna The area of the project is the habitat of many endemic Sahel species, some of which have integrated the IUCN red list(“IUCN Red List,” 2016) of endangered species. The African spurred Tortoise or Centrochelys sulcata did so reach the status of vulnerable status on the list.

Other critical factors affecting project management e.g. roads, infrastructure, climate hazards Concrete roads opened the way to some of the project’s most remote areas thanks to relatively recent infrastructural investments, sometimes driven by the mining industry. These are however sometimes cut off during the short rainy seasons by flooding.

B3 Recent changes in land use and environment conditions Describe current land-use practices and their effects Some historic background clarifies the context within which recent changes have occurred. In the last fifty years the environment has changed due to several factors. Rainfall in Burkina Faso declined rapidly between 1950 and the mid-1980s. During the 1970’s, huge droughts striking the Sahel of Burkina Faso, saw the disappearance of forests which used to cover continuous vast portions of the region. Rainfall did recover in the Central Sahel since the end of the 1990s (Lebel & Ali, 2009). However, between 2000 and 2009 the recovery stalled with corresponding average precipitation remaining about 15 percent lower than that of 1920–69. Temperatures have increased by 0,6 degrees Celsius since 1975, amplifying the effect of droughts. At the same time the rains migrated south intensifying northern droughts and spreading them to new southern areas. See Figure 1 – Regions of near future sites regeneration activities for a map of Burkina Faso’s isohyets migrating ever more southwards(“Direction Générale de la météorologie du Burkina,” 2016; Funk et al., 2012) Current land-use is mostly agro-sylvo-pastoral. With more pastoralism practiced by a less sedentary population in the Sahel. A latitudinal land-use gradient is observed, shifting towards more sedentary agroforestry practices towards the centre of Burkina Faso. Traditional practices may locally overexploit resources where demographic pressure exists(Souley Yero, Botoni, Subsol, Alfari, & Bouafou, 2015), such as in the Région Centre-Nord which experiences the impact of the urban growth of Ouagadougou. Land resources may also be overexploited where the effects of desertification are most intense such as the North of the Sahel. Migrating sand dunes and increasing droughts may concentrate herds on receding 15 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

pastures and evaporating ponds. Both of these phenomena combine into more or less extreme trends of land degradation. Burkina Faso is simultaneously also experiencing a recent anthropogenic greening carried by grass-roots local rural populations efforts and supported by development cooperation agencies. Amongst these, Switzerland’s Deserto Verde(“Deserto Verde,” n.d.) is an example having funded the restoration of thousands of hectares of degraded land. Luxembourg’s cooperation (LuxDev)’s AZAWAC project(“Support for the Dissemination of the Azawak Zebu,” 2016) neighbors some of OZG’s restoration sites with 800 hectares. Wallonie-Bruxelles International(WBI)(“Coopération: Des plants forestiers pour reverdir le Sahel,” n.d.) have also set the pace by supporting the same ecosystem regeneration model since 2014 in the Sahel of Burkina Faso. All of which are just examples of many efforts backed by local populations’ resilient agriculture methods and funded by international sources in the broad context of the Great Green Wall Initiative(FAO, n.d.-b; GGWSSI, n.d.)

B4

Drivers of degradation

Describe the causes of land & ecosystem degradation and/or deforestation and loss of ecosystem services As described in section B2, the broad context of Burkina Faso’s ongoing climate change trends are that of southwards retreating isohyets, migrating over dozens of km between the years 1950’s and the 2000’s under the impulse of climate change, itself intensified by human impact on the atmosphere(Rotstayn & Lohmann, 2002). Which translates into less precipitations for the driest inhabited areas. Which trend also combines with an observed rise in average temperature of 0,6°C over the past decennia. Decreasing rainfall and increasing temperatures degrade soils further favouring encrusting. Demographic growth increase demand for food production. Which require increasing productivity and motivate unsustainable practices in a generalized rural context of poverty. The prospects for the middle term are thus still those of receding precipitations, even if monsoon rising could be expected over the very long-term. That is hence over scales longer than human generational and agroforests maturation terms meanwhile climate models currently project most of Africa to dry further during the 21th century. Burkina Faso’s central plateau sees more land fertility deterioration than the strictly northern Sahelian climate, such as do other nations of the Sahel experience(Dai, 2011; Funk et al., 2012) Increased tree mortality reduces soil cover in favour of the lixiviation of its nutrients and erosion of organic matter. Increased run-off decays water quality which become more turbid and inevitably feed possibly anoxic aquatic ecosystems. The hydraulic elevator effect of trees’ primary roots systems disappears reducing the grass stratum and its foraging role for consequently decreasing cattle herds. Disappearing canopy shade also shrink cattle’s habitat extent together with that of many avian species. Inevitably such unhealthy ecological conditions care for less ecosystem services, water and food production amongst the most critical ones for local populations.

Part C: Community and Livelihoods Information C1 Describe the participating communities/groups (PV requirement 1.1, 7.2.1, 7.2.7, 7.2.8)


Populations The project is active in the Sahel region of Burkina Faso. Burkina Faso counts 18,11 million inhabitants. Its average growth rate increased from 1,8% in 1960 to 3,42% in 2006 and 3,32% between 2009-2010. For the Sahel region, 968.442 inhabitants were sensed in the most recent demographic monitoring of the region in 2006. With a total surface of 35.360 km², average population density reaches 27,39 inhabitants/km² or 0,27 inhabitants/ha. This population was constituted of 170.030 households. That is an average of 5,7 inhabitants per household (HH). National statistical sources don’t focus on the villages’ scale. OZG’s socio-economic report (Yair Levy & Kalaga, 2015) does however present local estimations. Socio-economic monitoring of the project has occurred yearly since its outset focusing on the villages most involved in the management of the restoring agro-forests. Between 2009 and 2010, the Oudalan province where Lilingo-Zoungwaye (LZ) and Bossey villages are located displayed a growth rate of 3,51%. The Soum province of Belehede village displayed a value of 3,32%. Lilingo-Zoungwaye itself reached as much as 5,87%, Bossey’s as much as 19,95% and Belehede’s a staggering 23,89%. Further details are illustrated in Annex 12, Tabel 42. Obviously, the populations of the villages restoring their land are observing a growth which is higher than the seemingly constant regional population growths. Burkina’s high growth rate doesn’t even reach the population growth of the three villages (See Tabel 42)

Cultural, ethnic and social groups Burkina Faso has a secular multi-ethnical heritage and diverse religious traditions including both Christians and Muslims next to many Earth religions. A strong cultural civic sense fosters a cohesive society where inter community consultation is institutionalized both at internationally recognized government level and at traditional government level. The mostly sedentary or semisedentary Mossi ethnic group constitutes the majority of its population, with increasing amounts of semi-nomadic and nomadic people, mostly Peuls, towards the North and entering the Sahel region. A minority of Touaregs also live in the North, mostly close to the border with neighbouring nation Mali. The majority of the Northern populations practice Islam meanwhile Christianity is more prominent in the South next to a minority but most diverse pool of Earth religions. A dominant language is practiced in each ethnic group meanwhile none really is homogenous. The Moré speak Mossi. The peuls Foulfouldé which also happens to be an inter-regional commune language practiced by most. Tamalcheck and Sonrai are practiced by another northern minority. Namely the Bellah, whom happen to constitute the most represented ethnic group of Gorom-Gorom and Lilengo.

Gender and age equity Because of the restricted means of the project, no investigation was made to reveal gender and age equity issues. Therefore, relatively recent governmental demographic statistics were used to approximate a snapshot of gender and age equity in the region. The next national demographic census happens to be planned for the near future but its figures will still fall short of integrating the current PDD. The mostly remote rural areas where the project is active, an exodus is experienced most often directed towards urban labour markets. These migrations leave countryside populations with a women majority amongst adults. Schooling favours boys even if many exceptions already exist. Some of which only do arise from development (cooperation) projects inciting girls schooling successfully. Governmental data shows that adults are still mainly dedicated to land related work. Pastoralism is mostly a masculine activity while women are more involved in agriculture (83,4% women 78,2% of Sahel men). More local level figures from 2009 delivered by the city hall of GoromGorom (GG) however show otherwise. Cattle raising was the main economic activity with 95% of 17 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

men and 5% of women involved. The second activity was agriculture with 98% of men and only 2% of women involved. The main activities fulfilled by women were not inscribed in the local economy. Interestingly, women equaled or exceeded men in proportion in the sectors of craftsmanship (3,5% of both genders), hostelry & restauration (1,2% of women against 0,6% of men), finance and domestic services (0,2% of both genders). Men exceeded women in all other sectors including health care, education, commerce and public administration. Women incomes happen to surpass those of men through their involvement in craftsmanship and commercial activities. Their organization into cooperatives combined with recent financial protective measures taken at national governmental level further favour the protection of their socio-economic status. Women may indeed open bank accounts at preferential costs. This initiative not only capacitates but also favours management of financial resources by women amongst households. Women’s life expectancy surpasses that of men by a little more than one percent. Ages pyramids from recent census and estimations (“Perspective Monde Outil pédagogique des grandes tendances mondiales depuis 1945,” 2016) illustrate a typically pre-demographic transition structure, typical of societies not yet having undergone development processes involving wealth increase. Between 2010 and 2030, the basis of the pyramid is expected to shrink although it would be maintaining a direct pyramid structure. Projections of the pyramid structure inverting its structure towards that of a developed population aren’t yet in sight. Men used to own more animals on average than women and women don’t seem to own any cow at all. Men produced more than women meanwhile the last gender only produced small crops. These trends are further illustrated under Annex 12 in Figure 48 and Figure 49.

C2 Describe the Socio-economic context (PV requirement 7.2.2-7.2.5) Livelihoods activities including access to land, natural resources and energy In 2010, as much as 89,3 % of the Sahel population was active. This first observation surpasses the lower 85,3% of all Burkina Faso, which figure is probably indicative of a resilient labor culture fostered by the Sahel’s harsh environment. 80,9 % of the population devoted itself to agriculture in the region with 83,4% of the women represented in the sector against 78,2% of Sahel men. At the local level of Gorom-Gorom, none of the inhabitants were involved in any other secondary or tertiary sector activities nor considered to practice any small profession whatsoever that wasn’t related to food production or any other domain of activity. In 2010, OZG surveyed 100 inhabitants of LZ village. About half the population is active in each sector implicating multiple activities per inhabitant. The situation had slightly evolved by 2014 with 5% more women involved in cattle raising and 5% more men in the commercial sector. Some slight diversification of the labor market also occurred with a little 2% of men practicing small professions not related to food production. Tabel 43 illustrates these figures. There can be read that men were indeed more involved in cattle raising with only 20% of women in the sector, but even more so in agriculture with 98% of land workers being men. Economic activity in Bossey village in 2014 is illustrated by Tabel 44. Figure 47 shows that the economic activities of the inhabitants of the various villages are not only relatively diversified, even if those are still nearly always related to food production. It also shows that locals are employed in many activities simultaneously. Most probably in at least three rather than those two monitored in 2009 by the city hall of Gorom-Gorom. Also Belehede is the only 18 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

village knowing a significant proportion of people working in small professions. To give but one but foremost example of these, gold mining is often practiced there either by large mining concessions or freelance. There can hardly be focused on economic activities in the Sahel without focusing on the primary economy into some more detail. Details shall only be provided for cattle raising and agriculture for sake of not losing focus of the main drivers of the local society. Indeed, even if mining, hunting and fishing are also part of the primary economy, these domains of activities shall be neglected in this report in favor of those practices more directly related to land restoration and agroforestry. The term of cattle raising has been preferred in the present document to those of pastoralism or ranching. Because pastoralism is often associated with nomadic or semi-nomadic practices, which were hardly monitored, and ranching, which is often associated with large scale or even industrial cattle raising. This is even if some of the farmers monitored did strictly practice ranching or pastoralism. Agroforestry regenerations are long term projects. Their effects are primarily influencing sedentary populations even if they do restore social peace between sedentary and nomadic communities by increasing the extents of rich grazing and fertile grounds. Also continuous quantitative monitoring is mostly possible amongst the sedentary communities. Higher alphabetization, the presence of local institutions and infrastructures facilitates the survey of the socio-economic status of these last communities. In decreasing order of importance, Sahel cattle is dominated by goats, cows, poultry (even if the latest underwent an unexplained significant decrease between 2006 and 2007 which isn’t apparently compensated by any increase of another cattle specie), ovine, mules and porcine. Porcine also underwent a similar less visible local decrease between 2006 and 2007. Ownership and production were monitored in 2010 and market prices communicated by Gorom-Gorom’s city hall. Figure 48 shows that men used to own more animals on average than women and that women don’t seem to own any cow at all. Figure 49 shows that even in agriculture, men produced more than women meanwhile the last gender only produced small crops. Both figures may seem to indicate that women are hardly involved in agriculture although Figure 48 and Figure 49 show otherwise.

Between harvesting seasons (read years) 2009-2010 and 2010-2011, cereal needs of the Sahel region covered by the local production evolved back from 70,3% to 92% meanwhile these had plummeted from 151,2% straight since 2005 to nearly half of their original figure. The regeneration method applied by the OZG project also improves daily life in terms of commuting. HM ditches indeed do constitute reservoirs during the rainy season, reducing water related commuting duties.

Cultural and religious context The majority of the Northern populations practice Islam meanwhile minorities of other faiths are present everywhere. Close to the border with Mali, nomadic Islam tendencies often brought by the Touaregs may be interpreted as a more stringent application of the Mohammedan religion. Both by Occidental foreigners and the majority of West-African Muslims. Inter ethnical concertation is a legion practice amongst the diverse Sahel populations of Burkina Faso. Trend only shadowed since the relatively unstable democratic revolution of 2014-2015 was opportunistically embraced by very minor Jihadist terrorist groups, often from Mali or originally 19 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

driven from Libya. These were answered by both drastic Burkinabe internal affairs and Occidental foreign affairs ministries limiting displacement to any foreigner wishing to travel to the North of the nation. Ouagadougou, from where the Burkinabe management of the project is organized, features modern and progressed practices of any religious faith in a context of international and multicultural populations. Which cosmopolitan background’s been one of the ferment of the recent and first genuinely people driven democratic revolution of Sub-Saharan Africa.

Assets and incomes/poverty status A detailed investigation of incomes at the village scale was published by OZG in 2015 (Yair Levy & Kalaga, 2015) An estimation essay of local net incomes based on the survey of a set of input indicators is detailed there for readers eager to deepen in methodological aspects falling out of the scope of the current PDD or interested in intermediate results of the calculation procedure. Gross product / inhabitant was estimated based on market prices and sales estimations before removing expenses there from to reach the net product / inhabitant for each village. Results reflected relative situations between villages but still often seemed overestimated in many contingences. Only some key results from that process are summarized here to present incomes at the village scale after having presented these at the regional scale earlier in this PDD. Results revealing gender disparities were retained in particular. Sales Yearly sales of cattle and agricultural products expressed in heads and kg respectively are illustrated by the histogram in Figure 50. Distinction between men and women is made. Men only sale cattle meanwhile women sale cattle, crops and artisan items. Figure 52 illustrates sales as monitored in LZ in 2014. No distinction is made there between men and women meanwhile ranges of the estimation could be built since the sampling was realized by OZG. In 2010, lack of standard deviation data from the samples themselves forbids establishing ranges. Incomes Following the UN’s multi-dimensional poverty index (MPI) calculated in 2007, Burkina Faso ranked 131th of the 135 nations classified (Malik, 2014). Following the UNDP, since 2008 Burkina Faso’s Human Development Index (HDI) ranked 181 on 187 nations classified with hardly an improvement to this relative position. That position remains the same for the inequality adjusted HDI.

Since 2006, the minimum guaranteed SMIG or minimal guaranteed inter-professional salary reached 30.684 FCFA or about 46,85 €. Figures from Lilingo-Zoungwaye’s 2009 situation, prior to the ploughing of the first sites are illustrated by following histogram on Figure 51 Men seem at first mostly involved in cattle raising meanwhile women seem mostly involved in agriculture and craftsmanship. However, it already appears very clearly that women had initially generated about twice less income than men did. Actually following the municipality of Gorom-Gorom, in 2009 most women had other activities than agronomic ones meanwhile men did mostly well involve in this sector. Amongst the women well involved in food production, more than double of the population which was involved in agriculture was actually working in cattle raising rather than in agriculture. Meanwhile practically all men were also involved in agriculture through their second activity (See Tabel 47) This shows that nearly all women initially worked in other activities than those related to strict food production. One could guess they were already playing a role in the market economy selling land products prior to OZG’s arrival. But the first and second activities of women were in large majority not 20 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

inscribed in the context of the world-economy and could hence not directly be monitored by economic indicators. Those activities often being related to community services. The sampling of 30 households, 30 men and 30 women in LZ in 2014 allows to estimate a range of average incomes for men and women generated by the various main domains of occupation as illustrated by Figure 55 and Figure 56. Men’s incomes obviously originated more from cattle raising than from agriculture or craftsmanship, meanwhile it was the opposite for women. Men’s total incomes of 2014 reached 105.266,67 FCFA on average meanwhile women’s reached significantly higher with 119.710,85 FCFA. Even at a significance level of 5%, the confidence intervals of both men and women don’t overlap, living but very little probability for another hypothesis than women earning more than men in 2014 in LZ. A focus on incomes generated by cattle raising and seeds harvesting only delivers a more mitigated discrepancy between genders. At the interval of confidence adopted, we cannot reject the hypothesis that both genders would have similar income levels. But we can accept the hypothesis that men would earn more than women in cattle raising and women more than men in harvesting. However, it is probable that women earn as much in cattle raising as men do in harvesting. Cattle raising is the dominant source of income for the entire Bossey village population, followed by agriculture which does generate significantly less incomes than cattle. Women earn incomes from craftsmanship through the confection of brooms, mats and seko’s. Men don’t seem to fabricate any artisan item in Bossey. No seed harvesting nor soap production realized in the village was observed in the sample. Finally, women’s annual 51.321,67 FCFA incomes are certainly significantly inferior to men’s 88.883,33 FCFA /year during this baseline.

At the interval of confidence adopted, we cannot accept the hypothesis that both genders would have a different income level. Men’s higher sampled average 108.600,00 FCFA than women’s 88.716,67 FCFA can’t conceal the fact that the maximum possible women income reaches 104.717,4 FCFA meanwhile men’s minimum reaches below this figure with 91.435,2 FCFA.

C3 Describe land tenure & ownership of carbon rights For smallholders and for community land (PV requirement 1.1) For other land included in the project (PV requirement 1.2) OZG exclusively regenerates communal land. Leaving privately owned land to private management avoids potential future conflict over restored fertile land. There is no other land tenure integrated in the project. Such communal territories, identified together with rural communities, remain dedicated to SLM practices during the whole forest maturation cycle under a land concession scheme. Burkinabe law directs all underground wealth to the state, meanwhile biomass is defined to be a community good. A land concession contract is signed between, on the one hand, communes’ mayors and/or village development councils’ chiefs and, on the other hand, OZG. The concession period is defined there in with a period definition depending on the local climate. 20 years is enough for the Sahel climate to see an agroforest reach maturity. The community is responsible to take care of the land and to protect it in every way possible, meanwhile OZG cares for project development. Property remains unchanged and all agroforestry products remain entirely available for local use to the exclusive benefice of the owning community. Following PV’s requirements, 60% of revenues from carbon credits are redistributed by OZG to the local communities after sale. While 40% of these are reinvested into the OZG project, capacitating more reforestation, land regeneration, agriculture restoration and wealth transfer into a virtuous circle.


Part D: Project Interventions & Activities D1 Summarize the project interventions Describe the types of intervention that are included in the project (PV requirements 2.1.1-2.1.4) including those for: Ecosystem restoration, assisted natural regeneration OZG’s restored Sahel ecosystem can be seen as a temporary Runoff Agroforestry System (RAS). The half-moon ditches indeed gully precipitation waters towards trees and grass’ root systems during the rainy seasons of the first years of each restoration cycle. Just long enough for taproots to bore sufficiently deep down to reach permanent underground moisture. Due to droughts and unsustainable practices topsoil has eroded away, exposing bare and hardened soil. During the rainy season seeds will sprout on this ground but their roots are not able to enter the dense and compacted earth. At the same time the water just runs off the surface and little moisture will enter the soil. As a result, natural regrowth fails to take place. In order to overcome this problem, we literally break through this physical barrier that is holding back natural forest regeneration. With a hydraulic plough we crack open the earth. The plough, which is called Delfino, is specially designed to work on dry lands. Soils suitable for treatment should not be too sandy or too rocky to allow the mechanized tillage. The ripper digs an underground furrow facilitating the infiltration of water into the ground and the growth of plants roots. Then the mouldboard creates micro basins to collect water, seeds, topsoil and organic material. These micro basins have the shape of a half moon and have a volume of about 1000 to 1500 litres (see Figure 4)(“Vallerani System,” n.d., “Vallerani System,” 2013). The large scale ploughing of such crescent shaped ditches was technically developed by late Dr. Vallerani, inventor of the Vallerani system. Which constitutes a Microcatchment Water Harvesting (MWH) practice(Mekdaschi Studer & Linger, Hanspeter (Centre for Development and Environment, 2013). When ploughing is finished, a second and final delineation is done to record the exact area under implementation. The Delfino plough typically reproduces the Zaï traditional technique(Berrahmouni et al., 2015; Sawadogo, 2013; “The WOCAT network,” n.d., “Vallerani System,” n.d.) on industrial scale as a single technologic intervention over the entire assisted natural regeneration process of endemic agroforests. Following the World Overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies (WOCAT), some of the main technical functions of the Zaï method are the control of dispersed or concentrated runoff by retention or entrapment, the increase / maintaining of soil water. Infiltration increase is mentioned as one of its secondary technical functions. The next activity in the process is aiding natural regeneration. In order to speed up the vegetation on the ripped land, people dibble seeds into the micro basins. For this purpose, seeds of native plants are collected. Sometimes these seeds are mixed with collected dung in order to improve growth. The species were selected and propagated by people for their great value to humans and livestock. Table 2 illustrates the main sown species, all native. Table 1 – Main sown woody species

Local utility and uses Primary Secondary Forage (leaves, fruit) Soil Fertility, timber Forage (leaves, fruit) Fencing, Firewood Forage (leaves, fruit) Gum Forage (leaves, fruit) Gum Forage (leaves, fruit) Fencing, Firewood Nutrition (fruits, oil) Lumber, Soil Protection Nutrition (fruits) Forage 22 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy. Scientific Name Acacia albida Acacia nilotica Acacia senegal Acacia seyal Acacia tortilis Balanites aegyptiaca Ziziphus mauritiana

It is worth mentioning that a large area of the project is situated in the Sahel Region of Burkina Faso which has been gazetted since 9 December 1970 as a silvo-pastoral and partial wildlife Reserve called "Réserve du Sahel". This area of about 1.600.000 ha, comprising circles Djibo, Dori, GoromGorom, and the subdivision of Aribinda is protected to preserve its rich biodiversity, though - it was primarily established to regulate the hunting there. In practice, this classification was not followed by an effective implementation in the field due to limited personnel and material resources, compared to the enormous extent of the reserve and the difficulties of access. Local bodies are not able to ensure that unsustainable practices do not take place. They cannot support alternative livelihoods due to a lack of awareness and capacity, an effective group organisation and financial resources. The project provides support for all these to strengthen the effectiveness of the community forest. Ecosystem rehabilitation Prevention of ecosystem conversion or degradation (includes REDD+) The local communities contracting concessions with OZG are responsible of the maintenance of the regenerating agroforests. They’re aware of these ecosystems’ superior value with living stands among which cash crops under the scheme of payment for ecosystem services (PES) within carbon markets. Improved land management Although many grasslands have been badly degraded, it is possible to properly manage livestock to reverse this trend. Under restorative management degraded grassland can enhance soil carbon sequestration (Derner et al., 2006; Allard et al., 2007; Soussana et al., 2010; Teague et al., 2011).

