Trees, Forests and People 15 (2024) 100483

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Trees, Forests and People

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com/journal/trees-forests-and-people

Barriers and opportunities in effective management of forest landscape

restoration: Tain II degraded forest restoration, Ghana
Samuel Kumi a, *, Paul Kofi Nsiah a, Hope Kotoka Ahiabu a, Emmanuel Sackey b
a
Department of Environmental Management, University of Energy and Natural Resources, Sunyani, Ghana
b
Department of Forest Science, University of Energy and Natural Resources, Sunyani, Ghana

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Forest landscape restoration (FLR) approach has become a key strategy to ensure sustainable forest management
Forest landscape restoration and counteract the impacts of deforestation and forest degradation on biodiversity, greenhouse gas emissions,
Management of FLR climate change, and food insecurity. However, the management of FLR to restore degraded forest landscapes
Barriers
remains a major conundrum in most tropical regions, including Ghana. This study, conducted in Tain II degraded
Opportunities
forest Reserve landscape in Ghana, examined the management of the forest landscape restoration project and
associated barriers and opportunities. A structured questionnaire was administered to 150 respondents from
three fringe communities. A partial least squares path model (PLS-PM) was used to examine and identify in­
terrelations between opportunity and barrier factors. The results indicated positive effects of incentives, farmers’
access to information, community-driven fire management, and technical assistance on FLR initiatives, while in
contrast, social restrictions, conflicts over resources and land usage, difficulty in sustaining FLR, land ownership
challenges, and governance issues impeded the FLR. There was a high degree of interdependence among the
various contributing factors, suggesting that effective management of the FLR requires diligent management of
trade-offs to help achieve sustainable forest management. Our findings underscore the need for community-based
restoration programs and innovative interventions that offer incentives and technical assistance to farmers and
provide constant information to stakeholders to foster synergistic future forest landscape trajectories for sus­
tainable development.

Introduction challenging, and that requires careful consideration of the complexity

The significance of reversing land degradation and restoring defor­
ested areas is widely recognized by the global community. This recog­
nition, is amplified by the UN’s declaration of a Decade of Ecosystem
Restoration and Bonn Challenge pursuing the goal of reforesting
350,000,000ha of degraded land by 2030, along with appeals of other
international bodies like the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)
to get restoration of 15% of degraded lands and the associated ecosystem
services (Hohl et al., 2020). In line with these international expectations,
several FLR programs and projects are being executed at local, regional,
and national levels. These initiatives include the APEC 2020 Forest
Cover Goal, which aimed to reforest 20 million ha of degraded area by
2020. The African FLR Initiative also seeks to reforest 100 million ha in
Africa, while Initiative 20×20 aims to restore 20 million ha in Latin
America and the Caribbean by 2030 (Foli et al., 2021). These restoration
goals are ambitious, and translating them into reality is equally
and changeability of ecosystems and sites and dynamic socioeconomic
and political situations (Hohl et al., 2020). This suggests that forest
landscape restoration governance and stakeholder management are
critical in realizing the global restoration goal.
Ghana’s forestry sector has been plagued by many management
challenges resulting in land degradation and slow restoration of defor­
ested areas. These challenges, according to Appiah et al. (2010), are
largely driven by agricultural expansion, fuelwood harvesting, mining,
wildfires, logging, and rapid urbanization. These problems are exacer­
bated by the increasing local, national, and global demand for timber
products, as well as the overreliance on forest-based livelihoods by
forest fringe communities (Appiah et al., 2020). To curb these chal­
lenges, the government of Ghana initiated several programmes,
including the Taungya agroforestry system. Under this restoration
model, farmers were granted access to parts of the disturbed forest re­
serves to grow annual crops, as well as plant and manage timber trees

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: Samuel.kumi@uenr.edu.gh (S. Kumi).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tfp.2023.100483

