dashboard.forestdeclaration.org

Tajikistan

Stretching across roughly 460 million hectares (Mha) as of 2018, forests that are highly significant for biodiversity are disproportionately important for supporting forest-dependent species. Designation of these areas of high significance for forests accounts for both species richness and endemism across forests globally, and is complementary to key biodiversity areas, which also include important areas for geographically restricted species. Key biodiversity areas, however, determine important sites for biodiversity according to a broader range of criteria, including ecological integrity, threat status, or irreplaceability.  
Loss of forest habitat in areas with high significance for biodiversity, specifically, may have outsized impacts on the species that inhabit these areas, but tree cover loss in these areas continues to occur. In 2022, for example, the world lost 2.2 Mha of tree cover in areas of high significance for forest biodiversity, with over a quarter of these losses concentrated in Brazil, Indonesia, and Madagascar. 

Stretching across roughly 460 million hectares (Mha) as of 2018, forests that are highly significant for biodiversity are disproportionately important for supporting forest-dependent species. Designation of these areas of high significance for forests accounts for both species richness and endemism across forests globally, and is complementary to key biodiversity areas, which also include important areas for geographically restricted species. Key biodiversity areas, however, determine important sites for biodiversity according to a broader range of criteria, including ecological integrity, threat status, or irreplaceability.  
Loss of forest habitat in areas with high significance for biodiversity, specifically, may have outsized impacts on the species that inhabit these areas, but tree cover loss in these areas continues to occur. In 2022, for example, the world lost 2.2 Mha of tree cover in areas of high significance for forest biodiversity, with over a quarter of these losses concentrated in Brazil, Indonesia, and Madagascar. 

Forest cover loss in key biodiversity areas is particularly concerning, as these areas play an outsized role in conserving biodiversity, due to, for example, being ecologically intact, or hosting species that live in just a few geographies. But in 2022, the world’s forested key biodiversity areas lost 1.2 million hectares (Mha) of forests. The good news is that this is a 30% decrease in forest loss relative to the annual average from 2018 to 2020, indicating that the world is making strides forward in eliminating tree cover loss in these critical biodiversity sites. The bad news is that even small amounts of loss within these key biodiversity areas can significantly harm biodiversity.  

Forest cover loss in key biodiversity areas is particularly concerning, as these areas play an outsized role in conserving biodiversity, due to, for example, being ecologically intact, or hosting species that live in just a few geographies. But in 2022, the world’s forested key biodiversity areas lost 1.2 million hectares (Mha) of forests. The good news is that this is a 30% decrease in forest loss relative to the annual average from 2018 to 2020, indicating that the world is making strides forward in eliminating tree cover loss in these critical biodiversity sites. The bad news is that even small amounts of loss within these key biodiversity areas can significantly harm biodiversity.  

Although most tropical primary forest loss occurs in just a handful of tropical forested countries, much of this loss is driven by the production of agricultural commodities for international trade, including beef, soy, palm oil, and cocoa; and products made with these commodities such as leather and chocolate. Demand from wealthier countries, in particular, drives much of this unsustainable production. In 2017, for example, almost 1.3 million hectares (Mha) of deforestation were embodied in internationally traded commodities. The countries with the highest levels of imported deforestation that year were China, India, and the United States, responsible for importing a collective 0.49 Mha of embodied deforestation. 

Although most tropical primary forest loss occurs in just a handful of tropical forested countries, much of this loss is driven by the production of agricultural commodities for international trade, including beef, soy, palm oil, and cocoa; and products made with these commodities such as leather and chocolate. Demand from wealthier countries, in particular, drives much of this unsustainable production. In 2017, for example, almost 1.3 million hectares (Mha) of deforestation were embodied in internationally traded commodities. The countries with the highest levels of imported deforestation that year were China, India, and the United States, responsible for importing a collective 0.49 Mha of embodied deforestation. 

Enhancing rural livelihoods depends on eliminating rural poverty. While rates of rural poverty have decreased in recent years, extreme poverty still poses a major challenge in rural areas, especially in countries such as South Sudan, Honduras, and Zambia, where over 50% of the rural population lives below the national poverty line. Reducing rural poverty is particularly important in the context of climate change, since climate-smart, resilient agriculture can require significant up-front investments, expensive inputs, and higher implementation costs – additional expenses that many farmers, particularly smallholder farmers, cannot afford without additional income or financial support. 

Enhancing rural livelihoods depends on eliminating rural poverty. While rates of rural poverty have decreased in recent years, extreme poverty still poses a major challenge in rural areas, especially in countries such as South Sudan, Honduras, and Zambia, where over 50% of the rural population lives below the national poverty line. Reducing rural poverty is particularly important in the context of climate change, since climate-smart, resilient agriculture can require significant up-front investments, expensive inputs, and higher implementation costs – additional expenses that many farmers, particularly smallholder farmers, cannot afford without additional income or financial support. 

<span class=”NormalTextRun SCXW253531080 BCX4″ data-ccp-charstyle=”ui-provider” data-ccp-charstyle-defn=”{“ObjectId”:”efa17122-9a5f-4259-a59b-40984941f234

<span class=”NormalTextRun SCXW253531080 BCX4″ data-ccp-charstyle=”ui-provider” data-ccp-charstyle-defn=”{“ObjectId”:”efa17122-9a5f-4259-a59b-40984941f234

Secure land rights play an essential role in enabling the restoration of ecosystems; defending lands that are under threat; supporting the development of profitable, sustainable agriculture; and reducing vulnerability to the impacts of climate change. In addition to formal documentation of land rights, communities and individuals need assurances that their land rights are secure and that they will accrue the benefits of, for example, improving cropland and pasture productivity, reestablishing trees, rewetting peatlands, or restoring mangroves. Without believing that they have long-term rights to land, they may have little incentive to devote their time, labor, and resources to such projects, particularly those that generate benefits over longer periods of time. Yet nearly one billion people worldwide believe they could lose part of their land or their right to use it within five years.  

Secure land rights play an essential role in enabling the restoration of ecosystems; defending lands that are under threat; supporting the development of profitable, sustainable agriculture; and reducing vulnerability to the impacts of climate change. In addition to formal documentation of land rights, communities and individuals need assurances that their land rights are secure and that they will accrue the benefits of, for example, improving cropland and pasture productivity, reestablishing trees, rewetting peatlands, or restoring mangroves. Without believing that they have long-term rights to land, they may have little incentive to devote their time, labor, and resources to such projects, particularly those that generate benefits over longer periods of time. Yet nearly one billion people worldwide believe they could lose part of their land or their right to use it within five years.