Successful conservation minded grassland managers practicing Holistic Management enhance the health of the ecosystem upon which we depend, as well as improve their profitability and quality of life. This is done while simultaneously providing ecosystem services desired by society through building soil, water, and plant resources (Walters, 1986; Holling & Meffe, 1996; Stinner et al., 1997; Reed et al., 1999;Savory and Butterfield, 1999; Barnes et al., 2008; Teague et al., 2009). Trails are safeguarded for pastoral migrations and nomadic foraging to realize a sustainable land management in combination with sedentary practices. Transhumant herds fertilize soils with dung and by forcing biomass in the ground by the mechanical effects from hooves. These also break some seeds open favouring their growth. Care is taken not to overgraze land. Cattle feeds on the grass carefully sown to favour the growth of seedlings during the first years. Getting the grazing right is no easy task. Generally, it seems clear that grazing itself does not cause desertification. Rather, it is poorly managed grazing that causes desertification. Mixed grazing systems (cattle, small ruminants, camels and wildlife) help to maintain wide plant diversity.

D2 Summarize the project activities for each intervention Complete Table D2 using a new row for each activity, e.g.: Table 2 – D2 – Description of activities

Intervention type Improved land management

Project Activity Agroforestry

Description Not Intercropping trees with crops, pastoralism, Arabic gum. (Exploitation

Target group

Eligible for PV accreditation

Smallholder farmers

Yes


and commercialization, management is covered by the Danish Coop. REDD+ Forest protection Regular community- Community No led patrolling in group forest area. Integrated nomadicsedentary pastoralism. REDD+ Assisted natural Enrichment sowing Community Yes regeneration and protection of group natural regeneration of native species. Trees, herbs, grasses. Water infiltration. Soil moisture and water level monitoring. Through on site qualitative observation and hydraulic infrastructure data such as dams and through quantitative remote sensing analysis. • Note that for each intervention eligible for PV certification, a technical specification must be included in Part G. Several project activities may contribute to a single project intervention • Please also list the project interventions (and major activities) for which Plan Vivo certification will not be sought

D3 Effects of activities on biodiversity and the environment Describe how project activities will affect biodiversity (PV requirement 2.2 & 2.4) Due to the severe degradation of the lands regenerated within the area, it is acceptable to consider the current biodiversity of the project sites as non-existing. As a consequence, the baseline biodiversity is set equal to zero. Without the proposed reforestation project, there would not be other changing circumstances that could affect the biodiversity in the area, so this would remain zero. The seeds used are seeds collected from endemic trees, grasses and herbs. The sowing of these seeds will enhance the biodiversity, as well as a natural regeneration process that will be facilitated by this initial sowing. A list of the seeds that are sowed on the respective sites can be found in Table 3, illustrating the expected increase in flora biodiversity. Table 3 – Sown seeds quantities per specie

Quantity(kg) per year

Specie Common name

Latin name

2010

2012

20132014

2015

2016

Woody species Zamenega

Acacia macrostachya

340


Gum arabic tree Umbrella thorn acacia

6 5

Tamarind

Acacia nilotica Acacia raddiana Acacia senegal Acacia seyal Adansonia digitata Balanites aegyptiaca Boscia senegalensis Leptadenia Parkia biglobosa Pterocarpus Tamarindus indica

Jujube

Ziziphus mauritiana

Red acacia or Shittah tree Baobab Thron tree/Egyptian myrobolan Hanza Locust bean or néré

25 50

25 50

20

50

50

104 50 101 95 43 8.050 425 42 24 75 42 102

2

100

100

1.800 321

6

150 320 50 100

Grass / foraging species Alysicarpus ovalifolius

One bag

Andropogon gayanus

One bag

40

Cassia sieberiana

39

Cassia tora

50

Cenchrus biflorus

800

86

Corchorus tridens

2

2

Eragrostis tremula

One bag

50

100

Panicum leatum

50

50

650

Pennisetum pedicellatum

One bag

50

Piliostigma reticulatum Sclerocarya birrea Senna obtisfolia Sesbania pachycarpa

Not specified

Desho grass

45

700

Combretum Bano

21

250 45 45 85 75 12

50 2

2

62

The patchiness of the project areas will create corridors that can be used as step stones that facilitate the arrival of other native species, as well flora as fauna. Following table of animal species already observed on site illustrate the fauna biodiversity increase potential of the near future. Although none of these species are listed by the IUCN(“IUCN Red List,” 2016) as endangered, reintroduction of threatened species such as the Sulcata turtle is projected. Table 4 – Animal species observed in 2012-2014

Migrant palearctic species Espèces palearctiques Latin name migratrices Common wheatear Traquet motteux Oenanthe oenanthe Spanish wheatear

Traquet oreillard

Oenanthe hispanica

white fronted redstart

Rougequeue à front blanc

Phoenicurus phoenicurus

Hoopoe

Huppe fasciée

Upupa epops

European bee-eater

Guêpier d’Europe

Merops apiaster

IUCN status Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern Least


European turtle dove

Tourterelle des bois

Streptopelia turtur

Chevalier culblanc

Tringa ochropus

White stork

Cicogne blanche

Ciconia ciconia

Ethiopian sedentary species Chestnut -backed finch lark Singing bush lark

Espèces sédentaires Latin name éthiopiens Alouette moineau à oreillons Eremopterix leucotis blancs Alouette chanteuse Mirafra cantillans

Red-billed hornbill

Calao à bec ouge

Tockus erythrorhynchus

Gray hornbill

Calao à bec gris

Tockus nasutus

Chestnut bellied Sandgrouse Abysinian roller

Ganga (tebournout ) Rollier africain

White throated bee eater

Guepier à gorge blanche

Merops albicollis

Nightjar sp.

Engoulevent sp.

Caprimulgus

Pied Crow

Corbeau pie

Corvus albus

Brown raven

Corbeau brun

Corvus rifolicus

Shikra sparrow-hawk

Epervier africain

Accipiter badius

Tawny eagle

Aigle ravisseur

Aquila rapax

Speckled pigeon

Pigeon de Guinée

Columba guinea

Rose-grey dove

Tourterelle rieuse

Streptopelia roseogrisea

Laughing dove

Tourterelle maillée

Spilopelia senegalensis

Ring-necked dove

Tourterelle du Cap

Streptopelia capicola

Red tailed buzzard --> red-necked buzzard Red-throated Bee-eater

Buse à queue rousse

Buteo auguralis

Guêpier à gorge rouge

Merops bulocki

Slender billed weaver

Tisserain minule

Ploceus pelzelni

Pigmy long tailed sunbird

Petit souimanga à longue queue Souimanga à longue queue

Anthreptes platurus Nectarinia pulchella

Pintade commune

Numida meleagris

Circaète brun Africain

Circaetus cinereus

Green sandpiper

Beautifull long tailed sunbird Grey-breasted helmeted Guinea fowl African snake eagle

Sénégalais Pterocles exustus Coracias abyssinicus

concern Least concern Least concern Least concern IUCN status Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern Least


Senegal wattled plover

Vanellus senegallus

Mammals

Vanneau caronculé --> vanneau du Sénégal Mammifères

Spotted hyena

Hyène tachetée

Crocuta crocuta

Golden jackal

Chacal doré

Canis aureus

Ruppels fox

Renard famélique

Vulpes rueppellii

African wild cat

Chat sauvage

Felis silvestris lybica

common genet

Genette commune

Genetta genetta

Hérisson africain

Atelerix albiventris

Lièvre du cap

Lepus microtis

Striped ground squirrel

Ecureuil terrestre

Xerus erythropus

Reptiles

Reptiles

Nile monitor

Varan du nil

Tropical hedgehog --> hedgehog? African hare

African four-toed

Latin name

Varanus niloticus

concern Least concern IUCN status Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern Least concern

Describe how project activities will affect the environment (soil, water) (PV requirement 2.3) Water Tree planting contributes to soil conservation and fertilization, furthermore, by increasing tree cover, the project will contribute to the improvement of watershed functions through: • Reduction of run-off through stem and root effects on soils. (Bromley, 1997; Madi, Mouzai, & Bouhadef, 2013) • Improvement of ground water recharge systems due to increased residence time. (Błażejewski & Murat-Błażejewska, 2009; Burgess, 1998) and through enhanced water infiltration (Bargués Tobella et al., 2014). • Reduction of water loss through reduced evaporation due to canopy cover. (Breshears, 1998)

In this project specifically, the soil preparation through the use of the Delfino plough will have a beneficial effect on the watershed functioning. The ploughed HMs function as small buffer basins in which rainwater is trapped, where it can infiltrate more easily in the soil. Roughly estimated the project will provide a buffer volume of 200 m³/ha. Separate rainfall events in this region are characterized by 10-20 mm or 100 – 200m³/ha. (Lebel & Ali, 2009; Lebel, 2003; Nicholson, 2013) This illustrates the potential of the project on enhancing infiltration of rainwater and thus contributing to the fertility of the area. Site specific conclusion of the project’s impact on water recharge systems should however still be evaluated in the light of direct monitoring. Examples have shown that deforestation may lead to water recharge by redirecting superficial flow towards more favorable infiltration areas favoring water table rise(Leduc, Favreau, & Schroeter, 2001). This is despite the deforestation caused disappearance of all the above mentioned virtuous impacts of trees on soil and watershed 27 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

functions. Different methodologies, based on remote sensing (NASA, 2016a) and on in-situ rainfall measurements, are being explored to evaluate the feasibility of monitoring the impact of the project on soil moisture. Current commonly accessible soil humidity remote sensing techniques, with about 0,1 degrees in square cell side resolution (about 10 km), still scale too coarse for the current size of the sites under restoration to be approached accurately. See Figure 3 for an illustrative map of soil moisture at 0,1° resolution as delivered by the Land Data Assimilation Systems(NASA, 2016b)’ Noah Land Surface Model L4 monthly 0.1 x 0.1 degree for Western Africa. However, accessible sensors combining active and passive sensing techniques like the current Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP) (Enrekhabi et al., 2014) shall in the near future allow for systematic finer soil moisture resolutions. For example, the Sentinel 1 mission may deliver signals with a 1 km resolution (Wagner, 2013), which would be comparable with those of most sites under restoration.

Figure 3 – Cartographic comparison between OZG sites at Gorom-Gorom and remote sensing soil moisture Soil

Biomass increase shall induce soil quality improvement through various bio-geochemical processes. All organic carbon sequestered in soils is extracted from the atmosphere by photosynthesis and converted to complex molecules by bacteria and fungi in synergy with insects and animals. The increase of Soil Organic Carbon (SOC) has been estimated to increase with 0,74 t C / ha / year in the Sahel and 0,82 t C / ha / year in the Centre-Nord. Both C and N increases estimated from a soil sampling analysis realized by OZG yield typically between 70% and 130% over 20 years. 28 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

A healthy and biodiverse vegetation is tributary of a and favors the return of mycorrhiza fungi with increases in carbon uptake which may reach 70% per unit of nitrogen when these are combined to vegetation. Research and development in this field involving the Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO-KNAW(“Nederlands Instituut Voor Ecologie Netherlands Institute of Ecology,” 2016)) shall delve into the possibility of inoculating endemic soil communities in degraded soils of the project’s sites under restoration to favor such virtuous cycles. Termites play an important role in the soil community by both oxygenating the soil and favoring water infiltration. The giant young tree which’s weight had been sampled and removed from OZG’s statistics for sake of keeping defensive, had grown on a termite mound. Which offers a project related illustration of the favorable impact of termites on soil fertility. By using the tools of grazing and animal impact and paying attention to adequate plant recovery, in a period of as few as three years, many long disabled processes come back to life. For example, insects such as dung beetles return. They retrieve ruminant excreta and store it more than 18 inches beneath the surface creating new soil and storing carbon in the process (Richardson & Richardson, 2000). Worms and small mammals such as moles and prairie dogs churn the soil, while deep-rooted perennial grasses regrow and create channels for water and gases. Mycorrhizal fungi, with literally thousands of miles of hyphae in a small patch, transport nutrients which they have the unique ability to obtain minerals from soil and exchange them for carbohydrates from photosynthetic plants. The fungi synthesize a stable glycoprotein, glomalin, that holds 4 to 20 times its weight in water. Microorganisms join the elaborate fray, and in the process create complex carbon molecules that store carbon deep in the soils for a long period of time (Jones, 2009a). These are the healthy soils that Holistic Managers throughout the world strive to recreate, capturing carbon, providing food, re-establishing balanced hydrological and nutrient cycles, and imparting beauty to the land. A dozen or so species of shrub seeds used as a fodder can be found in the dung of animals and consequently very useful in the regreening efforts, especially as animals are migrating around. A manure application experiment from the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) carried out in the ICRISAT Sahelian Center in Niger shows the importance of manure in the process of restoring the land. Soils on-site were extremely sandy but still showed huge differences in rainfall infiltration, from as low as 30% to 300% only 5-10 m away. This is related to differences in soil crust formation and microtopography.

Part E: Community participation E1

Participatory project design

Describe the participatory planning process (PV requirement 4.1) Local communities are approached through a first sociologic assessment of their potential interest for an assisted natural regeneration project. Environmental awareness and eagerness to address degradation is evaluated through interviews. Given local interest in a cooperation with OZG to support such development cooperation is observed, prospection agreements are sometimes signed at that stage to secure further project development steps. An environmental assessment follows to identify degraded sites targeting exclusively land falling under common ownership and within logistic distance to impact local livelihoods favourably. The regeneration aptitude of soils at hand is than evaluated. If soils are deemed inapt for restoration using the Vallerani method, focus is redirected towards alternative suitable communal territory always in accordance with local interests. Land concession agreements are proposed next for undersigning by both OZG and local communities. The latest are represented by either village development committees, mayors and the cabinets of the city halls of the main villages of the communes involved. 29 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

These contracts include obligations along both sides to guarantee balanced and sustainable winwins. Namely: - Both parties engage into a collaborative effort to Re-green the environment in the benefit of the Burkinabe people and to mitigate climate change following the criteria of the Kyoto Protocol and the Clean Development Mechanism. - Both parties recognize the interest of reforestation with local species for mitigating desertification, soil erosion and adverse intense rain and wind impacts, meanwhile increasing local productivity for local human and cattle populations. - The city hall engages itself into taking all dispositions allowing for the conservation of the Sahel forest cover to be recovered by assisted natural regeneration on reclaimed land over a minimum of 20 years in the benefice of the local population. - Entrepreneurs Without Frontiers engages itself to find financing necessary for the yearly reclamation of an undefined extent of land on the territories chosen for that purpose by the local population and to realise a bouli (rain water reservoir) for their own profit. - Both parties shall elaborate together with rural communities and in the villages concerned a pluri-annual working plan to specify surfaces, land and tree species in order to be able to quantify the annual carbon dioxide offset projected in the future Sahel forests and to locate a destination for bouli realisation. - Both parties recognize that reforesting offsets greenhouse gas (GHG) and generate voluntary emission reduction units (VER’s) in the profit of those realising these projects. They agree that OZG delivers these VER’s contractually against fixed rates to those people and enterprises interested during reforestation periods with a control and follow up guarantee of 20 years. - Both parties agree on using the funds obtained by the delivery of VER’s for carbon offsetting as PES and that these amounts shall be invested by OZG annually in the region to reclaim degraded land, realize boulis and monitor the forests scientifically in order to compare growth previsions with field reality. - Amounts obtained yearly by market agreements on carbon certificates shall be used within the year to execute the following phase of the project as foreseen by the action plan and land planning with this aim and in favour of the local population. - OZG engages itself to develop a Project Idea Note (PIN) for submission under the Plan Vivo projects registry following the foundation’s standard and to hereby guarantee the certification of the tonnage of carbons offset by each forest as VERs. - Yearly evaluation and concertation reunions shall take place with concerned village populations after the rainy seasons. Talks’ results shall deal the purpose of possible readjustment of future works and efforts. On that occasion, the financial balance of the operation shall be debated and a prognosis of the opening year shall be presented. Socio-economic monitoring of baseline conditions occurs before the direct sowing occurs in the half-moon ditches. Yearly monitoring follows thereafter.

Describe the identified target group(s) and their involvement in design (PV requirement 4.4) Describe how any community groups are governed (PV requirement 4.4) The internationally recognized governmental structure of Burkina Faso exists next to traditional political structures. BF’s administration is geographically divided into regions, provinces and communes, sometimes locally superseded by cantons. Communes may have mayors heading city halls depending on the means available. Local representatives are elected following democratic processes which have been reinforced since BF’s people led democratic revolution of 2014 followed by a failed military coup in 2015. The traditional power which’s governing processes may often include verbal negotiations 30 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

following democratic principles inscribed in secular oral traditions. Local chiefs’ committees are an example thereof. Such committees gather during each prospection, negotiation, project implementation and monitoring visits with OZG. Hereby, public consultation is secured as decisions on every step of project development are presented and discussed. Possible local grievances are expressed and further activities are evaluated by the chiefs. Which approach secures bottom-up support of the project.

Describe how any barriers to participation will be addressed to ensure the involvement of women, socially excluded communities etc. (PV requirement 4.2 & 4.3) Rural communities of the areas welcoming the degraded land regeneration projects are consulted from the very first stages of prospection through interviews realized in respect of sociologic methods. Socio-economic status of those communities is identified through a combination of ad-hoc surveys realized by OZG in-situ and regional statistics. Figures are those typical of under-developed populations with strong demographic growths, triangular ages’ pyramids, very low literacy and incomes, very basic infrastructures and gender inequities in education and salary. Most are sedentary even if semi-nomadic and nomadic communities intermingle with populations from villages and settlements surrounding the restoration sites. During assessments prior to possible project implementation, protocol deals the purpose of local people consultation through the representation of local chiefs’ committees. Special attention is addressed to vulnerable groups such as children and women. Which step verifies the social integrity of the given community’s interest in an environmental restoration project. OZG engages only if the community undersigns the principles safeguarding the sustainable involvement of all portions of the populations next to safeguarding the interest of all stakeholders. If such ideas are supported, the schooling of children both girls and boys with the forests’ incomes is mentioned as a condition in any agreement. Agreements are also conditioned to the investment of women in the sowing processes for which they are paid by OZG. Men’s efforts are in turn invested in patrolling the forests, mostly during consequently increasing pastoralism or cash crop exploitation. Corridors are maintained for transhumant nomadic and semi-nomadic minorities, mostly from the Peul ethnic group, to herd their cattle. Which secures both sedentary and nomadic populations’ interests during such pastoral migrations. Corridors care for fire barriers. Cattle fertilize and even sow land without overgrazing it. The favourable involvement of women and children is contractually inscribed in the agreement protocols signed by both local authorities and OZG. BF is also rich of an inter-community consultation tradition involving the multi-ethnical population at all levels of power. Which tradition plays a major role in pacifying the nation.

E2

Community-led implementation

Describe the preparation and registration requirements for plan vivos or management plans (PV requirement 4.5, 4.6 & 4.7) Local visits are attended by a sociologist translating the needs and grievances of local stakeholders. Local tree or plant species of interest are recorded for reintroduction where possible. Geomorphologic adverse trends such as receding shores, advancing dunes are also observed next to oral collective recollection of local landscape history. Failed past crops during possible prior regeneration projects are identified. 31 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

The ability of locals to invest their efforts during project implementation without undermining the agricultural productivity upon which local livelihoods may depend is also verified. Projects failing to meet this requirement are strayed from until feasible project scales or locations may be deemed sustainable.

Describe the assessment system for plan vivos for technical, and other criteria. (PV requirement 4.7) During prospection, typical Sahel land degradation is an obvious observation realized during prospection by OZG. In that climate, degraded soils are typically encrusted and consequently bare of practically any vegetation besides perhaps isolated trees remnant of the more favourable past previous to the big droughts. The ability of locals to engage into massive seeds’ management and sowing activities is evaluated. The presence of seeds producing/delivering sources and storing areas is verified. When the geographical extent of the project requires, local experienced agriculture specialists are contracted periodically to capacitate cumbersome logistic operations at hand. When such aren’t yet existent, the constitution of women or environmental cooperatives is encouraged to transact seeds purchase and to finance sowing activities. OZG’s local Burkinabe and foreign Belgian experts monitor growth rates yearly through terrain visits.

Describe the mapping, recording and storage of plan vivos/management plans (PV requirement 4.8 & 4.9) Cartography of the boundaries of restoring sites is an ongoing process realized opportunistically as logistic conditions allow. All sites from 2010 until 2015 included have been mapped by in-situ GPS measurements. The borders of the most recent ones have often been corrected using remote sensing data gathered by OZG. Such information is collected through a combination of free data shared on the Web (Google Earth) and remote sensing delved at their source through research cooperation (NASA). Yearly monitoring of flora biodiversity and biomass is recorded on site on paper documents before being digitalized with Microsoft Excel in tables for further analysis, research and archiving. On field tree density counting were extrapolated using remote sensing counting of half-moon ditches densities as proxies of the average tree counts per half-moons. Fauna observations are made qualitatively through the mere noting of presence of eventually returning species, accompanied by photographic material when possible. Photographic traps experiments have started and are expected to deliver images of yet unmonitored nocturne species as well. Long term soil carbon has been estimated based on in-sit sampling campaigns which have yielded a holistic approach of tree and grass biomass impact on the Burkinabe Sahel and Sudano-Sahel’s semi-arid ecosystems’ capacity to offset carbon. This analysis was published in 2016 through a consolidated ecologic report(Yaïr Levy et al., 2016). A methodology for the remote sensing monitoring of soil moisture using accessible material meeting the scale of the project is in development at OZG.

Provide GIS version of plan vivos (only if applicable) (PV requirement 4.11) GIS Cartography of the project sites mapped to this day lies in Annex 10. 32 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

E3

Community-level project governance

Describe how communities will be involved in decision-making and project management in coordination with the Project Coordinator (PV requirement 4.12) Yearly visits to the main villages of the various regeneration sites allow for local consultation and the expression of possible grievances within the conditions best known by the local communities to deliberate on issues whether political or not. Namely, the local chiefs’ committees gathering places usually located on the villages’ main squares’ or in city halls when existent.

Describe the community-based grievance and grievance recording system for the project (PV requirement 4.13 & 4.14) Any possible grievances are expressed orally true to local customs and filed by hand writing on site during sociologic consultations. However scarce good quality communication media may be in the rural areas of the project, cell phones are used to communicate on common basis to assess field activity and maintain oral contact respective of traditional protocols. Such practices sometimes are often taken to cross-continental scales with calls from village chiefs reaching as far out as OZG’s members of the council of administration and senior advisors in Belgium. These diplomatic protocol efforts maintain occasions to formulate possible concerns and grievances officially at the source of project management. Such points are listed in the agenda of discussion within periodic reunions of OZG’s Council of Administration for democratic decision taking upon remediation and improvement measures. Which are then registered in statutes. Mandates are distributed following common agreements to take actions translated to OZG’s employees and volunteers whose tasks and activities impact ground level stakeholders. When emergencies arise, the council may decide through mail exchange following the same democratic principle governing decision taking to allow for timely reaction. Resolutions and the monitoring thereof are taken in the statutes of the thereupon following COA reunions.