Available online 24 December 2023

2666-7193/© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
S. Kumi et al.
during the early years of the establishment of the forestry plantation.
Farmers were required to vacate the Reserves after two or three years,
within which time the timber species are expected to be established and
have a dense canopy. The intervention failed as a result of the poor
involvement of farmers in benefit sharing and decision-making and land
tenure challenges (Abugre et al., 2010). The government, after a broader
stakeholder consultation and evaluation of the Taungya System intro­
duced the Modified Taungya System (MTS), which made the farmers the
legal owners of plantations and ensured that benefits are shared equi­
tably with other stakeholders based on their contributions to the plan­
tation development. Despite the wide acceptance of the MTS as a
promising model for degraded forest restoration, recent empirical
studies have identified several challenges that threaten its sustainability
(Acheampong et al., 2016). Despite these challenges, a few studies (e.g.,
Whittaker, 2020; Foli et al., 2021) have focused on establishing and
documenting social and governance challenges inherent in FLR imple­
mentation. Previous studies have provided a good understanding of
technical and ecological aspects of restoration, but significantly less
focus has been accorded to social and governance-related issues.
Understanding FLR stakeholders’ management and social barriers
and opportunities can guide future restoration governance and imple­
mentation. This paper aims to identify the barriers and opportunities in
FLR management in degraded Tain II Forest Reserve in Ghana. The
paper will increase the understanding of drivers of the barriers and
opportunities in the context of restoration projects and thus illuminate
the role of stakeholder management and governance in restoration
performance.
Material and methods
Study area
The Tain II Forest Reserve is located in the Bono Region, close to
Berekum, between latitudes 7◦ 22′ and 7◦ 41′ N and longitudes 2◦ 17′ and
2◦ 27′ W. The landscape land cover forms are forest, teak plantations,
agricultural, and degraded areas. River Tain borders the Reserve at the
north. The ground level in some areas of the Tain sub-basin is 240–300
metres above sea level and is rocky or undulating. The slopes range in
steepness from 5 to 12%, and the ground is gently undulating. The
summits are largely flat and wide, with grades ranging from 0 to 4%. The
rainfall pattern of the area is bimodal, with the major peak in June. The
primary wet season occurs in June, and the minor season in October in
the research region, with 1200mm of rain falls on average each year.
November to March is the main dry season, with August marking the
second and minor drought.
Close to 11 ethnic groups, with Bono people as the original ethnic
fraternity, inhabit the area. Other dominant groups in the area are
Dagaare, Asante, Frafra, Nkwaman, Ewe, Sisala, Burkinabe, Krobo, and
Wala. Most of the communities surrounding the Reserve are agrarian.
The majority of farmers work on their land or within the forest reserve,
while others engage in sharecropping arrangements on land off the
Reserve.
Form Ghana, an afforestation company, is currently executing the
FLR programme in the degraded area of Tain II Forest. The afforestation
company is working on a 14,000-ha concession and has successively
reforested 8900ha since it started operation in 2013 through 2021 in the
Reserve in partnership with the surrounding communities (Akroforo,
Ampenkrom, Asantekrom, Akrokrom Kotaa, Kojoarkorkom, Namasua,
Oforikro, and Yawtwenekrom).
Data collection and analysis
To determine the latent variables or factors influencing the barriers
and opportunities in the effective management of FLR, a literature
search was mounted in the academic database (ScienceDirect and
others). In addition, we reviewed land use and cover maps of the FLR
2
Trees, Forests and People 15 (2024) 100483
area and conducted field observation and interactions. Regarding bar­
riers, the search put forward six (6) major factors. The study then hy­
pothesized that lack of resources [LacRes], difficulty in sustaining
initiatives [DiffSusIn], social restrictions [SocRes], land ownership/
Tenure Rights issues [LOTR], governance [Govn], and ineffective
management of fire for forest landscape restoration initiatives
[EMFLRI]) and their related manifest variables influence sustainable
forest landscape restoration. For the opportunities, the search put for­
ward four (4) major factors; access to information [Accinfo], access to
technical assistance [AccTec], incentives, and integrated community fire
management [IntCFMgt].
To provide a comprehensive understanding of the existing barriers
and opportunities in the effective FLR management of the Tain II
