Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note June 2023 REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note June 2023 © 2023 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000; Internet: www.worldbank.org This work is a product of the staff of the World Bank Group. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or currency of the data included in this work and does not assume responsibility for any errors, omissions, or discrepancies in the information, or liability with respect to the use of or failure to use the information, methods, processes, or conclusions set forth. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Nothing herein shall constitute or be construed or considered to be a limitation upon or waiver of the privileges and immunities of The World Bank, all of which are specifically reserved. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for non- commercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Please cite the work as follows: “World Bank. 2022. Armenia Landscape Restoration Note © World Bank.” All queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. Cover / Layout design: Vladimir Mirzoyev Cover photo: Gosh Lake, Armenia, by @wirestock, Freepik.com CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note iii CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS..............................................................................................................1 LIST OF ACRONYMS................................................................................................................ 2 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY........................................................................................................ 4 2. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................... 6 3. COUNTRY AND LAND USE CONTEXT................................................................................10 4. STATUS AND MANAGEMENT OF FORESTS AND FORESTS IN PROTECTED AREAS........14 4.1 Forests ..........................................................................................................................14 4.2 Forest management.......................................................................................................16 4.3 Protected areas.............................................................................................................18 4.4 Biodiversity conservation in forest areas.......................................................................21 5. ECONOMIC CONTRIBUTIONS OF FORESTS..................................................................... 23 5.1 Provisioning services.................................................................................................... 23 5.2 Non-wood forest products (NWFPs)............................................................................. 28 5.3 Regulating services...................................................................................................... 30 5.4 Cultural services............................................................................................................31 6. FOREST AND LAND DEGRADATION, AND ITS COSTS..................................................... 34 6.1 Extent of forest and land degradation........................................................................... 34 6.2 Economic and other costs of forest and land degradation........................................... 35 6.3 Drivers of forest and land degradation......................................................................... 35 6.4 Opportunities for sustainable management of degraded land...................................... 38 7. FORESTS AND CLIMATE CHANGE.................................................................................... 42 7.1 Climate change and its impact on forests...................................................................... 42 7.2 Role of forests in climate change mitigation.................................................................. 44 8. LEGAL, INSTITUTIONAL, AND POLICY FRAMEWORK..................................................... 47 8.1 Key forest institutions and their development............................................................... 47 8.2 Forest ownership.......................................................................................................... 50 8.3 Decentralized bodies dealing with forests.....................................................................51 8.4 Civil society involvement in forests and forestry......................................................... 53 8.5 Strategic forest and land use planning......................................................................... 55 8.6 Armenia’s international commitments as related to forests.......................................... 58 8.7 Forest financing and PPPs............................................................................................ 59 8.8 Forest education and awareness raising on forests and trees .................................... 60 9. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................ 62 BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................................................................................................................... 64 iv Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Map of Armenia.........................................................................................................10 Figure 2: Land cover types of Armenia.....................................................................................12 Figure 3: Forest cover of Armenia ...........................................................................................15 Figure 4: Nationally designated protected areas in Armenia (SPAs)........................................ 20 Figure 5: Fuelwood production in Armenia.............................................................................. 24 Figure 6: Timber harvesting in Armenia.................................................................................. 25 Figure 7: Wood supply from fallen wood in Armenia............................................................... 26 Figure 8: Timber trade by Armenia.......................................................................................... 27 Figure 9: Sawnwood production and trade by Armenia........................................................... 27 Figure 10: Wood and wood products trade by Armenia........................................................... 27 Figure 11: Drivers and impacts of forest land degradation in Armenia..................................... 36 Figure 12: Measures for and impacts of sustainable forest land management in Armenia...... 39 Figure 13: GHG removal by forests in Armenia and its economic value................................... 45 Figure 14: Net GHG emissions from various sectors except forestry in Armenia in 2017......... 45 Figure 15: Institutional set-up as it relates to forests and forestry.......................................... 48 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Overall landscape types of Armenia as per bioclimatic zones.....................................14 Table 2: National Parks and State reserves of Armenia............................................................19 Table 3: Economic value of NWFPs in Armenia....................................................................... 30 Table 4: Economic value of selected regulatory services in Armenia.......................................31 Table 5: Economic costs of deforestation in Armenia during 1990–2020................................ 35 Table 6: Total net GHG emissions in Armenia.......................................................................... 45 Table 7: Division of selected tasks between the MoE, the Forest Committee, and Hayantar SNCO................................................................................................................ 49 LIST OF BOXES Box 1: An example of an introduced berry with income potential - sea buckthorn.................. 29 Box 2: Wildlife watching and recreational hunting....................................................................31 Box 3: Recommended FLR options from Landscape Restoration Strategy and Action Plan 2022–2032............................................................................................................41 Box 4: Predicted climate change in Armenia........................................................................... 43 Box 5: REDD+/Forest carbon as an opportunity for Armenia?................................................. 46 Box 6: Success stories of civil society actors in forest landscape restoration........................ 54 Box 7: Examples of forest capacity building in forest education..............................................61 Box 8: Four strategic priority areas of Landscape Restoration Strategy ................................ 62 CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This Policy Note was prepared by the World in Europe and Central Asia). The team also Bank team including Rajesh Koirala (Senior thanks Linh Van Nguyen (Senior Program Environmental Specialist), Madhavi M. Pillai Assistant), Grace Aguilar (Program Assistant) (Senior Natural Resources Management for administrative support and Nigara Abate Specialist), Elena Strukova Golub (Senior (ET Consultant) for editorial support.  Environmental Economist), Irina Ghaplanyan The team extends its deep gratitude to the (Senior Climate Change Specialist), Juergen officials of the government of the Republic of Blaser (Consultant), Myles McDonagh Armenia who supported this work with their (Consultant), Sepul Barua (Consultant) and knowledge and insights as well as through Areg Karapetyan (Consultant). data provided to the team. The team thanks The team is grateful to the peer reviewer the management and staff of the Ministry of Timothy Brown (Senior Natural Resource Environment, particularly the Department of Management Specialist). The team is also Forest Policy, Hayantar SNCO, and Forest grateful for the invaluable guidance and Committee for the valuable contributions and support from Carolin Geginat (Country feedback. The team thanks many development Manager for Armenia), Sameh Naguib partners, who shared their knowledge and Wahba (Regional Director for Sustainable helped shape the contents and final policy Development at the Europe and Central Asia), recommendations of this report.  Paola Agostini (Lead Natural Resource This work would not have been possible Management Specialist) and Sanjay without financial support from the Climate Srivastava (Practice Manager; Environment Support Facility (CSF), the NDC Partnership in Sustainable Development Department and PROGREEN. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 1 LIST OF ACRONYMS AAC Annual Allowable Cut ATP Armenia Tree Project CBD Convention on Biological Diversity CEPA Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora EaP Eastern Partnership ENP European Neighbourhood Policy EU European Union FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations FLR Forest Landscape Restoration FMP Forest Management Plan GCF Green Climate Fund GDP Gross Domestic Product GEF Global Environment Facility GHG Greenhouse Gas GIZ German International Development Agency (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit) GoA Government of Armenia HCVF High Conservation Value Forest HEMC Hydrometeorology and Environmental Monitoring Center IBA Important Bird Area ICT Information and Communication Technology IMF International Monetary Fund INDC Intended Nationally Determined Contribution IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature LDN Land Degradation Neutrality M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MoE Ministry of Environment (former Ministry of Nature Protection) 2 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS MoTD Ministry of Territorial Development NAP National Adaptation Plan NBSAP National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan NDA National Designated Authority NDC Nationally Determined Contribution NFI National Forest Inventory NFP National Forest Program NFPS National Forest Policy and Strategy NGO Nongovernment Organization NPV Net Present Value NWFP Non-Wood Forest Product OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development OSCE Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe PPP Public-Private Partnership ROAM Restoration Opportunities Assessment Methodology SAP Simplified Approval Process (GCF) SDGs Sustainable Development Goals SNCO State Non-Commercial Organization SPA Specially Protected Area UN United Nations UNCCD United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNECE United Nations Economic Commission for Europe UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change UNFF United Nations Forum on Forests USAID United States Agency for International Development WEI Water Exploitation Index WRI World Resources Institute WWF World Wildlife Fund Currency and conversion $1 = AMD 390 (Oando, April 2023) CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 3 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This note synthesizes multiple reports cultural services. With only 11.2 percent of produced under World Bank support the territory forested and significant rates to the Government of Armenia (GoA) of land degradation, forest land restoration in undertaking landscape restoration (FLR) has strong potential. Meeting the Bonn opportunities assessment and provides Challenge of 50,000 ha (achieving 12.9 a detailed overview of opportunities and percent of forest cover) afforested by 2030 challenges in the forestry sector. The note is a useful intermediate target toward the has been developed through a consultative stated aim of eventually reaching 20 percent process and is expected to inform all relevant forest cover by 2050.2 Degradation pressures stakeholders on the current status of the persist however, and recent energy cost forest sector and opportunities to further increases will place further pressure on the improve it. resource. Comprehensive recent studies on Armenia is a forest-poor country; only 11.2 forest landscape restoration (FLR) present percent of the territory (334,100 hectares a highly credible roadmap and action plan [ha]) is forested, which is concentrated in that are the outcome of broad stakeholder three marzes:1 Tavush and Lori in the north consultation. The field investment contained and Syunik in the south. The predominant in the strategy is highly labor intensive and forest type is naturally grown broad-leaved in the post-COVID-19 recovery represents mountain forest with a small area of pine a potential triple win of enhanced rural forest. Estimates on the state of the forests, development, biodiversity protection, their extent, quality, health, and harvested and climate benefits (both mitigation and volumes vary widely depending on the data adaptation). sources and methodology used. Based on The objective of this note is to strengthen wood consumption data, harvesting volumes the dialogue with Armenia on the forest must be much higher than officially reported, sector in light of the ongoing reforms and while forest growth is lower than the current to explore how the country can reverse official estimates. These divergences, landscape degradation and increase its combined with limited silvicultural contribution to post-pandemic economic management and exacerbated by fires and recovery. Each hectare of forest is estimated uncontrolled grazing, mean that sustainable to deliver on average $417 per year in total forest use is clearly far from guaranteed. value from a number of ecosystem services3 Forestry can make more of a contribution (or $138 million annually). The note presents to Armenia, given its rich biodiversity an overview of the sector, highlighting and potential for social, economic, and these ecosystem services and outlining 1 Armenia is subdivided into 11 administrative divisions. Of these, 10 are provinces, known as marzes (մարզեր) and in the singular form marz (մարզ ) in Armenian. It is important to note that the data on forest cover are based on the last forest inventory, which was done back in 1993 (Source: Ministry of Environment - MoE). 2 This target was initially mentioned in Armenia’s First National Communication to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) (Source: MoE). 3 Value-transfer method is used for estimating the values of ecosystem services. The values of 10 ecosystem services are estimated — fuelwood, water, medicinal plants, wild fruits, mushroom, honey, habitat/species protection, hydrological regulation, greenhouse gas (GHG) removal, and recreation. The values of other ecosystem services could not be estimated due to the lack of required data. 4 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS opportunities to enhance the flow of value could improve the performance of local staff even further, including through increased and managers. A coherent and simplified jobs and forest associated livelihoods. regulatory support to address the challenge The important drivers of degradation are could be prioritized. addressed, as is the importance of the sector to climate mitigation, before a brief list of Priorities recommendations is given. Formalizing and adopting a national strategy for landscape restoration Key issues is recommended. 4 As part of a study Forests in Armenia face substantial commissioned by the World Bank, UNIQUE challenges. A significant share of forests Forestry and Land Use GmbH applied the is considered to be degraded. The direct Restoration Opportunities Assessment drivers of degradation and deforestation Methodology (ROAM), developed by the are: the encroachment of agriculture onto International Union for Conservation of forest lands and livestock grazing on forest Nature (IUCN) and the World Resources lands; the heavy dependence on forests by Institute (WRI), to identify potential areas rural population, including unsustainable for FLR and prioritize them at national and harvesting of fuelwood and non-wood subnational levels. The synthesis of this work products; conversion of forest lands to is a ‘Landscape Restoration Strategy and other land uses, including infrastructure Action Plan 2022–2032’ that identifies: eight and land development, mining industry, FLR intervention options; required changes in and so on; and an increase in pest, disease, legislation and policy to support the activity; and fire damage, exacerbated by climate the capacities required in administration, change. Indirect drivers include the lack of relevant government / nongovernment awareness among the general population organizations, and local communities; a about the importance of sustainable forest roadmap and action plan over a 10-year management and the lack of enforcement of period; financing needs and potential forest regulations and alternative, affordable sources; and a monitoring and evaluation sources of energy. (M&E) framework to ensure success. The The sectoral policies could be adjusted initial target over 10 years is the Bonn to support the required increase in FLR. Challenge of 50,000 ha afforested.5 Meeting the Bonn Challenge of restoring The draft strategy has benefited from 50,000 ha by 2030 is problematic if a comprehensive consultation across state business-as-usual approach to forest institutions, community organizations, planning and governance is used. The state nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), forest authorities lack physical equipment, and others. As of mid-2023, this document other infrastructure, and capacities is under final review by the GoA. Its formal needed for climate adaptation, FLR, and adoption will require a clear mandate from nursery management. Collaborative forest the GoA to prepare the strategy, the lead management and the principles supporting it role assumed by government agencies 4 Under the EU Green Deal and the EU Biodiversity Strategy 2030, the EU has pledged to plant 3 billion trees and has already exceeded this goal. https://environment.ec.europa.eu/strategy/biodiversity-strategy-2030/3-billion-trees_en. 5 According to the MoE, Department of Forest Policy, the Forest Policy and Strategy and National Action Program is currently under the development. FLR measures will be integrated into a single document instead of having several strategies and action plans for the same sector. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 5 in all phases of the strategy preparation, monitoring of forest biodiversity. and a binding commitment of the GoA to Building institutional capacity through implement the strategy and provide it with information and communication appropriate funding, perhaps contingent on technologies (ICTs) and a Forest the availability of donor resources. Formal Management Information System will raise acceptance and implementation of the FLR the efficacy of existing staff and management strategy is the principal recommendation of and support the management of the expanded this note and is assigned the highest priority roster of contractors, contracts, equipment, for immediate implementation. infrastructure, and human resources needed Adopting a comprehensive National to achieve the forest expansion targets. Forest Monitoring System is advised. Such a system will enhance quality control Linked to the FLR strategy, but with a and M&E of all activities and not just those scope that encompasses existing forests associated with a single project. and restored landscapes, this system incorporates a national forest inventory (NFI) A specific action plan is recommended and land cover classification. The system to address energy issues, particularly will be a comprehensive monitoring system fuel poverty in rural areas where forest that aligns with national reporting needs resources are under threat. An integrated and ongoing policy formation. Currently, the view is required to combat the use of forests State Forest Inventory System of Armenia is as a ‘backstop’ source of heating fuel in based on forest management planning data, any fuel or energy price crisis. This action which are aggregated from individual plots, will address the wider economic context, and is different from the wider practice of including the easy availability of alternatives aggregating data on NFI based on sample such as a natural gas, tax treatment of plot networks. In addition, the comprehensive imported wood (biofuel), and link with work National Forest Monitoring System assumes on improved enforcement of regulations. 