Part F: Ecosystem Services & Other Project Benefits F1

Carbon benefits

Complete Table F1 to summarise the carbon benefits per ha for each intervention over the project crediting period: Interventions are similar across all OZG sites and are calculated over the project period of 20 years. Details per site and per year are given in section G. Table 5 – F1 – Carbon benefits

Intervention type (technical (technical specification specification) ification)

1 Baseline carbon uptake / emissions i.e. without project (t CO2e/ha)

2 Carbon uptake/emis sions reductions with project (t CO2e/ha)

3 Expected losses from leakage (t CO2e/ha) Rather bring a few than none. Outsource from existing templates

4 Deduction of risk buffer (t CO2e/ha)

2-(1+3+4) Net carbon benefit (t CO2e/ha)


and examples. Trees (above and below ground woody species biomass)

Grass

0

0

86,27

2,8

Displaced exploitation. (1%) Intra-site tree competition (2%) Drought (5%) Drought (5%) Overgrazing (4%) 0

0,86 1,73

79,37

4,31 0,14 0,112

2,55

Soil Organic 72,26 132,64 -10% 60,38 Carbon (SOC) • Note that the underlying calculations in this table come from the technical specifications described in Part G • Normally there will be a technical specification for each intervention (in the case of REDD+ a group of activities implemented together is treated as single intervention)

F2

Livelihoods benefits

Complete Table F2 to describe how the project will affect different livelihoods aspects of the participating groups (use a separate table for each group if necessary) (PV requirement 7.3) Clearly identify any livelihoods aspects that may be negatively affected as well as those that will be positive (PV requirement 7.5) If any possible negative impacts are identified describe mitigation measures to address them (PV requirement 7.5) Table 6 – F2 – Livelihoods benefits (Sedentary, semi-nomadic and nomadic populations

Food and agricultur al productio n

Financial assets and incomes

EnvironEnvironmental services (water, (water, soil, soil, etc. etc.)

Energy

Timber & nonnontimber forest products (incl. (incl. forest food)

Land & tenure security

UseUse-rights to natural resources

Social and cultural assets

Fodder increase (1,5 T / ha / year)

With average beef head price of 248 € and 5-1,3 ha/UBT/dr y season, 50-191 € of potential increased income per year per ha of

Increased precipitati on through vegetation evapotranspirati effect on water recycling

Litter and dung exploitatio n for fire

Arabic gum, sylvicultur al derivated artisan products (brooms, mats, seko’s)

Communal land contractua lly safeguard ed for local usufruct

Communal land contractua lly safeguard ed for local usufruct

More gender equity through women incomes increase through sowing, cashcrops and sylvicultur al products craftsman


Depending on topograph y, tropical livestock unit reach 5-1,3 ha/UBT/D ry season

restored land. With average sesame prices of 0,76 €/kg and yield of 555 kg/ha/yea r(“Sesame : the new white gold for smallholde r farmers in Burkina Faso and Mali ?,” 2015), 424 €/ha/year of potential income increase With 2007 average of bean price of 0,230,92 € / kg and Cultural yields of 10,71 T/ha in theoretical open field, 2.4529.810 €/ha of potential income increase.

ship. Improved water quality through slowed run-off reducing sediment suspensio n.

Sedentary, seminomadic and nomadic rights on natural resources reinforced through concerted SLM

Men incomes increase through improved pastoralis m

Increased infiltration in broken up encrusted soils and longer water residence in halfmoon reservoirs.

Children education increase through reinvestmen t of incomes in schooling.

Increased soil moisture.

Better gender equity through contractua l schooling of boys and girls. Inter ethnical consultati on reinforced

Increased watertable recharge.


through shared SLM practices. Less commutin g for water collection.

Vegetation cover protect soils against run-off erosion. Soils protected from nutrients lixiviation.

Importatio n of urban products replaced by exportatio n of land products (s.a. dairy & medicinal plants).

Soil fauna increase and flora growth. Soil organic carbon and nitrogen increase. Improved microclimates (Temperat ed heat, more shadow casting, less winds, cleaner air, etc.)

F3

Ecosystem & biodiversity benefits

Complete Table F3 to describe the ecosystem impacts of each project intervention (PV requirement 5.13) Table 7 – F3 – Ecosystem impacts

Intervention type (technical specification)

Biodiversity impacts

Water/watershed Soil Other impacts impacts productivity/cons ervation impacts

Encrusted soil breaking and

Soil fauna increase and flora

Increased infiltration.

Vegetation cover protect soils

Returning microfauna and


creation of halfmoon crescent ditches.

growth.

Water biodiversity status improvement through less turbidity.

Direct sowing of grass and herbs.

Feeds wildlife and herds from year one of regeneration cycle.

against run-off erosion.

Increased soil moisture.

Soils protected from nutrients lixiviation.

Increased watertable recharge. Longer water residence in halfmoon reservoirs. Less water turbidity. Increased precipitation through vegetation evapo-transpirati effect on water recycling. Slows winds, protecting superficial soil sediments and biomass from erosion, casting shadow for microfauna

Soil organic carbon and nitrogen increase.

Protects tree seedlings. Direct sowing of woody species.

Feeds fauna and human populations.

Avian biodiversity favoured by increasing habitat.

herbal stratum favour matrix flow and increase infiltration capacity in soils.

Herding cattle fertilize regenerating land with dung and resown land effectively through acid activated consumed seeds. Wildlife stampede force biomass/ nutrients/organic carbon into soils.

Creates a watertable hydric reserve elevator effect redistributing reserves horizontally through secondary root systems. Avian biodiversity fertilize soils further with nutrients rich guano next to resowing land with digestive acid activated seeds. Climate change mitigation through atmospheric greenhouse gas


offsetting. Micro-climate improvement for fauna and flora.

Part G: Technical Specifications G1 Project intervention and activities Describe the intervention and show how it meets the applicability conditions (PV requirement 5.1.1) Describe all the project activities and inputs for the intervention showing how they are applicable to local geophysical conditions (PV requirement 5.1.2) The project intervention is Assisted Natural Regeneration (ANR). The basic philosophy of ANR is to rehabilitate forests and grassland areas. It is a simple, inexpensive and effective technique for establishment of secondary forest on degraded forested areas by protecting and nurturing natural tree seedlings, and therefore enhancing the natural recovery of degraded land. The key elements of ANR are quite basic such as removing or reducing barriers to natural forest regeneration, enrichment planting and controlled grazing. With ANR, the forest grows faster than it would naturally. We work in the communities of North Burkina Faso where our activities combine with the efforts of the Burkinabe government, local authorities, local communities and NGOs to combat desertification in the Sahel and to strengthen sustainable use of natural resources by pastoralists and farmers. The Sahelian forest consist naturally of a stratum with trees and shrubs and an important grassy cover which provides various produces to local people: food for men, highly nutritious forage for livestock, hay for the dry season, fences for fields, construction materials and raw materials for handicrafts and medicinal plants are only a few primary services it provides. However, for three decades, due to drought and overexploitation, the forests have been severely degraded and some areas are completely bare. Project activities and inputs To restore these degraded ecosystems and enhance the productivity of the vegetation as pasture for the benefit of farmers and agro-pastoralists, we will facilitate various activities that can be divided in 4 main headers. 1. Identification Together with the local population we make a selection of degraded areas to be treated. These are generally old grazing lands, depleted of any vegetation. Here meet with local communities and tell them what we want to do. We explain our methods, discuss the benefits and consider the responsibilities and duties. When an agreement is made we select sites that we want to treat. These are generally characterized by a clogged, hardened, impenetrable surface. The selected sites get a first delineation with GPS to establish size for further planning.

2. Community Development The population, which has the customary right over the land, commits itself, by signing a cooperation agreement signed by the mayor of the town, to protect newly afforested land and thus to maximize the overall volume of organic matter accumulated over a period of twenty years minimum. The forests are source of livelihood for the people and they have to ensure sustainable use. This means to protect the restored forest against fire, controlled grazing, no excessive cutting and monitor forest development. 38 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

The carbon fixed by the new forests will be offered for sale to companies in Belgium and other countries in the Annex 1 list of the Kyoto Protocol, in the form of VERs (Voluntary Emission Reduction). Revenues from the sale of VERs will be reinvested in the villages concerned, in other reforestation projects, but also in social investments, according to the needs identified by the population, such as watering points (boreholes, dams) and gardening sites. 3. Site Preparation Due to droughts and unsustainable practices topsoil has eroded away, exposing bare and hardened subsoil. During the rainy season seeds will sprout on this ground but their roots are not able to enter the dense and compacted earth. At the same time the water just runs of the surface and little moisture will enter the soil. As a result, natural regrowth fails to take place. In order to overcome this problem, we literally break through this physical barrier that is holding back natural forest regeneration. With a hydraulic plough we crack open the earth. The plough, which is called Delfino, is specially designed to work on dry lands. Soils suitable for treatment should not be too sandy or too rocky to allow the mechanized tillage. The ripper digs an underground furrow facilitating the infiltration of water into the ground and the growth of plants roots. Then the mouldboard creates micro basins to collect water, seeds, topsoil and organic material. These micro basins have the shape of a half moon and have a volume of about 1000 to 1500 litres(“Vallerani System,” 2013) (see Figure 4). When ploughing is finished, a second a final delineation is done to record the exact area under implementation.

Figure 4 – Site preparation deploying the Delfino plough


4. Forest Regeneration The next activity is aiding the regeneration process. In order to speed up the vegetation on the ripped land people dibble seeds into the micro basins. For this people collect seeds of native plants. Sometimes these seeds are mixed with collected dung in order to improve growth. The species were selected and propagated by people for their great value to humans and livestock. These are the main species, all native. Table 8 – Sown woody species and their utilities

Scientific Name Acacia albida Acacia nilotica Acacia senegal Acacia seyal Acacia tortilis Balanites aegyptiaca Ziziphus mauritiana

Utility and uses for the local population Primary Secondary Forage (leaves, fruit) Soil Fertility, timber Forage (leaves, fruit) Fencing, Firewood Forage (leaves, fruit) Gum Forage (leaves, fruit) Gum Forage (leaves, fruit) Fencing, Firewood Nutrition (fruits, oil) Lumber, Soil Protection Nutrition (fruits) Forage

Table 9 – Roles of project developer and local communities in the technical activities

Activities Identification

Community development

Site preparation

Natural regeneration

Jobs Village visits Informative meetings Site selection First delineation of site Training on seed collection Training on sowing Awareness on protection Training on monitoring Sale of VERs Sourcing tractor Ploughing Final delineation of site Seed collection Dung collection Sowing Protection Monitoring Reporting

Responsible OZG OZG OZG, community OZG, community OZG OZG OZG OZG OZG OZG OZG, community OZG, community Community Community Community Community Community OZG, community


G2 Additionality and Environmental Integrity Describe relevant laws and regulations for forest and land management demonstrating how project interventions exceed these requirements (PV requirement 5.4.1) Demonstrate how financial, social, technical or cultural barriers prevent the interventions from taking place without the project (PV requirement 5.4.2) Provide evidence to show that the project area has not been negatively altered prior to the start of the project for the purposes of claiming payments from ecosystem services (PV requirement 5.8) Give details of other projects or initiatives in the project area and any agreements that are in place to avoid double counting (PV requirement 5.14) It is worth mentioning that a large area of the project is in the Sahel Region which has been gazetted since 9 December 1970 as a silvo-pastoral and partial wildlife Reserve called "Réserve du Sahel". This area of about 1,600,000 ha, comprising circles Djibo, Dori, GoromGorom, and the subdivision of Aribinda is protected to preserve its rich biodiversity, though it was primarily established to regulate the hunting there. In practice, this classification was not followed by an effective implementation in the field due to limited personnel and material resources, compared to the enormous extent of the reserve and the difficulties of access. Local bodies are not able to ensure that unsustainable practices do not take place. They cannot support alternative livelihoods due to a lack of awareness and capacity, an effective group organization and financial resources. The project will provide support for all these to strengthen the effectiveness of the community forest. Rural Land Tenure Law number 034-2009/AN inscribes customary rules and practices legitimated land rights in national legislation. Which creates a legal framework for OZG’s efforts among local communities in favor of Sustainable Land Management practices on the degraded communal territories under ecologic regeneration, favoring local populations’ land access and tenure next to increasing investments in agroforestry and pastoralism. Lack of financial means is inherently the biggest barrier preventing these kinds of projects taking place but there are more. Table 10 – Barriers preventing interventions from taking place without the project

Barriers

Description

Financial/ economic

Target communities have insufficient resources to support rehabilitation and sustainable land management of pastures. Communities do not possess the skills and awareness to take up project development processes and activities.

Technical barrier

Ecological

Effective restoration of

How the project will overcome barriers. Funding for initial development is secured, ongoing project management and other costs will be met by payments for ecosystem services Training will be undertaken with the project coordinator staff, site coordinators and community field workers such as project purpose, GPS mapping, biomass inventories carbon quantification, protection protocols, etc… The project utilises tractor and


barriers

Institutional barriers

Social barriers

Cultural barriers

ecosystems is compromised by the phenomenon of compaction of the degraded soil. Poor to non-existent implementation of regulations and activities for securing property rights and promoting sustainable management of natural resources. Poor infrastructure and remoteness of communities.

Access to pasture is considered by people as free and is not governed by rules of formal ownership.

plough for efficient soil treatment.

Support to the communities to develop its own procedures and protocols for the community forests and facilitation to guide community groups and structures ensuring rural land tenure security. The project will invest in capacity development of local community members in order to secure continuation of the project. Restored project sites will be the first resources to be managed differently.

In no way the project areas will negatively alter the ecosystem before the start of the project for the purposes of claiming payments from ecosystem services. In cooperation with NASA, Digital Globe and the Intel Challenge Project OZG will have access to high resolution imagery from before and during crediting periods which can be used to serve evidence for this. Other project initiatives in the immediate vicinity are coordinated by REACH Italia(“Reach,” 2016) and AGED(“AGED,” 2016). For the time being there are no agreements in place between us and the other organizations as we are all clear about the purpose of these programs. Any attempt for double counting can easily be verified by checking the coordinates of the organization’s project sites.

G3 Project Period State the project start date and the period of time over which the climate benefits will be quantified with justification (PV requirement 5.5, 5.6 & 5.17) The total project period runs from 2010 until 2039. During the lifetime of the project we will have different start and end dates for multiple crediting periods. Each site will get a 20 year crediting period starting when restoration activities take place. For example, sites set up in 2010 will be credited until 2029, sites starting in 2014 will have a crediting period till 2033 The project has identified 67 sites to work with as per latest count. All these sites will receive similar restoration activities. Start dates for sites after January 2016 will vary from 2016 till 2019. Sites before January 2016 have been precisely delineated. Sites marked for activities after January 2016 are delineated but can still see small variations in exact delineation during implementation. See tables of project period/quantification/crediting and payment periods in Annex 7. Project period of some sites date further than three years back from this PDD’s publication, contrary with current Plan Vivo’s 2016 requirements but in line with those in vigor during the first steps of PDD redaction started after PIN redaction in 2012. Collaboration with Plan Vivo 42 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

was evident from the project’s outset as demonstrated by the earliest protocols and agreements with local communities. The respective project/quantification/crediting and payment periods are illustrated in Annex 7. Project starts with community and land prospections. These are typically followed by ploughing and sowing activities within the year. Time lag between prospections and land restoration may however range from months to years. Project start is hence considered to correspond to the first land works since the project agenda is fixed over 20 years by after. Quantification of carbon offset occurs between the first sowing years (some sites may be resown in case of crop failure) and the dry season of year twenty. Crediting periods depend on the various project sites’ ages. The sites realized during the OZG project’s first years constitute ex-post project implementation. Those realized since 2015 constitute ex-ante implementations since seedlings would just about start becoming shrubs by the start of crediting in 2017. Yearly forestation projected to be realized by 2019 included falls under exante implementation schemes too.

G4 Baseline scenario Describe current conditions and trends in the project area (PV requirement 5.12) Current conditions and trends in the project area Located at the fringe of the Sahara the climate is defined as hot semi-arid climates (type "BSh"), typified by hot to extremely hot summers and mild to warm winters. The sites are laying on a gently undulating plain between 280 and 350m above sea level. The project areas are located in the Sahel and Centre-Nord Region of Burkina Faso. OZG is working on 5037ha of communal land. An average of 5000 ha will be restored with about 10% of the area in the Centre-Nord region and 90% in the Sahel region of the country. Traditionally 3 climatic zones are distinguished in Burkina Faso; a Sahel climate in the North, a Sudan-Sahel zone in the middle and a Sudan zone in the South. Project activities will take place in the Sahel zone. (See Figure 5)(“Atlas de l’Afrique,” 2015; Smith & Levasseur, 2005)


Figure 5 – 13 Climatic Regions

There are two distinct seasons, a dry and a rainy season. In the Sahel zone the rainy season lasts about four months from June to September. The amount of precipitation ranges between 300 and 600mm. During the hottest period, the average high temperatures are generally between 36 °C and 42 °C, often for more than three months, while the average low temperatures are easily around 25 °C and 31 °C. During the "coldest period", the average high temperatures are between 27 °C and 33 °C and the average low temperature are between 18 °C and 22 °C. In the last fifty years the environment has changed due to several factors. Rainfall in Burkina Faso declined rapidly between 1950 and the mid-1980s, and recovered in the 1990s. Between 2000 and 2009, however, the recovery stalled, and the 2000–2009 average remained about 15 percent lower than the 1920–69. Temperatures have increased by 0.6° Celsius since 1975, amplifying the effect of droughts(Funk et al., 2012). At the same time the rains migrated south leaving the south even drier (See Figure 6).


Figure 6 – Smoothed rainfall and air temperature time series for east and west Burkina Faso and mean rainfall and temperature based on the 1920–69 time period.

Reduced rains and increased pressure on resources gave way to diminishing vegetation, disappearance of species and erosion. The spontaneous restoration of ecosystems is compromised by the phenomenon of compaction of the soil, in particular on "glacis", i.e. soft sloping sandy-loam and clay-loam soils. Clogging of the soil surface creates an obstacle for proper seed germination and alters the water cycle with reduced infiltration, surface runoff and installing erosion. This vicious cycle greatly reduces the productive potential of resources, because of the scarcity of vegetation, weakening of the remaining trees, and reduction of soil biological activity and loss of species. The threats are food insecurity, reduction of incomes and poverty. Also conflicts may arise between farmers and herders and increase migration of people. All these causes and threats are inter-linked and their combined effects tend to increase the problem. Direct obstacles are insufficient development activities and low capacity of direct stakeholders (in means and competence of work). If this situation is left unchecked, it can lead to a total failure of the soil system, trigger the onset of desertification and the situation may worsen to a point beyond repair.

Carbon Pools. List the carbon pools and emissions sources that will be accounted for and justify why any others have been excluded. (PV requirement 5.15) Carbon Pools The project is mainly focused around reforestation with trees next to grassland and herbs. Table 11 – Carbon pools measured

Carbon Pools Living Biomass

Trees above and belowground

Measured Yes

Dead Organic Matter

Aboveground non-tree Forest floor

Yes No

Soil

Dead wood Soil Organic Carbon

No Yes


For the project, the carbon pool in living trees and their roots will be measured and estimated as these contingences shall make up a large amount of the total stock. Aboveground non-tree or understory will be measured to capture the restoration of all vegetation in the area. Being a young forest, non-tree vegetation can be a significant biomass component. For this reason, we omit dead organic matter from the forest floor as well as dead wood as it is unlikely that significant quantities will accumulate in the coming 20 years. As we are working to restore degraded and depleted land, soil organic carbon will also be included for measurements.

Baseline methodology. Quantify the initial carbon stock for each carbon pool and describe how this was assessed (PV requirement 5.18) Baseline Methodology Living Biomass Table 12 – Carbon pools baselines

Carbon Pools Living Biomass

Trees above and belowground

Baseline Stock 0tc

Soil

Aboveground non-tree Soil Organic Carbon

0tc XXXtc

Carbon

Living biomass carbon stock will be estimated as zero, trees and non-trees. We follow the Methodological tool: Estimation of carbon stocks and change in carbon stocks of trees and shrubs in A/R CDM project activities, Version 04.2, under which carbon stock and change in carbon stock may be estimated as zero (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), 2013) Carbon stock in trees in the baseline can be accounted as zero if all of the following conditions are met: Table 13 – Null baseline accounting conditions

Conditions a) The pre-project trees are neither harvested, nor cleared, nor removed throughout the crediting period of the project activity. b) The pre-project trees do not suffer mortality because of competition from trees planted in the project, or damage because of implementation of the project activity, at any time during the crediting period of the project activity. c) The pre-project trees are not inventoried along with the project trees in monitoring of carbon stocks but their continued existence, consistent with the baseline scenario, is monitored throughout the crediting period of the project activity.

Activities The sparse trees that are present in the project sites will be part of the natural regeneration process and will not be removed Pre-project trees will not be harmed or damaged in any way because of project activities.

The pre-project trees will not be accounted in the carbon measurements. Their continued existence will be monitored through satellite imaging.

Pre-project trees will not be removed or harmed for our project. OZG and the communities know that older trees in the project areas have an important role to play. They are a source of seeds, a place of shadow and a haven for birds and other animals. Due to the large project area and small budget we will monitor the pre-project trees through satellite imaging. A photo of each site before the start of the project will be available to compare with later images. 46 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

Soil Organic Carbon (SOC) Soil Organic Carbon baseline pool has been assessed mainly through sampling of soils in the Sahel and Centre-Nord regions. Initial carbon pools are based on these samples. 60 soil samples were taken at pilot sites to estimate both organic and inorganic soil carbon contents. 30 were taken in the Sahel administrative region of Burkina Faso where most of the OZG sites are located and to be located and 30 in the Centre-Nord region.

10 samples of each location were taken at a given stage of growth. Three moments in the growth pattern of agroforests were sampled. Bare soils illustrating T=0 status, forests of about 10 years old illustrating half-way into the growth pattern and mature forests of about 20 years old. Each of those staged sampling was spread over two soil depths. Five samples of the 0-10 cm stratum after litter removal and five of the 20-30 cm stratum were taken avoiding roots. Each sampling point was located within a five by five meters square and each set of five points was spread over a 40 meters long line. The sampling method was inspired by the World Agroforestry Centre’s 2010 manual (Hairiah, Dewi, Agus, Velarde, & Ekadinata, 2010a). Stratums of 0-10 and 20-30 have been chosen because typical soil depth for SOC is 30cm [4].