degraded Forest area, three communities were purposely chosen based
on their involvement in the Forest Landscape project. The selection of
the communities (Arkokrom, Akroforo, and Kotaa) was based on
involvement in the project and accessibility of the location. A random
sampling method was utilized to select the general community re­
spondents above the age of 18 years who could be engaging in the FLR
Initiative project. Chiefs, opinion leaders, and chief farmers were pur­
posely selected. Based on population, the number of respondents was
distributed among the communities as follows: Arkokrom(58), Akroforo
(20), and Kotaa(28). Fifteen (15) management members from Form
Ghana (the FLR company), Form International, the Ministry of Food and
Agriculture, and the forestry commission were interviewed. A total of
150 respondents were engaged. A structured questionnaire instrument
was employed for the quantitative data collection. The themes of the
questionnaire covered 1) the demographic features of the respondents,
2) the benefits and involvement of the community in the FLR activities,
and 3) the drivers of barriers and opportunities in the management of
the FLR project (Table 1).
The interrelationships between the elements influencing the barriers
and opportunities in forest landscape restoration sustainable manage­
ment were examined and identified using the partial least squares path
model (PLS-PM). With the use of two sets of linear equations, the PLS-
PM model explains the connections between latent variables and their
manifest factors (outside model). An unobservable variable (or
construct) known as a latent variable is implicitly characterized by a
group of apparent variables, usually referred to as manifest indicators or
variables. Researchers employ these techniques to classify and examine
various scientific models (Abugre and Sackey, 2022; Jamil, 2012).
PLS-PM is a statistical technique that examines complex multivariate
associations between latent variables and their manifest variables. The
manifest variables are used to indirectly measure the latent variables
(Sanchez, 2013). The manifest variables in this study were the responses
to survey questions, and the latent variables represented factors gleaned
or emerged from the responses that influence effective forest landscape
restoration management. Thus, latent variables obtained through search
and field assessment were validated or otherwise through the survey
responses. The survey’s response choices were measured using a 7-point
likert scale (this includes, completely disagree, disagree, somewhat
disagree, neither agree nor disagree, somewhat agree, agree and
completely agree). In order to determine the interrelationships among
the factors of sustainable forest landscape restoration management in
the study model construct used PLS-PM modelling in R programming.
Results
Out of 150 respondents, 60% were within the age of 30 – 50 years.
Most (70%) of the respondents were male. Respondents with no formal
education were 40%, while those with basic and tertiary education were
52% and 8%, respectively. Approximately 95% of respondents were
farmers. Close to 39% of the respondents received a monthly income of
more than GHc 150($13.6), while 54% and 7% obtained between
GHc50 to 149($4.5–13.5) and less than GHc 50($4.5), respectively. All
the community respondents (100%) confirm the presence of forest
S. Kumi et al.
Table 1
Measurement instruments for Effective Management of FLR Initiatives
(EMFLRI).
S/ Latent variables
N and agricultural sectors is a
1 Access to Information
(AccInfo)
2 Access to Technical
Assistance (AccTec)
3 Incentives (Incent)
4 Integrated Community
Fire Management
(IntCFMgt)
5 Lack of resources
(LacRes)
6 Difficulty in Sustaining
Initiatives (DiffSusIn)
7 Social Restrictions
(SocRes)
8 Land Ownership/ Tenure
Rights (LOTR)
9 Governance (Govn)
Abbreviations Manifest variables
InvDem Do you agree that under FLR,
farmers are invited to
demonstration units and field
days?
AccFLRinfo Do you agree through
demonstration units and field
days, farmers get access to
information about FLR?
AccAgr Do you agree mechanisms are
put in place for farmers access
to rural agricultural extension
agents?
ExtAgt Do you agree rural agricultural
extension agents transfer
knowledge that helps in the
implementation of Good
Agricultural Practice?
AgriInpt Do you agree agricultural
inputs such as seedlings
(cashew, mango and citrus
seedlings), maize, pepper and
ginger are freely distributed to
farmers?
TrainFMgt Do you agree the integrated
community fire management
aspect of FLR provides training
on fire management?
PnPF Do you agree the training on
fire management helps to
prevent and protect properties
against fire?
TrainEqup Do you agree under FLR there
are community fire volunteers,
well trained and equipped to
