TERM PAPER

PHY-102
“Afforestation & deforestation”
DOS: 10/11/10

SUBMITTED TO:-
SUBMITTED BY:-
Mr. SREEKANTH REDDY Mr.
Vivek Kumar
Department Of physics, Roll
no :- 40
Re
g. No:-11000518
 Sec
tion:-E6001

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This is a humble effort to express our sincere gratitude

towards those who have guided and helped us to complete
this project.
A project reported is major milestone during the study
period of a student. We could have faced many problems
but our teachers’ kind response to our needs and
requirement, their patient approach and their positive
criticism helped us in making our project. Very warm
thanks to our project-in-charge “Mr. REDDY SIR” with
his support and constant encouragement AND LPU
LIBRARY it was not very easy without whose support to
finish our project.
With the motivation of our parent it was very easy to
finish our project successfully and satisfactorily in short span
of time.

VIVEK KUMAR
Abstract of the work undertaken:-
The “AFORESTATION AND DEFORESTATION” is one the most burning topic of this
present world because the whole globe is concerned about it. It was not a tough task to do
research on this given topic as it is the burning topic about which we are learning since
childhood. This is matter of great pride that I did work on this very topic as it will have graet
effect on the students about their future environment.

The work under this topic was to put a brief analysis on the need of aforestation,
consequences of deforestation. I have given my hundred percent to make this and hope i am
successful in my attempt.