Baseline Emissions. Estimate the changes in carbon stocks for each carbon pool under baseline conditions i.e. without project. Refer to any approved approaches that you have used for this. (PV requirement 5.18) Baseline Emissions Woody species biomass biomass (above and below ground) Zero t CO2 / ha/ year. Photographic reporting of the status of the restored sites prior to ploughing reveals soils strictly bare of litter, humus to reveal but encrusted lateritic soils. Those are seldom punctuated by isolated trees which don’t account for a significant carbon uptake. Grassland biomass Grass doesn’t manage settling on encrusted soils at any season. The biomass of the grass stratum remains thus CO2 / ha/ year. SOC Project activity soils have been going through the process of degradation for several decades, hence the SOC level is very low. In-situ sampling of soils at various stages of restoration starting from degraded soils have revealed estimates of carbon offset trends from baseline conditions to fully matured agroforests. This is based on the sampling results as compared to the UNFCCC information [4]. Sampling results indicate a T=0 SOC pool of 19.69 tons C/ha (=73 t CO2 / ha) in Centre-Nord and 14.96 tons C/ha in Sahel (55 t CO2 / ha). This compares to the UNFCCC information SOC0,i = 26.6 ton C/ha for tropical dry HAC soils that are severely degraded. SOC0,i is the lowest level C can go down to (in the conditions considered). As the samples results are already below that level SOC0,i, the baseline emissions are considered to be 0. Living Biomass For living biomass under current conditions we account that the changes in carbon stocks in trees and shrubs in the baseline scenario will remain zero. Again apply the methodological tool “Estimation of carbon stocks and change in carbon stocks of trees and shrubs in A/R CDM project activities, Version 04.2”. The following applies to the baseline scenario: for those lands for which the project participants can demonstrate, through documentary evidence or through participatory rural appraisal (PRA), that one or more of the following indicators apply(United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), 2013).


Table 14 – Indicators of carbon emissions under baseline conditions

Indicators a) Observed reduction in topsoil depth (e.g. as shown by root exposure, presence of pedestals, exposed sub-soil horizons) b) Presence of gully, sheet or rill erosion; or landslides, or other forms of mass movement erosion c) Presence of plant species locally known to be indicators of infertile land d) Land comprises of bare sand dunes, or other bare lands

Yes Yes Yes Yes

e) Land contains contaminated soils, mine spoils, or highly alkaline No or saline soils f) Land is subjected to periodic cycles (e.g. slash-and-burn, or No clearing-regrowing cycles) so that the biomass oscillates between a minimum and a maximum value in the baseline Conditions (a), (b) and (c) for accounting of carbon stock in trees Yes in the baseline, apply. Based on the above analysis the baseline of living biomass, trees and non-trees, will remain constant at 0 ton in case of no project activity. SOC Drylands, which cover 41 percent of the earth’s land surface and are home to 2 billion people, are widely affected by desertification, biodiversity loss, poverty and food insecurity. Soil erosion and degradation cause a significant release of CO2 to the atmosphere. Up to 20% of the world’s drylands are degraded and people living there are often locked in a vicious circle of poverty, destructive practices and environmental degradation (Reed & Stringer, 2015). The project sites soils are very degraded and have lost a lot of carbon next to the loss of fertility. This degradation has been going on for several decades because of droughts and overexploitation. The project activities will start and enhance carbon sequestration (CS) in these soils, next to bringing back fertility. Part G5 brings the details of the significant SOC sequestration contribution to the project.

Data Sources. Give details of all data sources, methodologies, default factors and assumptions used and give justifications for their use (PV requirement 5.2) Data sources Woody species biomass (above and below ground) Most data originate from yearly on-site measurements realized by OZG for sake of accuracy. HR remote sensing images are the next proxy used to estimate tree counts and biomass. Such costly imagery could be accessed thanks to a research agreement with NASA who’s been able to share such precious information from Digital Globe, the satellite imagery provider. Such exclusive source of information allows to reduce monitoring costs by allowing for extrapolations made possible by the very high resolutions of the images.

Scientific literature figures were the next source of information when field monitoring wasn’t possible. Many numbers explicitly cited in this report were either use for comparison with own measurements or retained as such in case own estimates were missing. Literature figures were also used as input for the calculation of own estimations where field data was lacking. 48 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

Underneath table illustrates the campaigns which have been realized up until redaction of the present document. Table 15 – Monitoring activities Time

Sites 2010 #2010BF/1-3 5/09/2011 #2010BF/1-3 04/2012 #2010BF/1-3 #2010BF/1-3 1/11/2012 #2010BF/2 5, 21/09/2013 #2013BF/1-2 End 2013 #2013BF/1-2 #2010BF/1-3, #2013BF/1-2, 10/2014 #2014/BF1, 3-5 #2010BF/2 2015 #2014BF/3-8, 12

Monitoring Type Indicators Baseline Soil degradation, vegetation absence Trees counting Trees/HM Biodiversity monitoring Trees/HM, species, heights Biodiversity monitoring Trees/HM, species, heights, DBH Biomass Tree and root weights Biodiversity monitoring Trees/HM, species Biodiversity monitoring Trees/HM, species

Observers K. De Smet and S. Kalaga W. Sels, K. Rijmen and S. Kalaga P. Torrekens and S. Kalaga K. De Smet and S. Kalaga K. De Smet and S. Kalaga W. Sels, E. Sels and S. Kalaga S. Kalaga

Biodiversity monitoring Trees/HM, species

K. De Smet and S. Kalaga

Biomass Tree and root weights, heights Biodiversity monitoring Trees/HM, species

K. De Smet and S. Kalaga K. De Smet and S. Kalaga

Grassland biomass

Estimations have strictly been delved from scientific literature in combination with the qualitative verification of its presence among the restoring sites. SOC Data sources for SOC are a mix of on-site measurements, remote sensing, calculations and literature. Baseline and carbon pool statements are primarily based on the 60 samples taken and the analysis of the results. These conclusions are confirmed by several literature references; more details about these data sources can be found in section G5.

• •

•

• •

Table 17. Please refer to “Baseline methodology” under section G4. These measurements are the basis for both the SOC baseline and the SOC sequestration calculations and results. Annex 5 Figure 13 and Figure 14: EX-ACT_SOC_Simulations_V1 draft based on (Grewer, Bockel, & Bernoux, n.d.). This document provides a reference for the woody species biomass and SOC considering a number of model assumptions. Annex 5 Table 37 and Table 38: UNFCCC_CDM_SOC tool_V1 draft based on (UNFCCC/CCNUCC, 2011). Similar to EX-ACT this tool also provides reference information based on model assumptions. FAO: World Soil Resources Reports: Carbon sequestration in dryland soils (Pretty et al., 2005). This document was used as general reference information. The potential for carbon sequestration (Silver et al., 2000): This document provides an excellent overview of not only biomass carbon but also stresses the importance of SOC in the content of climate change.

G5 Ecosystem service benefits Climate benefits methodology. For each carbon pool, describe how the expected climate benefits (i.e. with project) were quantified. Refer to any approved approaches used. (PV requirement 5.7, 5.18) Living biomass methodology Because our total program covers many project sites at different places, the application of a practical and transparent monitoring methodology described in OZG’s recent ecologic report(Yaïr Levy et al., 2016) shall be pursued further. This is until further organizational growth and relaxing of safety measures which have been enforced on Northern Burkina Faso during the last three years shall allow for the integration of the following improvements to the current activities. Each year shall see the conduction of measurements at strategic sites to embrace the environmental gradients of all the land under restoration. 49 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

Sampling Plots Plot Type We will be measuring on temporary plots, i.e. each year we will select a different patch at the site to take the sample. We do this in order to minimise possible tampering with the sample plots. Sample Procedure Instead of working with nested plots we shall be continuing our practice of measuring growth in 100 half-moon sample areas per site. We will monitor the half-moon sample areas straight along the row. In which the half-moons are laid. Each pit is 5 m long and 0.5 m at its widest point. There is a 2m space between each row. In order to capture growth outside the half-moons we will also survey the area on the right side of the half-moon for presence or absence of vegetation. 1 half-moon sample area will be 12.5m2, multiplied by 100 we will cover 1250m2 per site. In each of these half-moon sample areas we will measure trees and name them with numbers. 100 individuals shall also be measured for height and georeferenced.

Figure 7 – Illustration of half-moons sample area size

See Annex 4 from Table 23 to Table 26 for data recording templates. Since direct sowing implies the measuring of seedlings, a critical DBH differentiating trees from shrubs could be set as follows. • Shrub < 2 cm DBH • Tree ≥ 2 cm DBH (6 cm girth) This separation is however impossible to take into consideration for the first years of monitoring since heights were systematically preferred to DBH measurements for practical reasons already explained in this report. Future monitoring may allow to distinct shrubs from trees based on DBH for sake of complying with possible additional certifications requiring more stringent definitions. In case trees have multiple branches, all stems ≥ 2cm DBH shall be measured, the square of each stem added and then the square root of that total taken to estimate DBH as summarized by following equation: DBH = √ + + Another option is to take the diameter at root collar (DRC) and convert to DBH based on scientific literature relations. Undergrowth biomass Is estimated from scientific literature for herbs and grasses and for seedlings based on countings and desctrutive sampling methods. The amount of seedlings is extrapolated from their density by 100 HM combined with the density of HM / ha. Three seedlings are destructively sampled on year three and 50 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

weighted on-site to extrapolate seedlings biomass. Annex 4 illustrates monitoring logbooks templates for ecologic monitoring next to socio-economic monitoring. Woody species biomass (above and below ground) ground) A realistic 20 years’ tree carbon biomass accounted for by the addition of root biomass estimations based on a root to shoot ratio of 1,5 with aboveground biomass (41,53 kg), yields 103,84 kg / tree. Considering observed densities of 3 trees/HM and measured HM densities of 212,57 HM / ha gives a tree density of 637,71 trees / ha. Which yield a total period tree carbon sequestration of 66.217,81 kg / ha. corresponding to 3,31 T / ha / year. As a mean of comparison, (Campa et al., 1998) mention 6,07 tons of tree biomass / ha / year meanwhile Breman & Kessler stand at a lower 4,56 tons / ha / years of tree biomass for climates of 300 mm of precipitations. Which correspond to the sites’ typical minimum annual rainfalls. Grassland biomass Grass biomass productivity was estimated from literature as reaching 1,5 T of dry matter / ha / year(Roose, Dugué, & Rodriguez, 1992) of potential foraging sources. Which corresponds to an estimated additional 0,14 t CO2 / ha / year. SOC Soil Organic Carbon baseline pool and climate benefits have been assessed mainly through sampling of soils in the Sahel and Centre-Nord regions. 60 soil samples were taken at pilot sites to estimate both organic and inorganic soil carbon contents. 30 were taken in the Sahel administrative region of Burkina Faso where most of the sites are to be located and 30 in the Centre-Nord region. 10 samples of each location were taken at a given stage of growth. Three moments in the growth pattern of agroforests were sampled. Bare soils illustrating T=0 status, forests of about 10 years old (T=10) illustrating half-way into the growth pattern and mature forests of about 20 years old (T=20). Each of those stage samplings was spread over two soil depths. Five samples of the 0-10 cm stratum after litter removal and five of the 20-30 cm stratum were taken avoiding roots. Each sampling point was located within a five by five meters square and each set of five points was spread over a 40 meters long line. The sampling method was inspired by the World Agroforestry Centre’s 2010 manual (Hairiah, Dewi, Agus, Velarde, & Ekadinata, 2010b). Stratums of 0-10 and 2030 have been chosen because typical soil depth for SOC is 30cm(UNFCCC/CCNUCC, 2011). The 10 – 20 cm layer was assumed to be the average of 0 – 10 and 20 – 30 layers. All the samples were assayed by Bunasols(“Bunasols,” 2016). Most important assays done were: Bulk density, Organic matter w/w%, Carbon w/w%, N w/w%, Nitrogen was part of the assessment as it is besides carbon (organic matter) an important indicator for soil fertility improvement. For each location, average (AVG) and standard deviation (SD) was calculated. Increase of SOC and N from T=0 to T=10 and T=20 was calculated on a w/w% basis leading to (using the bulk density) a quantity expressed as ton C/ha sequestration over 10 and 20 years. The main results out of these calculations were: SOC at T = 0 ton C/ha; SOC at T = 20 ton C/ha and SOC increase in ton C/ha/yr. Also equivalent CO2 numbers were calculated. These results were compared to typical reference points out of literature. Sample results are listed in Annex A, calculations, graphs and results are in Annex D.


Expected climate benefits. Estimate the climate benefits (carbon benefits) for each carbon pool showing how these were calculated relative to the baseline (In G4) (PV requirement 5.1.3, 5.7, 5.15 & 5.18) Woody species biomass biomass (above and below ground) A remote sensing monitoring of baseline isolated stands allows to verify the virtuous role new growth has on them meanwhile no death rate any more significant than climax values get observed throughout the restoration years. 23 were trees sampled in 2012 amounting a total of 18,6 kg or 808,7 grams / tree. In 2014, three trees only could have been weighted totaling an impressive 53,7 kg due to a single potential future giant tree. Only the middle tree weighing 5,6 kg after 5 years was retained for the purpose of fitting weight with age. In any case interpolating mean aboveground biomass linearly between 2012 and 2014 gives a yearly tree growth of 2,4 kg. meanwhile scientific literature didn’t infer these results(Campa, Grignon, Gueye, & Hamon, 1998; Breman & Kessler, 1995) Grassland biomass Qualitative observation of the strict absence of grass on encrusted soils allowed to estimate additional undergrowth by grass to be equal to the total grass stratum biomass estimated from (Roose et al., 1992) Namely, 1,5 T of dry matter / ha / year corresponding to an estimated additional / ha / year 0,14 t CO2 SOC Results using the methodology as described in the previous section. All the sample assay data can be found in Annex A, as an example below the results for one location in the Centre-Nord region: Table 16 – Excerpt out of sample assay results list N° LABO

Region

Sample point

Site age

Site Remote sensing map File name

Depth cm

D app % g/cm³

C%

MO %

N%

3539

Centre-Nord

WP618

Site 0ans

Yilou 0 ans

(0-10)

1,63

0,713

1,229

0,056

3540

Centre-Nord

WP618

Site 0ans

Yilou 0 ans

(20-30)

1,46

0,478

0,824

0,042

3541

Centre-Nord

WP619

Site 0ans

Yilou 0 ans

(0-10)

1,46

0,263

0,453

0,027

3542

Centre-Nord

WP619

Site 0ans

Yilou 0 ans

(20-30)

1,61

0,216

0,372

0,021

3543

Centre-Nord

WP620

Site 0ans

Yilou 0 ans

(0-10)

1,59

0,506

0,872

0,042

3544

Centre-Nord

WP620

Site 0ans

Yilou 0 ans

(20-30)

1,65

0,245

0,422

0,021

3545

Centre-Nord

WP621

Site 0ans

Yilou 0 ans

(0-10)

1,59

0,658

1,134

0,063

3546

Centre-Nord

WP621

Site 0ans

Yilou 0 ans

(20-30)

1,63

0,478

0,824

0,042

3547

Centre-Nord

WP622

Site 0ans

Yilou 0 ans

(0-10)

1,46

0,423

0,729

0,035

3548

Centre-Nord

WP622

Site 0ans

Yilou 0 ans

(20-30)

1,61

0,207

0,357

0,021

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

Project SOC Pool as ton C (or CO2) /ha The raw sample data have been processed in order to calculate the SOC carbon benefits. Centre-Nord and Sahel have been considered two different strata as there was some difference in the baseline pool and in the sequestration. The following steps have been taken in order to come to the final tCO2 per year numbers (See Annex D for details): AVG and SD have been calculated for C and N at every location (n=5 for each). 52 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

Each location has a certain “age” (T=0, T=10 and T=20) stamp and using this information the SOC concentration in the soil was visualized in the graphs. All the graphs (n=8) show very similar patterns. The C and N increase over 20 years is typically between 70% and 130%. Carbon AVG results have been used to calculate: 1° the C w/w% increase in the soil 2° the total C content of the 30 cm soil layer both baseline and 3° project pool carbon after 20 years. Table 17 – SOC pool based on sampling analysis results

SOC Pool based on sample results SOC in 30 cm layer

Units

Depth T=0 SOC w/w AVG w/w C % increase over 20 years Bulk density soil Bulk density soil Volume soil SOC pool T =0 SOC pool T =0 SOC pool increase over 20 years SOC pool T = 20 SOC/ha pool increase per year SOC/ha pool increase per year

m % % g/cm³ Kg/m³ m³/ha Kg C /ha Ton C /ha Ton CO2/ha Ton CO2/ha M g C/ha/yr Ton C/ha /yr

Centre- Nord 0,3 0,42 0,35 1,57 1567 3000 19689 19,69 60,38 132,64 0,823 0,823

Sahel 0,3 0,33 0,33 1,49 1489 3000 14961 14,96 54,04 108,94 0,736 0,736

These results have been cross checked against literature information, main 3 cross reference below. UNFCCC worksheet (See Annex 5 UNFCCC worksheet tables Table 37 and Table 38): Baseline SOC pool (degraded soil) is 26.6 t C/ha comparing to 15 and 20 respectively Sahel and Centre- Nord. This proves the extreme degradation of the soils considered. The UNFCCC SOC pool increase over 20 years is 11.4 t C/ha compared to 15 and 16 for Sahel and Centre-Nord. This is an acceptable deviation considering the low starting C pool for the OZG sites next to the 2 references below. EX-ACT worksheet (See Annex 5 Figure 13 – EX-ACT simulation page 1 of 2 ): Initial SOC pool is not available in this tool. Soil pool increase is 4 ton CO2/ha/year or 1.08 t C/ha/year. EX-ACT SOC pool increase over 20 years is 21.63 t C/ha compared to 15 and 16 for the OZG sites. Whereas the UNFCCC gives a lower number, this tool indicates a higher number as compared to the OZG sample results. Reference Silver et al. (2000) indicates 0.41 t C/ha/yr over a 100 year period, and at faster rates during the first 20 years: 1.3 t C/ha/yr. These two numbers translate respectively to 8.62 t C/ha and 26 tC/ha over a 20 year period. The OZG sample data 15 and 16 correspond very well. Project SOC Pool as ton C (or CO2) Using historical and future information about the number, size and location of the OZG sites, a calculation of the total C sequestration in the soil is made. Two strata have been considered. Namely, the Sahel and the Centre-Nord regions. Regional SOC are summarized in Table 18. Table 18 – regional SOC offset estimation Region

Surface

SOC CS 20 yrs

SOC CS 20 yrs

SOC CS rate

ha

t CO2/site

t C/site

t C/ha/yr


Sahel

3.600

400,00

53.006,61

0,74

CentreCentre-Nord

400

30.192,22

8.226,76

0,82

OZG’s own defensive measurements may hardly be considered to stand on the high side. Scientific literature instead offers strong arguments not to reconsider any of these measurements any lower. An overall total of 3,31 T / ha / year of tree biomass and 2,7 T of CO2 / ha / year of Sahel soil carbon is retained. Converting to reach T CO2e is done based on the following set of factors. The proportion of dry to wet biomass analyzed at the laboratories of the University of Gent was found to reach 71%. Applying further biologic constant of 50% of carbon content in biomass and stoichiometry factor 3,67 to convert carbon into CO2e as presented in the methodology section yield 7,15 t CO2e / ha / year, year figure applicable to 90% of the upcoming sites. See underneath table for detailed Sahel values of these calculation steps. Centre-Nord SOC stand at 3,02 TCO2e / ha / year meanwhile based on a linear relation between precipitation and woody foraging biomass (Houérou, 1969), = 2,17 − 103 With, Y = dry foraging woody biomass (= leaves) in kg / ha / year X = precipitations in mm The leaves biomass of the region would reach 1416 kg as compared to 982 kg for the Sahel. Which yields a ratio of 1,44 between both. Which may roughly let estimate yearly total Centre-Nord carbon dioxide offsets to 9,36 year which figure may be applicable to an estimated 10% of 9,36 TCO2e / ha / year, upcoming restoration sites. The project’s total CO2 offset is summarized by Table 19. Table 19 – Project total CO2 offset summary Year

Site #

Surfaces(ha)

Carbon offsets (tCO2e/site/project cycle) Above ground

2010

Underground

Trees

Grass

Tree roots

Organic and mineral

Total

#2010BF/1

97,50

2.582,78

273,00

6.456,45

5.265,00

14.577,23

#2010BF/2

14,60

386,75

40,88

966,81

788,40

2.182,85

#2010BF/3

75,30

1.994,70

210,84

4.986,37

4.066,20

11.258,10

2012

#2012BF/1

80,40

2.129,80

225,12

5.324,09

4.341,60

12.020,60

2013

#2013BF/1

51,80

1.372,18

145,04

3.430,20

2.797,20

7.744,62

#2013BF/2

37,00

980,13

103,60

2.450,14

1.998,00

5.531,87

#2014BF/1

67,20

1.780,13

188,16

4.449,98

3.628,80

10.047,07

#2014BF/2

44,40

1.176,16

124,32

2.940,17

2.397,60

6.638,24

#2014BF/3

114,10

3.022,51

319,48

7.555,70

6.161,40

17.059,09

#2014BF/4

58,90

1.560,26

164,92

3.900,36

3.180,60

8.806,14

#2014BF/5

36,40

964,24

101,92

2.410,41

1.965,60

5.442,16

2014


#2014BF/6

114,30

3.027,81

320,04

7.568,95

6.172,20

17.088,99

#2014BF/9

31,80

842,38

89,04

2.105,80

1.717,20

4.754,42

#2015BF/5

107,30

2.842,38

300,44

7.105,41

5.794,20

16.042,42

#2015BF/6

60,40

1.600,00

169,12

3.999,69

3.261,60

9.030,40

#2015BF/4

195,8

5.186,74

548,24

12.965,88

10.573,20

29.274,06

#2015BF/13

125,4

3.321,85

351,12

8.303,99

6.771,60

18.748,55

#2015BF/12

70,00

1.854,30

196,00

4.635,40

3.780,00

10.465,70

#2015BF/7

22,40

593,38

62,72

1.483,33

1.209,60

3.349,02

#2015BF/3

25,5

675,50

71,40

1.688,61

1.377,00

3.812,51

#2015BF/1

55,8

1.478,14

156,24

3.695,08

3.013,20

8.342,66

#2015BF/2

10,9

288,74

30,52

721,80

588,60

1.629,66

#2015BF/10

464,1

12.294,01

1.299,48

30.732,70

25.061,40

69.387,59

#2015BF/11

81,8

2.166,88

229,04

5.416,80

4.417,20

12.229,92

#2015BF/14

62,00

1.642,38

173,60

4.105,64

3.348,00

9.269,62

#2016BF/1

114,00

3.019,86

2,80

7.549,08

6.156,00

16.727,74

#2016BF/2

54,87

1.453,51

2,80

3.633,49

2.962,98

8.052,78

#2016BF/3

75,38

1.996,68

2,80

4.991,33

4.070,25

11.061,07

#2016BF/4

17,00

450,33

2,80

1.125,74

918,00

2.496,87

#2016BF/5

71,48

1.893,51

2,80

4.733,41

3.859,92

10.489,63

#2016BF/6

9,56

253,24

2,80

633,06

516,24

1.405,35

#2016BF/7

77,00

2.039,73

2,80

5.098,94

4.158,00

11.299,47

#2016BF/8

207,23

5.489,52

2,80

13.722,77

11.190,42

30.405,51

#2016BF/9

60,00

1.589,40

2,80

3.973,20

3.240,00

8.805,40

#2016BF/10

875,00

23.178,75

2,80

57.942,50

47.250,00

128.374,05

#2016BF/11

50,00

1.324,50

2,80

3.311,00

2.700,00

7.338,30

#2016BF/12

301,47

7.985,94

844,12

19.963,34

16.279,38

45.072,78

#2014BF/7 #2014BF/8

2015

2016

#2016BF/13 #2016BF/14


#2016BF/15

219,12

5.804,49

613,54

14.510,13

11.832,48

32.760,63

#2016BF/16

50,31

1.332,82

140,88

3.331,79

2.716,96

7.522,45

#2016BF/17

50,00

1.324,50

140,00

3.311,00

2.700,00

7.475,50

#2016BF/18

54,38

1.440,50

152,26

3.600,98

2.936,47

8.130,20

#2016BF/19

100,00

2.649,00

280,00

6.622,00

5.400,00

14.951,00

#2016BF/20

17,85

3.814,56

49,98

1.702,18

1.106,70

6.673,42

#2016BF/21

30,00

3.814,56

84,00

2.860,80

1.860,00

8.619,36

#2016BF/22

20,00

3.814,56

56,00

1.907,20

1.240,00

7.017,76

#2016BF/23

134,00

3.814,56

375,20

12.778,24

8.308,00

25.276,00

#2016BF/26

128,00

3.814,56

358,40

12.206,08

7.936,00

24.315,04

#2016BF/27

34,00

3.814,56

95,20

3.242,24

2.108,00

9.260,00

#2016BF/28

50,00

3.814,56

140,00

4.768,00

3.100,00

11.822,56

3.814,56

0,00

0,00

0,00

3.814,56

#2016BF/29

2017

2018

2019

TOTAL

#2016BF/32

48

3.814,56

134,40

4.577,28

2.976,00

11.502,24

Planned

300

7.947,00

840,00

19.866,00

16.200,00

44.853,00

Planned

500

13.245,00

1.400,00

33.110,00

27.000,00

74.755,00

Sahel

3.600,00

95.364,00

10.080,00

238.392,00

194.400,00

538.236,00

Centre-Nord

400,00

15258,24

1.120,00

38.144,00

24.800,00

79.322,24

Sahel

3.600,00

95.364,00

10.080,00

238.392,00

194.400,00

538.236,00

Centre-Nord

400,00

15258,24

1.120,00

38.144,00

24.800,00

79.322,24

Sahel

3.600,00

95.364,00

10.080,00

238.392,00

194.400,00

538.236,00

Centre-Nord

400,00

15258,24

1.120,00

38.144,00

24.800,00

79.322,24

506.380,14

45.229,05

1.224.079,50

971.997,19

2.747.685,88

G6 Leakage & Uncertainty Identify any potential reductions in climate benefits due to leakage. If this is significant, describe how it will be mitigated by the project (PV requirement 5.19 & 5.20) Identify where uncertainty exists in the calculations and how this has been taken into account to give a conservative estimate of climate benefits (PV requirement 5.2) Only three seedlings per half-moon ditches were considered instead of the 3,68 estimated. 212 halfmoon ditches per hectare were estimated instead of the 280 realized on average on the field as 56 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

published in literature. The heaviest tree was excluded from the belowground biomass samples from 2012 and the promising fast grown sample from 2014 weren’t included in growth extrapolations. Only 20 years of growth were accounted for in the Sahel region to integrate the fast growing biology of local pioneer woody species such as Acacia raddiana. Finally, drier Sahel conditions were extrapolated to estimate more humid Centre-Nord’s grass growth despite the existence of more favorable precipitation patterns there.