6 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS 2. INTRODUCTION Forests in Armenia have long been a which has an estimated economic value of source of a broad range of provisioning, $33 million.6 Furthermore, by hosting many regulating, and cultural ecosystem of Armenia’s over 100 ancient monasteries services that are vital for not only the economy and cultural and religious sites and being of the country but also the health and well- predominantly located in mountainous being of its citizens. Fuelwood—the most landscapes, the country’s forests offer important forest-based provisioning service several important cultural services. Most in Armenia — is a crucial source of energy prominent of them are recreation, wilderness, for cooking and heating, amid high costs of scenic beauty, and spiritual values. Forests gas and electricity, for all households in rural and related industries including nature- areas and lower-income households in urban based tourism also sustain valuable rural areas. Other important provisioning services employment. include timber, food (wild fruits, mushroom, The aggregate economic value of the and honey), and medicine. However, ecosystem services is $417 per ha per year extensive production forests cannot be (in 2021 constant $). This corresponds to a accommodated within the country due to the total ecosystem services value of about $138 topography, climate, and availability of land. million per year for all forests of Armenia, At the same time, the service values that which is equivalent to 1.1 percent of the forests and trees can deliver provide vital country’s gross domestic product (GDP) in support to other land uses as well as make 2020. It should be noted here that due to the an essential contribution to the well-being limited availability of necessary biophysical and quality of life of the whole population. and socioeconomic data, valuation of Forests—by regulating watersheds—provide only 10 forest-based ecosystem services a significant portion of water and its more was possible for this Policy Note. Had the even distribution for irrigation and drinking in valuation of more ecosystem services been the country, especially during relatively dry possible, the aggregate economic value periods of the year. Armenia’s forests—by would have been much higher than what is maintaining hydrological balance and water reported. flow in rivers and streams, reducing surface Continued land degradation affects the runoff, and thus preventing soil erosion vital role of forests in providing ecosystem and siltation—play a crucial role in keeping services. The proximate drivers of such agricultural land fertile. Also, by conserving degradation are overcutting; overgrazing; biodiversity (habitat/species protection) and mining; infrastructure development; and supporting pollination, forests contribute to forest fire, pests, and diseases. The key the production of food and other crops. underlying drivers are economic activities Forests are also an important carbon sink, that intensify land use competition and high on average, removing about 0.5 million costs of gas and electricity, particularly for tCO2eq greenhouse gas (GHG) each year the low-income households. Such costs are 6 There is a need for recalculation of the national GHG inventory estimates for the Land Use, Land-use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) sector, identified by CITEPA/ONFI reports (2021) (MoE). CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 7 likely to remain high in the foreseeable future, and economic potential of the state forests. given the current geopolitical situation, Armenia’s National Forest Program (NFP) leading to continued forest degradation for 2005–2015 (a new Forest Policy and Strategy fuelwood harvesting at the same rate or and National Action Program of Armenia faster than before. Soil erosion, uncontrolled currently under development) identifies surface runoff, landslides, disturbance to an optimal forest cover as 20.1 percent, the hydrological cycle, and flooding are which is nearly double today’s forest area. commonly attributed to deforestation and Armenia’s updated Nationally Determined forest degradation in Armenia. In 1990– Contribution (NDC) for 2021–2030 seeks to 2020, the country lost nearly 6,300  ha of reduce the country’s GHG emissions by 40 forests which resulted in a net GHG emission percent from 1990 emission levels, and with of about 93,000 tCO2eq per year.7 Other the adoption of the new NFP it is envisaged vital ecosystem services are also lost due to to increase the forest cover to 12.9 percent deforestation and forest degradation. The by 2030, corresponding to an increase of economic costs of deforestation—in terms of 50,000 ha of forests.8 Both sustainable use GHG emissions and loss of other ecosystem of land and better forestry management will services—are estimated to be over $8 be necessary to achieve these targets. The million per year (in 2021 cost $). Overall land NDC also highlights afforestation to prevent degradation in Armenia is estimated to have erosion as national priorities in the Strategy a total economic cost of $111 million per year of the Republic of Armenia on Conservation, (in 2021 constant $). Protection, Reproduction, and Use of Biological Diversity from 2015. Forest areas are almost entirely under public ownership. The majority is on state Private forestry is not considered an forest land with roughly 25 percent of its attractive investment in Armenia. While proportion in protected areas and all are under Armenia’s Forest Code enshrines the right to the mantle of the Ministry of Environment private ownership and community ownership (MoE). Forest policy and legislation are over forests and forest lands, private forestry largely defined in the Forest Code 2005, is not commonly practiced. Lack of adequate updated in 2018. It lays out requirements financial incentives and supporting policies for control and management but generally and an underdeveloped forest industry act as lacks provision for consultation and wider barriers for investments in private forestry. stakeholder engagement. The Forest Policy Community-based organizations lack Department, the Forest Committee, and adequate technical capacity and resources the ‘Hayantar’ State Non-Commercial to establish new forests and to carry out Organization (Hayantar [ArmForest] SNCO), environmentally and economically sound all under the MoE, are the national-level management, further limiting the options for institutions in charge of sustainable use establishing private forests. of forests in Armenia. Forest landscape Overall, while the Armenian forest sector restoration (FLR) is a critical goal of all these currently faces many problems and institutions to protect biodiversity and ensure challenges, a range of effective actions efficient use of the environmental, social, can be taken, with outside support where 7 Forest Landscape Restoration in the Caucasus and Central Asia (ECE/TIM/2018/Inf.3) report by UNECE (2019) estimates “Armenia’s restoration potential as 100,000 ha, which corresponds to the forest area degraded or lost between the 1990s and 2018.” Source: UNECE 2019. 8 The target 50,000 ha of area is recommended to cover both reforestation and afforestation activities in Armenia (MoE). 8 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS appropriate, to ensure that there is an services—is estimated to be just over expansion of trees and forests in the country. $199 million over a 30-year period. This is This will deliver products and services to equivalent to about 1.44 percent of Armenia’s support the economy and reduce the threat GDP in 2021. According to UNECE (2019), of damaging influences, including loss and Armenia has the potential to restore 100,000 degradation of the resource base from ha of forest land that is heavily degraded stagnation, overcutting, fire, uncontrolled and deforested. The supply of ecosystem grazing and, in the long-term, climate services from degraded and deforested change. land has reduced substantially and thus Net present value (NPV) of the restoration provides economic benefits in economic benefits of FLR—in terms of terms of the incremental supply of ecosystem the incremental supply of ecosystem services in the country.8 9 Heavily degraded and deforested land—that has potential for restoration in Armenia—has substantially depleted standing stock and biodiversity. Therefore, it is assumed that the land to be restored offers only 25 percent of economic benefits in terms of ecosystem services supply in comparison to fully restored forests. This means that the incremental economic benefits of restoration in terms of ecosystem services supply are 75 percent. As it takes time for forest land to be restored fully, it is assumed that 50 percent of the incremental benefits will be available in years 1–5 and 100 percent from year 6 onward. It is also assumed that 100,000 ha is restored in 10 years with 10,000 ha in each year. An ecosystem services value of $416.7 per ha per year—that is estimated for this note (see Chapter 5) — is used for estimating the economic benefits of restoration. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 9 3. COUNTRY AND LAND USE CONTEXT The Republic of Armenia is a landlocked of independence. After independence from country, with Türkiye to the west, Georgia the Soviet Union in 1991, Armenia was quickly to the north, Azerbaijan to the east, and drawn into a long-standing violent conflict Iran to the south (Figure 1). Armenia has a 9 with Azerbaijan, mainly over the Armenian long-standing cultural history as one of the Nagorno-Karabakh region. Armenia is a earliest Christian civilizations. Over the last unitary multiparty republic, based on the 2000 years, it frequently oscillated between constitution of 1995. The country undertook Roman, Persian, Byzantine, Arabic, Mongol, a series of fundamental democratic reforms Turkish, and Russian control as well as periods in 2018 after a nonviolent Velvet Revolution. Figure 1: Map of Armenia10 With an area of 29,743 km2, it is the 2020b), and the population density in Armenia smallest country in the Caucasus region. 11 is 104 per km2. The population is 98 percent Its population is 2.97 million (World Bank ethnically Armenian. According to various 10 Summarized to large extent from Armenia - Government and society | Britannica and https://data.worldbank.org/country/AM. The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the World Bank. 11 12 Areas as indicated by the World Bank. 10 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS estimates, the total number of Armenians in is 0.776 (UNDP 2020).17 the world is 5–9 million13 with the majority Current geopolitical events are a threat living in the states of the former Soviet Union to the economy generally and forest and more than 1 million living in the US. The resources in particular as they are a source major languages are Armenian and Russian. of alternative fuel. Russia’s invasion of Construction, services, and agriculture Ukraine and ongoing tensions with Ukraine are the most important sectors of the and ongoing tensions with neighboring Armenian economy. The service and Azerbaijan will have unpredictable industry sectors have been the drivers of consequences for the economic, energy economic growth through the expansion of and social environment of the country as a tourism, trade, and mining. Mining dominates whole and, given the high dependency of the Armenia’s goods exports. Exports of mined14 country on affordable energy sources from resources, including finished products Russia, the fate of the forest resources in based on raw materials such as aluminum particular. foil and raw diamonds, account for over The climate varies with elevation but half of Armenia’s merchandise exports is predominantly dry. Armenia is a annually. Mined copper resources represent mountainous country characterized by a the single biggest contributor to Armenia’s large variety of landscapes but also high merchandise exports. Cash remittances geological instability. The average elevation sent home by Armenians working abroad are is about 1,800 m above sea level. There are another important contributor to the GDP, no lowlands: half the territory lies at elevation representing 13 percent of the GDP.15 of 1,000–2,000 m with only about 10 percent An upper - middle - income country, of the country lying below 1,000 m. Armenia’s Armenia has seen strong progress in climate is subtropical dry and continental with poverty reduction. In 2021, 36  percent of high regional climatic variation according to the people lived in rural areas and 64 percent the elevation. Mean annual precipitation to in urban areas, mainly in the capital, Yerevan potential evapotranspiration ratio delineates (1.092 million people) (Statistical Committee three major climatic zones (as defined by IPCC of the Republic of Armenia 2021). Armenia 2019): warm temperate dry, cool temperate is classified as an ‘upper-middle-income’ dry, and cool temperate moist. The overall country by the World Bank, with gross national pattern is wet spring, dry summer, with moist income per capita of $13,110, and 44.7 percent autumn and winter, with winter precipitation of the population was considered poor, being falling as snow at higher elevations.18 Average at the upper-middle-income class poverty line June and August temperature in the plain is ($5.50 per capita per day) in 2020. Poverty 16 25°C and more; January temperature in the at the international poverty line ($1.90 per plain and foothills is −2°C to −5°C. Winter is capita per day) has fallen drastically since particularly rough on the elevated, windswept 2001 and remains low, at only 0.4 percent in plateau. The ranges of the Lesser Caucasus 2020 (Statistical Committee of the Republic prevent humid air masses from reaching inner of Armenia 2021). Human Development Index central Armenia. On the mountain slopes, 13 https://www.britannica.com/place/Armenia/Settlement-patterns. 14 Armenia - Mining and Minerals (trade.gov). 15 https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/BX.TRF.PWKR.DT.GD.ZS?locations=AM&view=chart. https://databank.worldbank.org/views/reports/reportwidget.aspx?Report_Name=CountryProfile&Id=b450fd57&tbar=y&dd=y&inf=n&zm=n&country=ARM. 16 17 http://hdr.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/ARM. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 11 yearly rainfall is around 800 mm, while on the elevation tundra. The semidesert landscape plains, it is low at 400 mm or less. is covered with scant vegetation. Dry steppes predominate with drought-resistant grasses, Though it is a relatively small country, the thorny bushes, and juniper. The forest complexity of terrain and biogeographic zone lies in the southeast and northeast of regions within Armenia results in a Armenia, in higher elevations up to 2,200– rich fauna and flora. Armenia lies at the 2,400 m above sea level. The alpine tundra, junction of various biogeographic regions with its scant cushion plants, covers only and is characterized by a wide variety limited mountain areas and solitary peaks. of landscapes (Figure 2). There are five Landscape and biological diversity are a altitudinal vegetation zones: semidesert, unique and important asset for nature-based steppe, forest, alpine meadow, and high- tourism. Figure 2: Land cover types of Armenia Source: The Acopian Center for the Environment, American University of Armenia. Agriculture is an important sector in the instead.20 Agriculture has a long tradition economy, accounting for about two-fifths and supports an important food business of the GDP and employing 30 percent of sector. The sector employs the most people the labor force,19 although its contribution but average annual earnings are low. to the economy is on the decline, with the Agricultural lands cover 64.2 percent of the services and industrial sectors growing territory and arable land accounts for less 18 https://climateknowledgeportal.worldbank.org/country/armenia/climate-data-historical. 12 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS than 18.12 percent of the total area. Pastures Viticulture is important in various parts of and meadows cover about 46.09 percent the country. Extended orchard crops most of the territory. 21 Farmlands in mountain commonly include peaches and apricots, regions form a mosaic of cereals, orchards, together with other temperate fruit trees. vineyards, and pastures. Above 1,000 m On agroforestry land, walnuts, hazelnuts, elevation, cattle raising is important and the almonds, pomegranates, figs, and kiwi fruits extensive alpine pastures are used for raising are produced. Beekeeping is widespread, livestock (cattle, dairy cows, and sheep). and tobacco is widely cultivated. 19 https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.AGR.EMPL.ZS?locations=AM. 20 https://www.adaptation-undp.org/projects/supporting-armenia-advance-their-nap-process. 21 Based on cadastral land cover classification data of Armenia (2022 year) (MoE). CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 13 4. STATUS AND MANAGEMENT OF FORESTS AND FORESTS IN PROTECTED AREAS 4.1 FORESTS area in 2021 to be about 330,000 ha or about Armenia is a mountainous country with 11 percent of the total land area (Figure limited and unevenly distributed forest 3). Forest cover is distributed unevenly,22 resources. The landscapes in Armenia include occurring predominately in the mid-zone of semideserts and deserts, steppes, forests, mountains, at altitudes between 500 m and and subalpine and alpine lands (Table 1). The 2,100 m in the north and up to 2,500 m in natural vegetation of each landscape has been the south. Approximately 64 percent of the altered significantly due to the long history of country’s forests are located in two marzes different land use practices within them. Data (Tavush and Lori). There is a third large forest on the current extent and quality of forests area in the southern marz of Syunik. Small areas are contradictory and according to the various of primary forest totaling 17,000 ha remain in sources, the forested area varies between mountainous areas of the country. With 0.1 249,000 ha and 334,100 ha. For this report, a ha forest per capita, Armenia is far below Landsat 8 based remote sensing analysis was averages of Commonwealth of Independent conducted and estimated the total forested States (2.7 ha) and the world (0.5–0.8 ha).23 Table 1: Overall landscape types of Armenia as per bioclimatic zones Percentage Landscape type Altitude (m) General distribution land covera Semideserts and deserts 700–1,300 10 Ararat valley and adjacent hills Mountain steppes / meadows 1,300–2,100 37 Dominant landscapes in the country Forests and shrublands / Mainly Tavush and Lori Mars in the 500–2,200 20 woodlands north, Syunik Mars in the south Throughout, principal extensive Subalpine and alpine meadows >2,100 28 meadows/pasture Note: a. Remaining 5 percent of area is wetland and water surfaces. Forests suffer from high levels of further damage with forest-covered areas degradation. The potential forest and gradually turning into grasslands. Estimates woodland area (including shrubland) is from the feasibility study for a national estimated to have been 20 percent of the land forest inventory (NFI) in 2005 (which was area but this has been reduced substantially not undertaken) suggest that 70 percent of over the past. More recently, challenging Armenia’s forests are degraded or overmature socioeconomic conditions and the energy (Hayantar 2005). This results from cutting crisis 22 23 in 1990/2000s contributed to significant old high-quality mixed oak and beech forests 22 http://www.davidpublisher.com/Public/uploads/Contribute/5a55bae371dc7.pdf. 23 Junge-Fripp 2011 Understanding the Forestry Sector of Armenia - Current Conditions and Choices - Final report. 14 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS mainly through sanitary cuts24 and the lack out of the official forest area of 328,470 ha, of application of silvicultural measures. 310,000 ha are naturally regenerating forests. Mature forests became young low-quality For 1990 the same statistic was 321,000 ha, coppice hornbeam forests because of high- suggesting a loss in natural forest cover of grade cuttings, including unregulated timber 11,000 ha over 30 years. Contrary to the exports. In the few planted conifer forests in official forest cover level of 11 percent, many the basin of Lake Sevan, approximately one- national forestry experts and civil society quarter of the forest stands around the lake organizations assert that the real forest have been clear-cut, leading to accelerated cover of Armenia is 7–8 percent. This issue is erosion. According to the FAO-FRA (2020b), explored more in Section 7 of this document. Figure 3: Forest cover of Armenia Source: Based on Landsat images 2021, manually improved with Google Earth ©HAFL, 2022. Natural forests 25 in Armenia are four major forest types distributed throughout predominately deciduous (97 percent). the country: There are some relict stands of the only ി Beech dominated forests (Fagus orientalis) native conifer tree species in Armenia, the make up to more than 40 percent of Caucasian pine (Pinus kochiana). There are all forests. These are widespread in 24 Sanitary cut or felling is mostly defined as harvesting that is done outside medium-term FMPs due to unexpected events such as pests, disease infection, storm damage, and other comparable reasons. 25 The term ‘natural forests’ is used in this report and refers to naturally regenerating forests. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 15 northern Armenia, particularly on north- 81.3 percent of Armenia’s total forest cover facing slopes at altitudes of 800–2,000 area and make up 93.96 percent of the total m, with the best growth between 1,000 wood stock.27 Other tree species—Caucasian and 1,800 m asl. Other tree species in pine, birch, elm, maple, ash, pear tree, apple the beech forests include Caucasian tree, yew, hazel, plane, walnut, and others— lime (Tilia cordata), Litinov birch (Betula are mainly represented together with forest- litwinow), and the spindle tree (Euonymus forming species and cover 18.7 percent of europaeus). the forest cover area. ി Oak forests with different species (for example, Quercus macranthera; Q. 4.2 FOREST MANAGEMENT iberica) are characterized by complex Forests are classified according to major and varied typological composition and objectives such as protective (freshwater grow mainly between 600 and 2,200 m preservation and soil stabilization) or special asl. These cover about one-third of the purpose (that is, specially protected areas forested area and often occur mixed with [SPAs], urban and recreational forests, and other broad-leaved species such as ash so on). Only care and sanitary cutting are (Fraxinus excelsior), hornbeam (Carpinus allowed, and in forest reserves no felling is betulus), Georgian maple (Acer ibericum), allowed. Production forest is available, but its cork elm (Ulmus suberosus), and field extent is limited. Forest regeneration cuttings maple (Acer campestre). are allowed for such forest category. ി Hornbeam rich forests, covering about 14 Protection of soil, water, and biodiversity percent, occur at elevations between 800 predominate as management objectives. m and 1,800 m and may also be mixed with Up to 50  percent of Armenia’s forests are oak and wild fruit tree species. Hornbeam located on difficult-to-reach terrain, either also appears as a secondary species in on steep hillsides or in ravines, with major the few remaining natural pine forests. implications for the country’s overall forest ി Pistachio/wild fruit forest, characterized resources comprising inaccessible, partly by shrub and small tree size (woodland overaged forests with wood resources that type), is a fourth major forest type cannot be effectively managed for production including species such as pistachio and/or protection. By contrast, more (Pistacia mutica), almond (Amygdalus accessible forests are heavily degraded due fenzlianum), sea buckthorn (Hippophae to overexploitation including illegal cutting, rhamnoides), and wild cherry (Prunus livestock grazing, and so on. spp. 26 It occurs at elevations between Forest management plans (FMPs) 900 m and 1,200 m in the north and at are key to the sector. Wood (including higher elevations (1,800–2,000 m) in the timber) harvesting is carried out by the south of the country (World Bank 2020a). state enterprise Hayantar and its technical Beech and oak forests are of the highest branches on the basis of FMPs regulated productivity and the most productive by the Forest Code and the instruction forests can be found at altitudes of 1,300– of the Government of Armenia (GoA) on 1,600 m above sea level. The main forest ‘Development of Management Plans for species (beech, oak, and hornbeam) cover Forest Enterprises.’ The law does not provide 26 USAID, 2009 27 State forest inventory data, 1993 (MoE). 16 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS private industry with licenses to harvest potential to be used as afforestation sites. wood for commercial purposes (World However, afforestation and reforestation Bank 2020a). The 10-year FMPs define capacity is limited. Annually from 2000 to the locations; time frames of measures on 2009, an average of 3,354 ha were afforested protection, guarding, and use of forests; and reforested, 385 ha newly planted, 594 ha and the volume of the annual allowable cuts regenerated through coppicing, and 2,374 ha (AACs). Most of the FMPs were introduced naturally regenerated with the help of fencing and developed with donor assistance and fertilizers. Annually from 2009 to 2013 in 2006–2008 (German International only 351 ha, on average, were afforested and Development Agency, Deutsche Gesellschaft reforested, in large part through international für Internationale Zusammenarbeit, GIZ) and projects (Ministry of Nature Protection 2014). approved in 2010. A revision and update of According to further official data, annual FMPs in north-eastern Armenia is currently average reforestation activity increased to funded by the state budget, receiving support 2,289 ha between 2018 and the end of 2020. also from the United Nations Development If we expect to achieve the Bonn Challenge of Programme (UNDP)/Global Environment 50,000 ha in the remaining 10 years to 2030,30 Facility (GEF) project.28 FMPs are not always current levels will have to increase to over properly implemented, in part due to lack of 4,300 ha annually or about 30 percent higher capacity for their implementation. than the most productive period (2000– Despite the high volume of wood use and 2009).31 The Restoration Opportunities forest loss and degradation, afforestation Assessment Methodology (ROAM) Report rates are low. For example, in 2017, Hayantar ‘Report IV: Landscape Restoration Strategy carried out 423 ha of reforestation, of which and Action Plan 2022–2032’ assumes that an only less than 60 ha were planted.29 The annual target of 7,000 ha will be required.32 remaining hectares were reforested through Nursery capacity is limited. Hayantar assisted natural regeneration. An additional produces forest tree seedlings in one 62 ha of forests were planted in 2017 with central nursery at the Hayantar Hrazdan various programs and grants on non-forest Branch tree nursery established in 2013 fund lands. with the support of the Food and Agriculture Potential for increased levels of Organization (FAO). Its production capacity afforestation and reforestation exists but is more than 100,000 seedlings per year activity levels have historically been low. and the main seedlings produced include, Investment in agriculture was limited following among others, Pinus sylvestris (P. kochiana), independence, meaning that the forest area Quercus macranthera, Fraxinus excelsior, lost has not been designated for agriculture. Acer trautvetteri, Malus orientalis, Pyrus As a result, competition for land in these caucasica, and Juglans regia, both bareroot areas might be less pressing than in areas and in trays with alveoli. A private sector with a tradition of agriculture dating from nursery run by the Armenia Tree Project before 1990. Also, former mining sites have (ATP) has the capacity to produce 60,000 28 UNDP, Mainstreaming Sustainable Land and Forest Management in Mountain Landscapes of North-eastern Armenia PFG 2016 on Sustainable Land and Forest management 29 Reforestation could also refer to forest regeneration cuttings. 