evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

Gazetted Forests Participatory Management Project — Household PES Contracts for Reforestation (Burkina Faso)

Burkina Faso · Central Burkina Faso (Gazetted Forests) · See the Burkina Faso profile

Evidence: Quasi-experimental Top 96% 20/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

A Forest Investment Program-funded scheme paid Burkinabè households up to $238 per group for surviving trees on degraded gazetted forests; a randomised evaluation found the lean-season cash payments cut food insecurity by 35% with no evidence of labour displacement.

11.5-12.5 million USD
Programme funding (Forest Investment Program) (2013-2019)
284000 hectares
Area targeted for restoration (2013-2019)
12 forests
Gazetted forests covered (2013-2019)
5400 households
Direct beneficiary households (2013-2019)
2700 women
Women among direct household beneficiaries (2013-2019)
850000 people
Indirect beneficiaries (2013-2019)
0.62 USD per tree surviving
Linear contract payment rate (August 2017)
62-238 USD per five-person group
Threshold contract payment range (August 2017)
35 %
Reduction in household food insecurity from lean-season payment timing (2017 study period)
60 %
Reduction in severe household food insecurity from lean-season payment timing (2017 study period)
Gazetted Forests Participatory Management Project — Household PES Contracts for Reforestation (Burkina Faso)

Details

Maturity
Established
Promoter
African Development Bank / Government of Burkina Faso (Forestry Administration), evaluated by Tilburg University & World Bank researchers
Period
2013-2019 (contract pilot fielded August 2017)
Keywords
reforestation, dryland restoration, PES contract design, food security, REDD+ readiness

Context

Burkina Faso's Gazetted Forests Participatory Management Project targeted restoration of approximately 284,000 hectares across 12 gazetted forests, funded with $11.5-12.5 million from the Climate Investment Funds' Forest Investment Program (FIP) and implemented by the African Development Bank together with Burkina Faso's Forestry Administration. It benefited an estimated 5,400 direct households (2,700 women) and around 850,000 people indirectly.

Objectives

To test and implement household-level payment-for-environmental-services (PES) contracts that incentivise tree-planting and survival while addressing the food-insecurity risks associated with unpaid or delayed reforestation labour, particularly during the agricultural lean season.

Activities

In August 2017, researchers from Tilburg University and the World Bank fielded a trial of two PES contract models among programme households: a linear per-tree-surviving payment of $0.62 per tree, and a threshold contract paying $62-238 per five-person group depending on the tier of tree survival achieved.

Results

Timing cash payments during the lean season reduced household food insecurity by 35% and severe food insecurity by 60%, with no measurable displacement of labour from farming. Results were published in the American Journal of Agricultural Economics (Adjognon, van Soest & Guthoff, 2021).

Conclusions

Lean-season timed PES payments can materially improve household food security among reforestation participants without drawing labour away from farming activities, suggesting payment timing design is as important as payment amount or structure for PES programmes targeting poor rural households.

Implementation

Indicative cost
High (€500k–€5M) — $11.5-12.5 million total from the Climate Investment Funds' Forest Investment Program; individual contract payments ranged from $0.62 per surviving tree (linear) to $62-238 per five-person group (threshold).
Time to results
Long (> 3 years) — Overall programme ran 2013-2019; the PES contract-design trial was fielded in August 2017.
Staffing & skills
African Development Bank (implementer), Burkina Faso Forestry Administration, Tilburg University researchers, World Bank researchers

Conditions for success

  • Aligning cash payment timing with the agricultural lean season to avoid food-insecurity trade-offs
  • Group-based (five-person) threshold contracts alongside individual linear per-tree payments

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Attachments

Similar practices you may find useful