Identify and list key assumptions used in these calculations. Describe the approaches that will be used to validate these assumptions over the course of the project (including updating the technical specifications) (PV requirement 5.3 & 5.9.5) The project identifies two main internal threats that could be carried out by actors from inside the communities. Grazing and cutting of trees. The activities of grazing and collection of fire wood are activities that are directly related to the livelihood of the local community and cannot be stopped. However, this should not be a problem as mitigation measures are easy to work out. The communities will draft their local land charters based on the principles of customary rights, which are local conventions based on customs and land uses. These land charters contain rules relating to conservation of shared natural resources and managing land disputes. They can contain rules that forbid woodcutting and only allow deadwood collecting, limit access and apply rotational grazing. Increased logging and/or grazing outside our project areas due to abovementioned restrictions are not possible because we work in places that did not have any vegetation. In fact, by establishing our sites we can even take pressure away from other areas In our context local threats are very real. Grazing land is not formally owned by the herders, but local place names are proof of a long-lasting presence of the two predominant ethnic groups, Tamashek and Fulani, who have customary rights to land. This customary land ownership is recognized by the law of Burkina Faso, even though the state remains as the ultimate owner of any "undeveloped" land. Access to pasture is considered by people as free and is not – for the time being - governed by rules of formal ownership. This is mainly explained by the variable growth conditions of the vegetation, subject to strong variations in space and time. Custom dictates that all breeders, thus including the transhumant “coming from afar”, have the right to move towards and use the fodder resources available when needed. This is particularly important in the beginning of the rainy season, when good pasture is still rare. On the other hand, the hospitality is a duty for all, because if "you're lucky enough to have resources on your land this year, it may be totally different next year". In this context, individual appropriation (or even by the community) does not make much sense. Here we have to apply the same rationale as with internal threats. Project areas can be open for grazing but the goal of the project must be communicated to the outside actors. In the same way logging or land clearance will not be tolerated by the communities involved.

External threats that result from displacement of unsanctioned activities carried out by actors over which the community have no direct control. The theme that is emerging is to consider the level of harvest from ecosystems at which system function is continued, rather than simply maximizing the utilisation of the available resources, which in many environments results in the rapid degradation. In each area this will be different with specific requirements and needs. Aspects that are closely related to sustainable grazing include(Leser, 2006) the following as listed in Table 20. 57 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

Table 20 – Sustainable grazing aspects and actions Aspects Actions Be spatially flexible, but also restrictive. The pastures will be open but sometimes there will be restrictions Ensure the recovery of the reserve biomass. Herders must know when to move their flocks Preserve the buffer capability of the overall Allow for a buffer in case of dry years system. Reduce the variability in the income. Regenerated forests can serve as a source for extra income Make an investment in the long-term future. Ultimately we need everyone to understand the purpose of this work so that short-term restrictions are clear and supported

Identify where uncertainty exists in the calculations and how this has been taken into account to give a conservative estimate of climate benefits (PV requirement 5.2) The two main threats identified for the project are • Overgrazing • Overexploitation of wood products by cutting Grazing Effects of grazing are difficult to foretell. One is the eating of saplings. Surveys from project areas present the number of trees that survive after 4-5 years. Demonstrating that the agroforestry model is viable. Second is the eating of grass/herbs and its impact on SOC. Here many factors come into play; precipitation, soil type, cattle numbers, grazing intensity, grass species, gradation, management, scanning through scientific literature, it seems that grazing has a negative effect on SOC unless there is fertilizer input. here the loss in organic matter is compensated by an increase in growth through fertilizer. The negative effect of grazing on annual SOC stock growth also differs. It can be negative, positive or neutral depending on many factors. Because we aim for sustainable grazing SOC should increase. Rates however are difficult to find. Given the complexity of the modelling of this contingency, neither positive nor negative prediction impacts is retained in this PDD. In general, grazing at appropriate stocking levels will maintain or enhance soil carbon stocks (Conant et al. 2001) due to positive effects on vegetative growth (LeCain et al. 2000; McNaughton et al. 1996; Sims et al. 1978) and turnover of both above-ground shoots and below-ground roots (Nyborg et al. 1999; Schuman et al. 1999; Sims et al. 1978). However, many of the details are not well understood (Ingram et al. 2008; Parton et al. 2001) and mixed results are common (Derner et al. 2006; Pineiro et al. 2009) as cited in ((DOIC), n.d.) The practice of GE enhanced SOC storage at the decadal scale in the Inner Mongolian grasslands. The increases of SOC storage were mainly observed in macro aggregates while SOC storage in micro aggregates decreased to some extent. These findings were consistent with previous studies [6,35]. For instance, a meta-analysis of 133 published papers by Wanget al. [3] showed that the practices of GE increase SOC content by 34% on average in the Inner Mongolian grasslands. He et al. [7] compared the influence of different grassland managements on SOC storage in this region and found that SOC storage was enhanced in the order of GE > mowing > winter grazing > reclamation. Previously we examined the effects of different grazing intensities in the Inner Mongolia grasslands (0, 1.5, 3.0, 4.5, 6.0, 7.5, and 9.0 sheep ha–1), and found that SOC storage enhanced significantly in grasslands with no grazing or low grazing pressure but decreased under heavy grazing pressure [36]. Overall, GE enhanced SOC storage in the surface soils of the Inner Mongolian grasslands at decadal scales through increasing new SOM input and depressing SOM decomposition to some extent (Wen, He, & Zhang, 2016) Increasing grazing intensity increased SOC by 6–7% on C4-dominated and C4–C3 mixed grasslands, but decreased SOC by an average 18% in C3-dominated grasslands. (McSherry & Ritchie, 2013) 58 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

Compared with grazing-free grasslands, lightly grazing grasslands showed an apparent capacity to sequester C and N in soil, but heavily grazed grasslands exhibited a C and N loss. The grazing grasslands in northern China have the capacity to sequester C in soil under appropriate grazing pressure, but they exhibit C loss under heavy grazing. Our findings indicate that there exist a system transformation from soil C sequestration under low grazing to C and N loss under heavy grazing, and that the threshold for this transformation was 4.5 sheep ha−1(He et al., 2011) To clarify the response of soil organic carbon (SOC) content to season-long grazing in the semiarid typical steppes of Inner Mongolia, we examined the aboveground biomass and SOC in both grazing (Gsite) and no grazing (NG-site) sites in two typical steppes dominated by Leymus chinensis and Stipa grandis, as well as one seriously degraded L. chinensis grassland dominated by Artemisia frigida. The NG-sites had been fenced for 20years in L. chinensis and S. grandis grasslands and for 10years in A. frigida grassland. Aboveground biomass at G-sites was 21–35% of that at NG-sites in L. chinensis and S. grandis grasslands. The SOC, however, showed no significant difference between G-site and NGsite in both grasslands. In the NG-sites, aboveground biomass was significantly lower in A. frigida grassland than in the other two grasslands. The SOC in A. frigida grassland was about 70% of that in L. chinensis grassland. In A. frigida grassland, aboveground biomass in the G-site was 68–82% of that in the NG-site, whereas SOC was significantly lower in the G-site than in the NG-site.(Cui et al., 2005) The evidence from this study suggests that in the short to medium term (< 15 years) measurable gains in SOC with adoption of rotational grazing in similar eco-climatic zones should not be expected to be observed. The data analysis presented here provided limited support to the hypothesis that rotational grazing management can positively change SOC stocks, but detecting this small signal relative to the large variability in SOC is exceedingly difficult. While we did not detect positive trends in SOC over time, NDVI data indicated that plant production was increasing slightly under rotational relative to continuous grazing. This finding of increasing productivity suggests that given enough time observable gains in SOC may be found.(Sanderman, Reseigh, Wurst, Young, & Austin, 2015) Rates of C sequestration by type of improvement ranged from 0.11 to 3.04 Mg C · ha–1 y–1, with a mean of 0.54 Mg C · ha –1 · y–1, and were highly influenced by biome type and climate. We conclude that grasslands can act as a significant carbon sink with the implementation of improved management.(Conant, Paustian, & Elliot, 2001) An Assessment of Grazing Effects on Soil Carbon Stocks in Grasslands (Piñeiro, Paruelo, Oesterheld, & Jobbágy, 2010) Wood cutting The effects of wood cutting can be demonstrated with data of project areas where we show the number of trees that survive after 4-5 years. Pruning should not be a problem (Aidenvironment, 2015; FAO, n.d.-a; Peltier, Marquant, Madi, Ntoupka, & (IRAD), 2013) Should all trees undergo a 5 year drought, OZG would repeat the restoration given insurance schemes may be contracted accordingly to back up the project. Such schemes are currently investigated.

Part H: Risk Management H1 Identification of risk areas Identify the risk areas, risk levels and actions to be taken mitigate risks (including the frequency of reassessing risks). Present this in the form of a table. (PV requirements 6.1 & 6.2) Wrong execution of agronomic methods, soil aptitude misevaluation or common environmental threats may cause crop failure. Half-moon shaped ditches may be superficial or misshaped resulting into inter-connected linear ditches. Heterogeneously distributed seeds may result in excessive local competitions occurring next to below critical population densities. Extreme flooding may displace seeds massively or drown them, it may dramatically erode crescents. Pests and plague may strike crops even if the risk is substantially lower for the sown species which 59 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

are all endemic. Exceptionally dry years such as the 1970’s may see fodder plummeting, increase tree mortality. Which may force remaining populations to over exploit remnant vegetation at unsustainable rates. Although such events rarely occur, generalized damage is possible. OZG is investigating possible the insurance contracts in order to back every stakeholder of the project up in exchange of a yearly fee. During the massive immigration of refugees from Mali in 2012, OZG experimented overgrazing over some of its first plots needed to answer emergency needs. Little oversight and care was needed for those sites to turn into the most productive ones of the following year. Which allows to relativize the risks related to overgrazing. Yearly local consultation deals on grazing activities too. Bush fires are part of the African savannah ecosystem. Corridors get foreseen to mitigate fire spreading. Such hazards cause more direct damage than severe drought but are less important since Sahel discontinuous vegetation patterns disfavour fire spreading out and the ecology of many local species are adapted to fire.

H2 Risk buffer State the risk buffer % for each technical specification (minimum is 10%) with justification (PV requirements 6.3 & 6.4) Table 21 – Risk areas, levels and mitigation actions Risk area

Risk level

Mitigation action

Crop failure (Epidemies, flooding, wrong ploughing/sowing deployment, inapt soils, ecologic competition) Drought (Exceptional dry years)

5%

Resowing on year two organized when first year growth massively fails

5%

Establishment of centralized water reservoirs (bouli's) with incomes from PES Fire 2% Corridors and project failure insurance contracting by project developer Overgrazing (Mismanagement, massive 4% SLM advice giving through local migrations) consultation and refugees emergency support Overexploitation (Mismanagement, massive 4% SLM advice giving through local migrations) consultation and refugees emergency support Risk assessment to be reevaluated yearly and resubmitted to Plan-Vivo on a five year basis

Part I: Project Coordination & Management I1

Project Organisational Structure

Project coordinator and legal status (PV requirements 3.1 & 3.5) Entrepreneurs Without Frontiers (OZG, Ondernemers Zonder Grenzen in Dutch) acts as project developer and coordinator from its siege in Belgium, Boechout with a local representation in Burkina Faso, Boechout. It has the Belgian status of Non-Profit Organization (NPO). The Council of Administration of OZG sieges periodically following the NPO status of the Belgium Kingdom, mandating tasks and activities following democratic elections. A bank account is opened in Burkina to manage payments of ploughing activities, seeds management and ecosystem services.


Describe the organisational structure for the project and the roles of each organisation involved (use diagrams and tables if necessary) (PV requirement 3.2) The organisational structure of the OZG project is typically a bottom-up one as it has mostly been driven by volunteer work up until redaction of the present document. Following organigram illustrates the structure of the NPO.

Figure 8 – Internal structure of OZG

The project coordinator heeds local populations’ demands for degraded communal land regeneration through assisted natural regeneration deploying the Vallerani system (Socio-economic community prospection). The project coordinator seeks funds from mixed sources. Namely B2C, B2B and B2I even if this last model hasn’t yet been implemented up until 2016 included. These funds may be designated towards the restoration of specific sites according to the donating or investing stakeholder(s)’ own specific interests in the project. Many contributors may finance a single site and inversely many sites may be financed by a single contributor. Land prospection follows under conditions laid forth by prospection protocols established in collaboration with locals (See Annex 9) to assess prospected areas’ potential to restore in the best interest of locals. Parameters such as the proximity of local communities eligible to benefit from the given land restoration are evaluated. The aptitude of soils to be ploughed using the Delfino plough is also considered. A second land prospection is then realized with the participation of the partner organization Reach’s ploughing teams to verify land aptitude and adversely to designate alternative restoration sites. OZG finances Reach’s activities in real time following contractual agreements. OZG finalizes the initial local communities consultation by contracting land concessions with the 61 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

communities involved. Ploughing occurs during dry season followed by direct sowing of a mix of woody species and herbs and grass as short as possible prior to the rainy season. Local structures, preferably women cooperatives or environment preservation bodies, are deployed to manage the payment of sowing activities.

Capacity and experience of each organisation involved (PV requirement 3.4) OZG is an NPO aiming for genuine Profit for People and Planet. The Burkina Faso project is the organization’s first, which it has been realizing for already 8 years strong of entrepreneurial drive and professionalism. The past and present members of its Council and many volunteers combine the best of environmental and human sciences’ expertise, together with strong management and business administration experience. Its early agro-forestry project was recognized by the King Baldwin Foundation from the outset of the project, levelling private and B2C funding. Its entirely ex-post implementation of the first CDM Sahel project(De Smet, 2012) has valued it full accreditation by the UNCCD at COP 12 in Ankara in October 2015. The US children charity funding NGO Render Effective Aid to the Children (REACH) has many projects among which, the Italian branch “Reach Italia” has invested its efforts into the deployment of the Vallerani System. The organization is a pioneer of the deployment of the agronomic system. The organization’s field team is expert in the sociologic consultation of local communities and their follow up during the deployment of the Delfino plough technique. Soil aptitude verification for regeneration also features among the expertise that make prospection possible.

Stakeholder analysis (diagram) (PV requirement 3.6) The avail of traditional and governmental authorities of each community welcoming the OZG project is received. In what matters traditional governments, this occurred mostly through oral protocol with VDC, chiefs’ councils, the King of Zimntanga and the Mossi Emperor, always respecting the bottom-up approach going from villages and communes towards larger territorial authorities. In what matters governmental authorities, permission to act according to common agreements is obtained at city halls, mayors’ cabinets and ministries following the same approach. The participation of other organizations is seeked where favourable to the enhancement of the key processes of project implementation. Women cooperatives are favourably implicated in the financing of sowing activities and local environmental organizations in the purchase of seeds (See Figure 28, Annex 9). Other potential ploughers than REACH Italia are also sought where necessary to optimize land restoration logistically. AGED is retained for potential future activities in the Djibo area. And 300 additional hectares are in the pipeline with a third private field executive for a Bird Life International financed restoration effort around the RAMSAR Oursi site.

I2

Relationships to national organisations

Describe how the project coordinates and communicates with national organisations (especially government) OZG communicates with national organizations through meetings organized by other organizations such as CIFOR or building up reunions such as one organized by the Belgian Embassy end of August 2016. Its permanent representation in Burkina may be invested for protocol meetings formal and informal such as receiving Belgium’s national focal point on a visit to Burkina. Meanwhile OZG’s sociologist may typically present the project at local conferences such as those organized by CIFOR. Local protocol is also arranged supported and diplomatic links maintained strong of linguistic and sociologic assets. 62 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

Describe (if any) linkages between the project and other government schemes or projects OZG is accredited by the UNCCD of which both BF and Belgium are member parties. The OZG project is in line with EU politics in terms of conservation of African biodiversity((MacKinnon, Aveling, Olivier, Murray, & Paolini, 2015) The Belgian cooperation is active in BF which’s been added to the list of partner nations recently. OZG’s assisted regeneration efforts correspond to reforestation and afforestation activities as described in the REDD+ program to which Burkina Faso’s participating(RAPPORT DE PROGRESSION ANNUEL REDD + ( avec une mise à jour semi- annuelle ) Pays : [ BURKINA FASO ], 2015)

I3

Legal compliance

Describe how the project will meet any legal requirements of the country. Include any written approval from government for the project if required. (PV requirements 3.7 & 3.8) OZG’s officialy inscribed in the Burkinabe Journal as active organization with granted permits from the ministries of agriculture of interior affairs, decentralisation and security. See Annex 7. Its activities fall under local Rural Land Tenure’s Law number 034-2009/AN and precedes the nation’s efforts to implement a National Action Plan (NAP) for REDD+ (RAPPORT DE PROGRESSION ANNUEL REDD + ( avec une mise à jour semi- annuelle ) Pays : [ BURKINA FASO ], 2015) with which the project complies.

Outline the policies of the project coordinator to ensure equal opportunities for employment and any other legal compliance (PV requirements 3.133.15) Project implementation is conditioned at community level to the participation of women in the retributed implementation activities and to the equal benefit sharing of direct agroforestry and pastoralism incomes for girls’ and boys’ schooling. Lists of participating individuals are written down during consultation and sowing activities as illustrated in Annex 9, by a development council reunion report in Figure 29.

I4

Project management

Give a timeline (approximate) for project establishment, piloting, scaling up and monitoring Nearly 6.000 ha have been realized over the course of 8 years already before fostering PES. 20062008 were studying years for OZG to research and develop its first win-win model. The very first reforestation had occurred over three forests totalling 150 hectares, with ploughing starting in 2009 and sowing occurring in 2010 for the first trees to start growing in the second semester. 2012 saw the first exhaustive monitoring of biomass occurring. This after a few yearly tree counting and phytosociological surveys efforts. A second forest was realized that same year over 80 hectares. After that, site restoration were based upon the method validated by the monitoring efforts of 20102012. 2013 saw the realization of another 89 hectares before a first upscaling in 2014 when not less than 467 ha were realized. Growth was to keep an exponential component with as much as 1281 ha realized in 2015. This year, 2016, already 2848 hectares have been ploughed and sown with about another 800 ha in the pipeline. Further growth, possibly exponential, is expected during the coming years. A defensive yearly 4000 ha is projected to be realized from 2017 to 2019 included. All the while, monitoring’s kept occurring yearly following a strict agenda implemented given inland security conditions prevail. More in detail, monitoring has occurred on specific sites representative of the environmental conditions reigning in the restoring sites of the sampled area. T0 observations realized before the ploughing of the encrusted degraded soils basically consist in the status of the degraded lands which were nearly if not totally void of woody biomass. T1 observations consists of the counting of seedlings per specie within the recently ploughed halfmoon ditches. T2 don’t get monitored if no sudden crop failure occurred since prior monitoring time 63 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

step. Because biomass mostly grows under the ground during the first years. From T3 onwards, yearly tree counting per half-moon ditches combined with specie identification has been realized on representative sites. Height measurements have been realized about every two-years. These were preferred to breast height diameter (BHD) because most woody Sahel species divide in multiple stems from the ground up. Which structure may only reduce towards a single or a main central trunk after many years amongst most individuals of many species. Just like for measuring BHD, the alternative of measuring the average crown diameter would already have been too time consuming from the outset of the project in 2010, given the scale of 150 hectares of restored land already at hand from the first year.

Describe the project record keeping system (PV requirements 3.11 & 3.12) Monitoring data is backed up using various media independently from the source. In-situ measurements are usually recorded by hand writing, mostly in what matters socio-economic monitoring. Ecologic monitoring partly gets recorded digitally in real-time such as for cartographic objectives optimized with GPS technology. Data is recorded on physical drives both in Burkina Faso and in Belgium, shared on a password protected public server and on private ones. This is next to some printed paper copies of scanned documents. The data’s been safeguarded from loss through important publication efforts. The socio-economic of all the project up until 2015 included has recently been published under the form of a deepened and extensive research report(Yair Levy & Kalaga, 2015). All the ecologic monitoring’s been bundled, synthesized and reported extensively this very year (Yaïr Levy et al., 2016).