Thank you
 Table of contents
 Introduction

 Afforestation and plantation forestry

• SUMMARY

• PLANTATION FORESTS

• PLANTATION FORESTRY

• THE FUTURE OF PLANTATION FORESTRY

• IMPORTANCE OF PLANTATION FORESTRY AND SUSTAINABILITY

 Brief discussion with data and figure

 Causes of deforestation

 Need of aforestation

 Consequences of deforestation

 Reforestation, Afforestation, Deforestation,

Climate Change, global warming
 Introduction
Deforestation: The Means to an End
Our natural resources are being exploited;
things that were once plentiful are now a
scarcity. Our air and water are becoming
contaminated due to pollution, causing
great harm to the environment.
Fortunately, the earth has a natural filter:
forests. Trees composing forests around
the world absorb pollutants, fight erosion
and produce oxygen for our breathing
needs. Unfortunately, this filter is being
cut down as we speak. Although forests
can be harnessed for valuable
commodities, deforestation causes
irreversible harm to the environment and
civilization because it affects biodiversity,
results in nutrient depleted soil and
enhances greenhouse gas emissions.
Forests, especially those in tropical areas
are largely uncharted territory. The life
and function of extinct animals such as
dinosaurs are well known. However, this
will never be the case for many of the
microorganisms, plants and small animals
inhabiting tropical forests. As the
biologically diverse Amazon rainforest is
being slashed and burned, complex
ecosystems are as well. “Scientists
estimate that we are losing more than 137
species of plants and animals every single
day because of rainforest
deforestation”(“Rainforest Facts”, 2009).
The greater the biodiversity in an
ecosystem, the more resilient and
productive it will be. As basic biology
will tell you, the removal of one species
will affect many more. This is nothing to
be taken lightly when “scientists believe
that the canopy may contain half of the
world’s species”(“Amazon Rainforest,”
2003). Each one of the approximately 5
million species found in tropical
rainforests rely on other animals to survive
and hopefully thrive. At the current rate of
destruction, 1.5 acres a second, rainforests
will be a mere memory by 2050
(“Rainforest Facts”, 2009). With such jaw
dropping facts, it is a wonder why such an
important and amazing thing is being
destroyed. Unfortunately, it seems money
is the ultimate motivator, especially in
poor areas. Environmental conservation
will continue to take a back burner while
deforestation pillages our earth
 Afforestation and plantation forestry
SUMMARY
Plantation forests now comprise around
135 million ha globally, with annual
plantation Afforestation and reforestation
rates nearing 10% of total area. Some 90%
of plantation forests have been established
primarily to provide industrial wood, and
their relative global importance in this role
is increasing rapidly. Most of the
remaining 10% of plantation forests were
established primarily to supply fuel or
wood for non-industrial use. About 75% of
the existing plantation forest estate is
established in temperate regions, but it is
in the tropics that the rate of expansion is
greatest. The expanding tropical plantation
forest estate includes trees grown primarily
as agricultural plantation crops and which
now also supply wood to forest industries.
Almost all existing plantation forests were
established and are managed as even-aged
monocultures; species and interspecific
Hybrids of a few genera dominate
plantation forestry worldwide. Effective
research and development, based on
appropriate genetic resources and good
silviculture, are the foundations of
successful plantation forestry production.
Resolving relatively fundamental
Issues remain the priority in many young
plantation programmes; in more advanced
programmes, the application of more
sophisticated technologies - particularly in
biotechnology and processing -
is necessary to maintain improvements in
production. Many plantation forests,
particularly in the tropics, are not yet
achieving their productive potential. The
sustainability of plantation forestry is an
issue of wide interest and concern. The
evidence from industrial plantation
forestry suggests that biological
sustainability, in terms of wood yield, is
likely to be sustainable provided good
practice is maintained. The relative
benefits and costs of plantation forestry in
broader environmental terms, and in terms
of its social impacts, are the subject
of greater controversy, and pose the
greatest challenge to plantation foresters as
we approach the millennium. Our
experience with plantation forestry as it
has developed this century offers us an
excellent platform for rising to these
challenges.
PLANTATION FORESTS:-
It is difficult, as others (eg Evans 1992,
Mather 1993) have commented, to define
either “Afforestation” or “plantation
forests” precisely. In particular, it is often
not easy to distinguish between
Afforestation and either rehabilitation of
degraded forest ecosystems or enrichment
planting, or between plantation forests and
various forms of trees on farms. The
definition proposed by FAO to
the 1967 World Symposium on man-made
forests and their industrial importance,
which uses as its criterion land use
changes associated with afforestation or
reforestation, has been the basis of
subsequent official estimates (eg Pandey
1995), and is adopted here for the sake of
consistency. However, any consideration
of plantation forests should acknowledge
that the distinction between them and
some other forms of forestry is not always
clear; thus, definitions, discussion and
estimates vary. The global extent of
plantation forests in 1990 is estimated at
around 135 million ha (FAO 1993,
Gauthier 1991, Pandey 1995, Sharma
1992). About 75% of these plantation
forests are in temperate
regions and about 25% in the tropics and
subtropics; some 5% of are found in
Africa, a little more than 10% in each of
the American continents, some 20% in the
former USSR, and around 25% in
each of Asia-Pacific and Europe (Gauthier
1991, Kanowski and Savill 1992). Species
and interspecific hybrids of only a few
genera - Acacia, Eucalyptus, Picea and
Pinus – dominate plantation forests, with
those of a few others - eg Araucaria,
Gmelina, Larix, Paraserianthes,
Populus, Pseudotsuga or Tectona - of
regional importance (Evans 1992, Pandey
1995, Savill and Evans 1986). The
ownership of plantation forests extends
from governments and large industrial
corporations to individual farmers, and
their management varies considerably,
from relatively simple and low-input to
highly sophisticated and intensive.
Most plantation forests have been
established as even-aged monoculture
crops of trees with the primary purpose of
wood production (Evans 1997). Around
90% of existing plantations have been
established for the production of wood for
industrial use, and most of the remainder
to produce wood for use as fuel or
roundwood. Some plantation forests are
grown and managed, either primarily
or jointly, for non-wood products such as
essential oils, tannins, or fodder. The
provision of a diverse range of other forest
benefits and services, including
environmental protection or rehabilitation,