30 The Bonn Challenge: Armenia’s 2018 pledge. 31 Bonn Challenge of 50,000 ha is assumed to be afforestation not reforestation (MoE). 32 According to the MoE, there will be an additional target set, which will include activities not limited to afforestation only and will aim to address reforestation needs more comprehensively. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 17 seedlings per year. These facilities cannot (2019–2023) proposes to restore the city’s meet targets for restoration, enrichment buffer forest area by 40 ha (ArmenPress planting, reforestation, and afforestation. 2018). Armenia launched a pan-Armenian The seedlings produced per year might cover large-scale tree planting program in 2020 a planting area of 150–300 ha at a maximum. where it is expected that 10 million trees Post-COVID-19, government tree planting would be planted on various sites. However, systems used willow cuttings to good effect, the program met with technical problems which have the advantage of being available that were further exacerbated by the effects without recourse to nurseries; however, the of the COVID-19 pandemic (HETQ 2021). efficiency of these planting activities is yet to be assessed. 4.3 PROTECTED AREAS In some regions of the country, Despite being a relatively small country nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in terms of land area, Armenia is rich in have developed planted forests on biodiversity. The country is endowed with community lands, but these cannot be six distinct landscape zones: deserts, semi- officially referred to as forests according deserts, steppes, forests, sub-alpine and to the current state regulations. Such alpine meadows, and wetlands. Because tree plantation projects aim to involve rural local communities and self-governmental of great altitudinal variations, the country bodies for better outcomes. The projects is home to a large number of floral and are mainly supported by international donors faunal species. In particular, the steppe and implemented by Armenian NGOs often in and mountainous terrain provide favorable cooperation with the government. Armenia’s conditions for biodiversity richness as well government forestry agency Hayantar as endemism. Endemism is high, with about provides land for afforestation and tree 4.0 percent of fauna and 3.8 percent of flora planting projects. Successfully planting trees considered endemics (Perry et al. 2020). is a challenge due to livestock grazing and a A network of SPAs was first established lack of climate-adaptive silviculture. There in Armenia in 1958 to protect ecosystems is considerable need to create capacity and habitats as well as rare, endemic, and for planning, selection, installation, and threatened species. Currently, such sites are management of planted forests in Armenia. implemented under four different national Planting trees in landscapes, on farms, designations: (1) national parks; (2) state and in urban and peri-urban areas is a reserves; (3) state wildlife sanctuaries; new and growing activity in Armenia. and (4) national monuments where 60–70 The role of forests in peri-urban and urban percent of the species composition of the contexts is a field which did not receive flora and fauna, including the majority of much attention in forest sector planning. rare, endangered, and endemic species, is Some Armenian settlements are located concentrated.33 The number and total extent around landslide-prone sites, mainly in of protected areas increased substantially mountainous areas and at the foot of the between 2000 and 2014. A special mountains. Sites exposed to these risks need government program to increase the number soil and water conservation through tree of natural monuments focused on the Lori planting. The City of Yerevan 5-Year Plan and Tavush provinces. As of 2014, the total 33 Sixth national report of the Republic of Armenia Convention on biological diversity. 2019. https://ace.aua.am/files/2019/05/2019-6th- National-Report-CBD_eng.pdf. 18 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS territory covered by SPAs was 387,054 ha or areas. approximately 13.1 percent of Armenia’s total State reserves are established to protect land area. Table 2 summarizes the protected the natural course of dynamic ecological areas, and Figure 4 gives an overview of the processes and rare species of flora and fauna. geographic location of the major SPAs in the Human activity, including logging, haymaking, country. hunting and introduction of animals, and Four national parks, Arevik, Dilijan, Lake plant gathering, is restricted. State reserves Arpi, and Sevan, cover a total area of are set aside as scientific research entities 233,358.2 ha or 7.9 percent of Armenia’s with strict conservation regimes (Khanjyan territory (Biodiversity and Landscape 2004). Under the 1994 IUCN international Conservation Union 2014). National parks classification, state reserves of Armenia fall include natural and cultural landscapes and under the 1a designation. Armenia has three involve human activities along with nature state reserves (Khosrov, Shikahogh, and protection issues. National parks employ a Erebuni) covering approximately 35,469.4 zoning system, with areas defined for strict ha or 1.2 percent of the country (Biodiversity conservation, recreation, and economic and Landscape Conservation Union 2014). activities (Khanjyan 2004). Under the 1994 The Forest State Reserve Khosrov (Ararat IUCN 34 international classification, national province) was awarded the European Diploma parks of Armenia are category II protected on Protected Areas in 2013 (Table 2). Table 2: National Parks and State reserves of Armenia National parks Size: 31,211.2 ha Important for the protection of endangered and rare Arevik Altitude: 450–3,500 m species such as the Caucasian leopard, the Armenian (established in Broadleaf forests, juniper open mouflon, and the Mediterranean turtle. Biodiversity 2009) woodlands, subalpine and is reflected by its location in the south of the country, Syunik marz alpine meadows, semideserts, where Iranian, Anatolian, Caucasian, and Central mountain steppes Asian fauna come together. Size: 33,765 ha Rich in forest and meadow fauna and flora. Well- Dilijan Altitude: 1,070–2,900 m studied biodiversity including non-wood forest (established in Year of establishment: 2002 products (NWFPs). Important gene pool for local 2002) Landscape: Woodlands, lakes tree species, important for preservation of primary Tavush marz and rivers, mineral springs, forest landscapes, provides local economic benefits mountain meadows through nature-based tourism Features mountain steppes, subalpine grasslands, Lake Arpi Size: 21,039 ha and high alpine rocky outcrops lakes, wetlands, and (established in Altitude: 2,025–3,190 m rivers. The lakes and marshes of Lake Arpi National 2009) Mountain steppes, subalpine Park are globally important for breeding birds and Shirak marz meadows, lakes, and wetlands migratory birds. Sevan Size: 147,343 ha Encompasses the largest lake in Armenia and a buffer (established in Altitude: 2,000 m zone, incorporating the slopes of adjacent mountain 1978) Freshwater ecosystems, ranges. Major source of irrigation and drinking water Gegharqunik forests, rocks, mountain and provides electricity, fish, recreation, and tourism; marz steppes, alpine meadows includes special Ramsar sites 34 International Union for Conservation of Nature. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 19 Table 2 Other major Specially Protected Natural Areas (SPNAs) Size: 23,213 ha Khosrov Important State Forest Reserve with different forest Altitude: 700–2,800 m (established in types, open junipers woodlands, and oak forests. Mountain ranges, rocks, 1958) The reserve harbors rare animal species such as the semideserts, mountains, and Ararat marz Caucasian leopard, the bezoar goat, and brown bear. high mountain steppes Size: 12,137 ha Shikahogh High biodiversity with relict and endemic flora and Altitude: 700–2,400 m (established in fauna species. The steep terrain provides diversity Mountain ranges, small 1958) of climatic and site conditions. Gene pool with virgin streams, rocky massifs, Syunik marz broadleaf forests (oak and hornbeam) subalpine meadows, caves Erebuni Size: 118.8 ha The smallest among Armenia’s three reserves. It (established in Altitude: 1,300–1,400 m protects a unique gene stock of wild cereals (family 1958) Semidesert and mountain Poaceae), including more than 100 varieties of wild Kotayk marz steppes wheat and their habitat. Figure 4: Nationally designated protected areas in Armenia (SPNAs) Source: MNP of Armenia Ministry of Nature Protection of Republic of Armenia, 2014. Strategy and state program of conservation and use of specially protected nature areas of the Republic of Armenia. Government Decree N1059- Ա, September 25, 2014, Yerevan. 20 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS There are currently 27 designated state and 2,212 species of invertebrates live in and wildlife sanctuaries registered, these forests (Biodiversity and Landscape occupying approximately 114,800 ha or 3.9 Conservation Union 2014). One of the main percent of the country’s territory and 232 threats to forest biodiversity is the reduction designated natural monuments (Biodiversity and fragmentation of forested areas leading and Landscape Conservation Union 2014). to disruption of ecosystems. A number of Sanctuaries are designated to conserve issues are of concern including deforestation specific species and their habitats and and forest degradation, illegal grazing in correspond to the IUCN management forests, poaching, unsustainable use of category IV (Ministry of Nature Protection natural resources, unauthorized construction, of the Republic of Armenia 2014). Natural inefficient use of land, irresponsible mining, monuments in Armenia are natural objects land and water pollution, and other pressures having special scientific or historical-cultural that lead to loss of plant and animal habitats significance; they correspond to category III and genetic diversity. In situ conservation of of the IUCN classification (Khanjyan 2004). biodiversity in Armenia is carried out over about 74,074.3 ha of forest cover areas within In addition, Armenia has 18 Important Bird the SPNA sites, representing 3.7 percent of Areas (IBAs), 23 proposed Emerald Networks the total territory of Armenia or 29 percent of of Areas of Special Conservation Interest the SPNA system. (‘Emerald Network Sites’), 3 Ramsar sites, and 12 Prime Butterfly Areas. However, the boundaries of many SPNAs within the forestry branches are unclear Protected area management is and need to be reassessed and clarified. implemented through 10-year plans There are no regulatory mechanisms rather than longer-term master plans. in Armenia for identifying any of the Armenian biodiversity conservation is mainly biodiversity ‘hotspots’: Emerald Network implemented through the designation of Sites and IBAs; habitats for endangered, these sites, where, as already mentioned above, 60–70 percent of the species critically endangered, and endemic composition of the flora and fauna, including species; FMPs for high conservation value the majority of rare, endangered, and forests (HCVFs); eco-corridors with large endemic species, is concentrated. Important seasonal concentrations of animals; and the to note is that there are no special long-term inclusion of sites of migratory routes. There management plans for protected areas; they is, therefore, no basis for action for the are managed based on FMPs developed with conservation of these important areas. a 10-year time horizon. A national action plan on biodiversity exists but is weakly implemented. In 4.4 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION December 2015, Armenia adopted a revised IN FOREST AREAS National Strategy and Action Plan on the Conservation, Protection, Reproduction, and Armenian forests are home to over 320 Use of Biological Diversity and associated species of trees and shrubs and one-third of Action Plan for 2016–2020, in accordance protected areas. These include species such with Aichi Biodiversity Target 17. Obstacles as pine, birch, elm, maple, ash, pear, apple, to implementation of the strategy and action yew, hazelnut, plane, and walnut. Moreover, plan are related to the underestimation of the 56 species of birds, 17 species of mammals, importance of biodiversity and ecosystem CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 21 services (their values and benefits are yet February 11, 2017, to the Convention on to be assessed and considered in economic Biological Diversity (CBD) and the sixth development programs), insufficient assessment report in 2019. The latter lists stocktaking and monitoring of biodiversity four main targets related to forests in the components, insufficient cooperation country: between various state structures and ി Identify the ecosystem services cost local self-governing bodies, inadequate estimation methodology and test it in development of intersectoral relations and weak integration of biodiversity issues in specially protected nature areas. respective sectoral policies, and a lack of ി Carry out inventory and mapping of mechanisms for enforcing environmental degraded and fragmented forest and legislation. pasture ecosystems, identify direct and National biodiversity targets and actions indirect causes of habitat loss. proposed in the National Biodiversity ി Develop proposals on the introduction of Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) incentives for biodiversity conservation in are clearly strongly linked to forests and community and private lands. reemphasized in recent reviews. The broader rationale is to include biodiversity ി Develop and implement a program fully in forest management planning and on awareness raising and provision operations so that it is considered adequately. of information on conservation and The reviewed NBSAP 35 was submitted on sustainable use of biodiversity. 35 35 Armenia - NBSAP v.2 (2015) | InforMEA. 22 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS 5. ECONOMIC CONTRIBUTIONS OF FORESTS 5.1 PROVISIONING SERVICES Most of fuelwood is harvested illegally. Fuelwood Several estimates of fuelwood production, demand, and consumption in Armenia are Fuelwood is the mainstay of energy available that differ from each other. The annual needs. A sizable portion of the Armenian report for 202136 of the Hydrometeorological population depends on wood—alongside and Monitoring Center—based on the forest natural gas—for its energy needs. In rural monitoring data—estimated the combined areas, households typically use natural fuelwood demand in five regions37 in 2021 gas for cooking and fuelwood for heating. to be 95,000–115,000 m3. According to the Households lacking an indoor kitchen also annual report for 2022,38 the combined use fuelwood for cooking. Lower-income demand in 10 regions39 ranged from rural and urban households tend to rely on 240,000 m to 290,000 m , while the total 3 3 fuelwood to meet both their heating and production was 51,993 m3 from Hayantar energy needs, as fuelwood remains the SNCO, Sevan National Park, Dilijan National cheapest and most easily accessible energy Park, Zangezur National Park, and Jrvezh source for many people (World Bank 2020b). Park Complex. World Bank (2020b) reported Amid the increasing cost of alternatives, a total fuelwood production of 848,000 m³ fuelwood is under pressure. Amid high (about 0.29 m3 per person) with 99 percent costs of natural gas and electricity in of it going toward households’ consumption Armenia, the demand for fuelwood (as well as in the country. According to the FAOSTAT, the timber) has been increasing. This has led to fuelwood production in the country is nearly wood harvesting exceeding sustainable limits twice as much of the estimate mentioned in the country. The AAC is determined by the earlier. During 2013–2020, the annual FMPs which are usually made for 10 years. average fuelwood production in the country FMPs allow thinning and sanitary cutting, not was estimated to be 1.55 million m3 (Figure commercial harvesting of mature trees, all of 5). However, even the FAOSTAT estimate is which are done by Armenia’s 22 state-owned likely to be an underestimate. The Economic forestry enterprises (World Bank 2020b). Development and Research Center (2014) AAC falls far short of the wood demand in the estimated a total fuelwood consumption of country. The gap between wood demand and about 2 million m3 per year in the country. supply is filled by the informal sectors through Another estimate by Gevorgyan (2014) puts unreported and illegal logging. Illegal logging the national average consumption at 10 m³ has been an important contributing factor to per household per year. This gives a total overharvesting, which itself is the main cause consumption40 of 6.53 million m3 per year for of forest cover loss and forest degradation in Armenia. Since there is literally no overseas Armenia (see Chapter 5.5 for more on this). trade of fuelwood by Armenia—as reported 36 http://www.armmonitoring.am/public/admin/ckfinder/userfiles/files/texekanq/tarekan/Tarekan%202021.pdf 37 Yerevan, Lori, Tavush, Syunik, and Gegharkunik. 38 http://www.armmonitoring.am/public/admin/ckfinder/userfiles/files/texekanq/tarekan/annual-2022-1.pdf 39 Yerevan, Lori, Tavush, Syunik, Gegharkunik, Vayots Dzor, Ararat, Armavir, Kotayk, and Aragatsotn. 40 Considering an average household size of 4.50 persons (source: https://globaldatalab.org/areadata/hhsize/ARM/) and a total population of just over 2.96 million (World Bank data). CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 23 by FAOSTAT and UN Comtrade—the total commercial interests and poverty-related consumption is satisfied by production factors but not well monitored. Increasing within the country. This, together with the wood demand amid a restrictive harvesting big difference between the production regime contributes to illegal logging. It is and consumption figures, suggests that estimated that illegal logging is about 20– a large amount of fuelwood is harvested 30 times more than the officially reported by the informal sector and thus remains unreported in official statistics. Much of the harvesting (World Bank 2020b). UNDP informal sector harvesting is done illegally.41 (2015) puts the illegal logging figure at 0.63 Illegal logging in Armenia is driven by both million m3 per year. Figure 5: Fuelwood production in Armenia 2,5 2,0 1,5 Millions 1,0 0,5 - 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Source: FAOSTAT. While it is not reflected in the formal rating.42 The main reason is that the poor economy, fuelwood use has a significant population has limited financial resources economic value. There have been and cannot afford to switch to other sources considerable efforts by the GoA to reduce of energy as it requires investment in stoves fuelwood consumption. However, a large and the cost per energy unit of gas is far part of the rural population (75 percent) is greater than that of fuelwood. Estimation still dependent on forest resources for its done for this Forest Policy Note suggests that energy supply. Rural dwellers make up 36 the annual economic value of fuelwood—in percent of the total population in Armenia, terms of subsistence value and cash income among which 14 percent are poor and 86 generated by selling—in Armenia is $275 percent non-poor according to poverty per household (in 2021 constant $). This 41 A GoA decree on ‘Providing privileges to the forest communities of RA for the use of fallen wood as fuel-wood (2011)’ allows households in villages located within 5 km of forests to collect up to 8 m³ dead wood for free. The purpose of the decree was to reduce incentives to pay for illegally harvested fuelwood. However, often fallen dead wood is available only in remote locations and is not accessible due to lack of forest roads, and thus the decree fails to serve the purpose so far. 42 https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/136121559746939925/pdf/Armenia-poverty-and-equity-brief-spring-2019.pdf. 24 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS corresponds to a fuelwood value of $200 per wood harvesting in the forests of Armenia ha of forests per year 43 and just under $66 is currently limited to thinning, coppicing million for the forests in the entire country. operations, and sanitary cuttings. According to the official records, timber harvesting Timber never exceeded 4,000  m3 per year during Commercial timber production is limited 2010–2020 (Figure 6). However, the actual but also suffers from illegality. Armenia’s timber harvesting—like fuelwood—is most current timber supply is too small to allow likely to be much higher than the official for a commercial logging industry amid a one as much of the timber harvesting in the restrictive wood harvesting regime. Official country remains unreported and/or is illegal. Figure 6: Timber harvesting in Armenia 4.000 3.500 3.000 2.500 m3 2.000 1.500 1.000 500 - 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Source: Hayantar (unpublished data, 2013–2016, 2018), Armenian Ministry of Environment 2020 (2017) and FAOSTAT (2010–2012, 2019–2020). Deadwood and branchwood collection the removal of deadwood (fallen wood) could may be significant. Fallen wood and be as much as 1 m3 per ha per year (higher sanitary felling are not, by their very nature, bound of the estimate). This amounts to a predictable in volume. Nevertheless, they total wood supply of about 330,000 m3 per can make up a significant share of the volume year 44 to the Armenian market from fallen of wood supplied to the domestic market. wood itself. However, the data on fallen wood Sanitary fellings are often found to violate provided by Hayantar for 2013–2017 suggest the law and actually be part of wider illegal that their actual annual contribution to the logging. Formal figures on the timber supply wood supply was only between 50,000 m3 from such felling are not available while and 70,000 m3 (Figure 7). technical experts and Hayantar suggest that 43 Valuation was done by using the benefit-transfer method. Household-level fuelwood value per year was calculated based on data from Mkrtchyan and Grigoryan (2014). The value for the entire country was derived by multiplying the household-level value with the total number of rural households in Armenia as the fuelwood is usually collected by people living the rural areas. Urbanization rate in the country is 63.3 percent, meaning 36.7 percent people live in rural area, and thus we assume that rural households in Armenia is 36.7 percent of all the total. The value for the entire country is divided by the total forest area for deriving the value per hectare. Necessary inflation adjustment was done with GDP deflation for Armenia (until 2020, year of latest data availability) and $ inflation rate (for 2021) for deriving the values in 2021 constant $. Source: Mkrtchyan and Grigoryan 2014. 44 Considering Armenia has 0.33 million ha of forests. Part of this wood supply is used as fuelwood. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 25 Figure 7: Wood supply from fallen wood in Armenia 80 000 70 000 60 000 50 000 m3 40 000 30 000 20 000 10 000 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Source: Hayantar (unpublished data). Sales procedures are in place but the level Armenia has a large negative trade balance of illegal trade is estimated to be much in wood and wood products. During 2010– higher than reported. Hayantar sells the 2021, the country has not exported any limited amount of wood, both fuelwood and industrial roundwood but imported varying so-called ‘technical wood’ (that is, poor- quantities (Figure 8). During the same quality wood for construction purposes), period, sawnwood production and export45 at fixed low prices in three different ways: were almost identical 46 but minimal, below (a) standing trees on demarcated plots; 1,000 m3 in most years, while imports (b) wood cut into pieces 1 m long, stacked increased rapidly from nearly 19,000 m 3 in close to a forest road; and (c) wood cut 2016 to over 130,000 m 3 in 2021 (Figure into pieces 1 m long, stacked in designated 9). Increasing demand for sawnwood in the storage places outside the forest. Estimates construction and furniture industry amid of actual harvesting volumes vary widely minimal and falling local production might depending on data sources and methodology have caused the increase in imports. The used. However, they all show that the actual total value of import of wood and wood harvesting volumes are much higher than products in Armenia varied between $34 the officially sanctioned harvesting level million and $68  million,47 while the export and this illustrates the severe challenges value never exceeded $2.2 million during to the sustainability of forest use and of 2010–2021 (Figure 10). The development of governance faced by the sector. a logging and wood processing industry is Because of the supply constraints, constrained by limited wood supply. 45 In February 2020, the government passed a law banning export of wood and wood products outside of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU). 46 Almost identical sawnwood production and export may have happened for two reasons. First, at least some portion of the imported sawnwood is exported after value addition through further reprocessing. Second, since official industrial roundwood production is minimal, a significant portion of exported sawnwood is produced from unreported or illegally harvested timber. 47 In 2021, about 42 percent of the import came from Russia, 13 percent from Türkiye, and 9 percent from China (UN Comtrade). 26 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS Figure 8: Timber trade by Armenia 70 000 60 000 50 000 m3 40 000 30 000 20 000 10 000 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Import Export Source: UN Comtrade. Figure 9: Sawnwood production and trade by Armenia 140 000 120 000 100 000 m3 80 000 60 000 40 000 20 000 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Import Export Production Source: UN Comtrade (trade) and FAOSTAT (production). Figure 10: Wood and wood products trade by Armenia 80 70 60 Million $ 50 40 30 20 10 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Import Export Source: UN Comtrade. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 27 Water for irrigation and drinking the form of recharging water sources. While most of the country’s forests are concentrated Water is a scarce resource in Armenia and in the northeast and southeast, Lake Sevan forests have a positive role in its regulation Basin, and the other watersheds, they provide and provision. With a water exploitation water to a significant part of the country index (WEI) of 45 percent,48 the country is through rivers and streams. subject to severe water stress (OECD 2015). By protecting the watershed and regulating Commercial benefits accrue to water the hydrological cycle, forests in Armenia bottling interests in these areas. The water play a crucial role in recharging groundwater balance and quality and quantity of drinking and surface water sources such as streams water resources in Armenia are directly and lakes and thus are an important source influenced by its forests. Mineral water of water for drinking and irrigation purposes. resources in Ararat, Kotayk (villages of Arzni, Forests in the country—nearly all being Bjni, Buzhakan, Hankavan), Tavush (Dilijan located in mountainous areas—have positive village), Vayots Dzor (Jermuk village), and effects on river flow rates and seasonal Syunik (Lichk village) provinces are important water distribution by increasing water sources of drinking water and bottled water infiltration and preventing erosion. Notably, sold domestically and abroad (Perry et al. the watersheds in the Lake Sevan Basin in 2020). According to the Statistical Committee the central eastern part of the country not of Armenia, just over 1.1 million m3 of mineral only feed springs in the Ararat Valley in the water was extracted from the forest areas in Southwest but also regulate surface flows 2018 (Statistical Committee of Armenia 2018). and provide water for irrigation and energy generation (Perry et al. 2020). 5.2 NON-WOOD FOREST In protecting the headwaters, forests PRODUCTS (NWFPS) make a strong economic contribution. Forests are vital sources of foods (plants The economic value of water retained by and animals), medicines, and a range of the forests—estimated by using the benefit- other products and are important as a transfer method for this Policy Note—is just means of generating cash income and over $55 per ha per year (in 2021 constant $) subsistence for the citizens of Armenia. in irrigational use.49 This amounts to about $19 Most communities particularly those in million per year for total water value of forests rural areas of Armenia depend—besides in irrigation use. The estimation is based on the fuelwood—on NWFPs such as forest fruits, relevant data from OECD (2015). It is assumed berries, edible plants, mushrooms, game, that 25 percent of this irrigation water is and medicines for their livelihoods, wholly attributed to forests of the country. This is or partially. Part of the NWFPs is used for justified by the fact that forests in Armenia generating income by selling them in local constitute about 11 percent of total land area markets or on the roadsides,50 but majority is and their influence concerning water can reach used by the communities for the subsistence an area about twice the total size of forests in (Perry et al. 2020). 48 A country with WEI above 40 percent is considered to be under water stress (OECD 2015). 49 The economic value of drinking water provided by the forest could not be estimated due to lack of necessary data. No previous studies on valuation of water provided by Armenian forests for irrigation and drinking exist. 50 According to the Article 44.1 of the Forest Code, “Citizens shall have the right to be, without any permit, in the forests under the state or community ownership for recreation, collection of wild fruits, berries, nuts, mushrooms and plants for personal consumption except cases envisaged by law or other legal acts.” 28 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS A total of 120 wild fruit, nut, and berry wine. Cornelian cherry is also popular for bearing plants are found in Armenian its multiple health benefits and is widely forests. They together constitute about 40 traded on roadsides across Armenia. Apart percent of the total woody species growing from the wild fruits, edible wild plants such in the forests of the country. These plants as dock sorrel, asparagus, and mushroom are extensively used by the population as a are eaten by local people in Armenia. source of food (Nalbandyan 2000) and are a Commonly collected mushrooms include valuable source of food security. Commonly meadow mushrooms ( Agaricus campestris, used wild fruits include dog rose or rosehip, A. silvaticus), granulated boletus (Suillus wild pear and wild apple, cornelian cherry, granulatus), and chanterelle (Cantarellus currant, dewberry, raspberry, gooseberry, hawthorn, walnut, fig, pomegranate, sea cibarius). Beekeeping is another important buckthorn (see Box 1), cherry plum, and activity in most of the communities adjacent hazel. Rosehip is the most common NWFP to forests (Mkrtchyan and Grigoryan 2014). after fuelwood and is used to make a Medicinal plants represent a fairly high popular tea, jam, jelly, marmalade, and proportion of the forest flora in Armenia. Box 1: An example of an introduced berry with income potential - sea buckthorn As a forest crop, sea buckthorn possesses many valuable economic traits. It is one of the best land improvement species and most promising crops for the afforestation of dunes, embankments, and ravines. Armenia has accumulated extensive experience in the cultivation and processing of sea buckthorn and is producing both oil and alcohol- free beverages from it. It was introduced widely in the Altai region in the 1950s. It is said that in the past, more than 3,000 ha were enriched with sea buckthorn in Armenia, with harvests of up to 2 tons per ha and potential for much higher production. In the 1980s, Armenia produced some 300 tons of sea buckthorn fruit annually. Sea buckthorn fruit acontains large quantities of biologically active substances (medicinal oil, vitamin C, carotene, and organic acids), making it an important raw material for the pharmaceutical and food industries—producing medicinal oil and alcohol-free beverages. The economic value of NWFP is The valuation suggests that forests provide significant. In Armenia, literature estimating NWFPs worth nearly $28 per ha per year the economic values of various NWFPs per with wild fruits contributing the highest of hectare of forests as well as at regional $10.1 per ha per year while honey the second and country levels does not exist at the highest of $7.9 per ha per year. The value time of writing this Policy Note. Valuation of of NWFPs (excluding water) provided by all several important NWFPs (excluding water) forests of Armenia is estimated to be just was possible by using data from existing over $9 million per year (Table 3). literature through benefit-transfer method. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 29 Table 3: Economic value of NWFPs in Armenia51 NWFPs Value, $ per year (2021 constant $) $/ha/year Entire Armenia, $/year Medicinal plants a 7.60 2,508,343 Wild fruitsb 10.10 3,322,500 Mushroomb 2.00 664,392 Honeyb 7.90 2,583,649 Total 27.64 9,078,885 Note: Estimation using benefit-transfer method using data from (a) Mkrtchyan and Grigoryan 2014 and (b) UNDP 2014. 5.3 REGULATING SERVICES supports agricultural production in Armenia Forests of Armenia offer several regulating like elsewhere in the world. services that are vital for economic Forests are an important carbon sink in development and environmental integrity Armenia. According to the National GHG in the country as well as for maintenance Inventory Report (2020), during 2000–2017, of the health and well-being of its citizens. the country’s forests removed, on average, The country’s forests are mostly managed just over 0.52 million tCO2eq of GHG per year for protective purposes, specifically for the from the atmosphere (Armenian Ministry protection of soil and water. Forests help of Environment 2020). 52 Forests regulate maintain water balance in the ecosystems and climate most notably temperature, humidity, thus river flow and seasonal water distribution and precipitation and thus help maintain by increasing infiltration rates and preventing favorable living conditions for human erosion. Particularly on steep terrain, forests beings and animals. Trees in urban areas, in reduce surface water runoff and protect particular, control excessive heat and regulate topsoil from erosion and flooding and thus microclimate. Being one of the most climate- prevent siltation and improve water availability vulnerable and water-stressed countries in the long term. For example, forests in Lake in the Europe and Central Asia region, the Sevan Basin reduce the sediment deposition country is increasingly exposed to natural that helps counteract water pollution and disasters such as heatwaves, droughts, keeps water levels stable (World Bank 2021d) in the lake. Reduced sedimentation flooding, landslides, and wildfires. This also helps protects wildlife habitats in the exposure increases the risks of agricultural area. By maintaining water balance and productivity loss, destruction of infrastructure protecting the soil from floods and erosion, and tourism facilities, and further reduction forests keep the soil fertile, which is vital for of the country’s already limited capacity agriculture (Perry et al. 2020). Forests are to mitigate and adapt to climate change also important for biodiversity conservation, (World Bank 2021a). Armenia’s forests play that is, safeguarding genetic resources, a crucial role in minimizing the impacts of or species, and their habitats. Bees and other preventing natural disasters such as drought, insects are vital for pollination, which in turn desertification, flooding, and landslides. 51 See Table 1 for more detailed breakdown of NWFP. 52 The CITEPA/ONFI reports from 2021 advise recalculation of the National GHG inventor for LULUCF sector (Ministry of Economy). 30 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS Literature estimating the economic values economic values of these three services are of regulating services does not exist at $125 per ha per year with GHG removal being the time of writing this Policy Note and so the highest at $101 per ha per year (in 2021 the valuations here are an underestimate. constant $). The value of these services for Biophysical and socioeconomic data that are all forests of Armenia is estimated to be $41 needed for valuation of such services are million per year (Table 4). Had the economic generally lacking in the country. By using value of numerous other regulatory services data from existing literature and applying been estimated, the value per hectare and benefit-transfer method, valuation estimates for the entire country would have been much are made for three regulating services. The higher than what is reported. Table 4: Economic value of selected regulatory services in Armenia NWFPs Value, $ per year (2021 constant $) $/ha/year Entire Armenia, $/year Habitat/Species protectiona 2.8 906,459 Hydrological regulationa 21.6 7,107,104 GHG removalb 100.7 33,074,688 Total 125.0 41,088,251 Note: Estimation using benefit-transfer method based on data from (a) Siikamäki et al. 2015. (b) GHG removal data are from Armenian National NIR 1990–2017 (MoE 2020). Average of the low and high shadow prices of carbon for 2020 suggested by World Bank (2017) is used for this valuation. 5.4 CULTURAL SERVICES value of Armenian forests is estimated to be Because of predominantly mountain $9 per ha per year54 (in 2021 constant $), landscapes, corresponding complex which corresponds to a total value of about forests in Armenia provide several $3 million per year for all forests in the entire important cultural services such as country. aesthetic values, spirituality, recreation, Forests have good potential for an and tourism. Armenia is endowed with over expanded role in recreation and tourism. 100 ancient monasteries and archaeological Article 41 of the Armenian Forest Code and religious sites including several listed describes forest use for cultural, health, as United Nations Educational, Scientific sport, recreation, and tourism purposes. and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Nature-based tourism, as related to forests, Heritage Sites and most of which are located 53 refers to interactions that people have inside the forests and in mountainous regions. with forest ecosystems, including outdoor These enhance the cultural services provided recreation, aesthetic enjoyment, education, by the country’s forests notably tourism, and the intrinsic spiritual value of land and spirituality, and recreation. The recreational trees. Armenia’s protected area network 53 These are the monasteries of Haghpat, Sanahin, Geghard, and the Upper Azat Valley; cathedral and churches of Echmiatsin; and the Archaeological Site of Zvartnots. 54 Based on Siikamäki et al. 2015. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 31 is a cornerstone for nature-based tourism; cultural heritage. Thus, forests—being however, areas outside these hotspots also closely associated with both reasons—is an merit consideration in an expanded view on important driver of tourism in the country using forests for wider goods and services. (see Box 2). Armenia’s tourism sector had been While suffering from uncertainty growing strongly before the COVID-19 currently, Armenia has significant crisis in terms of income and arrivals. nature-based tourism potential. The Armenia welcomed over 1.65 million tourism sector, which relies on natural international tourists in 2018, and inbound features of the country most notably forests, tourist number has grown on average has unrealized potential both as a tool for 9 percent per year between 2012 and supporting economic development and for 2018. 55 Tourism contributed $503  million fostering economic growth (Gad Bigio, Von to Armenia’s economy (3.9 percent share Culin, and Karapetyan 2019). In particular, of GDP) in 2018 and provided employment this includes adventure tourism, eco- to 36,900 people in the travel and tourism tourism, and cultural tourism. Moreover, in industry—3.4 percent of the total workforce view of the unpredictable security situation (World Economic Forum 2019). According in the Eastern Europe and Central Asia due to to the Ministry of Economy, the top two Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, nature-based reasons for choosing Armenia as a vacation tourism has fallen to a historic low and the destination is nature and historical and future development is highly uncertain. Box 2: Wildlife watching and recreational hunting A particular asset of Armenia’s forests is its fauna that can attract wildlife watching and recreational hunting. Forests are home to large mammals such as wolf (Canis lupus), brown bear (Ursus arctos), Syrian beer, lynx, red fox (Vulpes vulpes), red deer (Cervus elaphus), and roe deer (Capreolus capreolus). The alpine zone of the country situated 2,000 m above the sea level is rich in birds including the mountain turkey, horned lark, and bearded vulture as well as mammals such as bezoar goat and mouflon. Recreational hunting is allowed through licenses, and commercial hunting is limited. Hunting and fishing activities are managed by the MoE and pursuant to Article 5, Part 1, Clause 8 of the Law of the Republic of Armenia on the Management of Hunting and Hunting Economics. Permissible quantities of hunting and amateur fishing for social purposes are defined in the findings and recommendations put forth by the Scientific Center of Zoology and Hydroecology of the National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Armenia. The institute provides the findings every year for the hunting season, but it is the MoE and specifically through the minister’s decree that the final amount for each permissible hunting and fishing species is stipulated. 55 International tourism, number of arrivals - Armenia | Data (worldbank.org). 32 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS Green job creation environmental and a socioeconomic component with a budget of $400,000. The Forestry can assist in recovery and rural program aimed at planting 2 million cuttings job creation. The draft NFP of Armenia, of willows in the riparian zones across the which was developed with the support of country. According to the government the FAO, lays the groundwork for increasing report, close to 1,000 people, who are from Armenia’s forest cover to 12.9 percent by not only the communities adjacent to the 2030 and creating green jobs while fulfilling riparian zones but also other parts of Armenia this target. The NFP aims for community (from six different marzes), have been engagement by offering the members engaged in the planting. This project was permanent and temporary jobs in planting deemed successful and the GIZ committed and maintenance operations.  For example, a similar amount of money to do another using the ROAM report estimate of 20–30 round of planting (employing 1,000 people person-days per hectare restored, a labor and planting 1 million cuttings of willow and need of between 1.4 and 1.7 million person- poplar species). This is the model that the days would be generated if this target was government intends to adopt on a rolling achieved through option 1 (restoration of basis, considering that for willow trees and degraded forests). However, large-scale and similar species, cuttings are suitable for long-lasting FLR will only occur if participants planting in riparian zones and there is no have a vested interest in maintaining the up-front cost on nurseries, labor, and other tree cover, as seen in collaborative forest resources to grow seedlings. Again, ‘Report management. IV: Landscape Restoration Strategy and Mass planting of willow cuttings is Action Plan 2022–2032’ of the ROAM study adopted as an efficient planting and labor presents a more strategic assessment of engagement model. It is important to note FLR priorities and recommends the use of that following the COVID-19 pandemic, different and more appropriate species in the GoA launched a COVID relief program each context, in addition to the required new on its own finance, which contained an nursery capacity. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 33 6. FOREST AND LAND DEGRADATION, AND ITS COSTS 6.1 EXTENT OF FOREST AND LAND trend most likely continued after that period. DEGRADATION A 1993 inventory estimate indicated the total The country as a whole is exposed to the standing wood volume to be 42 million m3 forces of land degradation. Currently, 82 (about 127 m3 per ha) with an annual average percent of the land area of Armenia is, to growth of 0.45 million m3 (less than 1.5 m3 per varying extents, exposed to desertification ha and year). The figures for both wood stock and 27 percent of these lands face extremely and annual growth seem to be extremely severe desertification (UNCCD 2017). Land low. Either they are not accurate estimates lost to infrastructure, building, and similar or the existing natural forests overall are uses has also increased by 27,230 ha and heavily degraded in terms of wood stock. An now represents about 3.5 percent of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in total area of Armenia. Chemical pollution Europe (OSCE) study in 2006 estimated the occurs on 272,000 ha, with most of the land standing timber stock to be even lower, 28 contaminated by mineral substances used million m3,56 which corresponds to 85 m3 per in agriculture and by chemicals in urban hectare. These findings suggest that some areas. Pollution by minerals has increased degree of forest degradation most likely has due to the relatively low cost and incorrect occurred in much larger areas beyond the application of chemical fertilizers, especially 11,000 ha reported above. nitrate. Acidification is mainly associated Degradation levels are set to increase. with natural soil properties, but salinization Continuous land degradation and increasing has intensified partly due to poor irrigation drought are expected to lead to changes in practices. The area prone to overgrazing Armenia’s forest cover. Armenia’s Fourth has not increased in recent years but the National Communication to the United consequences of past overgrazing have not Nations Framework Convention on Climate been eliminated and such land now covers Change (UNFCCC) (NC4) (MoE 2020) about 170,000 ha. forecasts a potential loss of forest and Deforestation and forest degradation are woodlands of 14,000–17,500 ha (around 3–4 the major environmental problems in the percent) by 2030 as a result of changes to country. According to the FAO-FRA (2020), ecosystems and growing conditions as well during 1990–2020 Armenia lost 6,260 ha as an increased frequency of forest fire, of forests. Moreover, 11,000 ha of naturally pest and disease outbreaks, and invasive regenerated primary forests were degraded species. In the forest areas of the country, into secondary forests during the same overuse of forest resources, exacerbated by period. The average growing stock over the effects of climate change, has resulted bark in the Armenian forests decreased from in erosion, landslides, and disturbance to 19.43 m per ha in 1990 to 11.63  m per ha 3 3 the hydrological cycle (Republic of Armenia in 2015 (FAO-FRA 2020) and the declining 2015). 56 OSCE mandated research on ‘Economic Research on Armenia’s Forestry and Wood Processing Sector (2006)’. 