Partnerships for Trans- frontier Natural Resource Management: Experiences from South Africa Christo Marais Department of Environmental Affairs
1. Example of a Protocol for trans‐frontier conservation areas. 2. Examples of Articles in TFCA agreements 3. An example of a trans‐frontier project 4. Value of ecosystem services 5. Forms of land degradation. 6. Examples of impacts of land degradation with trans‐frontier implications. 7. Achievements in South Africa to date 8. Challenges 9. Some opportunities for unlocking resources. 10.Developing the market Presentation Outline
General Trans‐frontier Conservation and Resource Protocol (1) • Recognising the principle of sovereign equality and territorial integrity of the states involved; • Desiring the enhancement of the socio‐economic conditions of life of the people in the Region through, among others, fostering growth, maximising job creation, broadening ownership patterns, and promoting peaceful activities and harmonious interactions among the peoples of the region. Olsson et al 2001
General Trans‐frontier Conservation and Resource Protocol (2) • Recognising the significant interdependence of economic development and conservation within the region. • Conscious of threats posed to the natural environment by its physical destruction or alteration, by over‐utilisation of the resource base, by uncoordinated development, by pollution of land, water and air, and by insufficient integration of environmental considerations into the development process;
General Trans‐frontier Conservation and Resource Protocol (3) • Recognising that economic development in the region can be significantly facilitated and promoted by co‐operation among the parties and harmonisation of approaches and regimes in the areas, among others, of conservation and land resource management policies and capacity building; • Considering that an efficient way of promoting sustained economic development opportunities and contributing to expedited economic growth and global competitiveness in the region is to do so by creation of an attractive environment through the development of stable regulatory frameworks within which the parties and investors may operate;
General Trans‐frontier Conservation and Resource Protocol (4) • Recognising the intrinsic ecological value of the natural environment in the region, its unique geophysical and topographical formations, its global significance as an IUCN International Centre for Plant Diversity, its wide diversity of fauna including threatened and endangered species, the importance and sensitivity of life support systems in the region and the region’s cultural, spiritual and historical value; • Acknowledging the various international conventions ratified by the parties and desiring to promote the objectives thereof and to facilitate the implementation of the understandings therein;
General Trans‐frontier Conservation and Resource Protocol (5) • Desiring to promote sustainable development and the utilisation of natural resource base, the maintenance of a healthy environment, and holistic cross‐border ecosystems management; • Recording that to enhance the conditions of life and of the people in the region, the parties initiated the Lubombo Spatial Development Initiative and concluded a General Protocol in that regard (in the case of South Africa, Mozambique and Swaziland).
General Trans‐frontier Conservation and Resource Protocol (6) • Recording further that among the objectives of the general protocol were the creation of a stable and attractive climate for investment through cross‐border co‐operation in a variety of areas and to ensure that economic development occurs in a balanced manner consistent with international and domestic environmental goals and obligations and which recognises the importance of preserving the region’s unique environmental wealth. • And further recording that among the undertakings of the parties in the General protocol were the undertakings (i) to consult with each other with respect to harmonisation of policies and/or regulatory regimes with regard to, among other things, appropriate cross border integration or integrated co‐ordinated management of conservation areas, and (ii) as soon as possible, to draft and implement protocols executed by the Parties on transnational regulatory matters.
Articles/Components in TFCA agreements should include: 1. Trans‐frontier Conservation and Resource Area Objectives 2. Undertakings by the parties 3. Establishment and constitution of the trans‐frontier conservation and resource area commission. 4. Duties and powers of the TFCA Commission 5. Functioning of the TFCA commission 6. Financial arrangements 7. Dispute settlement 8. Respect for National Legislation and Other Agreements
Example of a Trans‐frontier Project: Livelihood enhancement through transboundary natural resource management in the Limpopo corridor Project purpose: Contribute to the development of sustainable land and natural resource use systems in target areas adjacent to the GLTFP and help communities to make the best use of the potential “value added” opportunities the TFCA has to offer.