help in fire education, training,
prevention and other fire
activities in the communities?
EffFLR Do you agree the availability
of resources allows for the
rapid and cost-effective
delivery of FLR?
DiffAcc Do you agree enough financial
support is required to make the
FLR a success?
LacMon Do you agree that lack of
monitoring and feedback is a
barrier to successful FLR?
LonTerm Do you agree that restoration
is an extended procedure and
requires continuous
monitoring?
UnwilLO Do you agree it may be
impossible to choose the
optimal sites for restoration
due to the unwillingness of the
land owners to release land?
Problem Do you agree it may prove
problematic to find areas large
enough to host and maintain
restoration objectives due to
growth in population?
RigtnResp Do you agree lack of clarity
about who has rights and
responsibilities over land and
forests is a barrier to FLR?
LacTrust Do you agree lack of trust
between social actors is a
problem for FLR
implementation?
Gap Do you agree gaps in
communication between the
3
Trees, Forests and People 15 (2024) 100483
Table 1 (continued )
S/ Latent variables Abbreviations Manifest variables
N
land administration, forestry,
challenge to FLR?
10 Fire MajBar Do you agree fire is a major
threat/barrier to FLR?
AffNatF Do you agree these activities
affect the nature of the forest?
11 Effective Management of WitnComm Do you agree FLR has been
Forest Landscape witnessed in this community?
Restoration Initiatives
(EMFLRI)
Opport Do you agree that FLR offers
you some opportunities?
landscape restoration activities in the landscape. The majority of the
respondents confirmed the importance of the FLR in the area. Approx­
imately 63% of the community members have daily access to nontimber
forest products from the restored areas or support in community inter­
vention like integrated fire management programs the FLR management
has instituted. Most respondents indicated that the community is
actively involved in the restoration activities, estimating the participa­
tion in agroforestry and community fire initiatives as 76% and 24%,
respectively. About 90% of the respondents indicate that the manage­
ment of the FLR has challenges and opportunities (Fig. 1).
Direct and indirect effect of latent variables on opportunities and barriers
for effective management of forest landscape restoration
The total effects for the opportunities model showed that access to
information (Accinfo), access to technical assistance (AccTec), and in­
centives had positive direct and indirect impacts on the effective man­
agement of forest landscape restoration initiatives (EMFLRI). Also,
incentives had the highest positive direct and the lowest positive indi­
rect impact on effective management of Forest Landscape Restoration
Initiatives (Fig. 2). On the contrary, access to technical assistance
(AccTec) had the lowest positive direct impact on effective management
of forest landscape restoration (EMFLRI). Again, access to information
(Accinfo) had the highest positive indirect impact on the effective
management FLR initiative.
Regarding the barriers for effective management of forest landscape
restoration initiatives (Fig. 3), Social restrictions (SocRes) had the
highest direct impact, as well as slight indirect impact on effective
management of FLR initiatives (EMFLRI). Also, Difficulty in Sustaining
Initiatives (DiffSusIn) had direct and indirect impact on EMFLRI but the
least direct impact on EMFLRI. Again, land ownership/tenure rights
(LOTR) had direct and indirect impact on EMFLRI. Moreover, ineffective
management of fire (Fire) had direct impact on EMFLRI. However,
Governance issues (Govn) had negative direct and indirect impact on
EMFLRI (Fig. 3). Furthermore, SocRes had the highest positive direct
impact on LOTR. Also, SocRes had positive direct impact on Govn.
SocRes also had both negative direct and indirect impact on Fire.
The inner model illustrates the associations between the constructs
for both opportunities and barriers for the effective management of
Forest Landscape Restoration Initiatives (Figs. 4 and 5). The outer model
also demonstrates how the block indicators and latent variables interact
for both opportunities and barriers. Contrary to our hypothesis, the
inner model of opportunities for effective management of Forest Land­
scape Restoration shows that, only access to information (Accinfo) had a
negative relationship with integrated community fire management
(IntCFMgt) (Fig. 5). Access to info had a direct relationship with access
to technical assistance, incentives and effective management of forest
landscape restoration. Access to technical assistance also had a direct
relationship with incentives, IntCFMgt and effective management of
forest landscape restoration initiative (EMFLRI). Moreover, incentives
S. Kumi et al. Trees, Forests and People 15 (2024) 100483