34 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS 6.2 ECONOMIC AND OTHER COSTS Chapter 5). The GHG emissions and loss OF FOREST AND LAND DEGRADATION of ecosystem services resulted in a total economic cost—estimated by using benefit- Annual losses due to forest degradation transfer method—of just over $8 million per are at least $8 million. The deforestation year to the country (Table 5). It should be during 1990–2020 in Armenia (nearly 6,300 noted that due to lack of required biophysical ha) is estimated to have caused a total GHG and socioeconomic data, economic valuation emission of about 2.78 million tCO2eq57 was possible for just nine58 of numerous which corresponds to about 93,000 tCO2eq ecosystem services that are lost due to per year. This deforestation also resulted deforestation. If the valuation of all affected in the loss of vital ecosystem services ecosystem services was possible, the total that Armenian forests usually provide (see economic losses would be much higher. Table 5: Economic costs of deforestation in Armenia during 1990–2020 Item Economic costs, $ per year GHG emissions 5,559,717 Foregone ecosystem services 2,628,183 Total 8,187,900 Note: Estimated by using benefit-transfer method. Estimates of national annual losses on Prevention is more cost-effective than all land types rise to $111 million. UNCCD having to address issues that have (2017) suggested over 14 percent of Armenian already occurred. The implementation of rural population in 2010 was dependent on ecosystem restoration (rehabilitation after land that was degraded and in 2000 the fire, pests and diseases, irregular felling of rate was about 12 percent. The dependency trees, deforestation, or structural damage) is rate is likely to have increased further now technically more difficult, time-consuming, assuming that the past trend has continued. and more costly than effective measures for Land degradation severely affects people’s their prevention and protection. livelihood by reducing the availability of vital ecosystem services such as food, wood, 6.3 DRIVERS OF FOREST water, and soil fertility and thus increasing AND LAND DEGRADATION the risks of poverty particularly in rural areas The proximate drivers of forest of Armenia. It is estimated, based on data degradation in Armenia include both from UNCCD (2017), that the economic cost anthropogenic and natural factors of land degradation in the country is over (Figure 11). The anthropogenic factors $111 million per year (in 2021 constant $). notably include overharvesting of forests About 45 percent of this cost comes from the particularly for fuelwood and timber, illegal decline in provisioning ecosystem services logging, uncontrolled grazing, infrastructure (UNCCD 2017). development, mining including pit mining, 57 FAO EXACT model is used for GHG emission estimation. 58 Fuelwood, medicinal plants, wild fruits, mushrooms, honey, water for irrigation, protection of habitat and species, hydrological regulation, and recreation. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 35 forest fires, and water extraction for households in rural areas continue to depend irrigation. Natural drivers include pests and on fuelwood for energy. An improvement in diseases, salinization, and increased forest the gas supply after 2010 led to a short-term fires (Figure 11) due to droughts that are reduction in illegal cutting for fuelwood; frequent, particularly in the Ararat valley however, the costs of gas and electricity and some areas of Vayots Dzor and Syunik remain high for poor households and are marzes. These natural threats are enhanced now likely to increase substantially and by anthropogenic factors (Schulte and wood removals are likely to continue, or Harutyunyan 2020). even increase, given the current geopolitical The underlying drivers of deforestation situation. As the proposed expansion of and forest degradation in Armenia forest cover to 2050 will not generate include economic and population growth increased supplies in the short term, and high costs of energy (notably natural other actions will be required if forest loss gas and electricity), particularly for lower- and degradation are to be controlled and income households. These all lead to reversed. Regulatory ambiguities leading, high demand for forest-based ecosystem for example, to the allocation of the same services, particularly fuelwood and timber land for forest use and pasture and climate as well as intense land use competition, for change are the other key underlying drivers example, agriculture and mining as demand of deforestation and forest land degradation for outputs from them also increases. Most in Armenia (Figure 11). Figure 11: Drivers and impacts of forest land degradation in Armenia Underlying High costs of Economic & Regulatory Climate Drivers non-wood energy population growth ambiguities Change Energy sector Infrastructure, industry Forest & land use Natural factors Uncontrolled Increased Mining wildfires grazing Proximate Drivers Over & illegal harvesting of Uncontrolled Overharvesting of wood for energy housing timber & illegal Salinization Lise logging Over extraction of water Irrigated Pests and agriculture Deseases Impacts Long-term loss of forest Livelihood & food Loss of biodiversity & other and landscape productivity insecurity ecosystem services 36 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS Mining causes serious direct and indirect steep mountainous slopes of the country. impacts on forests and biodiversity. It is worth mentioning that land under the At the mining site level, land preparation State Forest Fund is often used for pastures and expansion and waste management are and haymaking, which causes problems destructive processes, changing abiotic related to soil and forest degradation. and biotic conditions, and in some cases, Moreover, imbalances in the use of pastures transforming natural forests, and threatening and meadows are occurring due to the species and ecosystems. Landscape impacts underutilization of some areas and severe on forests and biodiversity also emerge localized overgrazing of others. In these through indirect, secondary, and cumulative circumstances, the forest and the extensive pathways. Negative impacts can also occur rangeland sectors are competing land over larger distances as sediments export uses, particularly in areas where there are along rivers with the discharge of chemical satisfactory soil and moisture conditions. and physical mining wastes. As a result of Forests are overcut and failing to mining activities, about 8,000 ha of land regenerate naturally. Deforestation in has been degraded with an additional 1,500 Armenia is driven directly by legal and ha used to store tailings dumps. Pollutants illegal tree cutting for commercial purposes from these are commonly leached out, (construction, infrastructure, export, and affecting waterways and local biodiversity.59 mining) and indirectly by broader issues such According to recent data (2018) from the as lack of awareness about sustainable forestry Hydrometeorology and Monitoring Center, 16 rivers in Armenia have been identified as among forest-dependent communities and having the highest degree of pollution as a lack of community ownership of forests. While result of mining activities.60 There has been illegal logging fell between 2004 and 2015, an expansion of mining across the country, there has been a sharp increase from 2016 affecting 34,900 ha of forest land in 2013, onwards. Generally, regeneration is weak or primarily in the Lori and Syunik provinces. nonexistent. Over 30 percent of coppice oak Between 1990 and 2000, 30 percent of forests are low-density stands with no seed forests in Lori province were affected by regeneration. Overstocked pine plantations mining (Ministry of Nature Protection 2014). are left unthinned. Many oak, beech, and juniper forests are not regenerating at all.61 Overall, the State Forest Fund land and other rural areas in Armenia face Fuelwood harvesting is likely to increase a significant and growing threat of in intensity. In general, (illegal) tree degradation of forests. Extensive harvesting and overuse of forest resources pastures face competing land uses, with are attributed to a large proportion of rural serious direct implications for local rural households being overly dependent on populations concerning food security and fuelwood as their main source of energy. long-term sustainable development. The This trend in deforestation for firewood can effects of climate change aggravate the be traced back to the start of a severe energy current critical situation and accelerate the crisis in 1992. In the Lake Sevan Basin, pathway of destruction, in particular in the for example, approximately one-quarter few HCVFs remaining in the ravines and of forest plantations were clear-cut in the 59 See https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/289051468186845846/pdf/106237-WP-P155900-PUBLIC.pdf. 60 Source: Armenian Ministry of Energy infrastructures and Natural Resources. 61 ROAM Analysis, Report 1. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 37 period until 2005 (Sayadyan 2005). High total forested area. Chemical intervention deforestation rates are likely to continue at this scale seems excessive and raises as the demand for biomass for heating and environmental concerns. The increase in domestic use remains high. This is expected fire and pest outbreaks is at least partly to adversely affect the poorest households attributed to changing climate, which leads due to a decline in firewood availability and to deterioration of natural forest restoration, price increase. Up to 9 percent of households especially in the lower mountain zone (550– in Armenia use wood as fuel for cooking and 1,200 m), where the annual precipitation heating and more than 300 small, medium, does not exceed 600 mm on average and is and large wood processing companies less in many years. operating in Armenia use 10 times more wood than the maximum volume set by the state for annual cutting (OSCE 2007). 6.4 OPPORTUNITIES FOR SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF DEGRADED LAND Pests, diseases, and fire are crucial drivers of forest degradation in Forest degradation in Armenia also Armenia. Unregulated forest felling and presents an opportunity for sustainable early exploitation of cut blocks bring land management, as illustrated in Figure about changes to the microclimatic and 12. Zoning of forested areas and pasture, sanitary conditions in forests such as high pasture management, well-defined temperature, abundant light, and wood afforestation, and forest restoration efforts debris. These contribute to increased risk of as well as focused restoration efforts on more widespread pests and diseases as well former mining sites and linking of forest as drying of trees and fire hazards. These restoration with direct local needs (for phenomena can be more clearly observed example, firewood - eventually charcoal in the open forests of central and southern and woodfuel and NWFPs) are considered parts of Armenia as well as in natural pine important measures. In areas with low forest forests. In particular, some forest locations cover, combining tree planting, such as in Aragatsotn, Hrazdan, Kotayk, Vayk, fodder banks and shade and boundary trees, Jermuk, and Meghri regions are on the verge with agricultural production on private lands of drying out and require continuous forest is a practical solution. These opportunities protection and fire risk reduction and control could also be a solution in heavily degraded measures. sites, such as salt-affected wastelands, According to official statistics, the where the planting of multipurpose tree area infected with forest diseases has species, including for firewood and animal increased since 2000. In 2016–2021, funded fodder, can make these lands productive by the state budget, aerial chemical control again while at the same time contributing to methods were used on about 19,503 ha of livelihoods of local people. Simultaneously, forests 62 infected with pests and diseases, such land improvements will also contribute which means on more than 50 percent of the to climate mitigation. 62 As stated in the draft NFP 2021–2030. 38 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS Figure 12: Measures for and impacts of sustainable forest land management in Armenia Afforestation Forest Management Nature-based Solutions Agroforestry & Pasture management Regreening Close-to-nature Investment in & protective silviculture ecological planting infrastrucure E ective zoning Measures forests/pastures Mining site Co-management schemes in forest Locally-based restoration ecotourism management Agro-sylvo pastoral Community NWFP Forest carbon management woodlots/chacoal management management systems Forest landscape restoration Impacts Long-term restoration Enhanced livelihood Enhanced supply of ecosystem of the production capacities & income opportunties services including climate change mitigation & adaptation benefits A Land Degradation Neutrality (LDN) adequate funds to enable them to move up strategy exists but its implementation to higher-value agricultural chains and stay is limited. The GoA developed its LDN competitive, thereby also increasing their strategy to address the issues identified livelihood opportunities. Furthermore, there above. This includes four targets: (a) arrest is a lack of validated data on the condition cropland degradation and promote agro- of land and the state of natural resources, ecology (conservation plus modern ‘organic’ including forests and trees in landscapes. technology), (b) afforest and/or reforest Pest and disease monitoring and control two-thirds of the degraded land, (c) halt requires further attention. In general, deforestation and improve forest management rapid detection of pests and diseases on 100 percent of the national territory, and (d) to diagnose them and take appropriate eliminate overgrazing and improve grassland effective measures is still problematic in the management on 100 percent of the national field of forest protection. In recent years, territory. Despite relatively good knowledge active forest protection measures have been and high-level understanding of the land implemented but there is still a lack of special degradation situation, there are at present studies and regular monitoring data on pests no national programs, plans, or regulations and diseases and their spread. To implement to promote the introduction and scaling-up forest protection and fire prevention of LDN on lands outside the State Forest measures effectively, an integrated forest Fund land.63 Based on current knowledge, protection management plan/strategy and the new Agriculture Policy (2019–2029) lacks action plan needs to be developed as well as LDN considerations. Local communities have ensuring that ecologically safe technologies little or no capacity to generate or invest are being applied. 63 See https://www.thegef.org/projects-operations/projects/10365. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 39 Concerted action is needed to address rural land and forest management. What is needed fuel poverty and divert users away from is a closer look at ‘landscape management’ illegal logging. An OSCE study recommends where from each sector of the economy the addressing the problem of deforestation elements are combined to achieve the best on the economic level by expanding natural overall use of scarce resources. gas supply to remote villages through The Assessment of Forest Landscape microcredits, exempting taxes for importing Restoration Opportunities in Armenia wood to Armenia, promoting recycling and is highly relevant, current, and renewable energy production, and tightening comprehensive. The associated ’Landscape the enforcement of policies and regulations.64 Restoration Strategy and Action Plan 2022– There are a number of projects under way, 2032’ identifies eight specific FLR options which also target improving the energy (see Box 3) with a total potential intervention efficiency of stoves in rural communities area of over 387,000 ha. Four strategic as well as developing infrastructure for areas identified for development in support alternative biofuel sources such as pellets of FLR are (1) Institutional environment and briquettes.65 and steering, to create and maintain Agroforestry shows promise. Equally the institutional environment needed to important to note is the significance of manage the landscape restoration process growing multipurpose trees, for example, effectively and efficiently; (2) Development fruit and nut trees that have a long tradition of the capacity of the communities and in the country and could contribute to organizations involved; (3) Development export income. The potential for a combined of the required infrastructure (including landscape approach addressing forest technical equipment); and (4) Implementation landscape restoration through agroforestry of forest ecosystem improvement measures: in this part of the country is palpably possible. this concerns the actual implementation Additionally, as rangelands are affected by of landscape restoration options with overgrazing, direct interventions in pastures implementation ramping up swiftly, once the will help reduce pressure on forests and enabling measures are in place. allow close-to-nature silviculture, including Cost estimates to achieve the Bonn successfully regenerating existing forests. Challenge by 2030 vary considerably. The Scaling-up of pilot-scale interventions ‘Landscape Restoration Strategy and Action in sustainable land management is now Plan 2022–2032’ envisages achievement needed. Afforestation and reforestation of the 50,000 ha Bonn Challenge target for in particular have potential to be effective FLR over 10 years from 2022 to 2032. Under measures in restoring degraded forests the eight options, this could require a total in Armenia. However, such efforts have investment from as little as $9.3 million (in 2022 been hampered by a lack of resources, old $ equivalent) to as high as $663 million. The practiced, and the impracticality of separating former assumes the least expensive activities forest areas from livestock areas. The GoA, of coppice forestry, wildfire prevention, with international support, has pursued and support for natural regeneration are various pilot efforts to test new approaches to undertaken while the latter focuses on 64 https://www.osce.org/yerevan/48724. 65 Armenia is currently developing the Long-Term Low Emission Development Strategy, and it would be important to refer to any new analytics or scenarios presented there relevant to this issue. 40 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS windbreaks (the most expensive option). If all Significant attention to and expenditure eight options are implemented over 50,000 ha, on the enabling environment will also according to the area identified for each as a be needed. As identified in the draft FLR proportion of the total area, then the cost will strategy, investment of effort will be needed be approximately $45 million. The strategy in institutional strengthening and regulatory itself envisages more planning activities to reform as well as in the equipment and define the operational plan and the proportion technical capacity of Hayantar SNCO to to be spent in each activity. enable it to fulfill its role in FLR.66 Box 3: Recommended FLR options from Landscape Restoration Strategy and Action Plan 2022–2032 Forest ecosystems restoration options 1. Restoration of degraded forests through planting: planting species with mitigation benefits as well as those that sustainably provide fuelwood, timber, building, poles, and fruit production (oak, beech, and pine.) 2. Promotion of natural regeneration through tillage and soil mineralization: soil mineralization and sowing seeds in plots or trenches can be implemented to support regeneration. The focus here is on oak, beech, and juniper forests. 3. Coppicing of oak stands of secondary origin: coppicing is a short-rotation system based on harvesting the stump regrowth of deciduous trees; stands require regular intervention and eventual regeneration by planting. 4. Thinning of overly dense pine forests: within already degraded forests, silvicultural practices such as liberation thinning of variably dense pine forests can replenish the quality and stocking of forests. 5. Wildfire prevention: through the construction of firefighting roads/access routes and tilled strips in oak, pine, and juniper forests, it aims at reducing societal impacts and mitigating the threats. Forest plantations establishment options 6. Establishment of anti-erosion/soil protection plantations: to slow down or reverse erosion on mountainous or hilly sides, the creation of anti-erosion forest strips is recommended. 7. Establishment of windbreaks and hedgerows: windbreaking forest strips are recommended to be cultivated to prevent the negative impacts of wind on forests (especially during growing stages), protect agricultural lands, ensure better amelioration, and improve overall land productivity. 8. Reclamation of mining sites and landfills (including phytoremediation): mine reclamation is the process of restoring land that has been formerly mined to a natural or economically usable state. It is highly relevant for Armenia, given the significant mining industry present in key forest provinces. 66 FLR interventions 6, 7, and 8 presented in the Box 3 should be considered accounting for the initial land use (afforestation on grassland, afforestation on cropland, afforestation on other land types, and so on), which is also required for national GHG inventory (MoE). CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 41 7. FORESTS AND CLIMATE CHANGE 7.1 CLIMATE CHANGE AND ITS observed heat wave in Yerevan in July 2018 IMPACT ON FORESTS reaching 42ºC. Armenia’s NC4 reported Armenia’s climate is characterized by a 10 percent reduction in average annual extremes, for example, heat waves in the precipitation over 1935–2012. The northeast summer and bitter cold in the winter67 The and central regions have become more arid. large climatic contrasts are because of the However, precipitation has increased in the diverse terrain conditions ranging from arid southern and northwestern regions and in through subtropical to high mountains. The the western region of the Lake Sevan Basin. average annual precipitation is low at 526 In respect to climate variability, the number mm. Altitude is the strongest controlling of days with heavy rainfall and hailstorms factor determining the spatial distribution has also increased. of temperature and precipitation. Sub- Armenia is projected to experience zero average temperatures are common in warming at levels significantly above Armenia’s mountain ranges while the highest the global average, resulting in major average temperatures are experienced in the threats to human health, livelihoods, relatively low-lying western plains. Similarly, and ecosystems. Projections reported by Armenia’s highest peaks may receive up the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate to 1,000 mm of annual precipitation while Change (IPCC) (Ar5 RCP8.5 A2), as well as precipitation can be as low as 200 mm in the recent reports from the World Bank, indicate western plains. average temperature increase of 2°C by Armenia is considered as the fourth most 2070, further precipitation decrease of 3 vulnerable country to climate change in percent, river flow decrease of 6.7 percent, Eastern Europe and Central Asia (World and snow cover decrease of 7 percent by Bank 2021b). The country’s Fourth National 2030 in Armenia. According to the United Communication (NC4) to UNFCCC reports States Agency for International Development that it experienced an average temperature (USAID), by 2030 yields are forecasted to rise of 1.23ºC between 1929 and 2016. This decline by 8–14 percent in agriculture and historical rise in temperature has resulted 4–10 percent in pastures and reduction of in the accelerated shrinking of the glaciers, natural forest cover of about one-third of the measured to be at least around 8 m per remaining 11.2 percent with over 15 percent year. Trends suggest climate variability has of Armenia’s higher plant species in danger been increasing in the recent years, with an of extinction. 67 67 Climate change portal of World Bank. https://climateknowledgeportal.worldbank.org/country/armenia/climate-data-historical. 