recreational opportunities, and CO
2 sequestration are also primary or
secondary objectives for many plantation
forests (Brown 1997, Evans 1992,
Gauthier 1991, Kallio et al 1987,
Lamb 1995, Myers 1989, Sedjo 1987,
Sharma, 1992).Trees grown as agricultural
plantation crops - eg rubber or coconut -
have not traditionally been considered as
forest plantations. However, the distinction
between the two forms of plantation
culture is diminishing from two
perspectives: from that of the forest
manager, as rotation ages reduce and the
intensity of forest plantation management
increases; and from that of the agricultural
tree estate manager, as these crops begin to
be used for wood products. The recent
example of forest industry development
based on wood supply from Asian rubber
plantations exemplifies the latter, and
provides a striking example of how
shifting supply factors and improved
processing technologies can offer
opportunities to non-traditional supply
sources, and thus expand the plantation
Base. Rubber wood recovered from rubber
estate re-establishment programmes now
substitutes for many traditional industrial
uses of natural forest woods from SE Asia,
and provides the raw material for newer
products such as medium-density
fibreboard. Similar processing
developments are in train, though as yet
less advanced, for the other major tropical
estate tree crops, oil palm and coconut.
Given the substantial areas of these
plantation crops worldwide - estimated at
around 7 M ha of rubber estate, 4 M ha of
coconut, and 3 M ha of oil palm - they
have considerable potential to both
supplement and compete with production
from more conventional plantation forests.
The harvest rotations of forest plantations
vary enormously, from annual or sub-
annual for some non-wood products, to
around 200 years for traditionally-
managed high-value temperate hardwoods.
With few exceptions so far, shorter
rotation plantations - typically of 5 to 15
years - have been grown for fuel, fibre or
round wood, and longer rotation
plantations - typically upwards of 25 years
- Principally for sawn or veneer wood
products.
Notwithstanding successful antecedents in
both temperate (eg oak in Europe) and
tropical (eg teak in Asia and India; though
see Keh 1997) environments, plantation
forests on large scale are a twentieth-
century phenomenon. The majority of the
world’s plantation forests have been
established in the past half-century, and
the rate of plantation aforestation has been
increasing progressively during this
period. Global rates of forest plantation
establishment and re-establishment are
poorly known, but are estimated at around
2.6 million ha annually in the tropics
(FAO 1993, Pandey 1995), and perhaps 10
million ha in the temperate zones (Mather
1990, 1993). Recent plantation expansion
has been greatest in the southern
hemisphere: in South America (principally
Argentina, Chile and Brazil), Asia
(principally Indonesia) and New Zealand,
where particular coincidences of public
policies, opportunities and market forces
have been most conducive to
Afforestation. In some countries, eg
Indonesia or Chile, plantation
establishment remains concentrated on
sites converted directly from natural
ecosystems; in others, eg New Zealand or
Portugal, plantation establishment has
shifted entirely to sites formerly used for
agriculture. The quality of plantation
Afforestation varies widely, and has been
especially problematic in some tropical
environments (Pandey 1995,1997).
Plantation forests currently provide around
10% of the world’s wood harvest; this
proportion is rising and will continue to
rise rapidly, as the area of natural forest
available for harvesting diminishes, as
economic pressures and technological
change favour plantation crops, and as the
plantation forest estate matures and
expands. The contribution of plantations to
wood production within domestic
economies varies enormously, reflecting
different forest endowments and policies -
from, for example, nearly 100% in New
Zealand or South Africa, to around 50% in
Argentina or Zimbabwe, to negligible
levels in Canada or Papua New Guinea.
Given the wood production objectives of
most plantation forests, and the
commodity nature of most wood markets,
plantation growth rates are of fundamental
importance because of their implications
for the cost of wood at harvest. Only
around 10% of existing plantations can be
classified as “fast-growing” (in SuttonÕs
(1991a) terms, yielding more than 14
m3/yr); most of these plantations
are in the southern hemisphere, with
around 40% in each of South America and
Asia-Pacific. The majority of “fast-
growing” plantations are of species such as
Acacia or Eucalyptus grown on short
rotations for the relatively low-value uses
of fuel, fibre or round wood; perhaps a
third are longer rotation crops, of either
softwood or hardwood species, grown
principally for sawn- or veneer wood.
Global supply and trade forecasts, for both
plantation production and its share of total
wood harvest, are imprecise and
complicated by the uncertainties of
demand growth within developing
Economies - as Apsey and Reed (1996)
comment, “the ... challenge is to sort out
the hype from the reality with respect to
fast growing plantations. Until this is done,
a good share of strategic planning
rests on a whirlpool of speculation”.
Imprecision notwithstanding, it is apparent
that fast-growing plantation forests are
already the most cost-competitive source
of pulpwood globally, and that the
PLANTATION FORESTRY:-
Plantation forestry at a global or semi-
global scale has been the subject of a
number of recent reviews (eg Carrere and
Lohmann 1996, Evans 1992, Kanowski et
al 1992, Mather 1993, Pandey 1995,
Sargent and Bass 1992, Savill and Evans
1986, Shell/WWF 1992). These reviews
highlight some important common
elements and trends: Use of well-adapted
genetic resources, and good silviculture at
all stages from nursery to harvest, are the
two technical foundations of successful
plantation forestry; each can make the
difference between resounding success and
abject failure. Many tropical plantations
are not achieving their production potential
because of inadequate attention to these
fundamental elements (Pandey 1997).
Successful plantation forestry is also based
on sound and substantial research and
development, its implementation in
operational management, and the
maintenance of close links between
research and practice as each evolves.
There is ample evidence of the adverse
consequences of failing to link adequately
research and practice (eg Evans 1992,
Kanowski and Savill 1992, Napompeth
and MacDicken 1990, Palmer 1988);
l Many plantation forestry programmes
have been founded on and developed
through international: and regional
cooperation; the century-long history of
cooperative research under IUFRO
expansion of the plantation resource is
likely to constrain pulpwood price
increases over the next decade. As the
availability and relative importance in
trade of higher-value wood products from
plantation forests increase, so too will the
influence of the plantation harvest on both
supply and demand options for these
products.
auspices (Burley and Adlard 1992), and