Fig. 1. Map of the study area.

Fig. 2. Direct and indirect effects of latent variables on opportunities for effective FLR management.

had a direct relationship with both IntCFMgt and EMFLRI. IntCFMgt had effective management of forest landscape restoration shows that
direct relationship with only EMFLRI (Fig. 5). governance issues (Govn) had a negative relationship with EMFLRI but
Again, contrary to our hypothesis, the inner model of barriers to had a direct relationship with Fire (Fig. 6). Lack of resources had direct

4
S. Kumi et al. Trees, Forests and People 15 (2024) 100483

Fig.3. Direct and indirect effects of latent variables on barriers of effective FLR management.

Fig. 4. The complete model of Opportunities for Effective Management of Forest Landscape Restoration Initiatives. NB: Red arrows indicate an inverse association,
whereas blue arrows indicate a direct relationship; Loadings are the numbers on the arrows.

relationships with DiffSusIn, SocRes, LOTR, Govn, Fire, and EMFLRI.
Again, DiffSusIn had direct relationships with SocRes, LOTR, Govn, Fire,
and EMFLRI. Moreover, LOTR had direct relationships with Govn and
EMFLRI but had negative relationships with Fire. Finally, Fire also had a
direct relationship with Govn and EMFLRI but had negative relation­
ships with LOTR and SocRes (Fig. 5).
Loadings analysis for opportunities and barriers
The extent of the association between the construct variable and its
indicators is demonstrated by the loadings (Fig. 6). The findings reveal
that the indicators and latent variables are highly correlated. As an
illustration, the manifest variables of Access to Information (Accinfo)
have correlations of 0.8717 and 0.9166 for Access to FLR Information

5
S. Kumi et al. Trees, Forests and People 15 (2024) 100483

Fig. 5. Inner Model of Barriers to Effective Management of Forest Landscape Restoration Initiatives. NB: Red arrows indicate an inverse association, whereas blue
arrows indicate a direct relationship; Loadings are the numbers on the arrows.

Fig. 6. Strength of the correlation between the construct variable and its indicators is demonstrated by loadings of opportunities for EMFLRI.

(AccFLRinfo) and invited to demonstration units (InvDem), respectively.
The manifest variables of Access to Technical Assistance (AccTec) have
correlations of 0.8999 and 0.9309 for Extension Agents Knowledge
transfer (ExtAgt) and Access to Rural Agricultural Agents (AccAgr),
respectively (Fig. 6).
The findings for the loading analysis for Barriers also reveal that the
indicators and latent variables are highly correlated for LacRes, SocRes,
and EMFLRI. For example, the manifest variables of Lack of Resources
(LacRes) have correlations of 0.7496 and 0.8969 for Difficult to Access
(DiffAcc) and Cost-effective delivery of FLR (EffFLR), respectively.
Difficulty in Sustaining Initiatives (DiffSusIn) have correlations of
0.5617 and 0.9421 for Lack of Monitoring (LacMon) and Long Term
(LonTerm), respectively (Fig. 7)
Outer model results
Loadings show correlations between a latent variable and an indi­
cator. Loadings above 0.7 are considered acceptable. Communalities
explain the proportion of variability explained by a latent variable and
its manifest variable. It also explains the amount of a latent variable’s

6
S. Kumi et al. Trees, Forests and People 15 (2024) 100483

Fig. 7. The strength of the correlation between the constructed variable and its indicators is demonstrated by loadings of barriers EMFLRI.

variance that is shared by both the indicator and the latent variable.
Table 3
Communalities of 0.5 indicate that the latent construct captures 50% of
Summary of inner model for Barriers.
the variability in an indicator.
The outer model results for Opportunities showed that more than Type R2 Block Mean AVE
Communality Redundancy
60% of the latent variables were able to explain their manifest variables.
A further analysis carried out was the redundancy, which was used to LacRes Exogenous 0.000 0.684 0.000 0.683
DiffSusIn Endogenous 0.113 0.601 0.068 0.601
determine the independent latent variables’ ability to account for
SocRes Endogenous 0.094 0.705 0.067 0.705
changes in the dependent latent variable, and the value found was very LOTR Endogenous 0.180 0.522 0.094 0.522
low. Govn Endogenous 0.078 0.688 0.054 0.687
The summary of the inner model for both Opportunities and Barriers Fire Endogenous 0.225 0.550 0.124 0.550
is presented in Tables 2 and 3, respectively. All the variables have their EMFLRI Endogenous 0.211 0.672 0.142 0.673

block communality and AVE to be in the accepted range of more than 0.5
as dictated by the rule. As such, they were adequate for the construct, Discussion
thereby validating the model. The validity of the structural model is
determined by the R2 . It measures the percentage of the variance in the Opportunities for the effective management of forest landscape restoration
endogenous explained by the structural model. Tables 2 and 3 show that
variance by the endogenous constructs is less than 2%, which implies The study’s findings demonstrated that incentives, access to infor­
that the variables have small effects in the model. This classification is mation, access to technical assistance all positively impact the effective
based on Cohen (1988) which states that R2 of 0 − 2% in social and management of forest landscape restoration initiatives (EMFLRI) in
behavioral sciences is considered small effect, 2% − 12% as medium, direct and indirect ways. This suggests that when farmers get access to
whilst 26% and above as large effect. additional information, technical assistance, and incentives regarding
forest restoration, it would ensure efficient management of forest
landscape restoration initiatives. This observation is in agreement with
Ullah et al. (2021). Sapkota et al. (2021) elaborate on the dimensions of
information issues by indicating that lack of accessible and timely in­
formation is a contributing factor that impairs the effective management
of forest landscape restoration projects.
The study also showed that incentives had a positive relationship
Table 2 with the effective management of the Forest Landscape Restoration
Summary of inner model for Opportunities. Initiative. Pascual and Perrings (2012) opine that incentives provided by
Type R2 Block Mean AVE existing markets and other institutions are the primary factors influ­
Communality Redundancy encing farmers’ decisions to devote their time and resources to forest
Accinfo Exogenous 0.000 0.800 0.000 0.800 landscape restoration initiatives, which result in sustainable forest
AccTec Endogenous 0.185 0.838 0.155 0.838 management. Incentives such as direct compensation payments, land
Incentive Endogenous 0.144 1.000 0.144 1.000 use development rights, payments or rewards for ecosystem services,
IntCFMgt Endogenous 0.121 0.810 0.098 0.810
and auctions for biodiversity conservation are some of the drivers of
EMFLRI Endogenous 0.577 0.675 0.389 0.674