42 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS Box 4: Predicted climate change in Armenia ി Armenia is projected to experience warming at levels significantly above the glob- al average, with potential warming of 4.7°C above the 1986–2005 baseline by the 2090s under the highest emissions pathway (RCP8.5). ി Expected rise in maximum and minimum temperatures is even more significant and represents major threats to human health, livelihoods, and ecosystems. ി Warming is projected to be strongly concentrated in the summer months of July, August, and September. ി Increased drought risk is a particular threat to poor rural communities reliant on subsistence agriculture. ി Glaciers in the Caucasus will largely disappear over the twenty-first century, and the pressure and dependence on water management infrastructure is also expected to grow significantly. ി A warmer and more drought-prone environment is likely to drive significant chang- es in ecosystem composition, notably driving dryland expansion, forest loss, and species range shifts. ി The increased risk of both flooding and landslide hazards demands attention to di- saster risk reduction, particularly in Armenia’s poorer rural communities. ി Reduction in both the total arable land and the yield of staple crops will threaten food production and efforts to eradicate undernourishment in Armenia ി Without adaptation and disaster risk reduction, changes will exacerbate income and wealth inequalities and hinder attempts to reduce poverty. Source: World Bank 2021b. Observable climate change impacts and degradation mainly due to irregular or vulnerability are expected to increase reduced soil moisture (FAO 2015). With because of the aging water and irrigation the predicted increased frequency and infrastructure and unsustainable land intensity of droughts, the decline of soil and water management practices in the quality will be significant. For the entire country. Climate change has already led to Caucasus region, an expansion of arid and shrinking glaciers, while droughts and storms semi-arid conditions is projected. Such have become more common. The changing changes will reduce ecosystem resilience climate is likely to cause a greater frequency and productivity resulting in species range and intensity of extreme weather events in the shifts and potential loss of biodiversity. Thus, future. Climate change impacts will lead to forest management planning and silvicultural the expansion of arid ecosystems, reduction measures, afforestation, and reforestation of forest areas and subalpine and alpine all need to consider the changing patterns landscapes, and increased vulnerability of and will need to be robust and attuned to forests as well as loss of biodiversity and these risks. increased erosion and mudflows. More than 15 percent of Armenia’s higher The climate change patterns predicted plant species are reported to be in danger of for Armenia may lead to soil and land extinction due to projected climate change. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 43 Accelerated desertification processes will 2025.70 The action plan identifies three key result in the expansion of semidesert and types of barriers with respect to adaptation: desert areas by 30 percent. More frequent (a) governance and institutional barriers; (b) summer droughts and water stress will information, knowledge, and technological reduce the growth rate of trees and increase barriers; and (c) financial barriers. In their susceptibility to pests and diseases. the analysis and measures, forests are This will also create conditions conducive to embedded under the term ecosystems and more frequent and intense wildfires, leading forest fire is particularly mentioned. to an estimated 14,000 to 17,000 ha of forest loss by 2030.68 Additionally, studies from the 7.2 ROLE OF FORESTS IN CLIMATE Armenian academia, the UN, and the World CHANGE MITIGATION Bank confirm that climate change is expected Armenian forests play a crucial role in to have significant effects on the population climate change mitigation. During 2010– dynamics of forest pest species. 2020, forests in the country are estimated Forests have a pivotal role in either to have removed, on average, 0.54 continuing as sinks or becoming sources million tCO 2eq 71 GHGs per year from the of carbon emissions. Armenian forests atmosphere. This amounted to a total GHG are expected to suffer significant growth removal of 5.9 million tCO2eq for the entire losses caused by insect attacks under period. For the same period, the average climate change. Severe and repeated pest annual economic value of this removal is infestations will lead to increased tree estimated to be $33 million72 (Figure  13). In mortality, which will also contribute to fact, forestry is the only carbon sink among the accumulation of drying dead organic the major sectors of economy of Armenia. matter in forests, thus increasing the risk of Energy, industrial process and product wildfires. As described, Armenian forests are use, waste agriculture, and other land uses becoming more vulnerable and less resilient (excluding forestry) are net emitting sectors. to climate change. Consequently, forests In 2017, energy was the biggest emitting may become a carbon source instead of a sector contributing 67 percent of the total net sink. In other words, without integrating emissions from all sectors, and agriculture and forests into climate change strategies, other land uses excluding forestry were the national commitments toward the Paris second biggest with 18 percent contribution Agreement and the country’s socioeconomic (Figure 14). The aggregate GHG emissions development targets will likely be from all these sectors increased from 6.8 compromised. On September 24, 2021, million tCO2eq in 1995 to 10.2 million tCO2eq Armenia submitted its National Adaptation in 2017, which corresponded to a 49 percent Plan (NAP) to UNFCCC, prepared by the growth (Table 6). In 2017, the GHG removal MoE and UNDP.69 In May 2021, the country by the forestry sector corresponded to −5.2 approved the National Action Programme of percent of the total net emissions from all Adaptation with a list of measures for 2021– sectors in Armenia. 68 Armenia Third National Communication on Climate Change 2015. 69 FCCC/SBI/2021/INF.7 (unfccc.int). 70 NAP_Armenia.pdf (unfccc.int). 71 Data for 2010–2017 are from MoE (2020) and data for 2018–2020 are estimated based on trend from 2010–2017. The MoE intends to recalculate the LULUCF sectoral estimates. 72 Average of low and high shadow prices of carbon for 2021 suggested by World Bank (2017) is used for this valuation. 44 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS Figure 13: GHG removal by forests in Armenia and its economic value tCO2eq Million $ - 100.000 40 35 - 200.000 30 - 300.000 25 - 400.000 20 15 - 500.000 10 - 600.000 5 - 700.000 - 1990 1995 2000 2001 2002 2003 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2004 2005 Economic value GHG Removal Source: GHG removal - MoE 2020 (1990–2017), estimation (2018–2020); economic value - estimation Figure 14: Net GHG emissions from various sectors except forestry in Armenia in 2017 6% 18% Agriculture and other land uses (without forestry) Waste 9% Industrial Processes and Product Use 67% Energy Source: Adapted from MoE 2020. Table 6: Total net GHG emissions in Armenia Year Total net GHG emissions from all sectors, tCO2eq 1995 6,814,200 2010 7,946,500 2017 10,153,500 Change during 1995–2017 49% Source: Adapted from MoE 2020. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 45 Armenia has an initial target of 2 percent cover is intended to rise to over 20 percent, a expansion of forest cover in the 10 years major step change in ambition. to 2030 but this accelerates to 7 percent In the NDC, adaptation policies and in the following 20 years. Armenia’s measures are considered of paramount updated NDC73 sets a target of increasing importance, considering that the vast the country’s forest cover to 12.9 percent mountainous ecosystems are highly by 2030 as a strategy to reduce its GHG vulnerable to the negative impacts of emissions by 40 percent from 1990 levels. climate change and water scarcity. Also, Sustainable land and forest management is also necessary to achieve the NDC target.74 the NDC envisages that adaptation activities Introducing climate adaptive silviculture will be prioritized based on the sectors most and restoration practices, reducing the vulnerable to climate change, including drivers of forest degradation, and increasing natural ecosystems (aquatic and terrestrial, participation in forest governance will forest ecosystems, biodiversity and land contribute to achieving NDCs and to low- cover). Please see Box 5 on the potential carbon development pathways consistent of reducing emission from deforestation with a temperature increase of less than 2°C. and forest degradation (REDD+) and forest In the period to 2050, the share of forest carbon markets for Armenia. Box 5: REDD+/Forest carbon as an opportunity for Armenia? Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, conserving and managing forests sustainably, and enhancing carbon sinks (REDD+) is a mechanism developed by Parties to the UNFCCC. It creates financial incentives for developing countries to reduce CO2 emissions in the forestry sector. Developing countries would receive results-based payments for results-based actions. The commitment of the GoA to enlarge the forested areas up to 20.1 percent by 2050 is a promising initiative in terms of participating in the REDD+ mechanism. For this purpose, appropriate organizational and other measures need to be undertaken. A first forest project that adopts strategic approaches of REDD+ has been put in place in December 2021 by the GoA with the FAO as an accredited entity. It is majorly financed by the Green Climate Fund (GCF) (Simplified Approval Process [SAP] 14: Forest resilience of Armenia, enhancing adaptation and rural green growth via mitigation). The question is whether forest carbon would be an attractive financing scheme for Armenia to increase its forest area and carbon stocks? This is because REDD+ requires strong political will; rigorous safeguards; active community engagement; and complex methodologies for monitoring, reporting, and verification. In addition, the total area available for forest expansion and the growing conditions for trees are relatively limited. Exceptions could be block planting of fast-growing woodfuel plantations, but the total area of these will, however, always be limited. 73 Nationally Determined Contribution of the Republic of Armenia for 2021–2030 under the Paris Agreement. Armenia’s intended nationally determined contribution (INDC) that was submitted to UNFCC in 2015 outlined the national climate change 74 goals up to 2050. Land use and forestry (afforestation, forest protection, carbon storage in soil) were the key sectors included in the mitigation contribution. Concerning forests, the INDC aimed to reach 20 percent of forest cover by applying an ecosystem-based approach by 2050. 46 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS 8. LEGAL, INSTITUTIONAL, AND POLICY FRAMEWORK The Forest Code of 2005 is the central amendments to the forest legislation should legal act in the system of forest legislation be aimed at providing legal framework for the which regulates the relations with respect multipurpose use of forests, contributing to to sustainable forest management including the improvement of the management system, safeguarding, protecting, protection, clarifying intersectoral legal relations and rehabilitation, afforestation, and reasonable responsibilities, and revising regulations use of forests and forest lands as well as considering realistic opportunities and the relations with respect to inventory/ potentials for their application. stocktaking of, monitoring of, and control over forest lands. 8.1 KEY FOREST INSTITUTIONS The code has not been amended since it AND THEIR DEVELOPMENT was adopted; forest-related legislation now needs to be clarified and simplified to The key forestry institutions in Armenia ensure the functional application of legal have been organized since April 2018 acts. There are many bylaws associated under the MoE. The MoE is responsible for with the Forest Code, which complicates law environmental protection and biodiversity enforcement in the context of insufficient conservation matters. It is also the focal point capacity of the sector and low public for UN CBD, UNFCCC, and United Nations awareness. To fulfil a future wider role of Convention to Combat Desertification forests in the sustainable development (UNCCD). With respect to forestry, MoE’s agenda of the country, the Forest Code and functions are to oversee the forestry sector forest management regulations need to be and all state forest lands in Armenia. The amended to include biodiversity conservation, MoE carries out its forestry-related functions climate change mitigation and resilience, through its Forest Policy Department as economic valuation of forests goods and well as through Forest Committee and services, protection of HCVFs, conservation Hayantar SNCO (Figure 15). Similarly, the of special protected nature forest areas, and Hydrometeorology and Monitoring SNCO, other environmental issues. part of the MoE, has a department of Forest The code is currently being reviewed. Monitoring which is focused solely on According to the National Forest monitoring the forests. The core functions Development Policy, Strategy and Action and overall duties on forest management and Plan 2021–2030 currently in discussion, conservation are presented in Table 7. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 47 Figure 15: Institutional set-up as it relates to forests and forestry "Hydrometeorology Environmental Protection Ministry of Environment and Mining Inspection Body and Monitoring (directly under the Government) Center" SNCO Division of Forest Use Hayantar SNCO Forest Committee (with 17 districts / branches) and Forest Land Use Forest Policy Department Division of Running Forest Cadastre Financial-Economic Department of Forestry and and Analytical Division Specially Protected Financial forest lands Legal Areas of Nature accounting Division of Forest management Department and Biodiversity Department Preservation Department Division of Reforestation, Biological Resources A orestation & Protection Management Department Production and Economic Forest inventory Division Procurement and cadastre Industrial and Economic Climate Policy Division Department HR management Foreign relations Accounting Division Division of Analysis Strategic Policy of Activities & Development Internal audit Programs Department Economy HR Division General department General Division Legal Division The main tasks of the Forest Policy implementation of measures to increase the Department are drafting legal acts, productivity of the state forests; protection programs, strategies, and guidelines of biodiversity of state forests; efficient use as well as developing mechanisms for and of the environmental, social, and economic coordinating the implementation of the potential of state forests; and provision of respective state policies. The department complete and reliable information on the is involved in the elaboration of economic forest lands and forests. The committee mechanisms for the protection and exercises the powers assigned to the state reasonable use and recovery of biodiversity, forest service by the Forest Code (Articles including payment schemes for nature 26 and 58) and is governed by a chairman use. The MoE approved the Charter of the who is appointed by the Prime Minister after State Forest Committee and its institutional consultation with the Minister of Environment. structure in 2018. The MoE supervises and It is structured into departments: Forestry defines the main directions of the committee and Forest Lands Management, Forest and its activities (Figure 15). Inventory and Cadastre, Financial and The Forest Committee’s goals and Accounting, Contractual Obligations Control, objectives include conservation, and Legal Departments and Subdepartments protection, restoration, afforestation, (HR management, Procurement, Foreign and effective use of state forests; Relations, Economy, and General department) ensuring sustainable forest management; as seen in Figure 15. 48 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS Table 7: Division of selected tasks between the MoE, the Forest Committee, and Hayantar SNCO75 Institutional structure Core functions/duties Development of state policy on protection, control, reproduction, Forest Policy Department and use of forests. Secures the legislative and regulatory framework Supervises the implementation of forest management activities State Forest Committee thus ensuring sustainable forest management Implements forest management activities on state forest land: Hayantar SNCO control, protection, conservation of biodiversity, restoration, re/ afforestation, and efficient use of state forests Environmental Protection Control over implementation of the instructions and requirements and Mining Inspection Body set forth by environmental legislation (supervision moved to the GoA) Environmental monitoring, including natural and anthropogenic Hydrometeorology and impacts on all components (forests and specially protected natural Environmental Monitoring Center areas, biodiversity, atmospheric air, water resources, lands, waste SNCO (HEMC SNCO) disposal sites) of the natural environment Department of SPNAs and Coordination of activities on SPNA protection and sustainable use, Biological Diversity support to development and implementation of the state policy Since 2018, Hayantar SNCO has been from selling forest products (approximately under the subordination of the Forest 30–35 percent). Hayantar has the following Committee. Its status and institutional categories of entrepreneurial activities: set-up are under revision due to ongoing ി Timber harvesting, processing, and sale reforms in the forestry sector. The main functions of Hayantar are to ensure control, ി Cultivation and sale of planting material protection, conservation of biodiversity, (seedlings, seeds) restoration, re/afforestation, and efficient ി Procurement, processing, and sale of use of state forests and forest lands. About secondary forestry (stubble/wood residues) 75 percent of forests and forest lands of ി NWFP forest use (harvesting; livestock Armenia (including 13 of 27 sanctuaries) are managed by Hayantar through the Head grazing; installation of beehives; Office (comprising 10 departments) and 17 collection of wild fruit, nut, mushrooms, forestry branches located in the marzes of berries, herbs, and technical raw Lori, Tavush, Syunik, Kotayk, Shirak, Vayots materials), as a result of which processing Dzor, Gegharkunik, and Aragatsotn. 76 The and sale of purchased bioresources AAC is determined in the FMP and based ി Production, processing, and sale of on respective proposal from Hayantar; agricultural products if the FMP has expired, these quantities ി Provision of recreational and tourism- are calculated by special commissions. related services Hayantar is financed by the state budget (approximately 65–70 percent) and revenues ി Provision of consulting and information. 75 Based on Grigoryan 2021. See Annex 5 for the key contacts in forestry sector in Armenia. 76 The status of FMPs needs to be checked: there is the information that FMPs have been voided, but the new ones are not approved yet. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 49 Reorganization is ongoing. In 2020, the as for hunting sites. former Forest Monitoring Centre related ി The Department of Specially Protected to the Forest Committee and Hayantar was Areas of Nature and Biodiversity of merged with other environmental monitoring the MoE is in charge of developing and units as the HEMC SNCO was set up in 2020 implementing policy of biodiversity and to monitor all natural resources, including SPNAs (all state reserves, national parks, forests. In addition, a draft law implementing state sanctuaries [nature reserves], and changes to the existing structure (which itself natural monuments) and supervising dates from as recently as 2018), including respective subordinate SNCOs managing the substitution of the Forest Committee, SPNAs. is currently under political consideration. Currently there are many overlaps, Simultaneously, there are plans to expand duplications, and contradictions between the Department of Forest Policy within the the major institutions involved in the MoE and Hayantar SNCO—both are to be management of Armenia’s forests. For given clearer mandates and the capacity to example, Hayantar SNCO, the Forest take on meaningful roles in spearheading Committee, and the newly established large-scale restoration. HEMC SNCO are all equally responsible for There are several other institutions securing the forest monitoring according to that undertake forest-related control or their charters; the function to conduct forest regulation functions. cadastre rests both on Hayantar SNCO and the Forest Committee, whereas the Forest ി Environmental Protection and Mining Policy Department leads the development Inspection Body (supervision moved to of the national action plans (programs), the GoA) is responsible for supervision and the Forest Committee provides support of maintenance and protection of forests in that process. This results in a forest and SPNAs as well as for controlling the management regime that is considered to be compliance of cutting and harvesting inefficient and weakly transparent. Despite activities with related regulations. It is some reforms and improvements within undertaking control functions of adhering the system, during the last years, a lack of to the environmental limitations and capacity at all levels has further affected the norms for the use of forest lands, including quality and efficiency of forest management for sanitary and protection zones, land in the country. planning, forest planning, urban planning, and land zoning documents as well as overseeing, for example, afforestation 8.2 FOREST OWNERSHIP activities in respect to the approved Currently, all forests are state owned norms and regulations. (State Forest Fund) under the responsibility ി The Biological Resources Management of the MoE, with the State Forest Committee Department of the MoE is responsible responsible for oversight and forest for issuing licenses, permits, contracts, management performed by Hayantar quotes, agreements, conclusions, and SNCO. Newly established forest plantations certificates related to use of flora and in community lands have not yet been fauna and protection of the environment. transferred to the category of forests; The department shall also run the thus, the forest ownership regime does cadastre of wild flora and fauna as well not apply to these plantations. Pasture and 50 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS hayfields are state owned on forest fund adoption of the existing Order to transfer land or community owned. Arable farmland the plantation into the category of forest and orchards are privately owned. On State is required in accordance with Article 29 Forest Fund land, Hayantar SNCO provides of the Forest Code of Armenia. To promote management, forest resource accounting, private forest ownership, the lands suitable protection/control of wildfires and pests, and for afforestation and reforestation need rehabilitation and reforestation of forests in to be properly mapped and the borders areas under its control. Community members adjusted to ensure that cadastre maps and can lease grazing rights from Hayantar on those of forest land are not contradictory. non-forested State Forest Fund land. The The existing Government Decree of the fact that community cannot easily lease Republic of Armenia ‘On Approval of the forest land will lead to an imbalance in Order of Handling State Forests and Forest favor of leasing for grazing purposes and a Lands for Use’ (N806, May 24, 2007) needs degradation of nearby forests. to be revised to adjust the regulation to the The Forest Code enshrines the right current functions of the MoE. It needs to be to private ownership and community mentioned, however, that state forest lands ownership over forests and forest lands, cannot be moved to private ownership at but to date no private forests have been present. put in place. This fact demonstrates a lack of interest to invest in forestry and also 8.3 DECENTRALIZED BODIES DEALING the lack of adequate incentives for forest WITH FORESTS management coupled with the complete Marz administrations are mandated to absence of secondary legislation. In terms implement the state territorial policy. of community-owned forests, it should be They are coordinated by the Ministry of noted that the capacities and resources Territorial Administration and Development of local self-government bodies are by (MoTD), which is the authorized body of the far not sufficient for planting new forests GoA for development and implementation of and carrying out environmentally and state policy on territorial administration. The economically sound management. This limits competences of territorial bodies of state the capacities to become forest owner. The management (marz administrations) in the concept of community ownership could sphere of sustainable forest management perhaps be revisited in favor of the forest are regulated in Article 8 of the Forest Code authorities retaining ownership but leasing and comprise to community groups or individuals. The ി Participation in the elaboration of current Forest Code does not allow transfer state programs and ensuring their of forest ownership to the community; implementation in administrative areas of however, it allows retaining the forests the marz; management to the community in the form of a trust management and this could be one ി Involvement of specialized services, potential solution. forest users, and population in forest fires in the administrative areas of the marz; Creation of forests on private land is possible but requires certain procedures. ി Implementation of state programs aimed To enable planting trees on state forest at the protection and use of forests and lands meant for free use, elaboration and forest lands; and CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 51 ി Other powers defined by the legislation competition’77 outlined the legal basis for of the Republic of Armenia. involving communities in management of forests within the administrative boundaries The Forest Code also stipulates in Article of the given community. State-owned 59 that ‘community forest control’ shall be carried out by the local self- forests can be leased or assigned for governing bodies within the administrative concessional management to forest user borders of the communities in accordance groups of communities (or community- with the procedure determined by the law. based organizations or NGOs) for up to 10 The competences of local self-governing years with possible renewal. The decree also bodies in the sphere of sustainable forest stipulates that management are regulated in Article 9 of the ി State forests may be handed over to Forest Code 2005 and comprise concessional community management ി Possession, use, disposal of community only in case of existing FMPs; and forests and running of forest economy ി Community organizations must have (that is, implementation of measures a specialist(s) educated in the field prescribed in the FMPs); of forestry with at least five years of ി Participation in the development of experience in forestry or agronomy. state programs and safeguarding While the Forest Code provides for of their implementation within their decentralized and co-management administrative territories according to the approaches, the de facto involvement of order determined by the law; marz administrations and communities in ി Involvement of specialized services, forestry matters is rather limited. Local forest users, and population in the works communities struggle to meet the stipulations to fight forest fires; without outside support, primarily because of lack of resources in the following areas: ി Management of state forests given for community management; and ി Legal knowledge and financing to establish and operate a community- ി Giving consent to change special- based organization purpose significance of lands and carry out engineer-geological studies ി Insufficient financial resources for any for the activities on construction, kind of forest investments blasting, extraction of useful minerals, ി Inadequate technical knowledge installation of cables, pipelines and other and experience in timber and NWFP communications, drilling, and others management and sale having no connection with the running ി No financial resources to engage the of forest economy and forest use on professionals specialized in forest community forest lands. management Collaborative or joint forest management ി Lack of technical skills and adequate is supported in law. In 2006, Government equipment for forest operations. Decree N583-N ‘Provision of state forests to concessional management for Sustainable community forestry the community organizations without managed for and by local stakeholders is 77 Meaning without public tendering. 