Perspectives on the socio-economic challenges and opportunities for tree planting: A case study of Ethiopia

We reflect on the socio-economic challenges in designing, implementing and monitoring tree planting activities using a case study of Ethiopia, a country aiming to restore 15 of the 127.7 million hectares (ha) pledged by 31 African countries as of June 2021. Based on a literature review and expert assessments, we describe and analyse the historical context of both deforestation and afforestation and reforestation in Ethiopia. We also assess the extent to which the socio-political environment in Ethiopia enables successful tree planting based on a set of socio-economic drivers known to affect tree planting outcomes. We find that, overall, there is a need to pay more attention to the socio-economic dimension of tree planting, in particular to fully consider both the needs and participation of local communities. We also perceive a high risk of afforestation being misidentified as reforestation; insufficient consideration of local community participation, benefit sharing and land tenure issues; and insufficient marketing for forest products derived from planted and natural forests. We recommend: (i) raising awareness about the risk of confounding afforestation and reforestation, and developing approaches to manage those risks; (ii) promoting bottom-up approaches to tree planting, to complement existing top-down approaches; (iii) assisting local communities in securing long-term rights and benefits over land, in setting objectives and in accessing the means for implementing tree planting; and (v) improving financial returns from tree planting activities while creating opportunities for the private sector.

Automated summary

In summary, there is a need for more attention to the socio-economic dimension of tree planting, particularly in fully considering the needs and participation of local communities. Risks identified include afforestation being misidentified as reforestation, lack of consideration for community participation and benefit sharing, and insufficient marketing for forest products.