the more recent role of FAO, demonstrate
the many benefits of collaboration to
plantation researchers and managers. As
Burdon (1992) and Williams (1996),
amongst others, have observed, the
increasingly proprietary nature of research
challenges these cooperative foundations;
l The appropriate level of research varies
with the stage of development of the
plantation programme. For example, as
many papers to this Congress (eg Aminah
1997, Biblis 1997,Genç and Bilir 1997,
KÚzmaz 1997, Lemcoff et al 1997,
Salerno and Giménez 1997, Sharma et al
1997, Stanturf et al 1997, Tunçtaner 1997,
ZoralÚoZlu 1997) demonstrate, there
remain many fundamental questions which
must be resolved to support new plantation
programmes.The continuing expansion of
plantation forests onto sites for which there
is as yet little plantation forestry
experience will continue to demand such
fundamental research. In contrast, as other
papers to this Congress illustrate (eg Evans
1997, Popov et al 1997, Watt et al 1997),
for programmes that are already well-
established, increasingly sophisticated
research and development will be
necessary to deliver or maintain gains; As
in other primary production enterprises,
advanced technologies are playing an
increasingly important role in plantation
forestry:
Applications of biotechnology in forestry
have recently been reviewed by Haines
(1994); those currently of most relevance
are genomic mapping, molecular markers,
transformation and micro propagation.
Their application in the production and
propagation of interspecific hybrids is of
particular interest to many plantation
programmes. The implementation of many
biotechnologies are interdependent, and
most are dependent for delivery on
successful clonal propagation techniques,
which
are now in operational use in many
programmes. The optimal integration of
biotechnologies with plantation forestry is
programme-specific, as demonstrated by
numerous examples (eg Griffin 1996, Watt
et al 1997, Wilson et al 1995);
w Advances in processing technologies are
allowing the use of smaller and younger
trees, and of species not previously
considered suitable for value-added
processing(eg papers to Topic 19, this
THE FUTURE OF PLANTATION FORESTRY:-
I have suggested elsewhere (Kanowski
1995, 1997) that there is evidence of an
emerging dichotomy in plantation forestry
concept and practice, between what I have
characterised as relatively simpler and
relatively more complex production
systems. Plantation forests as we know
them are relatively simple production
systems, typically even-aged
monocultures, with the capacity to produce
wood yields many times - often at least
tenfold - greater than most natural forests.
The importance of simple plantation
forests in meeting the wood needs of
societies will continue to increase;
providing they are well-managed, these
plantation forests should satisfy
sustainability criteria (Sutton
1991b, Evans 1997). This plantation
forestry for commodity production
benefits considerably from economies of
scale and integration with industrial
processing; it is also under strong cost and
Congress); Adequate planning and
decision support systems are central to
successful plantation enterprises.
Appropriate systems range from the
relatively simple (eg AhlbŠck 1997) to the
sophisticated (eg Pritchard 1989); the lack
of effective systems has been a major
constraint to, in particular, many tropical
plantation enterprises (Pandey 1997); l
There is long history of concern for the
biological sustainability of plantation
forestry (Evans 1997). As plantation
forests expand, so too have concerns for
their sustainability in the broader sense (eg
Hughes 1994, Carrere and Lohmann
1996). The sustainability of plantation
forestry is now an issue in terms of each of
its biological, economic and social
dimensions, as well as in the more holistic
sense of their conjunction (Barbier 1987);
sustainability concerns in plantation
forestry have a number of manifestations,
as outlined below;
profit pressure, thus both demanding and
permitting relatively high levels of
resource inputs. Consequently, it will be
increasingly concentrated on those sites
which are inherently more productive than
on those which are marginal, and from
which the costs of transport to processors
are least. The implication is of
plantation programmes which are more
intensive silviculturally and less extensive
geographically, located where the forest
land base is stable, secure and productive
(Bingham 1985, Gauthier 1991),
and where the economics of wood
production - in terms both of cost
structures within forestry and
of relativities with other land uses - are
most favourable. Prevailing political
ideologies suggest these plantations will
increasingly be under private, or quasi-
private, ownership and management.
Whilst successful - sometimes
outstandingly - in producing wood, simple
plantation systems do not necessarily
address well the other needs of societies in
which they are embedded. Where - as in
much of the less economically-developed
world - land is scare, time horizons short,
or demand strong for the non-industrial
products and services of forests, the
outputs of simple production
systems are unlikely to meet the more
complex needs of societies. In these
circumstances, a broader
conception of plantation forestry and range
of plantation objectives, and a more
intimate integration with other land uses,
are essential if plantation forestry is to
prosper and be sustained.
More complex plantation forestry
explicitly recognises that wood is not the
only product that people demand of
forests, and seeks to maximise social
benefits rather than just wood production.
The particular expression of plantation
forestry - where it lies along the continuum
from simple to complex - will depend on
the particular context; in developing a
more complex plantation forestry, we have
much to gain from our experiences of a
wide spectrum of forestry activities,
including agro forestry, community
forestry, and simpler plantation forestry.
More complex plantation forestry will be
characterised variously by:
A more intimate association between
forests and other land uses. Simple
plantation forestry is typified by a sharp
distinction between plantation forest and
other land use. The boundary between
plantation forest and non-forest use will
become less distinct as plantation forestry
becomes more complex. The various
taungya systems, widely practised as
means of Afforestation in the tropics
(Evans 1992), are an example of this
complexity at the early stages of plantation
forestry; much farm forestry (eg Grayson
1993, Lefroy and Scott 1994)
demonstrates such integration
at the level of the farm enterprise,
irrespective of the particular configuration
of tree growing;
lMore direct involvement of local people
in the conception and implementation of
plantation forestry, and in the sharing of its
benefits and products. The variety of joint
venture or share farmer schemes, which
recognise landownersÕ interests and
priorities as well as those of the
forest industryÕs, exemplify this for the
case of farm forestry. There is increasing
understanding of how participatory
planning, management and use might be
developed and practised in a forestry