Output #1: Development of enabling policy frameworks for transboundary natural resource management by communities’ facilitated. Activities: 1. Existing policies governing transboundary resource management catalogued and reviewed and constraints to cross border resource management of resources identified. 2. Cost and benefits of existing and alternative enabling resource management policies examined and policy briefs/recommendations developed with participation of affected communities and local and national policy makers. 3. Build local capacity in policy analysis and to lobby for, and adopt, new policies on cross border NRM
Output #2: Ecological, economic and social advantages (value added) of TBNRM identified and appropriate interventions developed. Activities: 1. Identify and evaluate potential “value added” TFCA developments in tourism, agriculture, management of wildlife populations and infrastructure and related service sectors. 2. Facilitate the development of appropriate cross border resource management protocols, joint ventures, private sector partnerships, as appropriate, with particular regard to community led initiatives. 3. Identify training needs and facilitate appropriate training/capacity building. 4. Establish a geographic information system (GIS) to support spatial analysis of TFCA issues and development of appropriate Decision Support Systems (DSS) at regional level.
Output #3: Targeted natural resource management projects in each of the partner countries implemented. Activities: 1. Implement the Partnering Country components of the regional programme in accordance with the Goal, Purpose, Outputs and Activities developed for the national project and in a manner that is integrated with, and contributes to, larger regional programme goal and purpose.
Output #4: Project management established and operational Activities: 1. Selection, appointment and mobilisation of core team; 2. Preparation of Inception Operational Plan and updating of General Operational Plan; 3. Reporting 4. Convening of Regional Programme Management Unit; 5. Convening of national Programme Management Units; 6. Programme logistic and administration: i. Establishment of office logistics; ii. Procurement of equipment and supplies; iii. Preparation of consolidated semi‐annual financial reports; 7. Selection and appointment of team members in partnering countries
South Africa’s Natural Resource Management Programmes
Ecosystem service valuations of South Africa using a variety of land cover data sources and resolutions Sharolyn J. Andersona, Briony L. Ankora, Paul C. Sutton “…The findings from the finer resolution data were $675 billion/year (1990 data), and $610 billion/year (2014 data). This, most recent (2014) estimate of total ESV is roughly 1.5 times larger than South Africa's GDP ($350 billion in 2014). …” Ecosystem Services 27 (2017) 173–178 The Value of Ecosystem Services in South Africa
Mapping and valuation of South Africa's ecosystem services: A local perspective J.K. Turpie, K.J. Forsythe, A. Knowles, J. Blignaut, G. Letley “... We used locally‐sourced and other relevant information to value ecosystem services provided by South Africa's terrestrial, freshwater and estuarine habitats. Our preliminary estimates suggest that these are worth at least R275 billion per annum to South Africans.” (7% of the RSA GDP, the same as one of the country’s biggest sectors, the mining sector) Ecosystem Services 27 (2017) 179–192 Immediate Value of Ecosystem Services in South Africa
“Over simplified” Spectrum of Degradation? Bush Encroachment & Invasive Alien PlantsDesertification
Achievements in South Africa to date Investment To date Full Time Equivalents Average Number of Work Opportunities for last 4 years Outputs Working for Water & sibling programmes R 12 875 380 223 009 49 527 3 152 947 Hectares Treated Working for Ecosystems 21 720 Hectares Treated Working for Wetlands R 857 011 11 947 2 238 1 292 Wetlands worked on Working on Fire R 2 737 201 36 754 5 291 15 439 Number of fires attended to R 16 470 000 271 700 57 100
How big is the market? (2017/18) Programmes Units Under Treatment Units Impacted Working for Water (Ecosystems & Forests) 848 533 47 166 300 Working for Wetlands 196 119 120 Working on Fire 737 480 5 038 800
Some Examples of Investment Opportunities
Investment Opportunities: The Upper End of the Water Value Chain • Flows • Flood/high flows • Low Flows • Yield from water infrastructure • Ground Water Recharge • Ecological Reserve • Sediments • Siltation of dams • Water quality • Purification costs • Waterweed management costs • Health risks
The Impact of IAPs in the Watersheds and Riparian Zones on Total Surface Water Yield •Current level of infestation •Reduction in Yield = 695 Mm3/a •Percent of Registered Use= 4.1 % • Future level of infestation •Reduction in Yield = 2,724 Mm3/a •Percent of Registered Use= 16.1 % Cullis et al 2007
Restored Donga Mrs. Mavundla leader of the Okhombe Trust Okhombe: Upper Thukela
Un‐restored donga 50m from Okhombe Restoration
1 Kilometer Downstream
10 Kilometer down at the inflow to Woodstock Dam
The dam surface 5 km down
The Dam Overflowing
Storage Space (m3) 500 000 Catchment size (ha) 77 100 % Silted Up after 4 year 70% Volume Silted Up after 4 year 350 000 Siltation/Year 87 500 % of Catchment Degraded 30% Upper Umzimvubu
Above ground 40 ± 3 7 ± 1 Litter 11 ± 1 1 ± 0.4 Roots 25 ± 1.3 11 ± 0.7 Soil 133 ± 27 95 ± 15 and falling? Total 209 ± 28 114 ± 14 t C ha‐1 Mills et. al. (2005) Austral Ecology Investment Opportunities Impacts of desertification on the carbon balance
…. Comparing measurements in a grazed area without a thicket canopy to those in an area with intact thicket cover, …it was found that the loss of thicket cover had resulted in an extreme change in soil infiltration rates, a decrease in soil moisture retention, an increase in run‐off, and increase in erosion. G. van Luijk R.M. Cowling , M.J.P.M. Riksen , J. Glenday(2013)
The Challenges 1. Governments generally cannot do it on its own. Through land users incentives programmes and with buy in from Departments like Rural Development and the private sector we can make it work. 2. Timespan of projects 3. Multiple party agreements 4. Access to markets ‐ The unlocking of third‐party resources by Implementing Entities (private and other partners) and integrating the needs of third‐party investors with that of the Department poses a challenge when working with standard supply change management processes. (It has the potential to unlock significant resources.) 5. Capacity to enforce environmental legislation (e.g. invasive species regulations, wetlands, fire, soil erosion, bush encroachment, etc). 6. Capacity to mentor new entrants to the sector. There is a need to grow the capacity of clearing contractors and community‐based NGOs to become implementing entities.
DEA Approach to Growing the Sector
Unpacking potential investment sources 1. Land users themselves through improved legislation and enforcement of the legislation. 2. Corporate Social Investments 3. Carbon market (tax) & credits 4. Water sector – Water Tariffs
Unpacking potential investment sources cont. 5. Value added industries from problem plant biomass. 6. Improved productive potential of land e.g. grazing, recreation especially eco‐tourism 7. International agency investments 8. Government (National, Provincial & Local)
Why Would Governments Invest 1. Crime 2. Education 3. Health 4. Job Creation 5. Rural Development 6. Food, Energy & Water Security
What are the institutional arrangements need to unlock the market? (1) • Legislative framework • Regulatory & Policy Framework (e.g. National Water Resources and Pricing Strategies) • An understanding of the “National Ecological Infra‐structure Socio‐ecological System”. • Active NGO sector. • Cross sectoral partnerships (e.g. the role that DST is playing in Upper Umzimvubu)
What are the institutional arrangements need to unlock the market? (2) NGO’s‐CBO’s Government ‐ Private Sector & International Investors Ensuring Repeatable Reliable Livelhoods
What resources do we need to unlock the market? • Capacity building of participants in the sector (career of choice) • Citizen Scientists • Advocacy & Extension services • Sector compliance management. • Well‐resourced M&E programmes with feedback loops.
What resources do we need to unlock the market? • Improvement of technical expertise to enhance economic viability. • Further investment in the development of value added industries to improve sustainability. (Biomass to Building Materials shows massive potential). • Capacity to make the economic case, translating the impacts of land degradation into its full ecological and economic impacts. • Political buy‐in.