Describe who will be in charge of business development, sales and managing transactions on the Markit environmental registry (Markit) OZG is organized following domains of activity. This structure capacitates teams directed by cell coordinators. A funding cell is coordinated by OZG’s chairman, Werner Sels, whose career long experience in sales spear-headed OZG’s entrepreneurial ambitions with a current concretization of nearly 6.000 ex-post hectares of restoring land. Backed by a driven and devoted team of long term volunteers, OZG’s council of administration shall at regular basis and at least yearly (re)assign the responsibility of the organization’s Markit registry account management. OZG’s treasurer, Marc Beullens, shall also play a supporting role in the administrative aspects of the Markit environmental registry.

I5

Project financial management

Describe the mechanisms for disbursement of PES funds (PV requirement 3.9) A second bank account similar to the operational one opened in Burkina’s BNP Paribas branch “Biciab” (See Figure 20 and Figure 21) shall be opened for the exclusive and transparent management of PES. These shall occur on a yearly frequency in close concerting with local communities implicating VDC in the presence of women representatives. Which concerting shall occur at the yearly occasion of the consultation process occurring for socio-economic or ecologic monitoring and/or possible additional land restoration projects. Depending on the local financial infrastructures available, communities may require OZG to transact directly in their stead for the sustainable development purposes agreed upon consultation processes. In other cases, OZG may transfer funds given local transparency credentials are demonstrated. Such may be women cooperatives or environmental organizations, such as those already mentioned and illustrated in the present report (See Figure 28).

Show the project budget and financial plan (PV requirement 3.10)


Describe whether the project is seeking, or has obtained, co-financing from partner organisations for the operational phase of the project, e.g. for expansion, ongoing technical work, tree planting activities, etc.

OZG has obtained co-financing for the sowing of trees from other organizations such as Ecosia through We Forest and various SME. It is currently finalizing co-financing with Bird Life International for more sowing activities and with Ondernemers Voor Ondernemers under the form of a partnership supporting both projects and organizational growth. The Belgian King Baldwin Foundation (KBS-FRB) allows recognized institutions such as OZG to alleviate fiscal burden on yearly gifts of 40 € to the project. Such fiscal mechanism levers additional funding from private and SME eager to realize Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) on a B2C principle.

I6

Marketing

Describe how Plan Vivo certificates will be marketed by the project coordinator OZG intends to pursue the marketing strategies deployed since 2009 to market the PES of the project under the form of VCR through high quality media productions such as articles and videos mostly published through its own website and the press. OZG has already time and again featured on national TV news, radio, festivals and conferences gradually increasing public attention. Publishing of the project on various carbon market related web portals and networking in related professional conferences is one of the most effective strategies already deployed which did already identify potential buyers. Prices shall be fixed based on market values using publications such as Forest Trends’(“Forest Trends,” n.d.) and the World Bank’s yearly reports on forestry carbon markets.

Describe the process for preparing a marketing plan for the project Marketing plans are established by the members of OZG experienced in marketing skills such as many members of the funding cell of the organization. These combine together with the communication cell of OZG strategies to expose the project, attract donations and investments in function of stakeholders’ profiles while focusing on a sustainable relationship rather than erratic or single contributions. Next there to, frequent fund raising activities take place on regular basis to support both the project and its realizations on the field. These have so far included an Art Fair, sponsored trekking and festival events to name but a few.

I7

Technical Support

Describe how continued technical support and capacity development will be provided for project participants Sowing activities are accompanied by OZG’s sociologist in those communities whom are on their first direct sowing experiences. The organization’s long term experience capacitates regional agriculture coordinators designated among local communities where logistic optimization requires such autonomy and if local expertise allows. OZG’s recruiting a local agronomist to take on over agriculture related activities on a permanent basis. Which shall allow further growth and foster the organization’s expertise further. Citizen science opportunities are under research and development to capacitate locals in MRV activities. Such capacity building shall link communities’ traditional knowledge of local ecosystems and trends’ with efficient tools for archiving, publishing and networking. Which shall eventually deliver the possibility to monitor such trends remotely based on validated proxies(Sop & Oldeland, 2013).


Part J: Benefit sharing J1

PES agreements

Describe the procedures for entering into PES agreements (PV requirements 8.1 & 8.2) The procedure for entering into PES agreement may be presented at various complementary scales. Communal agreements care for as local governmental recognitions of the project as possible, respective of a bottom-up approach. Meanwhile village level agreements allow even the most isolated small land holders to identify themselves with the project. The CDM’s basic principles are explained to mayors, their teams/cabinets at the communal level and to chiefs or VDC’s at the village level. This is while taking heed of respecting local conceptions of land tenure, usufruct and natural resources management. Reason why a sociologic approach integrating ethnical visions of society and the environment is key to deploy. The Sahel region of Burkina Faso being a natural reserve where many environmental projects have taken place in the last decennia, local awareness of sustainable development projects is enough spread out for such projects to be understood and welcomed. Even if most were established following either a charity point of view or following development cooperation schemes. The Plan Vivo approach and its focus on socio-economic impacts is discussed using case examples of the impact of the OZG project on livelihoods from other villages, when word-to-mouth hasn’t yet spread such experiences favourably. Land concession contracts include clauses on PES and states that the rules of the third party certifier, Plan Vivo, shall apply to manage carbon VER’s for carbon offset by the project mitigating climate change. Such contracts engage communities for 20 years, the minimum period for carbon offsetting to significantly impact global climate. Yearly (re)evaluation of the project occurring through yearly consultation processes shall allow for grievances to be expressed, shall PES agreements need steering. Determining quantities of ecosystem services transacted into the PES agreements hadn’t been possible in every single case prior to the completion of long term ecologic monitoring, which only got published in 2016(Yaïr Levy et al., 2016). The range of possible growth results of the applied system in the Sahel climate is large enough to forbid robust ex-ante projections when basing estimations upon only two or three years of monitoring. The results of the scientific research lying well above neighbouring projects demonstrate that postponing such figures in favour of an ex-post approach was preferable. Not only due to the more accurate estimates supported by larger databases but also due to the higher figures than originally foreseen. This doesn’t reject the possibility to combine the first sites (ex-post) and the near future ones (ex-ante) into the same current PDD by using the current monitoring results for ecosystem services quantification in upcoming PES agreements. Legal documents in Annex 7 all miss quantified PES since these were contracted prior to publication of the bundled monitoring results. However OZG may strive towards compliance with PV’s 2013 requirements, biases may be observed since OZG’s PIN had been written following the PV standards’ former 2008 guidelines. However favouring discrepancies between current requirements and the actual project model are always discussed based on criteria favouring sustainable and successful project implementation for all stakeholders.

Describe how the project coordinator will ensure that obligations are met (PV requirement 8.5 & 8.7) OZG keeps a financial buffer available for possible upfront payment obligations. Yearly issuance of PES also avoids weakening the financial basis of the organization in the absence of potential buyers/funders. The organization’s experience in finding such stakeholders is however proven by a high level networking proven track record after already 8 years of project implementation reaching the 66 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

current ex-post officialising of nearly 6.000 ha. Risk of non-payments shall be mentioned in the PES agreements according PV requirement 8.4 of upcoming ex-ante sites projected for realization up until 2019 included.

Identify any risks and associated mitigation measures regarding PES agreements (PV requirements 8.3, 8.4 & 8.6) PES agreements are extensively discussed during consultation in local communities’ languages and written in the official vehicular language of Burkina Faso, namely French, for both transparency towards locals and national administration recognition (PV requirement 8.3). Land tenure remains intact since the communal land on which the OZG project exclusively works remains completely local and communal property and usufruct of those communities during the entire PES agreements’ durations is guaranteed. (PV requirement 8.4) Potential smallholders and communities eligible to join the project are selected considering many criteria. The socio-economic and environmental status at hand come first while favouring the most needy, eager and eligible to benefit from the environmental restoration project proposed given the environmental conditions dealt with. Spatial considerations than follow, meanwhile integrating the very extended intervention sites as efficiently as possible within a logistic strategy. This in order to avoid waste of precious means into unproductive fleet displacement and future monitoring efforts. Sites are progressively started in every population hub of the Sahel region, hence avoiding to isolate or disfavour any given community. This is while aiming for eventual autonomous implementation of the project by rural communities given sufficient local capacity be built.

J2

Payments & Benefit Sharing

Describe how payments will be disbursed to participants and how they are linked to performance. Describe the conditions under which payments will be withheld Describe the measures that will be taken to ensure equitable and transparent benefit sharing by the project (PV requirements 8.8-8.13) The ex-post part of the project had first aimed for the 60-40 % distribution key of PES as designed by PV. Meanwhile it aims to stray from it in as far as own project financing’s been occurring up until 2016 included. Without forgetting that many direct local incomes were already generated by the project. Including project development and implementation costs in the balance may bring the proportion up to a …-…% sharing key, considering the exceptional own means injected into the project. Such would be necessary to account fairly for each stakeholders’ respective financial support of the project and risk assumed in its favour. (PV requirement 8.11). Such a significantly differing PES sales incomes distribution key won’t undermine efforts to effectively incentivise activities. On the contrary, it would capacitate stakeholders from CDM party 1 countries to sustainably engage into funding, as endeavoured by the OZG project, instead of donating for charities during determined or punctual periods. (PV requirement 8.12) As the project evolves into more ex-ante than ex-post implementation through the coming years, such distribution key may evolve closer to PV’s standard PES distribution scheme as project development and implementation costs should diminish for as long as such sharing key allows for sustained activity incentives along both local communities’ and financial stakeholders’ sides of the project. “Procès-Verbal” of reunions are registered following the best capacities of locals to record the detailed and rich oral negotiations taking place in real-time (PV requirement 8.13) (See Annex 9, Figure 29) [Plan Vivo council avail expected for further redaction]


Opmerking [levyya1]: Expecting management feedback.

Part K: Monitoring K1 Ecosystem services benefits Describe the monitoring plan for each project intervention. (PV requirement 5.9) Describe how communities will be involved in monitoring activities Describe the indicators that will be monitored; the frequency (annually, after every 5 years etc.); who will carry out the monitoring and how the results will be used and shared with participants (PV requirement 5.9) Monitoring of the project may be divided into ecologic and socio-economic domains monitoring. The first of which was realized under the form of environmental and bio-diversity monitoring. Following table illustrates by domain which indicator shall be monitored, whether its type is quantitative or qualitative, the associated monitoring method and frequency. Most of this monitoring plan has already been implemented from the project’s outset. Some aspects are improvements for the part of the implementation phase starting in 2017. Table 22 – Monitoring summary

Domain

Indicators

Type

Method

Frequency

Environment & biodiversity

Tree density / half-moon HM density / ha

Quantitative

Sampling

Yearly

Quantitative

Year one

Tree density / ha Grass density Tree heights

Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative

Sampling (Remote sensing) Extrapolation / Interpolation Observations Sampling

BHD

Quantitative

Sampling

Aboveground biomass Underground biomass Woody species / site Animal species

Quantitative

Destructive sampling (3 trees) Destructive sampling (3 trees) Sampling

Precipitations Soil moisture SocioSocio-economic

Quantitative Quantitative Qualitative

Yearly Up until year 5 Yearly except years 2 and 3 Yearly except underground Years 3 and 5 Years 3 and 5 Yearly

Quantitative Quantitative

Observations & citizen science survey Surveys Remote sensing

Ad-hoc (more or less yearly) Yearly Yearly

Population / gender Schooling / gender Immigration

Quantitative

Public survey

Quantitative Quantitative

Public survey or school information Public survey

Emigration

Quantitative

Public survey

Economic activities Market prices

Quantitative

Public survey

Quantitative

(Public) Survey

Yearly except years 2 and 3 Yearly except years 2 and 3 Yearly except years 2 and 3 Yearly except years 2 and 3 Yearly except years 2 and 3 Yearly with focus on seasonality


Incomes / gender Sales/gender Expenses / gender Gross product / inhabitant Net product / inhabitant

Quantitative sampling Quantitative sampling Quantitative sampling Quantitative

Survey (30 households)

Quantitative

Synthetic estimation

Survey (30 households) Survey (30 people) Synthetic estimation

Yearly except years 2 and 3 Yearly except years 2 and 3 Yearly except years 2 and 3 Yearly except years 2 and 3 Yearly except years 2 and 3

Locals are implicated in the monitoring of the environmental and biodiversity phenomena at hand by combining the methods and principles of citizen science and local awareness of ecologic indicators(Apia et al., 2013; Sop & Oldeland, 2013) The last authors cited have shown that probably none are best placed to assess of local environmental status and trends than locals themselves. In this sense, their consultation is a key step in the environmental monitoring process. Increasing local wealth and eventual technological transfer shall empower local monitoring autonomy for flora and fauna biodiversity assessments. Ecologic monitoring has mostly been realized by OZG’s experts and volunteers up until 2015 included, even if always accompanied by local communities’ members. Given the strengthened inland security codes, 2014 and 2015 have already experienced shortened surveys and sample populations. 2016 shall be monitored by Burkinabe experts in the field where Burkinabe internal affairs require foreigners not to travel. Which approach should be resumed until inland stabilization and mostly until neighbouring nations’ turmoil seize to cross frontiers.

K2 Socio-economic impacts Describe the socio-economic monitoring plan (PV requirement 7.3) Identify the selected socio-economic monitoring indicators and describe how they will be regularly monitored in a participatory way focusing on target groups (PV requirement 7.4) Socio-economic monitoring implicates communities first hand since they are themselves the subjects of the surveys. Data gathering among local administration institutions and organizations is a key step in optimizing monitoring efforts as much is already being gathered by third parties whether governmental or not. A range of indicators depending on the geographical scale of focus is surveyed by interviewing local. Typically, a minimum sample of 30 households is surveyed for sake of statistical robustness. The high cost of such operations motivates limiting socio-economic surveys to this strict minimum statistic threshold. Trees mostly growing underground during the first three years of regeneration, socio-economic monitoring isn’t going to occur during years 2 and 3 after sowing. Wealth impact by restoring sites isn’t likely to drastically occur during those years. The environment is mostly undergoing contrasted changes between T0 and T1 and once threes start to significantly grow aboveground, more in particular during the first part of the sigmoid growth curves of woody biomass. Which broadly undergoes accelerated growth around T5, depending on the tree species. Increased focus is laid upon vulnerable classes through a gender approach. Special attention is laid on migrations, which sometimes include more vulnerable groups such as refugees which may be indicative of shifting zonal/regional trends. Last but not least, follow up of children schooling, also by gender, is pursued. Results have reached a broad international public by two synthetic reports(Yair Levy & Kalaga, 2015; Yaïr Levy et al., 2016) while planned for redaction every five years. Such socio-economic and ecologic documents were written in English first for sake of constituting the backbone of third-party 69 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

certification procedures such as that submitted to PV. French versions are in the pipeline for translation to further favour spreading in the focus area where French language is the predominantly vehicular tongue.

K3 Environmental and biodiversity impacts Describe environmental and biodiversity indicators that will be monitored Describe how each indicator will be assessed; the frequency and who will carry out the monitoring Tree density / half-moon The number of seedlings are counted in, ideally, 100, and if necessary 50, half-moons per monitored site after the first rain seasons have ended. HM density / ha The length and breadth of half-moons shall be measured and noted for each site in order to estimated their densities. Half-moon densities shall be cross-validated using high resolution remote sensing data meanwhile most trees remain too small to be detected remotely. Tree density / ha Final tree density in space shall allow to estimate the total number of trees growing. This shall occur by multiplying tree density / HM by HM density as these indicators are described here above. Grass density Grass density is expressed as a qualitative indicator verifying the presence or absence of grass in HM and between HM. Successful restoration most often feature recolonization of degraded land between crescent ditches by grass after a few years. Grass biomass is estimated based on scientific literature. Tree heights Heights of 100 woody individuals, whether seedling or tree, per monitored site shall be measured insitu using a reference meter. Which figure’s eligible to be reduced to 50 individuals if security requires. Breast-height diameter Breast-height diameter was most often avoided during the first monitoring campaigns due to the higher work intensiveness of the technique. Only a few figures are available for 2012. Which work intensiveness arises from the morphology of many local tree species such as acacia’s which shoot out of the ground through multiple stems, multiplying monitoring costs many times as compared to measuring heights. Although this situation changes with time as trees grow higher while many stems die out or end being overgrown by a main stem or two evolving into genuine trunks. So BHD shall eventually occur next to tree height measuring. Aboveground/underground biomass The most cost-efficient highly accurate method of estimating these biomasses consists in cutting down trees and removing as much of their roots as possible. Since the method is entirely destructive only very small numbers of trees are retrieved from restoring sites. Namely 3 per campaigns. The range of tree statuses is maximized in order to take into account most of the effects of local environmental gradients’ variability on biomass as possible. Such sampling is going to occur about every two years, depending on the size of the sites surveyed. Woody species per site The tree population per specie per monitoring campaign shall be written down, focusing mostly on listed sown specie and on the known Sahel flora. Unknown or unidentified trees are observed and noted down as such. Animal species per site Fauna observations occur at two occasions. Either during punctual yearly monitoring campaigns’ visits, where observers are required to note species observed and photograph them if possible, or 70 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

throughout the year by local populations whom are much more aware of animal presence on their own territory. Camouflaged camera trap experiences shall be deployed just the same to reveal a.o. the still under-surveyed nocturnal fauna. Precipitations Gauges are present throughout the Sahel in a limited but efficient monitoring network and published following a decentralized fashion. Both local governments and NGO’s publish these numbers which are followed up by OZG. Soil moisture The evolution of soil moisture shall be monitored as both the scale of the forests growing increases and remote sensing imagery democratizes its prices. Various sensors offer promising near future opportunities to demonstrate improving soil moisture in function of restoration process on the project’s sites.

K4 Other monitoring Describe any other monitoring and indicators including (i) indicators of drivers of degradation (ii) institutional indicators (iii) governance indicators The socio-economic monitoring shall also deal the purpose of surveying degradation drivers through its focus on demography. The use of periodic governmental statistical publications next to humanitarian and environmental organizations’ shall hint on possible adverse evolutions of the project’s context.


Annexes Annex 1. List of key people involved with contact information OZG board, employees and volunteers • Werner Sels – Chairman – +32/495/77.06.00 – [email protected] • Yaïr Levy – Secretary and Director of Science – +32/476/75.47.25 – [email protected] • Saydou Kalaga – Sociologist - +226/78/85.38.64 – [email protected], [email protected] • Peter Torrekens – Permanent representation in Burkina Faso –+226/76/07.81.28 – [email protected] • Marc Beullens – Treasurer – +32/475/70.08.67 – [email protected] • Bart Goossens – Member of the Council of Administration - +32/3/201.14.23 – [email protected] Local level political figures (Mayors and traditional chiefs)

Moussa Ohaya Diallo, Mayor of the commune of Gorom-Gorom Makmoud Ag Amadou, Chief and VDC president of the village of Lilengo Maïga Hassane, VDC president of Aribinda Bossey Dogabé Moussa Oumarou, VDC president Abdoulaye Moussa, VDC vice-president Oumarou Souleymane, Secretary Hamidou Souleymane, adjunct secretary Mohamed Atiou, Treasurer Sakinatou Bouraima, women responsible Madina Oumarou, adjunct women responsible Mahidini Sekou, accounting commissary Boukari Tamboura, Mayor of the commune of Tongomayël Adama Barry, special commission president of the commune of Markoye Karim Sawadogo, Mayor of the commune of Guibaré Salif Macaire Ouedraogo, Mayor of the commune of Zimtanga Jean-Claude Ouedraogo, Mayor of the commune of Mané Field executives (Ploughing and sowing managers) Alain Long, coordinator Reach Amadou Boureima, Field team responsible Monitoring experts Saydou Kalaga, Sociologist Peter Torrekens, Ir. Agronomy T. Serge Zoubga, Ir. Water and forest


Annex 2. Information about funding sources We Forest Belgium based NGO engaged in reforestation with a climate change mitigating objective. The organization acts as a broker between funders and forestry projects. www.weforest.org Ecosia Germany based web search tool generating incomes from search tasks reinvested into reforestation. Belgian communes communes of Boechout, Hove and Lint Communal development cooperation councils (GROS) invest yearly into projects realized in developing countries. Inhabitants of any Belgian commune having a GROS is eligible to apply for funding. OZG’s siege commune and a few neighboring ones where active members reside regularly receive applications for funding which translate into erratic yearly funding ranging from a few hundreds to a few thousand EUR. Province of Antwerp The province of Antwerp is another local Belgian government funding SD projects. Their funds are typically larger than those communes are able to offer and more regular since these were started. B2C and SME’s SME’s ARGUS, the environmental focal point of KBC bank and CERA Group financed some of the kickstarting projects of the OZG project as a typical B2C endeavor. Maris-Stella, Sint-Jozef Instituut, Rotary Club Antwerpen-Oost are other examples of small scale charity oriented sources of funding, originating from either organizational or institutional perspectives. Many small enterprises feature among the funders such as Fiducial accountancy, Elektro Jacobs, Zetidee, De Bron, SMIT, Beneo Remy, VTI Lier, Zeppo, Seve bvba, C-Design, The Pioniers, Umicore, Ergeon, Beeldkas, etc. Private funders funders These do range all the way from a few only all the way to thousands of EUR per individual. The population of private funders is of the scale of the dozens of individuals.


Annex 3. Producer/group agreement template No agreements are officially formulated for any productions whatsoever. Groups agreements are made where groups are identified under the identities of communal city hall staffs where existent, village chiefs’ councils or village development councils’ members. Following examples retained from the commune of Gorom-gorom and the village of Lilengo constitute template agreements where only localities and personal names require adaptation.


Figure 9 – Land restoration agreement with the commune of Gorom-Gorom



Figure 10 – Detailed cooperation protocol with Gorom-Gorom commune, September 2013


Figure 11 – Cooperation protocol with Gorom-Gorom commune and Lilengo village, September 2013


Annex 4. Database template Ecologic template Up until 2015, monitoring occurred using ad-hoc logbooks during monitoring campaigns. Such as illustrated by the colour scan of the paper notebook of the tree species monitoring campaign of 2015 on site #2010BF/10.


Figure 12 – Ecologic monitoring campaign notebook, February 2015.

