Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Carbon Business Scenarios and Communities’ Choices Under REDD+ in Lindi Rural District, Tanzania

B. J. Temu, J. M. Abdallah, J. F. Kessy, G. C. Monela


This study assessed carbon business scenarios and communities’ tradeoffs in villages under TFCG-MJUMITA REDD+ Pilot area. Assessment of economic performance of REDD+ project was done by undertaking economic analysis of forest related land uses within REDD+ project site. Kinyope village forest (1,306 ha) was purposively selected, by using a sampling intensity of 0.06%. Sample plots were systematically laid out. Forest inventory was conducted to determine carbon storage potential. Snowball sampling was used to identify and study forest user groups, and checklists were used to assess land uses (shifting cultivation, charcoal production, pit-sawying and firewood collection). The results revealed that the sampled forest had a carbon storage potential of 71.14 tC ha-1 equivalent to 260.84 tCO2e ha-1, which is important in mitigating global carbon emission. NPV of forest carbon storage was TZS 7,470,989.60 ha-1year-1 at a discount rate of 20% for a 20 year project horizon. NPV for other forest related land uses at a discount rate of 20% and for a 20 years project horizon were: shifting cultivation (TZS 4,587,666.37 ha-1year-1), charcoal production (TZS 5,198,921.83 ha-1year-1), firewood collection (TZS 4,796,415.27 ha-1year-1) and pit-sawing (TZS 44,158,486.85 ha-1year-1). On average under without REDD+ scenario the forest related land uses (shifting cultivation, charcoal production, firewood collection and timber production) had higher NPV (TZS 14,685,372.58 ha-1 year-1) even at higher discount rates of 25%, 30% and 50%. NPV deference under without REDD+ scenario was approximately 2 times more than that of carbon storage alone (TZS 7,470,989.60 ha-1year-1). The implication is that a change in land use policy by giving more limited access to manage the forests for REDD+ would need a mixture of incentives.


Carbon businesses, REDD+, communities, trade-offs, economic analysis.

Full Text:


Disclaimer/Regarding indexing issue:

We have provided the online access of all issues and papers to the indexing agencies (as given on journal web site). It’s depend on indexing agencies when, how and what manner they can index or not. Hence, we like to inform that on the basis of earlier indexing, we can’t predict the today or future indexing policy of third party (i.e. indexing agencies) as they have right to discontinue any journal at any time without prior information to the journal. So, please neither sends any question nor expects any answer from us on the behalf of third party i.e. indexing agencies.Hence, we will not issue any certificate or letter for indexing issue. Our role is just to provide the online access to them. So we do properly this and one can visit indexing agencies website to get the authentic information. Also: DOI is paid service which provided by a third party. We never mentioned that we go for this for our any journal. However, journal have no objection if author go directly for this paid DOI service.