7
S. Kumi et al.
motivations that have impacted farmers’ participation in ensuring the
success of forest landscape restoration projects (van Noordwijk et al.,
2012; Kaczan and Swallow, 2013; Namirembe et al., 2014; Russi et al.,
2016). The PLS model shows a significant relationship between access to
information and effective management of FLR. This is consistent with
several studies that indicate that for the forest landscape restoration
community to ensure effective management of the FLR initiative, a
method that considers information accessibility is required to produce
data that can serve as the foundation for social learning and adaptive
management, both of which are crucial for FLR processes (Guariguata
and Evans, 2020; Evans et al., 2018; Uriarte and Chazdon, 2016;
Chazdon et al., 2020).
The analysis also revealed that Integrated Community Fire Man­
agement (IntCFMgt), which involved community partnership in con­
trolling fire, had a significant positive relationship with the effective
management of the Forest Landscape Restoration Initiative. This sug­
gests that the farmers and community stakeholders were effectively
involved in fire management over the forest restoration landscape,
contributing considerably to ensuring effective management of the FLR
initiative. This observation is consistent with the assertion by Pistorius
et al. (2017) and Höhl et al. (2020) that the strategy for restoring forest
landscapes should emphasize natural regeneration and recovery of
native species through community-based approaches in managing
restoration landscape, with area enclosures and integrated community
fire management.
Barriers to the effective management of FLR
The results showed that social restrictions (SocRes) had a significant
adverse influence on the effective management of Forest Landscape
Restoration Initiatives (EMFLRI). It implies that social restrictions
among farmers are more likely to impede the successful management of
activities to restore the forest landscape. This observation is in line with
the study by Knight et al. (2011) that shows that if the landowners are
unwilling to cooperate, it may be hard to select the best places for
restoration. Conflicts over resources and land usage, particularly at the
landscape scale, may impede rehabilitation techniques even in sparsely
inhabited areas. Again, as difficulty in sustaining initiatives (DiffSusIn)
and land ownership/tenure rights (LOTR) increase, they will hinder the
effective management of forest restoration. This is in keeping with
studies by Sunderlin et al. (2014) and Felker et al. (2017), which sug­
gested that the absence of formalized tenure rights, unclear rights, and
tenure insecurity are disincentives for local communities and in­
dividuals to participate in restoration initiatives. Overlapping claims
between formalized systems and customary tenure systems, resources
administered by different government ministries, private concessions,
and community lands, as well as between two or more customary sys­
tems, may occur and ultimately affect the management of forest resto­
ration. Inconsistencies in statutory laws governing land tenure and land
use can undermine conservation efforts.
Governance issues (Govn) had negative direct and indirect impacts
on the effective management of the Forest Landscape Restoration
Initiative (EMFLRI). This observation corroborates reports of FLR pro­
jects that show that inadequate or conflicting policies and regulations, as
well as a lack of meaningful engagement with local communities and
other restoration stakeholders, can result in mistrust and resistance and
ultimately derail FLR initiatives (Guariguata et al., 2019; Chazdon et al.,
2017; Reed et al., 2017). Thriving governance requires streamlining
appropriate policies and regulations, including local knowledge and
preferences, and collaboration with relevant stakeholders. Essentially,
as the right government policies increase or strengthen forest restora­
tion, there would be a decline in barriers associated with the manage­
ment of forest landscapes. As reported by IUCN (2020), for forest
landscape restoration to be successful, it needs to be supported by pol­
icies that incentivize, facilitate, and mobilize the implementation of the
restoration project. Policies will go a long way to address various aspects
8
Trees, Forests and People 15 (2024) 100483
of FLR and result in necessary guidelines or roadmaps that cover issues,