context (eg Arnold and Stewart 1991, FAO
1985, Griffin 1988, Gilmour and Fisher
1992), and this approach now characterises
some programmes involving plantation
forestry (eg Gilmour et al 1989, Arnold
1992). As the presence or absence of trees
is important in determining land tenure in
many societies (eg Arnold and Stewart
1991, Cornista and Escueta 1990,
Fortmann
and Bruce 1993), locally-appropriate
tenure arrangements are essential to
facilitate more
complex plantation forestry (eg Sargent
1990);
l More diverse species composition and
plantation structure, yielding an earlier and
more continuing flow of a wider range of
products and services than result from
simple plantation forests. This does not
necessarily imply that tree species will
grown as polycultures, though
this may offer advantages in particular
circumstances (eg Ball et al 1995,
Wormald 1992). In others, a mosaic of
relatively small blocks of different tree
species may be more easily managed,
but still yield the desired range of outputs.
IMPORTANCE OF PLANTATION FORESTRY AND
SUSTAINABILITY
Although estimates vary, the total area of
forest plantations in the world amount to
between 120 and 140 million hectares.
What is less uncertain is that the amount of
new planting (afforestation) is increasing
in both temperate and tropical countries. In
the tropics especially the present rate of
planting of 2-3 million hectares per year is
double that recorded in the 1960s and
1970s (FAO 1992; Evans 1992). The
purpose of such plantations is mostly
either for industrial production or
domestic use as building poles, fuelwood
and fodder. The great bulk of forest
plantations are of uniform age and uniform
composition (monoculture) and most are
managed to optimise the yield of wood
from the site. Also, clearfelling and
replanting is the commonest silvicultural
system, although, where appropriate,
coppicing is used as a means of
re-stocking. These features of plantation
silviculture - uniformity of crop, intensity
of production and concentration of
working - have raised concerns that many
of the sites on which trees are
planted may be incapable of sustaining
their productivity. Models of nutrient
export, examination of physical damage of
soil structure, and claims of greater risk
from pests and diseases have all
been advanced as reasons why intensive
plantation forestry may be inherently
unsustainable. The question of
sustainability, at least in the narrow
biological sense, has long been a concern
in agriculture particularly with arable
cropping. Several long-term experiments
exist in different countries of which the
oldest and most famous is Broadbalk Field
at Rothamsted Experimental Station,
Harpenden, England. Since 1843
successive crops of wheat have
continuously been grown and assessed.
Over a long period yields from the control
treatment, which received no fertiliser and
only minimal cultural treatment to control
weeds, has remained low but stable
(Johnston 1994). This work has shown that
even after 150 years the land itself has not
become “wheat-sick” and that
low yields arise from low external inputs
(though these are rising, notably the
anthropogenic ally derived nitrogen mainly
in rainfall, currently up to c. 30 kg ha-1y-
1). Unfortunately, factual evidence
concerning long-term productivity of
forest plantations remains meagre. But
without it foresters cannot properly
demonstrate how robust their silviculture
is and cannot refute claims that successive
rotations of fast-growing trees inevitably
leads to soil deterioration. This paper
examines the evidence of yield decline and
reports in detail on the best data sets in the
world, which describe the performance of
three successive rotations on the same
site (Evans 1996). The subject was
reviewed by the author in the 8th World
Forestry Congress in Jakarta in 1978
(Evans 1978). Since then significant new
information has arisen which is germane
to the question of sustainability.
BRIEF DISCUSSION ON THE GIVEN TOIPIC WITH AVAILABLE
DATA
Humans have been cutting down tress
since the dawn of time. The wood is a
great source of fuel and building materials,
while the barren land can be used for
farming and cattle rearing. However, with
every action there is an equally and
opposite reaction. Deforestation results in
nutrient depleted soil and eventually
erosion. The freshly exposed soil of the
forest floor is extremely vulnerable to the
elements. In it’s natural environment, the
soil is shielded by the canopy and receives
very little light. The Amazon rainforest
alone receives nine feet of rainfall a year;
fifty percent of it returns to the atmosphere
through the foliage of trees (“Amazon
Rainforest,” 2003). When all of these
protective layers are removed, the result is
detrimental. The rain washes away
nutrients and the sun dries the soil. In a
few short years, the land is no longer
fertile and soon abandoned. Due to
nutrient depletion, there is little to no hope
of reforestation (Frey, 2002). This
unfortunate cycle is exemplified in Africa.
Africa is currently experiencing
deforestation four times faster than other
countries. It is thought in the early 1900’s
Africa was home to 193,000 square miles
of coastal rainforest, currently, only 22.8
percent is left standing (Butler, 2009).
Deforestation has resulted in the dessert
we now know Africa to be. The visible
affects of deforestation are alarming,
however the seemingly invisible
consequences are detrimental to life on
earth.
Trees are vital to life; they capture carbon
dioxide and produce oxygen for us to
breathe through photosynthesis. These
“carbon sinks” assist in cleaning up after
carbon producing humans and are overall
vital to life. “Every year humans add over
30 billion tons of carbon dioxide [to] the
atmosphere” through simple actions such
as breathing, fires, and deforestation
(Hopwood & Cohen). In order to harness
the forest’s valuable commodity, the trees
are either cut down or burned to create
coal. “The largest anthropogenic
contributor to the greenhouse effect is
carbon dioxide gas emissions, about 77%
of which comes from the combustion of
fossil fuels and 22% of which is attributed
to deforestation”(Hopewood & Cohen).
The fuel to run chainsaws and heavy
machinery as well as the trucks to
transport the timber and coal contribute to
this statistic. In addition, “as we burn
down [trees], carbon is released into the air
and the carbon bonds with oxygen to form
carbon dioxide, adding to the greenhouse
effect”( Hopewood & Cohen). Normally,
the production of excess carbon would be
counteracted with the naturally occurring
process of photosynthesis. “The Union of
Concerned Scientists estimates that U.S.
forests absorb between one million and
three million metric tons of carbon dioxide
each year, perhaps offsetting between 20
percent and 46 percent of the country’s
greenhouse-gas emissions”(Johnson,
2009). Unfortunately, as deforestation
progresses, less carbon dioxide can be
recycled resulting in additional carbon.
Deforestation is a recognized contributor
of green house gasses and subsequently
global climate change. Many nations have
recognized this pressing issue and have
started action, however it is impossible to
know if the world will ever recover.