52 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS undervalued. There is a lack of awareness propagation, community forest planting, and knowledge about the values of forests economic empowerment of forest in the longer term for sustainable livelihood, adjacent communities, environmental the need for forest management planning for education, and awareness raising. a potential sustainable use of the forests, ി Armenian Environmental Network and the need to invest in forest and tree resilience to secure the forest assets in the ി Armenian Forests Environmental NGO long term. There is no lasting concessional ി ECOLUR informational center shares management by local forest user group or information about environmental issues community-based organization in place. This including mining, small hydropower needs to be addressed as a matter of priority plants (HPPs), energy, air, climate for Armenia to attempt to achieve its Bonn change, water, nuclear energy, Challenge targets. The forest authorities biodiversity, waste, forest, cities, and alone cannot achieve the required scale of weather. It shares information about the forest restoration. Amulsar gold-bearing mining project and its potential impacts on the health 8.4 CIVIL SOCIETY INVOLVEMENT IN of Armenian population and the habitats FORESTS AND FORESTRY and species protected under the There is no officially established platform convention. of civil society participation in forestry ി FPWC (Foundation for the Preservation decision-making in Armenia. Due to of Wildlife and Cultural Assets) overall policy aim in Armenia to promote and VivaCell-MTS works with local forest restoration and afforestation communities to protect and conserve activities, civil society involvement in unique natural and cultural heritage forestry activities is increasing. NGOs have and run environmental education and a practical contribution to forest and tree awareness raising campaigns. conservation and the implementation of ി My Forest Armenia NGO has established sustainable forestry, promotion of FLR, and a nursery in Lori marz with a capacity of capacity building of civil society actors for 250,000 plantings as of September 2020. forest activities.78 The active involvement The initial goal of this organization is to of academic institutions in forest and tree plant 400,000 trees per year or about 200 development, such as the Armenian National ha of new forest every year. The NGO is Agrarian University, Yerevan State University, engaged in a seed program, reforestation, and Yerevan State Pedagogical University, is and environmental education. remarkable. ി Public Administration Academy of The following NGOs are actively engaged the Republic of Armenia conducts in capacity building of civil society actors in environmental education courses for forest development activities (in alphabetic civil servants and community servants. order, non-exhaustive list): The process is coordinated by the Civil ി ATP, a charitable foundation, cooperates Service Council with the assistance of with the MoE and different communities of the MoE, MoTD, Municipality of Yerevan, Armenia to promote forest nurseries, tree and other local self-government bodies. 78 The list of environmental NGOs is available on the webpage of the MoE of the Republic of Armenia. http://www.mnp.am/en/coor- organizations. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 53 ി ‘Shen’ NGO in cooperation with the most vulnerable areas in Armenia. WWF community Dzoraglukh is engaged in Armenia implements activities aimed at forest planting on community lands of increasing the coverage of protected 5 ha and repairing the local irrigation areas, improving forest management, system. halting deforestation and restoring ി World Wildlife Fund (WWF) Armenia, degraded forest landscapes. in cooperation with the GoA, MoE of the Republic of Armenia, and communities, Recent engagement of civil society actors carries out protection and rehabilitation in FLR has been especially successful, as of the forest ecosystems in some of the outlined in Box 6. Box 6: Success stories of civil society actors in forest landscape restoration ATP: It was established in 1994 and has planted 4.5 million trees in 1,200 sites all over Armenia. ATP established four greenhouses with 1,200 m2 total area and four nurseries with 16 ha total area. ATP also implements the Backyard Nurseries’ project where 38 families in Armenia have planted over 40,000 trees. In 2005, ATP established Mirak nursery in Lori, Margahovit village to provide seedlings for forest sites in Northern Armenia. The aim of this nursery was to stop deforestation in Armenia. In this nursery, ATP has reached the goal of having a high tree survival rate. This nursery has the capacity to produce 200,000 seedlings annually. It has 500,000 trees under various stages of cultivation. In 2019, ATP established a greenhouse in Margahovit with a forest laboratory for experimentation and exploration of best quality seeds. Currently, the greenhouse can produce 30,000 seedlings per year. ATP organizes educational and training programs for communities and other interested parties to enhance understanding of and encourage responsibility for nature and its resources. My Forest Armenia: My Forest Armenia is a not-for-profit organization established in 2019, with the goal to plant 1.6 million trees by 2024 in Armenia. Since its establishment, My Forest Armenia has successfully initiated a seed program, nurseries, greenhouses, and reforestation projects throughout Armenia. The seed program aims to register trees by species using seed collection from proposed areas and data collection, analysis, and mapping. The goal is to identify native plant seeds and encourage conservation of those for the seed-based restoration of forests. My Forest Armenia has established several nurseries in Lori (Debet and Gugark) and Tavush (Haghartsin) region forest in Armenia, and the Armenian National Agrarian University is planning the construction of a greenhouse in Vanadzor (anticipated for summer 2021) with the aim of growing seedlings in containers and establishment of a research unit for students and university staff. 54 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS Shen NGO: In 2006, Shen established a nursery of forest and ornamental trees on 3 ha near Jraber community, Kotayk marz. Seedlings produced are given for free to state forestry agencies, environmental NGOs, and rural communities for reforestation purposes. In 2008, the Hrazdan branch of ‘Hayantar’ SNCO planted an oak forest on 8 ha using the seedlings from the Shen nursery. With the support of the local NGOs and financial support of a GEF project, over 7 ha of forest was planted in Chambarak with oak, poplar, ash, and other varieties. Since 2010, Shen has donated forest and ornamental trees from its nursery to villages in Kotayk, Aragatsotn, and Gegharkunik marzes. Since 2014, Shen has collaborated with the ‘Integrated biodiversity management, South Caucasus’ regional project of GIZ implemented by ECO Consult (Germany). The project envisages controlling soil erosion through planting new forests in Aragatsotn and Shirak marzes. A small nursery was established in Aragatsotn marz, where almost 20 ha of forest was planted and fenced. Another 60 ha was prepared and fenced for further forestation. 8.5 STRATEGIC FOREST AND LAND USE and reforestation; and forestry science and PLANNING education. The National Forest Policy and Strategy The NFP79 has been the main policy (NFPS) (N38, September 30, 2004) was document since being adopted in 2005. the basic legal act defining the main The main objective of the NFP 2005–2015 institutional issues and regulations was to guard forest ecosystems, rehabilitate around forest ecosystem protection, degraded forest ecosystems, use forest preservation, and restoration. It was valid resources in a continuous and efficient until October 2021, when a government manner, and ensure a sustainable forest decree (N1728-N, dated October 21, management strategy. The specific objectives 2021) invalidated it in preparation of include (a) to plan and implement activities adopting an updated strategy; however, aimed at sustainable management of forests; its development has been delayed. As of (b) to promote the development of state, May 2023, the updated Forest Policy and community, and other types of ownership; Strategy and National Action Plan is pending (c) to stimulate cooperation at national government’s approval latest by the end and international levels; (d) to support of 2023. Based on analysis of potentials, the involvement of internal and external barriers, and necessary improvements, the investments, and (e) to implement measures NFPS Forest Policy and Strategy formulates promoting sustainable forest management in strategic directions and measures for forest compliance with international treaties of the management and biodiversity conservation; Republic of Armenia. forest exploitation; protection from illegal An intensive process to review the NFP activities, fires, and diseases; afforestation 2005 was launched in 202080 and in 79 Republic of Armenia, 2005: National Forest Program of the Republic of Armenia, RA Gov. Decision N 1232. 80 Work mainly conducted in the framework of the FAO CP/ARM/3801 ‘Technical Support for Revision of the National Forest Policy and Strategic Framework’. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 55 early 2022, the draft NFP 2021–2030 forest sector and cover the entire scope of was prepared, which is being reviewed forest-related issues, including the rationale by the MoE. It was prepared jointly by of institutional set-up, planning, sustainable the MoE and FAO with broad stakeholder forest management, protection and consultation. The NFP objective includes conservation, afforestation and reforestation, planning 10-year measures of sustainable running of forestry, community and private forest management such as conservation, forests, monitoring of forests, socioeconomic protection, afforestation, and efficient use; impacts, and so on. It is essential to increase of forest productivity; conservation consider the NFP 2021–2030 in the current of forest biodiversity; and effective use of process of revising the Forest Code and the environmental, social, and economic related regulations. Some stakeholders potential of forests. Core elements of the recommended to withdraw the draft law of action plan integrated in the new NFP the Republic of Armenia ‘On Making Changes include improving the management system, and Addendums to the Forest Code of the RA’ mitigating the impacts of climate change, and initiate legislative amendments following promoting afforestation and reforestation, the approval of NFP 2021–2030. providing ecosystem services, improving It will be particularly important to engage cross-sectoral cooperation, and providing with communities to achieve forest information on forest lands and forests. expansion and further consultation is The action plan contained within the NFP planned. Moving toward the government’s also identifies priority tasks, including (a) initiative to expand forest areas, it is further restoration of degraded forest landscapes; (b) recommended that the NFP addresses the issues with respect to supporting increase of the forest cover; (c) maintenance establishment of community and private and development of environmental, social, forests, which have been underachieving and economic functions of forests; and so far. Forms of public-private partnerships (d) continuous and effective use of forest (PPPs) can be designed for use in the forest resources. The actions presented in the sector. The draft NFP, as a key document program indicate the steps necessary to defining the long-term development implement the tasks arising from the NFPS: perspectives in the forest sector, might still ി Forest guarding, protection, afforestation, undergo wide public participation involving and reforestation all stakeholders and interested parties, ി Management system efficiency including the forest-dependent communities and forest sector employees. ി Multipurpose use of forests To date, Armenia has made a ി Collaboration, awareness, and engagement. communication to the Bonn Challenge The topic areas within the NFPS and the to restore 50,000 ha by 2030 but there subject of the proposed revisions to the is no written action plan, as of now, on Forest Code have considerable overlaps how to achieve the Bonn Challenge. that need to be managed. The new National International consultants commissioned by Forest Policy and Strategy and Action Plan the World Bank prepared a ROAM analysis,81 is anticipated to draw up the priorities in the the definition of elements for a national FLR 81 A Restoration Opportunities Assessment Methodology (ROAM), developed by IUCN and the World Resources Institute (WRI), provides a flexible and affordable framework for countries to rapidly identify and analyze areas that are primed for FLR and to identify specific priority areas at a national or subnational level. 56 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS strategy, an action plan, and a roadmap a variety of Sustainable Development Goals to implement the restoration strategy in (SDGs), including SDG 15 and also SDGs August 2022. 82 It covers the priority areas for 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 13. Synergies with the restoration, identifies financing needs and SDGs and strategy programs in other sectors sources, and investigates the capacities and may strengthen and facilitate cooperation roles of participating stakeholders. It also between the authorities/units in charge of outlines an M&E framework to monitor the implementing different documents. implementation of the FLR strategy. In line The new Programme of the Government with the Bonn Challenge,83 the underlying of Armenia (2021–2026) has relevance long-term goal of FLR in Armenia is to restore to forestry. The program was adopted in the ecological functionality of deforested or 2021 by the new government and presents degraded forest landscapes and to enhance activities of the GoA that will guarantee the human well-being in and through these country’s sustainable development for the landscapes. The main proposed objective of respective period. In terms of forestry and FLR for Armenia include the following: issues related to it, the program includes the ി To increase the overall forest cover of the following policy actions: country ി Sustainable management of forests: ി To improve the conditions for natural protection, preservation, use, and regeneration of forests and to increase expansion of forested areas through their productivity afforestation and reforestation and ി To increase the water retention capacity continuous development of capacities in of the forest landscape and secure the this matter water provisioning function and other ി Protection of biodiversity and ensuring ecosystem services. biological safety, inventory of objects of The proposed national NFP 2021–2030 and flora and fauna the first draft of the FLR strategy require ി Renovation of the environmental establishing strong links with national monitoring system and sectoral strategies beyond the forest ി Approximation of the national legislation sector and their implementation programs. to the European Union (EU) environmental Both basic policy papers relate to broader legislation in accordance with the EU- policies and strategies that affect forest and Armenia Comprehensive and Enhanced forest policy, either at domestic level or tied Cooperation Agreement. to international agreements. National policies related to rural and economic development The National Security Strategy of the are closely linked to the goals on forest Republic of Armenia84 (2020) states conservation, expansion of forested areas, “We shall take effective steps towards the land restoration, disaster risk reduction, sustainable management and expansion of enhancement of the adaptive capacity of fauna and flora, forests, and protected nature people to climate change, transboundary reserves, as well as reducing soil erosion water management, and food and energy and desertification. Our priorities include security. Forest policy and strategies relate to the reasonable use of natural resources, 82 Report by UNIQUE, internal paper World Bank. 83 The Bonn Challenge; 2020: What is FLR?. 84 National Security Strategy of the Republic of Armenia (2020). CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 57 the remediation of damaged land, ensuring and their resources the safety of tailing ponds, preserving ി The European Landscape Convention biodiversity, and ensuring biosecurity.” (ratified in 2004) With respect to the agricultural sector, ി The UN World Heritage Convention the government decree ‘On Approval of (ratified in 1993) the Strategy 2020–2030 of Key Directions ി The United Nations Economic for Economic Development of Agricultural Commission for Europe (UNECE). Sector, the Action Plan and Timeline Thereof’ considers establishment of forest protection Important broader international policy belts as a measure for management of agreements include: agricultural risks. ി The European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) was developed to promote economic 8.6 ARMENIA’S INTERNATIONAL prosperity, stability, and security within COMMITMENTS AS RELATED TO the EU’s neighbors. FORESTS ി The Eastern Partnership (EaP) is a joint Armenia has ratified all major international initiative involving the EU, its member environmental agreements, including the states, and six Eastern European three Rio Conventions, the major international partners: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, trade agreements, and all relevant Georgia, the Republic of Moldova, and international processes and initiatives on Ukraine, as a dimension of the ENP. The forests. The major environmental agreements EaP aims at building a common area of include the following: shared democracy, prosperity, stability, ി The UN CBD, ratified in 1993, including and increased cooperation. commitment to the Aichi targets ി The EAEU (signed 2014) is an international ി The UNFCCC ratified the Kyoto Protocol organization for regional economic in 2003 and the Paris Agreement in 2017 integration, made up of Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, and ി The UNCCD ratified in 1997 and Russia. It creates a single integrated associated LDN targets under SDG 15.3 market, encouraging the free movement (2018) of goods, services, and common policies ി The Bern Convention on the Conservation in transport, industry, agriculture, energy, of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats foreign trade and investment, customs, (ratified in 2008) technical regulation, and competition. ി The Convention on International Trade ി Armenia also takes part in the in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna Comprehensive and Enhanced and Flora (CITES) (acceded in 2008) Partnership Agreement (CEPA), signed ensures that the international trade in in November 2017 between the EU and specimens of wild animals does not Armenia, strengthening cooperation in a threaten their survival large variety of sectors, including different aspects of environmental protection. ി The Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar) (acceded in 1993) is an intergovernmental Forest-related agreements and treaty that provides the framework for the commitments have been made with conservation and wise use of wetlands various institutions, processes, and 58 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS initiatives, including United Nations Forum conserve, restore, and sustainably manage on Forests (UNFF), UNECE/FAO Forestry its forests. and Timber Section, and FAO/Committee on The forest sector of Armenia has Forest (COFO). been supported by past and ongoing Armenia has committed to its own targets development projects/programs by under the Bonn Challenge. The Bonn international donors and agencies since Challenge has a global target of restoring independence of the country. The projects 150 million ha of deforested and degraded address long-standing issues in the sector land by 2020 and 350 million ha by 2030. As as identified more than two decades ago: part of its voluntary commitment, Armenia extensive illegal fuel wood cutting at levels pledged in 2018 to afforest/reforest 50,000 which cannot be sustained without further ha of land by 2030. In 2018, Armenia also depleting forest resources, uncontrolled signed the Astana Resolution in which grazing in forests, and forest fires. Most ministers and country representatives of the projects listed focus on biodiversity from Armenia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, the and the emerging threats posed by climate Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan change. reaffirmed their commitments to the Bonn Challenge. According to official data, 6,867 8.7 FOREST FINANCING AND PPPS ha of forest land were restored between 2018 Investment in forest management, and 2020 although this has not yet appeared maintenance afforestation, and restoring in Bonn Challenge reporting and overall; of degraded landscapes is largely not there is no strategy to support achievement happening because of a lack of resources. of this goal. The GoA has limited capacities to reinvest in Armenia is active in terms of commitments forest management due to the low level of to the UNFCCC and Paris Agreement direct income and thus low level of profits. to limit climate warming. The INDC of The state budget contribution to forests 2015 stated the 2050 goal as 20.1 percent has been limited over the past years, paying forest cover (or raising the forest cover mostly to maintain a critical administration from 330,000 ha at present to 595,000 ha to oversee and monitor forest use and forest by 2050). The updated NDC for 2021–2030 health. (from 2021) seeks to reduce the country’s Value-for-money analysis is difficult GHG emissions by 40 percent from 1990 due to lack of detailed information on emission levels and the implementation public sector financing. Private and public plan includes increasing the forest cover investments in the EU for forestry amount to 12.9 percent by 2030, corresponding to €20 per ha.85 Although, there is no data to an increase of 50,000 ha of forests. A on private sector financing for forestry in new international process was launched Armenia, state budget allocations for forestry in November 2021 at the Climate Change in 2020 and 2021 were $4.6 million and $4.2 Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC million, respectively, which is equivalent (COP26). Armenia, among 141 countries, to the per-hectare budget allocation of signed the Glasgow Leaders’ Declaration approximately €12. However, these figures on Forests and Land Use which commits include both administrative expenses Armenia, in a nonbinding way, to targets to (salaries, maintenance, and so on) and 85 ENECE. 