From 2016 onwards, printed logbooks of digital Excel formulae sheets shall be filled during campaigns and digitized by after. The corresponding template for tree species monitoring is illustrated here after. Table 23 – Tree heights and BHD logbook templates

…

OZG Journal de terrain: Hauteur d'arbres et diamètre à hauteur de poitrine (DHP) Date Toponyme du site Code du site Région Province Commune Observateurs Commentaires Arbres Hauteur DHP 1 2 3

100


100

…

OZG Journal de terrain: Nombre d'arbres et biodiversité florale Date Toponyme du site Code du site Région Province Commune Observateurs Commentaires Coordonnées géographiques Arbres (Nombre/DL) Demi-lune (DL) Système de référence: WGS84 Demi-lune N°. Waypoint (GPS) Nombre/DL Hauteur Acacia albida Acacia nilotica Acacia raddiana Acacia senegal Acacia seyal Balanites aegyptiaca Inconnu (Tani)Hasou Longitude (dd.ddddd) Latitude (dd.ddddd) Largeur (cm) Longueur (cm) 1 2 3 Holaasou Ziziphus mauritiana

Dans DL

Dans inter-lignes

Herbes(présence/absence)

Table 24 – Tree counts and species monitoring


Table 25 - Logbooks synthesis table

OZG Synthèse des journaux de terrain Date Toponyme du site Code du site Région Province Commune Observateurs Commentaires Demi-lunes / ha Arbres / ha Superficie du site Demi-lunes Totaux estimés Arbres Densités

Table 26 – Trees biomass logbook template

OZG Journal de terrain: Hauteur d'arbres et diamètre à hauteur de poitrine (DHP) Date Toponyme du site Code du site Région Province Commune Observateurs Commentaires Arbres Biomasse aérienne Biomasse souttéraine 1 2 3


Table 27 – Fauna observation logbook template

OZG Observations faune Date Toponyme du site Code du site Région Province Commune Observateurs Commentaires Espèce animale

Coordonnées géographiques Système de référence: WGS84 N°. Waypoint (GPS) Longitude (dd.ddddd) Latitude (dd.ddddd)

…

1 2 3

Socio-economic templates Table 28 – Demographic monitoring logbook template 1-Demographie Région Province Commune Village Observateurs Commentaires Temps

Date

Population

Masculin

Féminin

Naissances

Mariages

Décès

Immigration

Emigration

Immigration interprovinciales Entrées

Sorties

Année A Sem 1 Sem 2 Année A+1 Sem 1 Sem 2 … Ces informations seront collectées 2 fois/An en 2 Semestre = Janvier et Juillet pour chaque village où travail OZG

Table 29 – Age distribution monitoring logbook template 2- Répartition de la Population selon les tranches d'âges Date Région Province Commune Village Observateurs Commentaires Tranches d'âge 0-7 ans

6-7 ans

7-14 ans

14-24 ans

25-35 ans

36-46 ans

47- 60 ans

60 ans +

Masculin Féminin

Table 30 – Education monitoring logbook template 3- Éducation Filles Garçons


Table 31 – Economic activities monitoring logbook template 4- Activités économiques Date Région Province Commune Village Observateurs Commentaires Activités Agriculture Elevage Commerce Artisanat Petits metiers Autres (à préciser)

Nombre

Proportion de la population totale

4.1- Agriculture Début travaux (mois) Fin des Travaux (mois) Récoltes (mois) Cultures (Denrées) Productions (Kg) Vente (kg) Consommation (kg)

4.2- Elevage Especes Nombre de têtes de bétail Vente (Unités) Consommation (Unités) 4.3- Artisanat Objets confectionnés Matières Premières (MP) Origines de la MP Usage Vente (Unités) Prix de vente (FCFA) Consommation (Unités) Valeur / nature

4.4- Commerce Principales spéculations: Vendu Prix de vente (FCFA) Acheté Prix d'achat (FCFA) Lieu de transactions* *1-Vente à domicile,2-Au marché du village, 3-Au marché communal


Date Région Province Commune Village Observateurs Commentaires Activité économique Proportions Agriculture Elevage Bœuf Vache Chèvre Mouton Poulet Pintades

Mais Mil Sorgho Sésame Arrachide

Petite natte Grande natte Balais Sékos Savon Toiture Nourriture pour Bétail Foin Tourteaux Soins Vitamines

Artisanat

Elevage

Agriculture

Produits

Date Région Province Commune Village Observateurs Commentaires Décembre-Janvier Période des fêtes de fin d'année (FCFA) Prix de vente Prix d'Achat

Mai-Juillet Période de soudure (FCFA) Prix de vente Prix d'Achat

5- Le Marché

Site OZG

Origines Propre production

Dons

Femme

Revenu / Genre Homme

Table 32 – Market prices monitoring logbook template

Table 33 – Revenus monitoring logbook template

6- Revenus

Commerce Artisanat Dons Transfert site OZG


Table 34 – Incomes monitoring logbook template 7- Dépenses Date Région Province Commune Village Observateurs Commentaires Activité économique Proportions

Agriculture

Elevage

Commerce

Artisanat

Dons

Transfert

site OZG


Table 35 – Households surveys logbooks templates



Sales

N°

1 2 3

30

Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Raising Agriculture (kg) Forestry (kg) Organic manure Sheep Beef Goat Poultry Corn Mil Sorghum Sesame Beans Broom Forestry seeds Heads/person Heads/Hh Heads/person Heads/Hh Heads/person Heads/Hh Heads/person kg/Hh kg/person kg/Hh kg/person kg/Hh kg/person kg/Hh kg/person kg/Hh kg/person kg/Hh kg/person kg/Hh kg/person Item/Hh Item/person Item/Hh

Sales

Heads/Hh

Sales

30

Range max Range min Average Standard deviation

30

Purchases Soap Item/person

Purchases

Item/Hh

Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales Craftsmenship (Units) Mat Seko Soap Item/person Item/Hh Item/person Item/Hh Item/person

Sales

Could you provide the quantities of following products you've purchased this year Purchases Purchases Purchases Purchases Purchases Purchases Purchases Purchases Purchases Purchases Purchases Purchases Purchases Purchases Purchases Purchases Purchases Purchases Purchases Purchases Purchases Purchases Purchases Purchases Purchases Raising Agriculture (kg) Forestry (kg) Craftsmenship (Units) Organic manure N° Sheep Beef Goat Poultry Corn Mil Sorghum Sesame Beans Forestry seeds Broom Mat Seko Heads/Hh Heads/person Heads/Hh Heads/person Heads/Hh Heads/person Heads/Hh Heads/person kg/Hh kg/person kg/Hh kg/person kg/Hh kg/person kg/Hh kg/person kg/Hh kg/person kg/Hh kg/person kg/Hh kg/person Item/Hh Item/person Item/Hh Item/person Item/Hh Item/person 1 2 3


Sales


EWF' sites

Purchases Origins Auto production

Purchases

EWF' sites

Sales Sales Origins Auto production

Sales

Households (Hh) information: Survey of 30 Hhs Households (Hh) information: Survey of 30 Hhs Households (Hh) information: Survey of 30 Hhs Households (Hh) information: Survey of 30 Hhs Households (Hh) information: Survey of 30 Hhs Households (Hh) information: Survey of 30 Hhs Households (Hh) information: Survey of 30 Hhs Households (Hh) information: Survey of 30 Hhs Hhs information: Sample of 30 Hhs Possession bétail (Têtes) Productions agricoles (kg) Sheep Beef Goat Poultry Corn Mil Sorghum Sesame Beans Hh chief (HC) Cattle raising Agriculture Participating to Hh Village Population/Hh Age HC gender importance order importance order EWF's project Heads/Hh Heads/person Heads/Hh Heads/person Heads/Hh Heads/person Heads/Hh Heads/person kg/Hh kg/person kg/Hh kg/person kg/Hh kg/person kg/Hh kg/person kg/Hh kg/person 1 2

…

…

…


30

Incomes proportion used in following expenses Incomes proportion used in following expenses Incomes proportion used in following expenses Incomes proportion used in following expenses Incomes proportion used in following expenses Incomes(CFA) Expenses (%) Incomes(CFA) Sparing/Expenses Women Seeds OZG(FCFA) Total Education Health Food Cattle raising Agriculture Entertainment(Celebrations-Weddings) Sparing Controle Cattle raising(FCFA) Seeds OZG(FCFA) 1 2 3

30

Cattle raising(FCFA)

…

1 2 3 …

Men

Total

Education

Health

Food

Gender difference (%)

Annual revenues by gender

Population average (FCFA)

Incomes proportion used in following expenses Incomes proportion used in following expenses Expenses (%) Sparing/Expenses Agriculture Entertainment(Celebrations-Weddings) Sparing Controle

Women total


Cattle raising

Incomes proportion used in following expenses

Annual revenues by gender Annual revenues by gender Annual revenues by gender Annual revenues by gender Annual incomes (Random sampling without repetition) Men total Women Agriculture Cattle raising Seeds Craftsmanship P Industry (Soap) 1 2 3

P Industry (Soap)

30

Craftsmanship


Seeds

30

Incomes proportion used in following expenses


Cattle raising


Agriculture

…

1 2 3 …

Men


Table 36 – Revenus and expenses logbooks templates


Annex 5. Biomass estimations data

Figure 13 – EX-ACT simulation page 1 of 2


Figure 14 – EX-ACT simulation page 2 of 2


Table 37 – UNFCCC CDM SOC tool 1 of 2


Table 38 – UNFCCC CDM SOC tool 2 of 2


Annex 6. Example forest management plans/plan vivos •

Include real examples of plan vivos (PV requirement 4.10)













Figure 15 – Report of project implementation and consultation of 2010's activities in Lilingo, Gorom-Gorom


Annex 7. Project/quantification/crediting/payment periods Table 39 – Project quantification/crediting and payment periods



Sites sowing year

Sites sowing year

Sites sowing year

Sites sowing year

2009

trees grass trees grass

trees grass

2017

Sowing and

Seedlings becoming shrubs

Shrubs becoming trees

trees grass

2019

trees grass

2021

2021

2022

becoming trees

2022

Shrubs

Maximum height of some tree species

2022

Shrubs

becoming trees

Annual Crediting

Annual Crediting

Annual Crediting

2025


2026


2017

2025

Ex-ante PES

Ex-ante PES Ex-ante PES

2018

2019

2026

Ex-ante PES

Annual PES

Annual PES

Annual PES

Ex-ante PES

Annual PES

2017

of

of

of

of

2016

Ex-post PES 2010-2017 Ex-post PES 2012-2017 Ex-post PES 2013-2017 Ex-post PES 2014-2017

2015

2014

2013

2012

2010

2027

2027


2028

2028

2028

2029 End: 1st GHG offset cycle

GHG cycle

2029

2029

1st offset

2029

Max. height of some tree species

2028



2027

2027


2026

2026


2025

Annual Crediting

Payment calendar 2024 2023

becoming trees

Payment calendar 2024 2023

Shrubs


Quantification calendar 2023 2024

becoming trees


Shrubs


2025

Ex-ante Crediting

2020

2020

becoming trees


Shrubs

becoming trees


Shrubs


Project calendar 2023 2024


2022

Ex-ante Crediting

and

becoming trees

2021 Max. height of some tree species


2021


becoming trees

2020

Shrubs


Shrubs

2020

Start: Ploughing and sowing trees

becoming trees

2019

Sowing

becoming trees


Shrubs


Shrubs

2019 Max. height of some tree species


2019




2018

2019

2018

2018

Sowing and



2018




Ex-post Crediting of 2010-2017 included Ex-post Crediting of 2012-2017 included Ex-post Crediting of 2013-2017 included Ex-post Crediting of 2014-2017 included

trees grass

2016

2016

Sowing and


2017



2017

Ex-ante Crediting

2015

2015

Sowing and



2016




2016

Ex-ante Crediting

2014

2014

Sowing and

2015


2015

2018

2013

2013

trees grass

2014 Shrubs becoming trees Seedlings becoming shrubs

2014 Shrubs becoming trees Seedlings becoming shrubs

Ex-ante Crediting

2012

2012

Sowing and

2013


2013

2017

2011

2011

2012

Seedlings becoming shrubs Start: Ploughing and sowing trees

Seedlings becoming shrubs Sowing trees and grass

2012

2011

2016

2010

2010

2011

trees grass

2010

Sowing and

Sowing trees and grass

2010

Ploughing

2015

2014

2013

2012

2010

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2010

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2010

2030

2030

2031

GHG cycle

2031

2031

1st offset GHG cycle

2032

2032


2033

2033


2034

2034

1st offset

2035

GHG cycle

2035

2035

1st offset

2036

2036

2037

2037

2038

GHG cycle

2038

2038

1st offset

2038

1st GHG offset cycle

GHG cycle

2037

1st offset

2037


GHG cycle

2036

1st offset

2036


2035


2034


2034

2033


2033

2032


2032

2031


2030

2030

Annex 8. Permits and legal documentation








Figure 16 – French translation OZG foundation act for the Burkinabe authorities






Figure 17 – OZG foundation act as published in the journal of Belgium (Original Dutch version)




Figure 18 – Publication of OZG in the official Journal of Burkina Faso as NPO operating locally


Figure 19 – Receipt certificate of official intervention demand to the Burkinabe territorial administration, decentralisation and security ministry


Figure 20 – Certificate of COA decision of bank account opening in Burkina Faso

Figure 21 – Details of official Burkinabe bank account


Annex 9. Evidence of community participation •

Photographs/videos of the planning processes with communities (PV requirement 4.10)


Figure 22 – Local chiefs reunion during a consultation proces on land prospection mission in the Sanmantenga Province, 5/12/2014

Figure 23 – Local chiefs reunion during a consultation proces on land prospection in the Guibaré commune, 06/12/2014


Figure 24 – Land prospection in the commune of Mané, 06/12/2014

Figure 25 – Concerted land prospection with Mamadou Oumara, president of the Village Development Council of Mentao, 25/07/2015


Figure 26 - Signing agreement protocol with Petelkotia village's community


Figure 27 – Women and children of Mouroukouboulé walking towards site during sowing activities, 04/06/2015


Figure 28 – 2016 seeds purchase bill from local environmental organization “MANG-WEOGO”






Figure 29 – Report of development council reunion of Aribinda of 21/02/2016 with participant list


Annex 10.

Cartography

Figure 30 – Map of sites #2010BF/1-3


Figure 31 – Map of site #2012BF/1


Figure 32 – Map of sites #2013BF/1, 2












Figure 38 – Map of sites #2015BF/3-7, 12-13
















Annex 11.

Sites’ physical context Table 40 – Sites' geology

Year

2010 2012 2013

2014

Site #

Village

#2010BF/1 #2010BF/2 #2010BF/3 #2012BF/1 #2013BF/1 #2013BF/2 #2014BF/1 #2014BF/2 #2014BF/3 #2014BF/4 #2014BF/5 #2014BF/6 #2014BF/7 #2014BF/8 #2014BF/9

Lilingo Lilingo Lilingo Gagara, Lilingo Gagara, Lilingo Gagara, Lilingo Gassel/Larba Windé Belehede/Pessounomga Fété Kaye Bossey Dogabe Lilingo Zoungwaye Zoungwaye Zoungwaye Zoungwaye

#2015BF/5 #2015BF/6 #2015BF/4 #2015BF/13 #2015BF/12 2015

#2015BF/7 #2015BF/3 #2015BF/1 #2015BF/2 #2015BF/10 #2015BF/11

#2015BF/14

Geologie

Migmatites à biotite amphibole Migmatites à biotite amphibole

Migmatites à biotite amphibole Migmatites à biotite amphibole / Amphibolo pyroxénites, métagabbros noritiques Migmatites à biotite amphibole / Migmatites et granites indifférenciés Migmatites et granites indifférenciés Migmatites et granites indifférenciés Migmatites et granites indifférenciés Migmatites et granites indifférenciés Migmatites à biotite amphibole Migmatites à biotite amphibole Migmatites à biotite amphibole Migmatites à biotite amphibole Migmatites à biotite amphibole Migmatites à biotite amphibole Migmatites et granites indifférenciés Mourkboulé Migmatites et granites indifférenciés Migmatites et granites indifférenciés Doundougorou (Woba Demba) Migmatites et granites indifférenciés Migmatites et granites indifférenciés Belehede Migmatites et granites indifférenciés Mamasi Gaoubilé Migmatites et granites indifférenciés Migmatites et granites indifférenciés Mentao (Site réfugiés) Migmatites et granites indifférenciés Baliata Métavolcanites neutres à basiques, volcano sédimentaire: tufs, laves et sédiments associés Aréel Migmatites et granites indifférenciés (Est); Letpynites, migmatites leptynitiques (Oues) Tampal Volcano sédimentaire: tufs, laves et sédiments associés


Table 41 – Mapped sites' soil types


Soil types Site #

Region

#2010BF/1

Sahel

Province

Commune

Oudalan Gorom-Gorom

Village

Lilingo

#2010BF/2

Sahel

Oudalan Gorom-Gorom

Lilingo

#2010BF/3

Sahel

Oudalan Gorom-Gorom

Lilingo

#2012BF/1

Sahel

Oudalan Gorom-Gorom

Gagara, Lilingo

#2013BF/1

Sahel

Oudalan Gorom-Gorom

Gagara, Lilingo

#2013BF/2

Sahel

Oudalan Gorom-Gorom

Gagara, Lilingo

#2014BF/1

Sahel

Soum

Tongomayël

#2014BF/2

Sahel

Soum

Tongomayël

#2014BF/3

Sahel

Soum

Tongomayël

#2014BF/4

Sahel

Oudalan Gorom-Gorom

Bossey Dogabe

#2014BF/5

Sahel

Oudalan Gorom-Gorom

Lilingo

#2014BF/6

Sahel

Oudalan Gorom-Gorom

Zoungwaye

#2014BF/7

Sahel

Oudalan Gorom-Gorom

Zoungwaye

#2014BF/8

Sahel

Oudalan Gorom-Gorom

Zoungwaye

#2014BF/9

Sahel

Oudalan Gorom-Gorom

Zoungwaye

#2015BF/5

Sahel

Gassel/Larba Windé

WRB 2014 Classification

Eutric Cambisol Gleyic Solonetz Soil distinguished by Fe/Al chemistry –Dominance of kaolinite and oxides: Ferralsols FR rhodic (ro) (Munsell colour hue redder than 5YR moist) Soil with natric horizon starting ≤100 cm from the soil surface Solonetz (SN) Gleyic (gl): reducing conditions (by water saturation) Soil with little or no profile differentiation. Moderately developed. Cambisol (CM) Eutric: (eu) (high base saturation) Soil with little or no profile differentiation. Moderately developed. Cambisol (CM) Eutric: (eu) (high base saturation) Soil with little or no profile differentiation. Moderately developed. Cambisol (CM) Eutric: (eu) (high base saturation) Soil with natric horizon starting ≤100 cm from the soil surface Solonetz (SN) Gleyic (gl): reducing conditions (by water saturation)

Belehede/Pessounom Soil with natric horizon starting ≤100 cm from the soil surface ga Solonetz (SN) Gleyic (gl): reducing conditions (by water saturation) Fété Kaye

Soil with natric horizon starting ≤100 cm from the soil surface Solonetz (SN) Gleyic (gl): reducing conditions (by water saturation) Eutric Cambisol Gleyic Solonetz

Soum

Tongomayël Mourkboulé

#2015BF/6

Sahel

Soum

Tongomayël

#2015BF/4

Sahel

Soum

Tongomayël

Sahel

Soum

Tongomayël

#2015BF/12

Sahel

Soum

Tongomayël Belehede

Sahel

Soum

Tongomayël

#2015BF/3

Sahel

Soum

Tongomayël

#2015BF/1

Soum

Djibo

#2015BF/2

Soum

Djibo

#2015BF/10

Sahel

Oudalan Gorom-Gorom

Baliata

#2015BF/11

Sahel

Oudalan Gorom-Gorom

Aréel

#2015BF/14

Sahel

Mamasi Gaoubilé

Mentao (Site réfugiés)

Dori

Soil with natric horizon starting ≤100 cm from the soil surface Solonetz (SN) Gleyic (gl): reducing conditions (by water saturation)

Soil with natric horizon starting ≤100 cm from the soil surface Solonetz (SN) Soil with natric horizon starting ≤100 cm from the soil surface Solonetz (SN) Gleyic (gl): reducing conditions (by water saturation) Soil with natric horizon starting ≤100 cm from the soil surface Solonetz (SN) Gleyic (gl): reducing conditions (by water saturation) Soil with natric horizon starting ≤100 cm from the soil surface Solonetz (SN) Gleyic (gl): reducing conditions (by water saturation)

#2015BF/7

Séno



Doundougorou (Woba Demba) #2015BF/13

Soil with natric horizon starting ≤100 cm from the soil surface Solonetz (SN) Gleyic (gl): reducing conditions (by water saturation) Soil with little or no profile differentiation. Moderately developed. Cambisol (CM) Eutric: (eu) (high base saturation) Soil with little or no profile differentiation. Moderately developed. Cambisol (CM) Eutric: (eu) (high base saturation) Soil with little or no profile differentiation. Moderately developed. Cambisol (CM) Eutric: (eu) (high base saturation)

Tampal

Soil with natric horizon starting ≤100 cm from the soil surface Solonetz (SN) Gleyic (gl): reducing conditions (by water saturation) Soil with natric horizon starting ≤100 cm from the soil surface Solonetz (SN) Gleyic (gl): reducing conditions (by water saturation) Soil with natric horizon starting ≤100 cm from the soil surface Solonetz (SN) Gleyic (gl): reducing conditions (by water saturation) Soil with little or no profile differentiation. Moderately developed. Cambisol (CM) Eutric: (eu) (high base saturation) Soil with little or no profile differentiation. Moderately developed. Cambisol (CM) Eutric: (eu) (high base saturation) Eutric Cambisol Gleyic Solonetz


Annex 12.