The positive and negative aspect of deforestation :-

Earth and the lives of everything that The positive consequences of

depends on it - from the smallest bacteria
to the largest sea creatures - rest on a
delicate matter and that is balance. A
single, seemingly harmless disturbance in
this balance has consequences that are both
beneficial and disadvantageous. One of
these is deforestation.
Deforestation has always been a practice
of many developing communities and has
contributed greatly to civilization as we
know it today. Unfortunately, much of the
ill effects of deforestation is caused by
greed, bad agricultural practices and
government neglect.
Why forests are important: -
Other than for their beauty, forests are
highly responsible in keeping and
sustaining global ecosystems. In fact,
much of the quality of life we enjoy, we
owe to the forests. It is also the home of
more than half of all creatures and
organisms in this planet. From food to life-
saving medicines, forests give mankind a
variety of gifts that contribute much to our
quality of life.
deforestation: -
Depending on the needs of the social
group concerned, deforestation has made it
possible for communities to be built.
Forests make way for residential houses,
office buildings and factories.
Governments are able to build roads to
make trade and transport easier and
therefore more convenient to residents.
Deforestation can also mean the
conversion of forest land to productive
land for agricultural uses. This results in
better and more abundant production of
food and materials, virtually eradicating
periods of want and lack. Economically,
deforestation has contributed much in
giving many communities the opportunity
to make positive changes in their lives.
The negative consequences of
deforestation: -
Unfortunately, the negative consequences
of deforestation far outweigh its positive
effects. Here are a few of them:
1. Exposing soil to heat and rain. When
forests are cleared, soil cover, which
consists mainly of vegetation, is removed
as well. This exposes the bare soil to
extreme conditions produced by the sun's
heat and rainwater.
With these activities alternating, the soil
quickly compacts. As rainwater flows, it
will wash out the nutrients and other
organic materials that make the soil rich
and fertile. Add to that the frequent
activities of tilling, cropping and grazing
which gradually results to the degradation
of the soil's quality.
These practices are specially a concern in
areas where forest zones are drier.
Agriculture practice on top of
deforestation can result to the
desertification of many areas.
Desertification is also a direct result of the
demand for the soil to produce more (as a
consequence of the increase in human
population), thereby decreasing to a
significant degree the land's carrying
capacity.
2. Flooding. Deforestation can result to
watersheds that are no longer able to
sustain and regulate water flows from
rivers and streams. Trees are highly
effective in absorbing water quantities,
keeping the amount of water in watersheds
to a manageable level. The forest also
serves as a cover against erosion. Once
they are gone, too much water can result to
downstream flooding, many of which have
caused disasters in many parts of the
world.
As fertile topsoil is eroded and flooded
into the lower regions, many coastal
fisheries and coral reefs suffer from the
sedimentation brought by the flooding.
This results to negative effects in the
economic viability of many businesses and
fatalities in wildlife population.
3. Non-suitability of deforested areas for
conversion. Most of the areas that have
undergone deforestation are actually
unsuitable for long-term agricultural use
such as ranching and farming. Once
deprived of their forest cover, the lands
rapidly degrade in quality, losing their
fertility and arability.
The soil in many deforested areas is also
unsuitable for supporting annual crops.
Much of the grassy areas are also not as
productive compared to more arable soils
and are therefore not fit for long-term
cattle grazing.
4. The displacement of indigenous
communities and their traditional way of
life. When governments decide to offer
forests for deforestation mainly to open up
areas for 'civilized' communities, access to
forest resources by indigenous peoples are
ignored. In fact, indigenous peoples are
hardly included in economic and political
decisions that directly affect their lives.
This encroachment ignores their rights as
much as it takes away the resources that
their ancestors have bestowed upon them.
5. The loss in the number of biodiversity.
This is probably the most serious
consequence of deforestation. Put simply,
it means the destruction and extinction of
many plant and animal species, many of
whom remain unknown and whose
benefits will be left undiscovered.
Each year, as deforestation continues,
much of the wilderness from which we
benefit and would have continued to
benefit from will be lost forever. With it
are the millions of chances in the form of
plants and wildlife that could bring us
many economic and medical solutions to
pressing problems we currently face.
While it's true deforestation has brought
with it opportunities to improve our lives,
we have not mastered the right kind of
responsibility that goes with having
control over our planet's resources. As a
result, we and all the other creatures on
this planet suffer greatly from the
consequences of our actions.
Reforestation, Afforestation, Deforestation,
Climate Change and GLOBAL WARMING:-
• Deforestation affects climate change be-
cause it releases the carbon stored in the
plants and soils and alters the physical
properties of the surface (Bala et al.,
2007). Tropical ecosystems are the most
productive, and changes to them are likely
to have the greatest impact on climate
change. Models predict that their loss will
have a global warming effect and
experiments suggest that afforestation
projects in the tropics could help mitigate
global warming since they are the most
effective carbon sinks in the short term
(Bala et al., 2007; Malhi et al., 2002).
Worldwide, women have played an
important role in preserving tropical
forests. For example, in Zimbabwe,
women’s groups (over half of the 800,000
families living in communal areas are
Since 2001, under the Maya Nut Program
supported by The Equilibrium Fund, women
in Guatemala, Nicaragua, El Salvador and
Honduras have planted 400,000 Maya Nut
trees (Brosimum aliscastrum ). The Equi-
librium Fund is trying to participate in
headed by women) manage forest resource
and development projects through woodlot
ownership, tree planting and nursery
development.
• Men and women often have different productive
and reproductive roles with regard to forest
resource management. They play different parts in
planting, protecting or caring for seedlings and
small trees, as well as in planting and maintaining
homestead woodlots and plantations on public
lands. Men are more likely to be involved in
extracting timber and non-timber forest products
(NTFPs) for commercial purposes. Women
typically gather forest products for fuel, fencing,
food for the family, fodder for livestock and raw
materials to produce natural medicines, all of
which help to increase family income.
carbon trading with the USA and Europe to
show how specific projects could help
improve women’s lives, adapt to changes
caused by climate change and reduce
greenhouse gases (The Equilibrium Fund,
2007).
• The Mama Watoto Women’s group in Kenya
was formed in 1990 to address the scarcity of
fuelwood and poverty of rural women. This
scarcity forced women to collect wood from forest
reserves, thereby exposing them to legal penalties.
In response, the women established “women-
made forests” in sections within their own farms.
The afforestation programme improved soil
fertility, reduced illegal harvesting, and increased
the vegetation cover in the Kambiri region that
could sequester carbon (FAO, 1994).
• In the Uttarakhand region of the Himalayas, the
Chipko Movement comprises hundreds of
decentralized and locally autonomous
initiatives. Its leaders and activists are
primarily village women. The Movement
demonstrated that women can make a
difference when protecting forests and
developing afforestation projects. Their
afforestation programme not only reduced
landslides, but also solved the problem of
fuel and fodder. Women looked after the
