The oral presentations for this session were moderated by Dr. Regina Birner from the University of Hohenheim who introduced the speakers. The first presentation was given by Kewin Bach Friis Kamelarczyk and he spoke about Indigenous and scientific knowledge. His research was focussed on local verses scientific knowledge about local forest change dynamics in the Zambian copperbelt. According to the speaker, both local knowledge and scientific findings should be integrated because they can not really be separated if success is to be achieved practically. He noted that the Zambian forest policy promotes the use of different kinds of knowledge in the management and use of forests. His research found that scientific knowledge is mostly mixed with other types of knowledge without giving actual source of information and that local people rely on nararatives which are mostly subjective perceptions based on experience and observations in the past. In most cases, he observed that these local ideas have not been documented. In an attempt to compare deforestation rates between scientific and local perspectives, Kervin Bach found that science estimates about 50% of deforestation while local people think 40% of the forest has been removed. In conclusion, he stated that what science shows as true may not be reality on the ground and that science is not always objective but could also be subject to bias. He also found that local knowledge may be biased according to political interest of the people. He advised that more than one source of knowledge is needed to get unbiased understanding of reality on the ground and to take political action. The second speaker was Sreejith Aravindakshan, a SUTROFOR scholar currently in Copenhagen University who spoke about the impacts of invasive species on marginal home steads drawing on a case study of Aceria guerreronis on coconut palms in India. He gave an IUCN definition of alien invasive species as “non-native species which become established in natural ecosystems or habitat, and threatens native biological diversity”. The researcher added that such species are seen as a threat not only to biodiversity and ecosystems, but also to socioeconomic development, livelihood and human well-being of people which is what his research sought to investigate. The general impacts of invasive species were listed as; • Difficulty and delay in dehusking operations which results in more labor. • Affect quality and quantity of nuts and fibre. • Reduced benefits since under sized nuts are discarded by the traders • Reduced yields where loss of 20–30% was noted In conclusion, Seerijith found that • Women headed households were more likely to avoid livelihood shocks (18 percent) • Indian government and various agencies spend US $ 77.88 million from 1998–2008 to control coconut mite. • Infestation by the invasive A. guerreronis had severe economic impact on coconut plantations in India from 1998-2004. • Multiple social networks, size of land holding, gender and physical capital could possibly reduce livelihood shocks from coconut mite. • Integrated Pest Management against coconut mite was found to be successful in India as evidenced by infestation reduction since 2006. • Proper quarantine measures must be adopted to prevent the entry of invasive species to an exotic environment in the age of globalization and market economy. The last speaker of the day Mr. Jens Frayer spoke on the topic “understanding land use decision-making using Bayesian networks in Yunan-China”. He started the presentation by mentioning the importance/uses of forests such as carbon storage, soil erosion prevention, biodiversity improvement, income generation, etc. He stated that the objective of the research was to understand the causes of household level land use decision making and that the researchers intended to answer; which factors influence the area of planting trees and which factors influence the decision to plant trees on croplands. According to him, data was collected using a variety of methods including expert interviews, participatory mapping, group discussions, and questionnaire administered to households. He stated that the research revealed three factors which affect decision to plant trees, namely; Land quality – the more marginal the land, the more likely that the household would plant trees Education – the higher the education of a person, the more llikely that the person would plant trees Demography and culture (household size and ethnicity) - the finding here was that, small households were less likely to participate in tree planting while certain ethnic groups participated less often in tree planting activities. Mr. Jens Frayer also said the research revealed three main factors which influenced the area planted with trees. These factors are; Physical endowments (area of cropland) – it was found that larger croplands had more afforestation Livelihoods (income source) – it was found that households which engaged in agriculture without off-farm occupations tend to afforest more. Secondly, it was found that households engaged in animal husbandry afforest small areas. Welfare (welfare status, monetary income) – it was found that poorer households afforest more In summary, Mr. Jens Frayer stated that the research used a combination of stakeholder knowledge, expert opinion and data mining thus resulting in high predictive accuracy. He also noted that the research has resulted in an improved understanding of land use decisions and the effect of afforestation on tree cover within the study area.