including rights and obligations, land uses, and incentives.
Lack of resources had a significant association with the effective
management of Forest Landscape Restoration initiatives. Lack of re­
sources adversely affects FLR (Lachini et al., 2018). Availability of re­
sources provides clarity on responsibility and schedule to implement
FLR. The capacity to quickly and affordably accomplish a project is
made possible by the availability of resources. According to Villard and
Jonsson (2009), without enough funds, it becomes difficult to gauge the
effectiveness of FLR efforts or have the opportunity to change a course of
activities if required.
Conclusion
This study examined the management of the forest landscape resto­
ration project and associated barriers and opportunities. Access to in­
formation, incentives, and technical assistance are indispensable in
engaging farmers, locals, and indigenous communities for effective
forest landscape restoration management. Without stakeholders’ clear
understanding of landscape restoration objectives, there is a higher
tendency for the FLR projects to fail. Even if the powerful actors manage
to implement their activities in the short term, achieving sustainable
future landscape trajectories would be difficult. Social restrictions
among farmers, difficulties in sustaining initiatives, ownership/tenure
rights, and governance issues directly and indirectly impeded the forest
landscape restoration management in the Tain II forest reserve. The
research findings underscore the need for community-based restoration
programs and innovative interventions that offer incentives and tech­
nical assistance to farmers and provide constant information to stake­
holders to foster synergistic future forest landscape trajectories for
sustainable development.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Samuel Kumi: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft,
Validation, Supervision, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis,
Data curation. Paul Kofi Nsiah: Writing – review & editing, Validation,
Supervision, Methodology, Investigation. Hope Kotoka Ahiabu:
Writing – original draft, Methodology, Investigation, Funding acquisi­
tion, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. Emmanuel
Sackey: Writing – review & editing, Software, Methodology, Formal
analysis.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
References
Abugre, S., Sackey, E.K., 2022. Diagnosis of perception of drivers of deforestation using
the partial least squares path modeling approach. Trees For. People 8, 100246.
Abugre, S., Asare, A.I., Anaba, J.A., 2010. Gender equity under the modified Taungya
system (MTS): a case of the Bechem forest district of Ghana. Int. J. Soc. For. 3 (2),
134–150.
Acheampong, E., Insaidoo, T.F., Ros-Tonen, M.A., 2016. Management of Ghana’s
modified taungya system: challenges and strategies for improvement. Agrofor. Syst.
90 (4), 659–674.
Appiah, M., Damnyag, L., Blay, D., Pappinen, A., 2010. Forest and agroecosystem fire
management in Ghana. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change 15 (6), 551–570.
Appiah, M., Yeboah, B., Yeboah, M.A., Danquah, J.A., 2020. Community experiences in
the use of modified Taungya system for restoring degraded forests and improving
livelihoods in Ghana. Management 9 (3), 1.
S. Kumi et al.
Chazdon, R.L., Gutierrez, V., Brancalion, P.H., Laestadius, L., Guariguata, M.R., 2020.
Co-creating conceptual and working frameworks for implementing forest and
landscape restoration based on core principles. Forests 11 (6), 706.
Chazdon, R., et al., 2017. World leaders urged to scale up ’forest landscape restoration’
to combat climate change and biodiversity loss. Glob. Change Biol. 23 (6),
2432–2440.
Cohen, J., 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed. Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, Hillsdale, NJ.
Evans, K., Guariguata, M.R., Brancalion, P.H., 2018. Participatory monitoring to connect
local and global priorities for forest restoration. Conserv. Biol. 32 (3), 525–534.
Felker, M.E., Bong, I.W., De Puy, W.H., Jihadah, L.F., 2017. Considering land tenure in
REDD+ participatory measurement, reporting, and verification: a case study from
Indonesia. PLOS ONE 12, 1–22.
Foli, E., Kant, P., Katila, P., deJong, W., Kleine, M., Oduro, K.A., Obeng, E.A., Guuroh, R.
T., Jayaswal, L., Reddy, P.V., Saidulu, B., 2021. Governance of forest landscape
restoration – analyses of governance issues in cases from Ghana and India.