trees so carefully that the survival rate was
between 60–80% (Joshi, 2007). Some of the
other major achievements of the Chipko
Movement have been: a 15-year ban on
green felling in the Himalayan forests in
Uttar Pradesh; a ban on clear felling in the
Western Ghats and the Vindhyas; and
greater pressure for a natural resource
policy that is more sensitive to people’s needs and
ecological requirements.
• In Sudan, with the support of UNHCR, IUCN
and FNC (Forest National Corporation)
women are planting gardens and trees
around their houses. These provide them
with shade, windbreaks, fuelwood and fruit.
At the same time, it gives them more
security, as they don’t need to go so far to
get their fuelwood anymore. Very often
women are victims of assault when they
have to go far away from their village or
refugee camps in Sudan, and having the
• The distribution of economic incentives
achieved through REDD (reduce emissions
from deforestation and land degradation) or
payments for ecosystem services (PES) for
carbon storage and new carbon sinks should
be equitable among men and women. An
analysis of several India and Nepal
community forest groups highlighted the
fact that, in most cases, cash is not
distributed equally and funds are commonly
invested in resources or activities from
which women were unlikely to benefit, such
as club repair, purchasing community
utensils, rugs, drums, etc. (Agarwal, 2002).
trees close by, makes their lives both easier
and safer.
• In South-East Cameroon, when the Baka people
discussed their vision of the future, men and
women turned out to have different visions.
Women would like to have bigger
community forests so they can manage their
own forests and harvest NTFPs – they are
the ones who regularly go and gather food,
wild fruits, roots, wild yams and also raw
materials for making crafts/baskets/mats (all
essential for their livelihoods).
• In many cases, the market price for a hectare of
sequestered carbon offset is 50 times more
than the price obtained from converting that
hectare to other land uses (Chomitz et al.
2006). Informing women about such
resources could help improve their
household incomes and allow them to
decide which strategies are most favourable
for their environment and for themselves.
• Women’s empowerment is now being linked to
climate change solutions. In November
2006, Kenya’s Greenbelt Movement,
founded by Nobel Peace Laureate Wangari
Maathai, and the World Bank’s Community
Development Carbon Fund,
signed an emissions reductions purchase
agreement to reforest two mountain areas in
Kenya. Women’s groups will plant
thousands of trees, an activity that will also
provide poor rural women with a small
income and some economic independence.
Women’s empowerment through this
process will also capture 350,000 tons of
carbon dioxide, restore soil lost to erosion,
and support regular rainfall essential to
Kenya’s farmers and hydro-electric power
plants.
• The lack of women’s participation in the forestry
industry has proven to have detrimental
effects. Reforestation projects in India and
Nepal without a gender perspective faced
problems when replanting, protecting the
forests and implementing rules that protect
the reserves (Agarwal, 2002). Another
project that faced similar problems was the
Noel Kempff Climate Action Project. This
project aimed to meet conservation needs
and earn carbon credits. However, most of
their goals were not achieved because the
benefits were inequitable and there was little
or no participation at all of women in the
forestry team, conservation team,
government technical support, or
community councils (Boyd, 2002).
Forests are home to 300 million people
around the world and they contribute to the
livelihoods of many of the 1.2 billion people
living in extreme poverty (women constitute 70%
of the poor worldwide). Forests provide global
food security and resources, food, fodder, fuel and
medicine. However, the way people use and
manage forests depends on the socio-economic
and socio-cultural environment, age and gender
(FAO, 1989).
Forest ecosystems play an important role in
the global carbon cycle. For example,
reforestation and afforestation have both been
integrated as forestry-based mitigation schemes
into the international climate change regime (i.e.
the Kyoto Protocol). Both practices entail
converting non-forested land to forested land
through planting, seeding and/or the promotion of
seed banks and sources. Afforestation applies to
areas that have not been forested for at least 50
years while reforestation applies to land that used
to be forested but was turned over to another land
use. Nowadays, there is a debate on the
importance of addressing the reduction of
emissions from deforestation and land degradation
(REDD). Because it is estimated that close to one
quarter of all greenhouse
gas emissions are due to deforestation and REDD strategies could be used to promote
similar types of land degradation, effective the protection of current forests.
 Within the complexity of the services
that forests provide for climate change
mitigation, it is crucial to understand
women’s role in these processes.
Strategies are now turning to:
understanding and taking into account the
different benefits that women and men
derive from forestry services; recognising
gender differences in access to, control and
knowledge of forest resources; and
identifying the significant differences in
access of women and men to forest-related
decision making, institutions, and
economic opportunities.
When half of the population is not
included or is prevented from participating
in decisions, institutions, and programmes
relating to climate change mitigation, they
are unlikely to feel “ownership” of forestry
sector policies. Mitigation strategies
represent a unique opportunity to include
women in forestry programmes and
acknowledge that gender relations will
influence many aspects of forest
management and governance proposed for
reducing greenhouse gases.
Recommendations :-
• International negotiations or regimes in
relation to REDD must ensure
compliance with international and
national commitments on gender
equality and equity, including the
Convention on the Elimination of All
Forms of Discrimination against
Women (CEDAW).
• From the onset, ensure full participation
and integration of women, from local
and indigenous communities, in
policy design processes
(international and national) as well
as in the broad-scale implementation
of REDD.
• Forestry projects used to mitigate and
adapt to climate change require a
gender-based approach that captures
the socially-defined differences
between women and men, i.e.
gender-based differences in roles and
responsibilities, problems, needs and
priorities, and knowledge of, and
access to and control over forest and
tree resources.
• Promote systematic attention to the
participation of women in forestry
development in policies, strategies
and capacity-building efforts related
to the conservation and sustainable
development of forests and trees and
their use.
• There should be equitable access to, and
distribution of, the economic benefits
derived from forest services provided
to mitigate climate change.
Programmes should also promote
equal access of women to land
ownership and other resources
necessary for effective socio-economic
participation in forest management
and climate mitigation strategies
(e.g., land, capital, technical
assistance, technology, tools,
equipment, markets and time).
• Afforestation, reforestation, or forest
preservation projects that receive
payment for ecosystem services,
such as carbon sequestration, should
mainstream gender. Women should
be included in the design and
implementation of the projects, as
well as in the distribution of benefits.
• Both women and men must be trained in
methods to increase carbon
sequestration through new forestry
technologies, including nursery
techniques, site selection, and
selection of species, land
preparation, planting, weeding, and
maintenance.
• Responses to global climate changes
should avoid a narrow criterion that leads
to environmentally and socially harmful
consequences. These responses should
have broad goals that aim to reduce
climatic change, protect natural resources,
improve social well-being, promote
equality, and recognise that women are
key agents in climate change processes.
REFRENCES:-
BOOKS WITH PAGE NO:-

