Smallholders have begun to take advantage of a growing pool of investment in climate change mitigation. Meanwhile, early movers in this area are working to develop innovative models that will allow projects to be financially sustainable and scalable while benefiting local actors. This study focuses on two of these projects in East Africa, managed by Vi Agroforestry in Kenya and ECOTRUST in Uganda. They engaged in a participatory action research process to identify ways that local actors could take on expanded roles within the projects. Results are presented as case studies which include project context, roles of local project actors, actions selected, and the outcomes of the actions on the key actors targeted. The actions focused on building the capacities of community-based intermediaries, facilitating partnerships with local government and local non-governmental organizations, and supporting a more active role played by women. Key findings from this process were that community-based intermediaries can play a leading role in land management trainings; local government involvement is critical to project success; local non-governmental organizations and businesses can play central roles in training and providing market incentives to farmers to implement sustainable practices; and women’s roles in projects can grow if project benefits are aligned with their needs and trainings are made more accessible. These cases demonstrate that there is substantial scope for the responsibilities within agricultural carbon projects, and by extension climate-smart agriculture initiatives more broadly, to be institutionalized at the local level. However, regardless of the institutional setup, due to carbon market factors beyond the control of these projects, the financial case for smallholder projects that rely solely on financing from carbon credits remains challenging to these projects and others like them. As programmatic and policy-led approaches grow from these project models, it may be easier to find ways to integrate carbon financing with support for climate change adaptation, rural development, and ecosystem services provision. With these new models, the ability to institutionalize management and implementation capacity at the local level will remain critically important.

Access to finance is a key element of sustainable and inclusive landscapes. We conducted a literature review to identify the factors that contribute to or hinder inclusive financing for micro/small/medium-sized enterprises and projects across sectors in ways that collectively contribute to more sustainable landscapes in the tropics. The key factors in the design of inclusive landscape finance are landscape governance, the financial literacy of local stakeholders, access to finance technology and services, and inclusive finance facilities and associated mechanisms for integrated (i.e., multi-project, multi-sector, spatially coordinated) landscape finance. The most frequent challenges are the types of existing financial products, the lack of livelihood assets among recipients (such as capital and income), the lack of transparency in finance mechanisms, the small scale of potential business cases, and the high risks perceived by finance providers and their customers. From this review, we propose components specifically focused on financial inclusion that complement the framework for integrated landscape finance developed by the Finance Solutions Design Team for the 1000 Landscapes for 1 Billion People Initiative. We suggest how the revised framework can be applied in designing and assessing the inclusiveness of finance mechanisms for integrated landscape management and to guide further research.

Donors and non-governmental organizations are showing increased interest in integrated landscape initiatives (ILIs), where landscape stakeholders work together to achieve common goals related to development, climate change and conservation. In order to support the work of ILIs, we developed a novel methodology with which stakeholders—organized in multi-stakeholder partnerships—can assess how financial flows in the landscape are impacting their common goals and to identify funding gaps. Piloting the methodology in three landscapes in Indonesia, Ghana and Vietnam, we found that there were trade-offs between ensuring broad stakeholder participation in the assessments (to capture different perspectives) and the level of technical and quantifiable detail that could be acquired. The methodology effectively contributed to a common understanding among landscape-level stakeholders and triggered discussions on methods in which financial flows can be adapted to reduce their negative impacts or increase their positive impacts. It also functioned as a basis for the development of joint action plans and to initiate collaborations with the providers of financial flows that have potential to contribute to common landscape objectives. In addition to promoting common understanding and providing a basis for the development of action plans, we conclude that implementing the methodology also helped with strengthening the landscape partnerships themselves.