Occasional Paper No. 34, 54. IUFRO, Vienna, Austria, pp. 10–25.
Guariguata, M.R., Evans, K., 2020. A diagnostic for collaborative monitoring in forest
landscape restoration. Restor. Ecol. 28 (4), 742–749.
Guariguata, M.R., et al., 2019. Critical insights for a sustainable and equitable global
reforestation policy. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 3 (3), 419–428.
Höhl, M., Ahimbisibwe, V., Stanturf, J.A., Elsasser, P., Kleine, M., Bolte, A., 2020. Forest
landscape restoration—what generates failure and success? Forests 11 (9), 938.
IUCN (2020). Supportive policies are key to forest landscape restoration. Available: htt
ps://www.iucn.org/news/restoration-initiative/202012/supportive-policies-are-key
-forest-landscape-restoration.
Jamil, J.B.K., 2012. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling With Incomplete
data. An investigation of the Impact of Imputation Methods. University of Bradford.
PhD thesis.
Kaczan, D., Swallow, B.M., 2013. Designing a payments for ecosystem services (PES)
program to reduce deforestation in Tanzania: an assessment of payment approaches.
Ecol. Econ. 95, 20–30.
Knight, R.D., Mebus, K., d’Angelo, A., Yokoya, K., Heanue, T., Roehl, H., 2011. Ret
signalling integrates a craniofacial muscle module during development.
Development 138 (10), 2015–2024.
Lachini, E., Fiedler, N., Silva, G., Pinheiro, C., Carmo, F., 2018. Operational analysis of
forestry transportation using self-loading trucks in a mountainous region. Floresta
Ambiente 25 (4), 201–256. https://doi.org/10.1590/2179-8087.006015.
Trees, Forests and People 15 (2024) 100483
Namirembe, S., Leimona, B., Van Noordwijk, M., Bernard, F., Bacwayo, K.E., 2014. Co-
investment paradigms as alternatives to payments for tree-based ecosystem services
in Africa. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 6, 89–97.
Pascual, U., Perrings, C., 2012. Developing mechanisms for in situ biodiversity
conservation in agricultural landscapes. Conserving and Valuing Ecosystem Services
and Biodiversity: Economic, Institutional and Social Challenges. Earthscan, 151-74.
Pistorius, T., Carodenuto, S., Wathum, G., 2017. Implementing forest landscape
restoration in Ethiopia. Forests 8 (3), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/f8030061.
Reed, J., et al., 2017. Ten principles for a landscape approach to reconciling agriculture,
conservation, and other competing land uses. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 114 (21),
5523–5530.
Russi, D., Margue, H., Oppermann, R., Keenleyside, C., 2016. Result-based agri-
environment measures: market-based instruments, incentives or rewards? The case
of Baden-Württemberg. Land Use Policy 54, 69–77.
Sanchez, G., 2013. PLS Path Modeling with R, 383. Trowchez Editions, Berkeley, p. 551.
Sapkota, L.M., Jihadah, L., Sato, M., Greijmans, M., Wiset, K., Aektasaeng, N., Gritten, D.,
2021. Translating global commitments into action for successful forest landscape
restoration: lessons from Ing watershed in northern Thailand. Land use policy 104,
104063.
Sunderlin, W.D., Larson, A.M., Duchelle, A.E., Resosudarmo, I.A.P., Huynh, T.B.,
Awono, A., Dokken, T., 2014. In: How are REDD+ proponents addressing tenure
problems? Evidence from Brazil, 55. World Development, Elsevier, Cameroon,
Tanzania, Indonesia, and Vietnam, pp. 37–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
WORLDDEV.2013.01.013.
Ullah, A., Sam, A.S., Sathyan, A.R., Mahmood, N., Zeb, A., Kächele, H., 2021. Role of
local communities in forest landscape restoration: key lessons from the billion trees
afforestation project, Pakistan. Sci. Total Environ. 772, 145613.
Uriarte, M., Chazdon, R.L., 2016. Incorporating natural regeneration in forest landscape
restoration in tropical regions: synthesis and key research gaps. Biotropica 48 (6),
915–924.
Van Noordwijk, M., Leimona, B., Jindal, R., Villamor, G.B., Vardhan, M., Namirembe, S.,
Tomich, T.P., 2012. Payments for environmental services: evolution toward efficient
and fair incentives for multifunctional landscapes. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 37
(1), 389–420.
Villard, M.A., Jonsson, B.G., 2009. Setting conservation targets for managed forest
landscapes. Cambridge University Press.
Whittaker, A.R., 2020. Why we fail: Stakeholders’ perceptions of the social and
ecological barriers to reforestation in southern Malawi. People Nat 2 (2), 450–467.
https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10084.