1. AhlbŠck, AJ. 1997. Management planning of industrial plantations in Tanzania - principles

and
efforts. Paper to Topic 12, this Congress.
2. Aminah, H. 1997. Planting stock production of Dipterocarps in Malaysia. Paper to Topic
12, this
Congress.

3. Andersen, RS and W Huber. 1988. The hour of the fox. Univ Washington Press, Seattle.
158 p.

4. ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES

CLASS 8TH TO CLASS 10TH

SOCIAL SCIENCE –NCERT CLASS 9TH AND 10TH

SCIENCE –NCERT CLASS 9TH AND 10TH

SITES AND LECTURE NOTES OF RESEARCHERS:-

• Amazon rainforest. (2003). Retrieved February 24, 2010, from

http://www.blueplanetbiomes.org/amazon.htm
• Butler, Rhett A.(2009).Afrotropical Realm:Enviornmental Profile. Retrieved 24
February 2010, from Mongabay.com / A Place Out of Time: Tropical Rainforests and
the Perils They Face. website: http://rainforests.mongabay.com/0305.htm.
• Frey, E. F. (2002). Tropical Deforestation in the Amazon: An Economic Analysis of
Rondonia, Brazil. Issues in Political Economy, 11(1). Retrieved
from http://org.elon.edu/ipe/Frey1.pdf
• Hopwood, N., & Cohen, J. (n.d.). Greenhouse Gases and Society. Retrieved
from http://www.umich.edu/~gs265/society/greenhouse.htm
• Johnson, T. (2009, December 21). Deforestation and Greenhouse-Gas Emissions.
Retrieved February 25, 2010, from Council on Foreign Relations
website:http://www.cfr.org/publication/14919/deforestation_and_greenhousegas_emis
sions.html#p2
• Rainforest Facts.(2009) Rain Tree. Retrieved February 25, 2010, from
Raintree Nutrition, Inc. website: http://www.rain-tree.com/facts.htm