FAO Dryland Forest Plan Targets the Missing Link in Farm Resilience

The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations has launched a Call to Action on Dryland Forests, arguing that these under-recognized landscapes need stronger management, restoration, governance and investment. The initiative was unveiled in Rome on October 2 during World Forest Week and the 28th session of FAO’s Committee on Forestry.

Drylands are not marginal to the physical economy. FAO says they cover roughly 41 percent of the Earth’s land surface and contain 27 percent of global forest area. Their forests, woodlands and scattered trees support the livelihoods, food security and cultural identity of more than two billion people while supplying fuelwood, fodder, wild foods, medicinal plants and other marketable products.

The production link is especially important in places where rainfall is unreliable. Trees protect soils and water resources, support livestock systems and provide food or income when annual crops fail. That makes dryland forestry part of agricultural risk management, not a separate conservation subject. Degradation can weaken farm productivity and pastoral resilience even when the affected land is not classified as cropland.

FAO estimates that about one quarter of dryland forest ecosystems are already degraded. It identifies agricultural expansion, urbanization and unsustainable resource extraction among the principal pressures, while longer droughts intensify water stress and fire risk. The burden falls disproportionately on smallholders, pastoralists, Indigenous Peoples and local communities whose production systems depend directly on these landscapes.

The call’s central institutional proposal is a Dryland Forest Support Accelerator. FAO describes it as an anchored, country-driven mechanism intended to connect policy, finance, technical expertise and knowledge. It would help countries identify needs, integrate dryland forests into national plans, access longer-term finance, strengthen monitoring and coordinate work that is currently fragmented across projects and agencies.

The distinction between a proposal and an operating funding programme matters. FAO has announced the model and its intended functions, but the launch does not by itself establish a pool of capital, guarantee country participation or prove that restoration can be scaled economically in every landscape. Delivery will depend on governance, land tenure, local incentives, monitoring capacity and the suitability of interventions to water-limited conditions.

For producers, the practical question is whether support reaches working landscapes without treating all land use as interchangeable. Agroforestry, silvopastoral management, assisted natural regeneration and restoration can produce different results depending on grazing pressure, species choice, water availability and local rights. Programmes will need to measure both ecological recovery and effects on farm income, fodder supply and production risk.

The agenda also points to a wider investment gap. Dryland forests provide services that rarely appear fully in commodity prices, yet poorly designed finance can shift costs to land users or reward activity without durable outcomes. Transparent baselines, long-term monitoring and participation by the people managing the land will be essential if new finance is to generate additional restoration rather than simply relabel existing projects.

FAO’s announcement is therefore best read as a framework for scaling proven approaches, not evidence that scale has already been achieved. Its significance lies in bringing dryland forests into the same policy conversation as food production, climate resilience, biodiversity and rural development. The next test will be whether countries and funders convert the call into specific programmes with measurable land, livelihood and production results.