Socio-economic figures

Tabel 42– Population evolution at the various scales throughout the project (2009-2014) Nation Burkina Faso (Observations - Estimations) Men Women Total Men

Year

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

7.346.835

Mean annual growth rate

Population Provinces Oudalan Séno Soum Total Total Total

Region Sahel Women Total

Villages LZ (Sowing 2010) Bossey (Sowing 2013) Belehede (Sowing 2013) Total Men Women Total Men Women Total Men Women

7.877.945

15.224.780 522.692 528.802 1.051.494

214.061 286088 377.314

2.016 1.002

1.014

7.590.133

8.140.844

15.730.977 539.846 546.404 1.086.250

221.565 295027 389.839

2.109 1.048

1.061

8.409.208

7.839.350

2.262

8.683.882

8.095.324

2.407

8.964.829

8.357.967

9.252.556 3,31

8.627.830 3,34

3,32

3,28

3,33

3,31

3,51

3,12

3,32

2.511

1.243

531

712

12.767

5.700

7.067

2.681 5,87

1.491 19,95

618 16,38

873 22,61

15.817 23,89

8.003 40,40

7.814 10,57

Tabel 43 – Worker / sector relative to village population in LZ in 2010

Activity Agriculture Cattle raising Commerce Craftsmanship Small professions Other (precise)

2010 (Sampling by EWF of 100 people applying the stones method) Proportion(%) Individuals (Proportion X population) Active worker / Men Women Men Women Total Population (%) 98% 2% 967,26 21 988 49,00% 80% 20% 789,60 206 995 49,38% 0% 100% 0,00 1029 1029 51,04% 0% 100% 0,00 1029 1029 51,04% 0% 0% 0,00 0 0 0,00% 0% 0% 0,00 0 0 0,00% Tabel 44 – Worker / sector relative to village population in LZ in 2014


2014 (Source: Gorom-Gorom city hall) Proportion(%) Individuals (Proportion X population) Active worker / Men Women Men Women Total Population (%) 98% 2% 1233,82 28 1262 47,08% 75% 25% 944,25 356 1300 48,48% 5% 95% 62,95 1351 1414 52,74% 0% 100% 0,00 1422 1422 53,04% 2% 0% 25,18 0 25 0,94% 0% 0% 0,00 0 0 0,00% Tabel 45 – Worker / sector relative to village population in Bossey in 2014


2014 (Sampling by EWF of 100 people applying the stones method) Proportion(%) Individuals (Proportion X population) Worker / Men Women Men Women Total sector (%) 99% 1% 576,18 7 583 44,47% 98% 2% 570,36 15 585 44,59% 10% 90% 58,20 657 715 54,51% 1% 95% 5,82 694 699 53,30% 0% 0% 0,00 0 0 0,00% 0% 0% 0,00 0 0 0,00%


Tabel 46 – Worker / sector relative to village population in Belehede in 2014


2014 (Sampling by EWF of 100 people applying the stones method) Proportion(%) Individuals (Proportion X population) Worker / Men Women Men Women Total sector (%) 95% 5% 7602,85 391 7994 50,54% 93% 7% 7442,79 547 7990 50,51% 42% 58% 3361,26 4532 7893 49,90% 5% 95% 400,15 7423 7823 49,46% 5% 95% 400,15 7423 7823 49,46% 0 0 0,00 0 0 0,00%


Figure 47 – Economic activities proportion by village

Figure 48 – Cattle ownership by gender in Lilingo-Zoungwaye in 2010


Figure 49 – Agricultural product by gender in Lilingo-Zoungwaye in 2009

Figure 50 – Sales in LZ in 2009


Figure 51 – Lilingo-Zoungwaye 2009 incomes per gender

Tabel 47 – Activities distribution by gender in Lilingo-Zoungwaye in 2009

Gender Men Women

1st activity 2nd activity Cattle Agriculture raising

% participating in OZG's project

95%

98%

0%

5%

2%

0%


Figure 52 – Sales per inhabitant in Lilingo-Zoungwaye in 2014

Figure 53 – Sales per inhabitant in Bossey in 2014


Figure 54 – Sales per inhabitant in Belehede in 2014

Figure 55 – Men incomes in Lilingo-Zoungwaye in 2014


Figure 56 – Women incomes in Lilingo-Zoungwaye in 2014

Figure 57 – Men incomes in Bossey in 2014


Figure 58 – Women incomes in Bossey in 2014

Figure 59 – Men incomes in Belehede in 2014


Figure 60 – Women incomes in Belehede in 2014


Annex 13. BF CDM UNCCD UNFCCC NAP CO2 GHG PIN OZG SOC PES SME SD SDG

Acronyms / abbreviations

Burkina Faso Clean Development Mechanism United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification United Nations Framework Convention against Climate Change National Action Plan Carbon dioxide Greenhouse Gas Project Idea Note Ondernemers Zonder Grenzen (Entrepreneurs Without Frontiers in Dutch) Soil Organic Carbon Payment for Ecosystem Services Small and Medium-size Enterprises Sustainable Development Sustainable Development Goals

Annex 14.

Bibliography

DOIC), D. O. I. C. (n.d.). Positive list advice to the minister for the environment Soil-carbon-positive-listadvice. Retrieved from https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/pages/efced61e-baaf-4216838c-fbc518e84262/files/soil-carbon-positive-list-advice.doc Abdel-Rahman, G. (Desert Research Center, Matariya, Cairo, E., Seidhom, S. H. (Institut De L’environnement Et De Recherches Agricoles (INERA), B. F., & Leopold, S. (INERA). (2010). Soil and Water Relationships of Some Crops in Sahel-Dori , Burkina Faso. Am-Euras. J. Agric. & Environ. Sci, 7(3), 289–297. Retrieved from http://www.idosi.org/aejaes/jaes7(3)/8.pdf AGED. (2016). Retrieved September 30, 2016, from http://agedburkina.org/en/ Aidenvironment. (2015). FMNR in Sahel countries Making the case for Ecosystem Restoration, (April). Retrieved from http://www.ecosystem-alliance.org/sites/default/files/files/case_studies/150401 EA_Ecosystem restoration_Showcase FMNR.pdf Apia, W. A. T., Rall, A. L. C., Ayot, L. I. J. C., Terling, E. L. S., Ibbs, J. A. P. G., Tapia, W., … Sterling, E. (2013). Citizen science : A new conservation tool for the Galapagos. Galapagos, (2011-2012), 23–27. Atlas de l’Afrique. (2015). Retrieved September 30, 2016, from http://www.fructifera.org/ENG/HTML/Climate.htm Bargués Tobella, A., Reese, H., Almaw, A., Bayala, J., Malmer, A., Laudon, H., & Ilstedt, U. (2014). The effect of trees on preferential flow and soil infiltrability in an agroforestry parkland in semiarid Burkina Faso. Water Resources Research, 50(4), 3342–3354. doi:10.1002/2013WR015197 Berrahmouni, N., Regato, P., & Parfondry, M. (2015). Global guidelines for the restoration of degraded forests and landscapes in drylands Building resilience and benefiting livelihoods. FAO Forestry Paper (Vol. 175). Rome. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/3/a-i5036e.pdf Błażejewski, R., & Murat-Błażejewska, S. (2009). Water retention time in intermittently dosed sand filters. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 18(2). Breshears, D. D. et al. (1998). Effects of woody plants on microclimate in a semiarid woodland: soil temperature and evaporation in canopy and intercanopy patches. International Journal of Plant Sciences, 159(6), 1010–1017. Bromley, J. et alii. (1997). The role of surface water redistribution in an area of patterned vegetation in a semi-arid environment, south-west Niger. Journal of Hydrology, 198(1-4), 1–29. Bunasols. (2016). Retrieved October 1, 2016, from http://www.erails.net/BF/bunasols/ Burgess, S. S. et al. (1998). The redistribution of soil water by tree root systems. Oecologia, 115(3). Caldecott, B., Lomax, G., & Workman, M. (2015). Stranded Carbon Assets and Negative Emissions Technologies Working Paper. Oxford. Campa, C., Grignon, C., Gueye, M., & Hamon, S. (1998). L’acacia au Sénégal. (O. Éditions, Ed.)OrstomIsra. Paris. Retrieved from http://horizon.documentation.ird.fr/exldoc/pleins_textes/pleins_textes_7/divers2/010016064.pdf Chazdon, R. L., Brancalion, P. H. S., Laestadius, L., Bennett-, A., Buckingham, K., Kumar, C., … Célia, I. (2016). When is a forest a forest ? Forest concepts and definitions in the era of forest and landscape 165 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

restoration. AMBIO A Jounral of the Human Environment, (March), 1–36. doi:10.1007/s13280-0160772-y Conant, R., Paustian, K., & Elliot, E. (2001). Grassland Management and Conversion into Grassland: Effects on Soil Carbon. Ecological Applications, 11(2), 343–355. doi:10.3334/CDIAC/tcm.005 Coopération: Des plants forestiers pour reverdir le Sahel. (n.d.). Retrieved July 22, 2016, from http://www.wbi.be/fr/news/news-item/cooperation-plants-forestiers-reverdir-sahel#.V5HhbPmyOko Cui, X., Wang, Y., Niu, H., Wu, J., Wang, S., Schnug, E., … Tang, Y. (2005). Effect of long-term grazing on soil organic carbon content in semiarid steppes in Inner Mongolia. Ecological Research, 20(5), 519–527. doi:10.1007/s11284-005-0063-8 Dai, A. (2011). Drought under global warming: a review. WIREs Clim Change, 2, 45–65. doi:10.1002/wcc.81 De Smet, K. (2012). Plan Vivo Project Idea Note : Restoration of degraded ecosystems in the Sahel Burkina Faso. De Smet, K. (2013). Establishment and growth of Acacia raddiana forests after assisted natural regeneration in Northern Burkina Faso (#18). In DesertLand Conference on Desertification and Land Degradation (p. 142). Ghent. De Smet, K. (2014). La restauration d’écosystèmes sylvo-pastorals au Sahel Burkinabé au profit de la population et de la biodiversité. In Seminaire International sur l’Elevage et la Faune sauvage en milieux Arides et Desertiques, 16 - 18 dec 2014. Djerba: SIEFAD. Deserto Verde. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.desertoverde.ch/ Direction Générale de la météorologie du Burkina. (2016). Retrieved June 25, 2016, from http://www.meteoburkina.bf/ Enrekhabi, D., Yueh, Si., O’Neil, P. E., Kellogg, K. H., Allen, A., Bindlish, R., … West, R. (2014). SMAP Handbook Soil Moisture Active Passive Mapping Soil Moisture and Freeze/Thaw from Space. Mapping Soil Moisture and Freezs/Thaw from Space. Pasadena, California: National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Retrieved from http://smap.jpl.nasa.gov/system/internal_resources/details/original/178_SMAP_Handbook_FINAL_ 1_JULY_2014_Web.pdf FAO. (n.d.-a). Agroforestry Parkland in sub-Saharan Africa, Chapter IV Improved Parkland Management. Retrieved October 9, 2016, from http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/X3940e/X3940E06.htm FAO. (n.d.-b). Great Green Wall. Retrieved July 21, 2015, from http://www.fao.org/partnerships/greatgreen-wall/great-green-wall-home/en/ Forest Trends. (n.d.). Retrieved September 27, 2016, from http://www.forest-trends.org/ Funk, C., Rowland, J., Adoum, A., Eilerts, G., Verdin, J., & White, L. (2012). A Climate Trend Analysis of Burkina Faso. Informing Climate Change Adaptation Series Factsheet. Retrieved from http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2012/3123/ Ganaba, S. (2011a). La végétation ligneuse du SAhel (Burkina Faso). Université Cheikh Anta Diop (UCAD) et Université de Ouagadougou (U.O.). Ganaba, S. (2011b). La végétation ligneuse du SAhel (Burkina Faso). Université Cheikh Anta Diop (UCAD) et Université de Ouagadougou (U.O.). Retrieved from http://www.amazon.com/v%C3%A9g%C3%A9tation-ligneuse-Sahel-Burkina-Faso/dp/6131559945 Géologie du Burkina Faso. (2007). Retrieved May 7, 2016, from http://www.ambaburkina.dk/geologie.html GGWSSI. (n.d.). Great Green Wall for the Sahara and the Sahel Initiative. Retrieved July 21, 2015, from http://www.greatgreenwallinitiative.org/ Gidske, L. A., & Krzywinski1, K. (2007). Longevity and growth of Acacia tortilis; insights from 14C content and anatomy of wood. BioMed Central Ecology, 7(4). doi:10.1186/1472-6785-7-4 Grewer, U., Bockel, L., & Bernoux, M. (n.d.). EX-ACT Quick Guidance Estimating and Targeting Greenhouse Gas Mitigation in Agriculture. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/ex_act/pdf/Technical_guidelines/EXACT_Quick_Guidance_F inal_Draft_3.pdf Hairiah, K., Dewi, S., Agus, F., Velarde, S., & Ekadinata, A. (2010a). Measuring Carbon Stocks Across Land Use Systems: a Manual. Theredddesk.Org. Brawijaya University (Malang, Indonesia) and ICALRRD (Indonesian Center for Agricultural Land Resources Research and Development). Hairiah, K., Dewi, S., Agus, F., Velarde, S., & Ekadinata, A. (2010b). Measuring Carbon Stocks Across Land Use Systems: a Manual. Theredddesk.Org. Brawijaya University (Malang, Indonesia) and 166 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

ICALRRD (Indonesian Center for Agricultural Land Resources Research and Development). Retrieved from http://theredddesk.org/sites/default/files/resources/pdf/2012/measuring_carbon_stocks_across_l and_use_systems.pdf He, N. P., Zhang, Y. H., Yu, Q., Chen, Q. S., Pan, Q. M., Zhang, G. M., & Han, X. G. (2011). Grazing intensity impacts soil carbon and nitrogen storage of continental steppe. Ecosphere, 2(1), 1–10. doi:10.1890/ES10-00017.1 Houérou, L. (n.d.). FAO Acacia tortilis (Forssk.) Hayne factsheet. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/ag/AGP/AGPC/doc/Gbase/data/Pf000139.HTM Houérou, L. (1969). Principes, méthodes et techniques d’amélioration fourragère et pastorale en Tunisie. Rome. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/37854236_Principes_methodes_et_techniques_d%27am elioration_pastorale_et_fourragere_en_Tunisie IUCN Red List. (2016). Retrieved May 7, 2016, from http://www.iucnredlist.org/ Jaouadi, W., Hamrouni, L., Souayeh, N., & Khouja, M. L. (2010). Étude de la germination des graines d’Acacia tortilis sous différentes contraintes abiotiques. Biotechnology, Agronomy and Society and Environment, 14(4), 643–652. Kohler, P., Mala, S., Mwangi, W., & Wagner, L. (2015). Earth Negotiations Bulletin. Earth Negotiations Bulletin, 4(255), 1–17. Retrieved from http://wwwiisd.ca/desert/cst4sc3/ Lebel, T. (2003). Seasonal cycle and interannual variability of the Sahelian rainfall at hydrological scales. Journal of Geophysical Research, 108(D8), 8389. doi:10.1029/2001JD001580 Lebel, T., & Ali, A. (2009). Recent trends in the Central and Western Sahel rainfall regime (19902007). Journal of Hydrology, 375(1-2), 52–64. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2008.11.030 Leduc, C., Favreau, G., & Schroeter, P. (2001). Long-term rise in a Sahelian water-table: the Continental Terminal in South-West Niger. Journal of Hydrology, 243(1–2), 43–54. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(00)00403-0 Leser, H. (2006). The changing culture and nature of Namibi : case studies. In the Sixth Namibia workshop Basel (p. 84). Levy, Y., De Smet, K., Tetaert, F., Van Londersele, F., Lanckriet, S., Viroux, W., … Tucker, C. J. (2016). Ondernemers Zonder Grenzen: Ecologic Report 2016. Antwerp, Belgium. Retrieved from http://media.wix.com/ugd/e4be5c_fc89d5ec78f340b4971b88806fc1d7bc.pdf Levy, Y., & Kalaga, S. (2015). ENTREPRENEURS WITHOUT FRONTIERS SOCIO-ECONOMIC SURVEY 2015 Lilingo-Zoungwaye, Bossey & Belehede 2009-2014. Antwerp. Retrieved from https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7s9FsVY1p-OREpLcnU2RDd5cVE/view?pli=1 Lund, H. G. (2000). What ’ s a forest ? Journal of Forestry, 98(10), 37. MacKinnon, J., Aveling, C., Olivier, R., Murray, M., & Paolini, C. (2015). Larger Than Elephants Inputs for an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa. (E. Commission, Ed.). Brussels: Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. doi:10.2841/909032 Madi, H., Mouzai, L., & Bouhadef, M. (2013). Plants cover effects on overland flow and on soil erosion under simulated rainfall intensity. In Proceedings of World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology. N°. 80. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology (WASET). Malik, K. (2014). Rapport sur le développement humain 2014. New York. McSherry, M. E., & Ritchie, M. E. (2013). Effects of grazing on grassland soil carbon: a global review. Global Change Biology, 19(5), 1347–1357. doi:10.1111/gcb.12144 Mekdaschi Studer, R., & Linger, Hanspeter (Centre for Development and Environment, C. (2013). Water Harvesting: Guidelines to Good Practice. Bern. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/docrep/u3160e/u3160e00.htm#Contents Mol, L., & Sternberg, T. (2012). Changing Deserts, Integrating People and their Environment. Cambridge: The White Horse Press. Retrieved from http://www.environmentandsociety.org/node/3643 NASA. (2016a). Giovanni, The Bridge Between Data and Science v4.19. Retrieved June 25, 2016, from http://giovanni.gsfc.nasa.gov/giovanni NASA. (2016b). Nasa Land Data Assimilation Systems. Retrieved from http://ldas.gsfc.nasa.gov/FLDAS/ Nederlands Instituut Voor Ecologie Netherlands Institute of Ecology. (2016). Retrieved July 21, 2016, from https://nioo.knaw.nl/ Nicholson, S. E. (2013). The West African Sahel: A Review of Recent Studies on the Rainfall Regime 167 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

and Its Interannual Variability. ISRN Meteorology, 2013(453521), 32. doi:10.1155/2013/453521 Ontl, Todd A. (Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, Iowa State University, Ames, I., & Schulte, Lisa A. (Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, Iowa State University, Ames, I. (2012). Soil Carbon Storage. Retrieved from http://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/soil-carbon-storage-84223790 Peltier, R. (CIRAD), Marquant, B. (APT), Madi, O. P. (IRAD), Ntoupka, M. (IRAD), & (IRAD), T. (2013). Oral presentation Session III Boosting traditional management of Sahelian Faidherbia parks. In The role of functional diversity for ecosystem services in multi-functional agroforestry, FUNCITREE final conference, Trondheim 23-25 May 2013 : Book of abstracts (p. 28). Trondheim, Norway. Retrieved from http://agritrop.cirad.fr/570039/1/document_570039.pdf Perspective Monde Outil pédagogique des grandes tendances mondiales depuis 1945. (2016). Retrieved July 24, 2016, from http://perspective.usherbrooke.ca/bilan/servlet/BMPagePyramide?codePays=BFA Piñeiro, G., Paruelo, J. M., Oesterheld, M., & Jobbágy, E. G. (2010). Pathways of Grazing Effects on Soil Organic Carbon and Nitrogen. Rangeland Ecology and Management, 63(1), 109–119. doi:10.2111/08-255.1 Poorter, L., Bongers, F., Aide, T. M., Almeyda Zambrano, A. M., Balvanera, P., Becknell, J. M., … Rozendaal, D. M. A. (2016). Biomass resilience of Neotropical secondary forests. Nature, 530(7589), 211–214. doi:10.1038/nature16512 Pretty, J., Olsson, L., Farage, P., Warren, A., Tschakert, P., & Ardö, J. (2005). Carbon Sequestration in Dryland Soils. World Soil Resources Report. FAO. Retrieved from https://lup.lub.lu.se/search/publication/708922 RAPPORT DE PROGRESSION ANNUEL REDD + ( avec une mise à jour semi- annuelle ) Pays : [ BURKINA FASO ]. (2015). Retrieved from https://www.forestcarbonpartnership.org/sites/fcp/files/2015/August/FCPF_August 2015_Burkina Faso.pdf Reach. (2016). Retrieved September 30, 2016, from http://reach.org/ Reed, M. S., & Stringer, L. C. (2015). Impulse Report for the 3rd UNCCD Scientifi Conference. Birmingham, Leeds. Romijn, E., Lantican, C. B., Herold, M., Lindquist, E., Ochieng, R., Wijaya, A., … Verchot, L. (2015). Assessing change in national forest monitoring capacities of 99 tropical countries. Forest Ecology and Management, 352, 109–123. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2015.06.003 Roose, E., Dugué, P., & Rodriguez, L. (1992). Une nouvelle stratégie de lutte anti-érosive appliquée à l’aménagement de terroirs en zone soudano-sahélienne du Burkina Faso. Bois et Forêts Des Tropiques, 233(3). Retrieved from http://bft.cirad.fr/cd/BFT_233_49-63.pdf Rotstayn, L. D., & Lohmann, U. (2002). Tropical rainfall trends and the indirect aerosol effect. Journal of Climate, 15(15), 2103–2116. doi:10.1175/1520-0442(2002)0152.0.CO;2 Sanderman, J., Reseigh, J., Wurst, M., Young, M.-A., & Austin, J. (2015). Impacts of Rotational Grazing on Soil Carbon in Native Grass-Based Pastures in Southern Australia. PLoS ONE, 10(8), e0136157. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0136157 Sawadogo, H. (2013). Zaï forestier. Retrieved from https://qt.wocat.net/qt_report.php#results Sesame : the new white gold for smallholder farmers in Burkina Faso and Mali ? (2015). Retrieved from http://commonfund.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Publications/Special_Publications/CFC2014_Paper_Sesame.pdf Silver, W. L., Ostertag, R., & Lugo, A. E. (2000). The Potential for Carbon Sequestration Through Reforestation of Abandoned Tropical Agricultural and Pasture Lands. Restoration Ecology, (November). doi:10.1046/j.1526-100x.2000.80054.x Smith, S., & Levasseur, C. (2005). Atlas de l’Afrique : un continent jeune, révolté, marginalisé. Paris: Ed. Autrement. Sop, T. K., & Oldeland, J. (2013). Local perceptions of woody vegetation dynamics in the context of a “greening sahel”: A case study from burkina faso. Land Degradation and Development, 24(6), 511– 527. doi:10.1002/ldr.1144 Souley Yero, K., Botoni, E., Subsol, S., Alfari, I., & Bouafou, G. M. K. (2015). Mapping system for land degradation assessment in the Sahel countries of West Africa : case of Burkina Faso. In 3rd UNCCD Scientific Conference Combating Drought, Land Degradation and Desertificaiton for Poverty Reduction and Sustainable Development The contribution of science, technology, traditional knowledge and practices 9-12 March 2015, Cancún, Mexico (Vol. 11, p. 2015). 168 This report is © all rights reserved. No link to, copy or publication of the present report or its parts is permitted without prior consent from OZG and the leading author Yaïr Levy.

Stavi, I., Shem-Tov, R., Shlomi, Y., Bel, G., & Yizhaq, H. (2015). Recruitment and decay rate of Acacia seedlings in the hyper-arid Arava Valley, Israel. Catena, 131(August 2015), 14–21. doi:10.1016/j.catena.2015.03.004 Support for the Dissemination of the Azawak Zebu. (2016). Retrieved July 22, 2016, from https://luxdev.lu/en/activities/project/BKF/017 The WOCAT network. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.wocat.net/en/about-wocat.html UNFCCC/CCNUCC. (2011). Tool for estimation of change in soil organic carbon stocks due to the implementation of A/R CDM project activities (version 01.1.0). UNFCCC. Retrieved from https://cdm.unfccc.int/methodologies/ARmethodologies/tools/ar-am-tool-16-v1.1.0.pdf United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). (2013). Methodological tool Estimation of carbon stocks and change in carbon stocks of trees and shrubs in A / R CDM project activities Version 04.2. Bonn. Retrieved from https://cdm.unfccc.int/methodologies/ARmethodologies/tools/ar-am-tool-14-v4.2.pdf Vallerani System. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.vallerani.com/wp/ Vallerani System. (2013). Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling. Vallerani System srl. doi:10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004 Wagner, W. Soil Moisture Measurements from Space and Application to operational hydrology, 70 Satellite Soil Moisture Validation & Application Workshop 2013 121 (2013). Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16366269 Wen, D., He, N., & Zhang, J. (2016). Dynamics of Soil Organic Carbon and Aggregate Stability with Grazing Exclusion in the Inner Mongolian Grasslands. PLoS ONE, 11(1), e0146757. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0146757


project design document

project design document

Suggest Documents

project design document

Action Research Project Design Document

project design document - CDM Loan Scheme

Project Design Document (PDD) - Department Of Energy

PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT (PDD) - Department Of Energy

African Virtual University Project Design Document ...

Thesis/Project Document

Project Charter Document

Project Document Cover Sheet

Project Document Template - UNDP

Project Document - EPEX Spot

capstone project document

Project Document - EPEX Spot

View document - Dynamap Project

Project Document - EPEX Spot

Project Document Cover Sheet - Kultur project - EPrints

Project Document Cover Sheet - Kultur project - EPrints

Setting Up a Project Document

See project document - Climat Mundi

The document - Environmental Integrity Project

Updated Project Information Document (PID)

The Disclosure Project Briefing Document

World Bank Document - EMIT Project

LHC-PROJECT - CERN Document Server