Changing fire regimes in East and Southern Africa's savanna-protected areas: opportunities and challenges for indigenous-led savanna burning emissions abatement schemes

BackgroundLate dry-season wildfires in sub-Saharan Africa's savanna-protected areas are intensifying, increasing carbon emissions, and threatening ecosystem functioning. Addressing these challenges requires active local community engagement and support for wildfire policy. Savanna burning emissions abatement schemes first implemented in Northern Australia have been proposed as a community-based fire management strategy for East and Southern Africa's protected areas to deliver win-win-win climate, social, and biodiversity benefits. Here, we review and critically examine the literature exploring the design and application of savanna burning emissions abatement schemes in this region, characterizing their contextual and implementation challenges.ResultsWe show that the application of Northern Australian savanna burning methodologies in East and Southern Africa tends to adopt centrally determined objectives and market-based approaches that prioritize carbon revenue generation at the national level. The exclusive prescription of early-dry season burns in African mesic savannas prone to woody thickening can compromise savanna burning objectives to mitigate late-dry season wildfires and their greenhouse gas emissions in the long-term, as well as present multiple biodiversity trade-offs in the absence of formal metrics monitoring species' responses to changes in fire regime. These features restrict indigenous participation and leadership in fire management, creating uncertainties over the opportunities for local income generation through carbon trading. Findings suggest that future savanna burning applications will need to address asymmetries between formal institutions and local land governance systems, explicitly acknowledging colonial legacies in institutional arrangements across protected areas and hierarchies in agrarian politics that threaten processes of equitable decentralization in natural resource management.ConclusionWe argue that the effective transfer of the Northern Australian fire management model is limited by a lack of long-term ecological and emissions data and political and institutional barriers, and is hindered by the region's recent colonial history, population growth, and consequences of rapid climatic change. To provide a community-based strategy, savanna burning schemes need to establish context-specific legal frameworks and implement Free, Prior, and Informed Consent to safeguard the roles and responsibilities of indigenous and local people and their distribution of carbon benefits. AntecedentesLos incendios en la temporada tardia en areas protegidas de la sabana Sub-Sahariana se estan intensificando, aumentando las emisiones de carbono y amenazando el funcionamiento de los ecosistemas. El enfrentar esos desafios requiere del involucramiento activo de las comunidades locales y el apoyo a las politicas de incendios. Los esquemas de disminucion de las emisiones implementados previamente en el norte de Australia han sido propuestos como una estrategia de manejo comunitaria del fuego en areas protegidas del este y sur de africa, para desarrollar beneficios de ganancia (win-win-win) tanto en lo social, climatico y de diversidad. En este trabajo revisamos y examinamos criticamente la literatura que explora el diseno y la aplicacion de esquemas de disminucion de las emisiones de la region, caracterizando sus desafios contextuales y de implementacion.ResultadosMostramos que la aplicacion de las metodologias de quemas de las sabanas del norte de Australia en el este y sur de africa tienden a adoptar objetivos determinados centralmente y aproximaciones basadas en el mercado, que priorizan la generacion de ganancias a nivel nacional. La prescripcion exclusiva de realizar quemas durante la estacion de crecimiento temprana en sabanas proclives al crecimiento de renovales lenosos puede comprometer los objetivos de mitigar los incendios de fines de la temporada seca y sus emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero a largo plazo, asi como presentan multiples compensaciones en biodiversidad en ausencia de medidas formales de monitoreo de respuestas de las especies a cambios en los regimenes de fuego. Estos hechos restringen la participacion de los indigenas y el liderazgo en el manejo del fuego, creando incertidumbres sobre las oportunidades para la generacion de ingresos locales a traves de transacciones de carbono. Los resultados sugieren que la aplicacion de quemas en el futuro necesita determinar las asimetrias entre las instituciones formales y los sistemas locales del gobierno de tierras, los que explicitamente acuerdan legados coloniales de arreglos entre areas protegidas y jerarquias en politicas agrarias que amenazan los procesos de descentralizacion equitativa en el manejo de los recursos naturales.ConclusionesArguimos finalmente que la transferencia efectiva del modelo de manejo del fuego de norte de Australia esta limitado por la falta de datos ecologicos y de emisiones a largo plazo, por barreras politicas e institucionales, y obstaculizada por la reciente historia colonial de la region, el crecimiento de la poblacion, y las consecuencias del rapido cambio climatico. Para proveer de una estrategia basada en la comunidad, los esquemas de quemas en la sabana necesitan establecer un contexto especifico de marco legal, e implementar consensos Libres, Previos, e Informativos para salvaguardar los roles y responsabilidades de los indigenas y de la gente local, y la distribucion de los beneficios del carbono.

Automated summary

Late dry-season wildfires in sub-Saharan Africa’s savanna-protected areas are increasing carbon emissions and threatening ecosystem functioning. Proposed savanna burning emissions abatement schemes based on the Northern Australian model face challenges in adopting locally determined objectives and market-based approaches. The exclusive prescription of early-dry season burns in African mesic savannas may compromise long-term objectives to mitigate late-dry season wildfires and produce multiple biodiversity trade-offs. Indigenous participation and leadership in fire management are restricted, limiting opportunities for local income generation through carbon trading. The transfer of the Australian model is hindered by a lack of ecological and emissions data, political and institutional barriers, and the consequences of the region's colonial history, population growth, and rapid climatic change. Context-specific legal frameworks and the implementation of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent are necessary to safeguard the roles and responsibilities of indigenous and local people in savanna burning schemes and the distribution of carbon benefits.