2020. State of Europe’s Forests, https://foresteurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/SoEF_2020.pdf. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 59 specific programs in the forest sector, where Committee to develop investment programs the latter may include development projects in the framework of PPPs. This function of the which inflate the budget figures. Forest Committee has a rather limited scope as it is not linked to the national regulatory A review of funding and operation of the framework. The concept of PPP is indirectly sector is even more essential now, in referred to in the forthcoming new NFP view of an economic slowdown and the (currently in discussion) and the draft FLR potential impacts of climate change on strategy (which will enter in discussion soon). forests. There are several innovative options The establishment of FLR and the sustainable that Armenia could seek to explore on this management of forests (trust management, front, including the payments for ecosystem lease, free use, auction, tenders, and so on) services (PES) programs or potentially tap is envisaged to be included in the current into the carbon market to help finance the review of the Forest Code of the Republic ambitious reforestation/restoration goals. of Armenia. PPP might well be considered There is also the potential to more actively among them, if a legislative framework was engage the private sector, in particular the adopted and would play an important role in mining companies, to help finance major forest financing. new investments, such as rehabilitation of degraded sites, for example, with fast- 8.8 FOREST EDUCATION AND growing energy wood plantations. AWARENESS RAISING ON FORESTS PPPs could bring added investment and AND TREES a new law controls its implementation. The opportunities and incentives to obtain Since January 1, 2020, the Law of Republic forestry education are limited. During of Armenia ‘On Public-Private Partnership’ the Soviet period, no academic forestry (N113, June 28, 2019) entered into force (PPP education was provided in Armenia. As a Law) which envisages a number of safeguards result, Hayantar employees have a low level and control mechanisms to ensure the of forest education, with only 4 percent due management of the public assets and of the staff members having undergone infrastructures, pertaining to requirements on forestry education. This situation makes the selection of a private partner, the conditions formulation, implementation, and control of of the PPP contract, guarantees for rights of sustainable FMPs difficult. Nowadays, forest private partners, establishment of a database education is being promoted by international and reporting on PPPs, state support projects and some Armenian universities. Many mechanisms, and settlement of disputes. international programs include an element on PPP potentially can bring additional financing producing trainings on sustainable forestry in investment to the forestry sector, given the models that are adaptable to local conditions fact that in the Republic of Armenia budget using advanced analytical techniques and financing has never fully covered necessary community capacity building. The National expenses of the forestry sector. Agrarian University is the leading university The forest sector is not mentioned on forestry and agricultural programs in explicitly as a sector which would attract Armenia. However, financial resources are PPP and needs particular attention in often insufficient for training specialists, and amending the Forest Code, the FLR there are few graduates from the Agrarian strategy, and the NFP. Nonetheless, Article University able to work in the sector. Often 7.1 of the Forest Code entitles the Forest those who graduate cannot find employment 60 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS in the forest sector due to the need to improve benefits to the environment and biodiversity the attractiveness and competitiveness of as well as the economy especially in rural the forestry profession. areas. As Armenia affirms its commitment to The target to double forest cover in the double its forest cover by 2050, the goal period to 2050 raises the need for trained will require significant resources in terms professionals. The Armenian Forest Summit86 of financing, seedling capacity, and human underlined the need for contemporary forest resources in the form of trained experts science labs, endowment funds to support who are familiar with techniques such as forest education, updated training materials, tree propagation, nursery management, site and ongoing education for lecturers (see identification, tree planting, and long-term Box 7). Incentives to encourage and reward tree care and management. Yet environmental scientific research need to be supported by education, especially regarding the international partners. The forest experts effects of deforestation, is still lacking in stressed the importance of studying and most Armenian educational institutions, understanding Armenia’s biodiversity and where a new generation unaffected by the desperation induced by the energy crisis the potential impact of invasive species sits. There are no specialized institutes in and creating and implementing sustainable education that deal with forest management FMPs, tree nursery management, and or forest monitoring. Recent international wildfire prevention. The 30-year, large- projects try to include capacity building scale afforestation and reforestation efforts for different stakeholders on sustainable described in the INDC will create many job forestry and resilient afforestation and opportunities, and creation of a trained reforestation, along with the aim to deliver workforce to fill those jobs is essential. Box 7: Examples of forest capacity building in forest education My Forest Armenia engages different communities to implement activities on seed collection, nurseries, and reforestation. The first step is training and raising awareness of environmental issues during regular training sessions. Considering the employment situation in rural areas, this program is a chance for people to get vocational training in the sphere of reforestation and gives them access to a paying job. ATP and Agrarian University training programs respond to the request related to the lack of specialists in the fields of nursery management and forestry and the need to build the capacity of nursery and tree planting staff. A new partnership between ATP and the National Agrarian University has emerged to address this problem. Stu- dents at the university will conduct internships and field research at ATP’s nurseries and greenhouses. A pilot program will be held this year with the support of UNDP. ATP’s facilities and planting locations offer a number of learning opportunities, in- cluding nursery management, greenhouse management, forest management, urban forestry, and fruit tree production. 86 The Armenian Forest Summit: Global Action and Armenia. Co-organized by the ATP and the American University of Armenia (AUA) Acopian Center for the Environment took place in October 2019 in Yerevan. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 61 9. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS 1. IMPLEMENT LANDSCAPE RESTORATION STRATEGY AND ACTION PLAN 2022–2032 The Assessment of Forest Landscape on a comprehensive series of studies Restoration Opportunities in Armenia is an organized as a multistakeholder consultative important analysis to guide development process involving forestry and natural in the sector. A key recommendation is the resource management (NRM) experts, formal adoption and implementation of the government officers, private sector actors, associated Landscape Restoration Strategy and local communities. The four strategic and Action Plan 2022–2032. 87 This is based priority areas are outlined in Box 8. Box 8: Four strategic priority areas of Landscape Restoration Strategy Institutional environment and steering: Actions in this strategic area will create and maintain the institutional environment needed to manage the landscape restoration process effectively and efficiently. Delegation of powers and duties needs to be effectively reinforced; the concept of decentralization needs to be detailed for restoration of forest ecosystems; and establishment of new plantations needs to be effectively planned and enforced by communities, the private sector, or NGOs, in parallel to governmental efforts. Capacity development: Building capacity of the entities who implement landscape restoration will also contribute to building the capacities of the communities and other stakeholders involved. Development of the required infrastructure: Hayantar is not sufficiently equipped to implement landscape restoration measures on large areas, involving the implementation of FLR measures on several thousand hectares every year. The implementation of the (forest) landscape restoration roadmap provides the opportunity to revamp and upgrade the existing infrastructure (office infrastructure, machinery, and communication) by the active involvement of communities, the private sector, or NGOs. Implementation of forest ecosystem improvement measures : This concerns the actual implementation of landscape restoration options and therefore is the most important area. The implementation shall start small and shall be ramped up swiftly, especially when moving from the second to the third phase. 87 ROAM Study prepared by UNIQUE (2021), internal document World Bank. 62 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS 2. RECOGNIZE THE ROLE OF COMMUNITIES AND INVOLVE THEM IN RESTORATION EFFORTS FOR SUSTAINABILITY AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS The public and communities are insufficiently on progress and identifies on a continuous involved in the management of the State basis. The restoration potential could be Forest Fund. The forests and trees should be achieved in a sustainable and cost-effective viewed through a wide lens and engage both manner by transferring significant quantities state and non-state actors working to defined of degraded forest areas to the management standards and with access to accurate and of community groups or individuals on lease up-to-date information supported by a or through management contracts with clear monitoring system that provides feedback benefit-sharing arrangements. 3. DEVELOP AND MAINTAIN A NATIONAL FOREST MONITORING SYSTEM AND LAND AND ECOSYSTEM ACCOUNTS Responding to the challenges posed by these resources and pathways to protect and land degradation is hampered by the lack enhance them. This system will align with the of up-to-date information on the extent M&E framework needed for FLR. and quality of tree and forest resources The National Forest Monitoring System nationally. The concept of economic valuation should feed into a Forest Management of ecosystem services is still in development Information System. A centralized forest for Armenian policy and planning processes. management information system will organize Forest-based ecosystem services are data collection, planning, and management of neither clearly identified nor appropriately day-to-day activities in a structured way. This valued economically. Rather, they are often overlooked or, at best, seriously undervalued system can underpin achievement of long- in national planning and decision-making. term FLR targets, using a system embedded in The establishment of an NFI and land cover national institutions rather than supported on an classification to identify a trusted baseline for ad hoc, project-by-project basis. Functionality future forest monitoring and applied research, would include planning, data collection, storage, including in close-to-nature silviculture, is and reporting for monitoring, payment, quality required. Natural Capital Accounts (land control, and analysis. Systematic recordkeeping and ecosystem services) will build on these and application of ICT will improve transparency data sources to enhance understanding of and the effectiveness of state forest institutions. 4. DEVELOP AN INTERAGENCY MASTER PLAN TO INCREASE THE PRODUCTION AND LEGAL USE OF WOOD FOR HOME HEATING AND OTHER RURAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES Focusing on the demand side, and in light may also include expanding natural gas supply of energy price inflation experienced in to remote villages through microcredits and 2022, a specific focus is needed on the tax exemptions for wood imports to Armenia, energy budgets of local communities. Here promoting recycling and renewable energy we recommend an interministerial action plan production, and tightening the enforcement to promote, together with related ministries, of policies and regulations. The initiative efficient wood stoves, municipal biomass should be led by the MoE but should involve usage, and general energy efficiency. This other appropriate ministries. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 63 BIBLIOGRAPHY ArmenPress. 2018. “Yerevan City Council Approves Five-Year Action Plan.” December 25, 2018. https://armenpress.am/eng/news/959347.html. CBD (Convention on Biological Diversity). 2014. Fifth National Report of the Republic of Armenia to the Convention on Biological Diversity. https://www.cbd.int/doc/world/am/am-nr- 05-en.pdf. CBD. 2019. Sixth National Report of the Republic of Armenia to the Convention on Biological Diversity. https://ace.aua.am/files/2019/05/2019-6th-National-Report-CBD_eng.pdf. Economic Development and Research Center. 2014. “Residential Energy Consumption Survey.” UNDP. ENPI EAST FLEG II. 2017. Review and Analysis of Current Forestry Related Legislation, Institutional and Administrative Structure. Final report. s.l.: Enpi East Fleg II, 2017/5. http:// www.enpi-fleg.org/docs/final-report-review-and-analysis-of-current-forestry-related- legislation-institutional-and-administrative-structure/. ENPI-FLEG. 2014. “Scoping Study of Economic Significance of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) of the Forestry Sector of Armenia.” Framework Level Assessment of the Forestry Sector Capacities. Prepared by Armen Gevorgyan. Yerevan. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization).2015. “Armenia – Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015 – Country Report.” https://www.fao.org/documents/card/en/c/3e7d2d8d- ad49-4280-9621-3e0cb30f9647/. FAO 2020a. “Forest Resilience of Armenia, Enhancing Adaptation and Rural Green Growth Via Mitigation.” Approved funding proposal for Green Climate Fund. https://www.greenclimate. fund/sites/default/files/document/sap014-fao-armenia.pdf. FAO. 2020b. “Gender Action Plan for SAP014 Project: Forest Resilience of Armenia, Enhancing Adaptation and Rural Green Growth Via Mitigation.” https://www.greenclimate.fund/sites/ default/files/document/sap014-gender-action-plan.pdf. FAO. 2020c. “Gender Assessment for SAP014 Project: Forest Resilience of Armenia, Enhancing Adaptation and Rural Green Growth Via Mitigation.” https://www.greenclimate.fund/sites/ default/files/document/sap014-gender-assessment.pdf. FAO. 2020d. “National Forest Development Policy, Strategy and Action Plan of the Republic of Armenia for 2021–2030.” Draft. Internal document. FAO. 2021a. “Forest Resilience of Armenia, Enhancing Adaptation and Rural Green Growth Via Mitigation.” ANNEX 2. Feasibility Study. Internal document. FAO. 2021b. “National Forest Development Policy Forestry. FP Implementation Monitoring and Evaluation Plan 2021–2030.” 64 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS FAO-FRA. 2020a. Global Forest Resource Assessment Report Armenia. Rome. FAO-FRA. 2020b. FRA Country Reports - Armenia. Rome FLEG, and WWF Armenia. 2016. Galstyan, S. 2016. “Specially Protected Nature Areas of Armenia for Conservation of Forests and Biodiversity.”https://ecolur.org/files/uploads/pdf/ forest19-23.09.2016/siranushgalstyan.pdf. Forest Code. 2005. “Forest Code of the Republic of Armenia.” Gad Bigio, A., R. Von Culin, and A. Karapetyan. 2019. “Armenia’s Transformative Urban Future: National Urban Assessment.” Asian Development Bank. Gevorgyan, A. 2014. “Economic Significance of Ecosystem and Biodiversity of the Forestry Sector of Armenia.” ENPI East FLEG. Gharabegian, A. 2018. “Forest Restoration and Protection Related Challenges in Armenia.” PowerPoint presentation by the Adviser to the Minister of Nature Protection of Republic of Armenia on May 7, 2018. Grigoryan, H. 2021. Analysis of Legal and Institutional Framework for Forest Restoration. Internal Report for the World Bank. Hayantar. 2005. “National Forest Program of the Republic of Armenia.” RA Government Decision N123N, July 2005. https://unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/timber/meetings/20170913/ National_Forest_Program_Armenia.pdf. HETQ. 2021. “Armenia’s Ambitious Tree Planting Project: 90% Failure in Armavir.” IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2019. “Climate Change and Land. An IPCC Special Report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems.” https:// www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2019/11/SRCCL-Full-Report-Compiled-191128.pdf Khanjyan, Nazik. 2004. Specially Protected Nature Areas of Armenia. Yerevan: Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia. Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia. 2014. Fifth National Report of the Republic of Armenia to the Convention of Biological Diversity. Yerevan, Armenia. Mislimshoeva, B., J. Statz, A. Alaverdyan, and A. Karapetyan. 2021. Assessment of Forest Landscape Restoration (FLR) Opportunities in Armenia. Report IV: Landscape Restoration Strategy and Action Plan 2022–2032. Internal document. Mkrtchyan, A., and E. Grigoryan. 2014. “Forest Dependency in Rural Armenia.” FLEG II (ENPI East) Programme. MoE (Ministry of Environment). 2020. “Republic of Armenia - Fourth National Communication on Climate Change to the UNFCCC.” https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/NC4_Armenia_.pdf. Nalbandyan, A. 2000. “Prospects of Utilization of Non-Wood Forest Products in Armenia.” FAO. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 65 OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2015. “Assessing the Environmental and Economic Value of Water: Review of Existing Approaches and Application to the Armenian Context.” EU Water Initiative. OSCE (Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe). 2007. “Study on Deforestation in Armenia Made Public with OSCE Office Support.” Press Release, June 27, 2007. Perry, E., R. von Culin, A. Aleksanyan, K. Aghababyan, P. Bernazzani, J. Capron, C. Saab, and T. Durusu. 2020. “USAID/Armenia Foreign Assistance Act 119 Biodiversity Analysis.” Cadmus Group and ICF, Washington, DC. Republic of Armenia. 2015. “National Strategy and Action Program to Combat Desertification in the Republic of Armenia.” Yerevan. Sayadyan, H. Y. 2005. “Evolution of the Forest Cover in Armenia.” International Forestry Review 7 (2):113–127. Schulte, M., and A. Harutyunyan. 2020. “Drivers of Forest Cover Developments in Armenia: A Potential Afforestation Scenario of the Getik River Basin.” GAtES. Schmithüsen, F., G. Iselin, and D. Le Master, eds. 2002. “Experiences with New Forest and Environmental Laws in European Countries with Economies in Transition.” Proceedings of the Third International Symposium, Jundola, Bulgaria, June 2001, Jointly Organized by the IUFRO Research Group 6.1300 and the USDA Forest Service. Forstwissenschaftliche Beiträge der Professur Forstpolitik und Forstökonomie, Nr. 26; ETH, Zürich. Siikamäki, J., F. J. Santiago-Ávila, and P. Vail. 2015. “Global Assessment of Non-Wood Forest Ecosystem Services Spatially Explicit Meta - Analysis and Benefit Transfer to Improve the World Bank’s Forest Wealth Database.” PROFOR. Statistical Committee of Armenia. 2018. “Environmental Statistics of Armenia for 2018 and Time-Series of Indicators for 2014-2018.” Statistical Committee of the Republic of Armenia. 2021. The Demographic Handbook of Armenia 2021. https://www.armstat.am/file/article/demog_2021_2_.pdf. UNCCD (United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification). 2017. “Armenia - Investing in Land Degradation Neutrality: Making the Case.” Bonn, Germany. UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). 2007. Vulnerability and Adaptation of the Forest Sector of Republic of Armenia to Climate Change. Report brief within the framework of “Enabling Activities for the Preparation of Armenia’s Second National Communication to the UNFCCC” UNDP/GEF/00035196 Project. Yerevan. UNDP. 2014. “Ecosystem Services and Their Role in Poverty Alleviation in Armenia - A Case Study of Karaberd Gold Mine.” Yerevan. UNDP. 2015. “Mainstreaming Sustainable Land and Forest Management in Mountain Landscape of Northeastern Armenia.” Project Document, GCF, Armenia. 66 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note CONTENTS UNDP. 2020. Terminal Evaluation Final Report of the UNDP-GEF Project: “Mainstreaming Sustainable Land and Forest Management in Mountain Landscapes of North-Eastern Armenia.” UNDP. 2020. "Fourth National Communication on Climate Change under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change." https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/ NC4_Armenia_.pdf. UNECE (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe). 2019. “Forest Landscape Restoration in the Caucasus and Central Asia.” Geneva, Switzerland. UNECE, and FAO. 2019. “State of Forests of the Caucasus and Central Asia.” Geneva Timber and Forest Study Paper. Geneva. USAID. 2009. “Biodiversity Analysis Update for Armenia. Final Report. Prosperity, Livelihoods, and Conserving Ecosystems (PLACE) IQC Task Order #4.” https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/ Pnadp442.pdf World Bank. 2012. Climate Change and Agriculture. Country Note. https://documents. worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/750371468208161919/ armenia-climate-change-and-agriculture-country-note. World Bank. 2017. Guidelines for the Social Price of Carbon. Washington, DC: World Bank. World Bank. 2020a. South Caucasus - Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia: Private Enterprises in the Forest Sector - A Survey of the Private Sector in Wood Production and Processing. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/33238. World Bank. 2020b. Fuelwood Dependency in Armenia. https://documents1.worldbank.org/ curated/en/422971585303508163/pdf/Fuelwood-Dependence-and-Forests-in-Armenia.pdf. World Bank. 2021a. Agrobiodiversity Study for Forest Landscape Restoration. Internal report. World Bank. 2021b. Assessment of Investment Potential in Forest Landscape Restoration in Armenia. Internal report. World Bank. 2021c. Climate Risk Country Profile - Armenia. https://climateknowledgeportal. worldbank.org/sites/default/files/2021-06/15765-WB_Armenia Country Profile-WEB_0.pdf. World Bank. 2021d. Preserving Forests is Key to Armenia’s Climate Goals and Economic Sustainability. https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2021/06/07/preserving-forests-is-key- to-armenia-s-climate-goals-and-economic-sustainability#:~:text=Preserving%20Armenia's%20 forests%20is%20therefore,Tavush%20region%2C%20Armenia.&text=Prioritizing%20 climate%2Dresilient%20growth%20and,crucial%20for%20Armenia%20going%20forward World Economic Forum. 2019. Travel and Tourism Competitiveness Index 2019. https://www. weforum.org/reports/the-travel-tourism-competitiveness-report-2019/. CONTENTS Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note 67 Armenia Forest Landscape Restoration Note June 2023 REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT