IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis
Draft 2: July 2010
Brief
This Situation Analysis for the drylands of the Eastern and Southern Africa region of IUCN has been compiled
during the first quarter of 2010. It aims to provide a broad overview of the dryland context in the region, the state of
dryland environments, drivers of change and the opportunities for mitigating environmental degradation and for
promoting sustainable natural resource-based livelihoods. This analysis takes a regional overview, highlighting
commonalities and recurrent or important issues where possible, but avoids going into much detail about individual
countries. This analysis includes recommendations for addressing important environmental threats and the major
drivers of change, as well as recommendations over appropriate modes of intervention in the drylands.
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
Overview of Dryland Biodiversity in Eastern and Southern Africa ...................................................................... 3
1.1.
Dryland species and habitat diversity .......................................................................................................... 4
1.2.
Biodiversity hotspots in the ESARO drylands ............................................................................................. 5
1.3.
Protected Areas ........................................................................................................................................... 5
1.4.
Dryland Ecosystems .................................................................................................................................... 6
1.5.
Dryland Ecosystem Services....................................................................................................................... 7
Stakeholders and institutions ............................................................................................................................ 11
2.1.
People and livelihoods .............................................................................................................................. 11
2.2.
National Governments ............................................................................................................................... 13
2.3.
International institutions ............................................................................................................................. 15
2.4.
IUCN Members: analysis from members survey and other consultations ................................................ 18
Environmental status in the drylands ................................................................................................................ 19
3.1.
Land degradation and desertification ........................................................................................................ 19
3.2.
Species loss .............................................................................................................................................. 21
3.3.
Loss of ecosystem function ....................................................................................................................... 21
Drivers of change .............................................................................................................................................. 22
4.1.
Drylands as frontiers.................................................................................................................................. 22
4.2.
Knowledge gaps and un-reconciled knowledge systems.......................................................................... 22
4.3.
Low consultation and institutional accountability....................................................................................... 22
4.4.
Devolution, decentralization and participation ........................................................................................... 23
4.5.
Drylands Poverty ....................................................................................................................................... 23
4.6.
Energy ....................................................................................................................................................... 24
4.7.
Governance, rights and tenure .................................................................................................................. 24
4.8.
Resource competition and conflict ............................................................................................................ 25
4.9.
Invasive species ........................................................................................................................................ 25
4.10.
Climate Change ......................................................................................................................................... 25
4.11.
Adaptive capacity ...................................................................................................................................... 26
4.12.
Resilience .................................................................................................................................................. 27
4.13.
Urbanisation .............................................................................................................................................. 27
4.14.
Refugee hosting areas .............................................................................................................................. 28
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
1
5.
6.
Opportunities for drylands conservation and sustainable development............................................................ 28
5.1.
Upgrade the knowledge base .................................................................................................................... 28
5.2.
Re-evaluate and sustain dryland ecosystem services .............................................................................. 29
5.3.
Promote investment and improve access to markets ............................................................................... 30
5.4.
Rights, reform, risk and resilience ............................................................................................................. 30
5.5.
Invest in Multifunctionality ......................................................................................................................... 31
5.6.
Combating Desertification ......................................................................................................................... 31
5.7.
Community Based Natural Resource Management .................................................................................. 32
5.8.
Rangeland eco-tourism ............................................................................................................................. 32
5.9.
Payment for Ecosystem/environmental Services ...................................................................................... 33
5.10.
Disaster risk reduction ............................................................................................................................... 33
5.11.
IUCN mandate for the drylands ................................................................................................................. 34
5.12.
IUCN past engagements in the Drylands .................................................................................................. 35
Recommendations............................................................................................................................................. 35
6.1.
Priority Issues ............................................................................................................................................ 35
6.2.
Priority locations ........................................................................................................................................ 37
6.3.
Principles and Approaches ........................................................................................................................ 37
7.
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................................... 38
8.
Appendices ........................................................................................................................................................ 39
8.1.
Bibliography ............................................................................................................................................... 39
8.2.
List of all conventions ................................................................................................................................ 41
8.3.
List of IUCN ESARO members with drylands interest/focus ..................................................................... 45
8.4.
Details of National Action Programmes and Priorities on Desertification ................................................. 46
Summary
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
2
1.
Overview of Dryland Biodiversity in Eastern and Southern Africa
IUCN considers drylands to be tropical and temperate regions with an aridity index of less than 0.65 (see
Middleton and Thomas 1997). The Aridity Index measures the ratio of mean annual precipitation to mean annual
potential evapotranspiration: a ratio of 0.65 means that potential evapotranspiration is 1.5 times greater than mean
annual precipitation. Potential evapotranspiration is the amount of moisture that, if it were available, would be
removed from a given land area by evaporation and transpiration. UNCCD and others categorise the drylands into
four subtypes, whose extent is illustrated in Table 1.
Table 1: Classification of drylands by Aridity Index
Classification
Hyperarid
(deserts)
Arid
Semi-arid
Dry subhumid
Total
Aridity Index
AI < 0.05
0.05 < AI < 0.20
0.20 < AI < 0.50
0.50 < AI < 0.65
Global land area1
7.5%
12.1%
17.7%
9.9%
47.2
Using this classification, drylands cover an
estimated 47.2% of the terrestrial surface of the
ESARO land area2
24%
7%
15%
25%
71%
Figure 1: Aridity Zones in Eastern and Southern Africa
planet and 71% of the Eastern and Southern
Africa region3. The drylands are home to
considerably more than 40% of the regions’
4
population and include a number of major urban
centres. IUCN’s interpretation of drylands is
inclusive of drylands as considered by the
UNCCD (which omits the hyperarid sub group),
and is also consistent with the programme of
work on dry and sub-humid lands of the UNCBD.
The following map illustrates the distribution of
5
drylands in Eastern and Southern Africa .
As the name
suggests,
drylands are
characterised by scarcity of water, but equally
importantly they are regions where precipitation is
highly variable, both in terms of quantity, intensity
and location. Drylands are therefore highly
unpredictable and extreme events, such as
drought, frequently occur. Drylands occur in
every country of the region and they encompass
grasslands, agricultural lands, woodlands and
urban areas as well as numerous important
wetland ecosystems.
The drylands in East and Southern Africa are
characterized by low economic growth, a poorly
educated workforce, political weakness, and
consequent underinvestment in development.
The population of most dryland regions is
growing rapidly, due to a combination of local population growth and immigration. Population growth reflects the
widespread poverty and underdevelopment whilst in-migration to the drylands is influenced to some extent by the
weak tenure that existing populations have over their natural resources. Data on population dynamics, and
particularly the rural-urban divide, is weak in most dryland areas, but there is concern that the burgeoning “urban”
1
UNEP 1992
2
FAO: www.fao.org/corp/statistics
3
Eastern and Southern Africa in this case refers to the following countries: Angola, Botswana, Comoros Islands, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia,
Kenya, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Seychelles, Somalia, South Africa, Sudan, Swaziland, Tanzania,
Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
4
http://www.fao.org/docrep/012/i0372e/i0372e01.pdf
5
Note that the map was compiled by UNEP using WRI data, which differ slightly from the data shown in Table 1.
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
3
population remains heavily reliant on natural resource based livelihoods. These multiple social factors combine
with increasing climatic variability due to climate change to present real threats to the biodiversity, ecosystem
services and welfare of the drylands.
1.1.
Dryland species and habitat diversity
Drylands are home to some of the most unique biological diversity on the planet. Although not characterized by
high levels of species diversity, drylands are nevertheless home to some of the most “charismatic” species,
support high levels of endemism, and comprise many unique ecosystems. Drylands are home to 17% of the global
Centres of Plant Diversity, 47% of Endemic Bird Areas, 23% of Global Terrestrial Ecoregions, and 26% of
protected areas worldwide (World Resources Institute 2002). In addition, at least 30% of the world’s cultivated
plants and many livestock breeds originate in drylands, representing a precious genetic bank whose stock rises in
value as climate changes drive the need for their local adaptations. However, although these global data appear
impressive, data for African countries alone is scarce, representing a significant obstacle to conservation and
sustainable management.
Dryland species diversity is influenced by dryland ecology and is highly resilient or tolerant to drought and salinity.
Dryland ecosystems in Eastern and Southern Africa cover a variety of terrestrial biomes including grasslands at
various altitudes and latitudes, tropical and sub-tropical savannahs, a variety of dry forest and woodland
ecosystems (Mopane, Miombo and Acacia), and coastal areas, which are extremely heterogeneous. Aridity is a
major determinant of biological diversification in the drylands, but within each aridity zone there can be significant
variations between sites according to topography, geology, water and soil nutrients (Bonkoungou 2001).
Biodiversification in the drylands is driven not only by the diverse patchwork of habitats, but also by the seasonal
pattern of rainfall, fires and herbivore pressure. The type and intensities of environmental stresses impose
selection pressures in drylands such as low and highly variable rainfall, recurrent but unpredictable droughts that
may persist for several consecutive years, high temperatures, inherently low soil fertility, high incidence of salinity,
prevailing herbivore pressure, and fires. These stresses have selected for a large diversity of adaptive traits, such
as plant and animal species and micro-organisms able to develop rapidly and complete their life cycle in a very
short period of time (Bonkoungou 2001). As Box 1 shows, some species have developed mechanisms to escape
drought whereas other species have appropriate organs to resist drought.
Box 1: Biological adaptation to drought in drylands (Bonkoungou 2001)
• Drought escapers: plants "escaping" into seeds, or insects "escaping" into the egg or larval stage until wet
weather returns.
• Drought evaders: plants such as the salt bush with efficient, deep and widespread root systems or animals
such as snakes and lizards that avoid the heat burying themselves underground.
• Drought resistors: cacti that store the water in roots and trunks, or camels that minimise water loss.
• Drought endurers: shrubs and trees that go dormant, or animals such as frogs that estivate during dry seasons.
Biodiversity in the drylands depends on an array of different habitats and ecosystems, and fragmentation of these
units has important implications for biodiversity conservation. This creates a unique challenge of scale for the
drylands, since biodiversity can be reliant on a vast interconnected patchwork landscape. Elements within these
landscapes may be coveted by other resource users, for example water resources by farmers or forest patches by
conservationists, but their dislocation from the surrounding drylands can undermine the function of the entire
dryland ecosystem. Examples of these habitats include:
• Wetlands and oases which constitute islands of biodiversity in drylands and which are often the lifelines and
biodiversity hotspots within the drylands;
• Ponds, lakes and rivers which create similar islands of high biodiversity value, for example providing resting
places for migratory birds as well as crucial water for many other animal species;
• Groves (woodland patches), sometimes a remnant of more widespread vegetation, which are often revered in
local human culture as well as being economically important (for seasonal fodder, fuel, construction, medicines
etc.), and also often represent biodiversity micro "hotspots".
The many diverse habitats have played an important role in creating intra-species variation in drylands. Thus,
although species richness is higher in tropical forests than in drylands, within-species diversity is probably higher in
drylands than in forest ecosystems, because of the isolation of populations, although there is a lack of reliable data
to document this diversity (Bonkoungou 2001). IUCN and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) have identified 234
Centres of Plant Diversity (CPD) worldwide, of which 42 are within drylands. In addition to these biodiversity
hotspots, the drylands of the region are home to some of the world’s most iconic wildlife, and the largest
assemblies of mammals in the world inhabit the East African savannahs. Drylands also provide habitat for
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
4
numerous families of bird, with for example 73 Important Bird Areas harbouring species typical of the SomaliMaasai biome. Many of these species are threatened, and grasslands, shrublands and savannahs are considered
the second most important habitat for Globally Threatened Birds (Birdlife International 2010).
1.2.
Biodiversity hotspots in the ESARO drylands
Succulent Karoo6
The Succulent Karoo, which spans Western South Africa and Southern Namibia, is one of only two arid regions in
the world that are considered to be true Biodiversity Hotspots (the other being the Horn of Africa). The region is
home to 6,356 plant species in 168 families and 1,002 genera, a third to one-half of which are endemic, as well as
the richest succulent flora in the world (Davis et al. 1994). The typical vegetation is dwarf shrubland dominated
almost entirely by leaf succulents. Additionally some 130 species of stem succulents are found here and 700
species of stemless embedded forms (“stone plants”). The fauna of the Succulent Karoo is also rich in endemics,
particularly among insects, arachnids and reptiles. Numerous other vertebrates are found, including 74 mammals
(of which two are endemic) and 227 birds (one endemic). Protected area coverage in this hotspot is poor, with only
2.5% is protected (World Database on Protected Areas), although the reserve system is currently being expanded,
2
notably with the creation of the 600 km Namaqua National Park in South Africa.
Madagascar
Madagascar is one of the worlds priority hotspots and one of the top megadiversity countries of the World. Not all
of the country is Dryland, but a significant part of the country is dry sub humid, with dry deciduous forest in the
west and spiny desert in the far south. Madagascar has spectacularly high levels of endemism and high species
diversity, but information on most fauna is very poor. Furthermore, the data that exists is poorly disaggregated by
climatic zone.
Cape Floristic Region
The Cape Floristic Region, lying entirely in South Africa, is one of five Mediterranean-type hotspots worldwide. The
region has poor soils, yet contains the greatest extra-tropical concentration of plant species in the world, with 9,000
plant species, 6,210 of which are endemic, in just 78,555 km2. The most characteristic and widespread vegetation
is fynbos (fine bush) shrubland comprising hard-leafed, evergreen, fire-prone shrubs. The region has high species
endemism in amphibians and fresh water fish (though it is low in overall diversity). Less is known about
invertebrates, although they also appear to display high levels of endemism.
Horn of Africa
The Vast Horn of Africa region encompasses most of Somalia, Djibouti, and parts of Ethiopia, Eritrea, Kenya,
Yemen, Oman, and marginally the Sudan. The region also includes the Socotra Archipelago off the coast of North
Eastern Somalia, plus a few hundred islands in the red sea. It covers some 1.65 million km2, although a relatively
large proportion, such as the Danakil depression in North Eastern Ethiopia, contains very limited flora, and the
approximately 5,000 species of vascular plants found in the region are concentrated in a small percentage of the
area. Phytogeographically the area forms the core of the Somali-Masai region of endemism, which extends further
south into Tanzania. The most widespread vegetation type is Acacia-Commiphora bushland, with 30 species of
Acacia and 50 of Commiphora endemic to the area, but evergreen bushland, succulent shrubland, dry evergreen
forest and woodland, semi-desert grassland, and low-growing dune and rock vegetation occupy considerable
areas as well. Flagship species include frankincense (Boswellia sacra), myrrh (commiphora myrrha) and dragon’s
blood or cinnabar (Dracaena cinnbari), along with desert warthog (Phacochoerus aethiopicus), sacred baboon
(Papio hamadryas), a number of threatened antelope species and 31 endemic birds.
1.3.
Protected Areas
There are many protected areas throughout the Eastern and Southern Africa region and it has not been possible
yet to make a thorough assessment of those that are in the drylands. There are nevertheless many well-known
protected areas within the region’s drylands, including Kruger National Park, the Serengeti National Park, the
Maasai Mara National Park, the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Park, and the Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park. Other
important dryland protected areas include: the Awash and the Omo National Parks in Ethiopia; Amboseli, Tsavo
and Lake Nakuru Kenya; the Karoo National Park in South Africa; Dinder National Park in Sudan; Selous Game
Reserve in Tanzania and; Queen Elizabeth National Park in Uganda.
6
All data on Biodiversity Hotspots taken from Mittermeier et al. 2004.
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
5
The Great Limpopo Transfrontier Park (GLTP) is a joint initiative between Mozambique, South Africa and
2
Zimbabwe, covering 35,000 km² (with plans to extend to 100,000 km eventually) and linking the Limpopo National
Park in Mozambique, Kruger National Park in South Africa, Gonarezhou National Park, Manjinji Pan Sanctuary and
Malipati Safari Area in Zimbabwe, as well as the area between Kruger and Gonarezhou, the Sengwe communal
land in Zimbabwe and the Makuleke region in South Africa. Within the GLTP, Kruger National Park alone is one of
2
the largest game reserves in Africa covering 18,989 km and extending 350 kilometres from north to south and 60
kilometres from east to west. The park is part of the Kruger to Canyons Biosphere, an area designated by
UNESCO as an International Man and Biosphere Reserve.
The Mara-Serengeti ecosystem spans Tanzania and Kenya and encompasses the Serengeti National Park, the
Ngorongoro Conservation Area, Maswa Game Reserve, the Loliondo, Grumeti and Ikorongo Controlled Areas and
the Maasai Mara National Reserve in Kenya, including two World Heritage Sites and two Biosphere Reserves that
have been established within the 30,000 km² region. The area has a great diversity of wildlife, but it is the annual
migration of over a million wildebeest and 200,000 zebras for which the ecosystem is most famous, and which
brings in substantial revenues from wildlife tourism.
The Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park is a large wildlife preserve and conservation area straddling the border between
South Africa and Botswana and comprising two adjoining national parks: Kalahari Gemsbok National Park in South
2
Africa and Gemsbok National Park in Botswana. The total area of the park is 38,000 km , approximately threequarters of which lies in Botswana. The park is located largely within the southern Kalahari Desert and the name
Kgalagadi appropriately means “place of thirst”. The terrain consists of red sand dunes, sparse vegetation,
occasional trees, and the dry riverbeds of the Nossob and Auob rivers which are thought to flow (above ground at
least) only about once per century.
1.4.
Dryland Ecosystems7
Although there are only four dryland subtypes, there are a greater number of dryland ecosystems within the
subtypes. These are aggregated into large, higher-order units known as biomes, which are characterized by
distinctive life forms and principal plant species. Many environmental factors are used to delineate the boundaries
of the different biomes and many different systems of biome classification can be found. Following the Millennium
Ecosystem Assessment, biomes, or “terrestrial Ecoregions”, are large land units containing a distinct assemblage
of ecosystems, with boundaries approximating the extent of natural ecosystems prior to major land use change.
There are four categories of dryland biome, which successively replace each other along the aridity gradient,
although they overlap to a significant extent: desert, grassland, Mediterranean (mainly scrubland), and forest
(mainly woodland). Increasing humidity is associated with an increase in plant cover, stature, and architectural
complexity. The presence of different biomes within each dryland subtype demonstrates that biological species
respond not only to overall moisture deficit but also to other environmental variables, such as soils and
geomorphological and landscape features. Furthermore, a greater degree of species richness and diversity of
ecosystem services is observed as aridity declines.
The precise definition of forests and dryland biomes in the drylands is open to interpretation and a large part of
Africa’s grassland contains significant tree cover. According to FAO 1998, Forests are land with tree crown cover
(or equivalent stocking level) of more than 10 percent and area of more than 0.5 hectares (ha), with trees able to
reach a minimum height of 5 meters at maturity in situ (FAO 2006 sets this height at 2-5m). This definition may
consist either of closed forest formations where trees of various storeys and undergrowth cover a high proportion
of the ground or open forest formations with a continuous vegetation cover in which tree crown cover exceeds 10
percent. However, this definition excludes land that is predominantly used for agricultural practices: it is unclear if
this exclusion includes rangelands.
In a number of countries, the work of the forestry departments is heavily focused on tree-dominated dryland
landscapes. Dry forests are affected severely by deforestation, for example in Ethiopia and Kenya, in South East
Africa, and recently to an alarming degree in Somalia. In some cases the removal of woodland may be
compensated partly by regeneration of trees on farmland, and evidence from Western Africa demonstrates
widespread reforestation by dryland farming communities (Mortimore et al. 2009).
However, many drylands are not woodland and FAO statistics indicate that most dryland countries had from 30 to
50 percent of their area under pasture in 2000, although in many this fraction had increased since 1980. If fodder
crops are excluded, in Africa as a whole there was a decline from 31.1 percent to 29.6 percent, owing mainly to
agricultural clearances (FAO 2008). This small statistical change actually represents a large surface area, and in
most cases the agricultural clearances take place on the highest value land that has a disproportionately high
‘system’ value.
7
Predominantly sourced from the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) unless stated otherwise.
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
6
Box 2: Stability of grasslands
The dynamics of dryland ecosystems are poorly understood, in particular the role of grazing and burning in
determining the balance between trees and grasses. Under heavy grazing, grass loads are reduced and the
remaining grasses cannot support the fires necessary to inhibit the growth of unwanted shrubs, which expand their
canopies and reduce the grazing for herbivores. Thus an increase in above-ground biomass paradoxically
degrades the land in economic terms. However, a synthesis of data from 854 sites in Africa has indicated that at
above 650 mm mean annual precipitation, a combination of fire and grazing are necessary to restrict the growth of
a woody canopy, but below this level, the density of trees is controlled by rainfall, and diminishes with it (Sankaran
et al. 2005). The role of wildlife in influencing the balance between pasture and trees is not completely understood,
and although livestock may mirror some of these herbivore impacts, the impact of large species, notably elephants,
on tree cover is hard to replicate. Greater sensitivity of analysis is required to understand the distinctions between
different dryland climatic and ecological zones.
Figure 2: Global area covered by dryland subtypes and their broad biomes8
The most extensive forest and woodland vegetation in the ESARO region is the Dry Savannah Biome, which
comprises Miombo woodlands, the Horn of Africa Acacia Savannah, the Eastern Africa Savannah, and Mopane
woodlands. The Dry Savannah Biome is also home to a high diversity of large mammals and many of the most
famous parks in the region are found in this biome. Miombo woodlands, which cover much of central and southern
Africa, are important in terms of species richness, holding an estimated 334 tree species, with Miombo trees
growing interdependently due a tree-root fungus that increases their mineral uptake from the soil. Acacia
Savannah, which consists largely of shrubland, supports many endemic dryland plants. Mopane woodlands, found
particularly in the Zambezi valley, occupy flat and undulating river valleys and encompass several of southern
Africa’s major rivers, including the Zambezi, Luangwa, Shire, and Limpopo river valleys9.
1.5.
Dryland Ecosystem Services
Drylands provide numerous ecosystem services which people within and beyond dryland borders depend on for
their livelihoods and well-being, especially for producing food crops and providing forage for livestock (Zeidler and
Mulongoy, 2003). Drylands also provide fuel wood, shelter material, medicinal plants and fish (from wetlands in dry
8
The line, points, and figures stand for the broad biome diversity index (Shannon’s H); the pie chart shows the aggregated percentages for
broad biomes by dryland subtypes.
9
IUCN ESARO Regional Forest Situation Analysis 2010.
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
7
areas). Some provisioning services contribute significantly to national economies and include export commodities
such as Aloe or Gum Arabic. Dryland biodiversity is vital for local capacities to cope with and adapt to threats such
as drought, for example through providing emergency food from wild plants and animals in times of crop failure.
Climate regulating services in drylands are locally important, for example where vegetation modifies local
temperatures and mitigates the effects of heavy rainfall. Climate regulation is also now recognised to have major
global significance given the potential to sequester carbon in rangeland soil. Additionally, many drylands provide a
range of cultural, spiritual and recreational services that are important for local communities and whose global
value is partially articulated in the tourism market. These values are frequently under-measured and poorly
reflected in national accounts leading to investments that can undermine them.
Table 2: Values of ecosystem services in Kgalagadi South District, Botswana (in USD)
Plant Use
Livestock Use
Trophy Hunting
Tourism
Total
Carbon Sequestration
Erosion Protection
Direct Use: Annual
11
profits of enterprise
14
270
1,124
3,59015
8,735
-
Direct Use:
12
District total
91,874
68,216
7,739
23,427
191,256
-
10
Asset Value13
Indirect use
599,430
Nil
27,030
369,340
985,800
-
111,300
68,400
Supporting services
Supporting services include amongst others Soil Development, Nutrient Cycling and Primary Production. The
formation and conservation of soil to a large extent determines how much rainfall will be stored and subsequently
become available during dry periods, and the availability of moisture in soil is also an important factor in nutrient
cycling and a requisite for primary production. Soil formation and conservation are key supporting services of
dryland ecosystems and their failure is one of the major drivers of desertification.
Soil forms slowly, the rate and its degree of development (depth of soil, infiltration depth, and organic content)
declining with aridity, and formation is frequently out-paced by degradation, such as erosion or salinisation. In
hyper-arid areas, surfaces are often capped with mineral (cryptogamic) crusts that reduce infiltration and contribute
to soil-eroding flashfloods, but are also argued to play a role in protecting against wind erosion. Many arid drylands
contain dispersed plant clumps embedded in a matrix of apparently bare soil covered by a thin crust of
photosynthetic cyanobacteria, with mosses and lichens added in semiarid drylands. The crusts reduce water
penetration and thus channel runoff, sediments, nutrients, and seeds to the plant clumps, which then become
active sites of soil formation and organic matter decomposition.
Nutrient Cycling supports soil development and primary production by breaking down dead plant matter and
regenerating mineral nutrients. A vital difference between dry and humid lands relates to how nutrients are cycled:
in humid lands, soil micro-organisms are largely responsible for nutrient cycling, whereas in drylands, invertebrate
macro-decomposers are the most important. Ruminants are also considered of great importance in accelerating
the breakdown of plant matter, but their role in the most arid areas is limited by the productive capacity of the land
(largely determined by water availability). Furthermore, their metabolic needs are high and therefore, in the case of
domestic herbivores, much of the organic carbon consumed by the livestock does not return to enrich the soil but
is respired or extracted from the ecosystem as meat, hair, milk, and other animal products. The significance of
micro-organisms, such as microbes and fungi, declines with aridity due to their moisture dependence, and the role
of macro-decomposers such as termites and other invertebrates that are less water-sensitive become important for
nutrient cycling in drylands. When drylands are used for crops, tillage and excessive use of pesticides can reduce
these soil-dwelling macro-decomposers which, along with low root biomass of annual crops, can impair nutrient
cycling and reduce soil organic carbon.
10
Madzwamuse et al. 2007
11
Private values (net annual private profits to investment realised by households or community enterprises), as expressed in
monetary or in-kind transactions.
12
Economic values or estimated contribution to national income (outputs less the costs of production).
13
Present value of expected future contribution of dryland ecosystems in terms of economic rent.
14
Per household
15
Per community enterprise
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
8
Primary Production in the drylands is significantly lower than non-drylands, but there is great variation according to
the degree of aridity. Net Primary Production (NPP) of rangelands is predominantly generated by the natural
dryland plant community, whereas in cultivated drylands NPP is generated by agricultural crops and is often
elevated due to the use of irrigation water and fertilizers. Although globally the drylands do not compete favourably
with non-drylands for crop production, on average, industrial dryland countries produced wheat yields nearly as
high as those produced by non-dryland developing countries, highlighting the importance of the low availability of
inputs. Adjusting for these variables however, the trend of NPP increase in drylands does not significantly differ
from those of cultivated and forest and woodland systems. However, there is high seasonal and inter-annual
variation associated with climate variability, and this is negatively correlated with temperature and positively with
precipitation: two drivers that are expected to further affect dryland primary production through climate change.
Regulating Services
Regulating services include the regulation of water, climate, pollination and seed dispersal, although the regulating
services provided by dryland ecosystems are difficult to measure and are poorly understood. Nevertheless, good
land management can promote carbon sequestration, water storage (and purification), and nutrient (including
carbon) cycling and can limit erosion whilst radiation absorption in grasslands can mitigate the effects of drought or
erratic weather patterns.
Water is the limiting resource for dryland biological productivity and its regulation is of major significance,
determining primary production (enrichment of soil moisture), irrigation, livestock watering, and domestic uses, as
well as the occurrence of flash floods and associated damage. Vegetation cover modulates the water regulation
service, and its efficiency in intercepting rainfall determines the fraction available for human use. Vegetation
removal, excessive livestock trampling and tillage can increase soil water erosion through disintegration of the
biological soil crust. Water regulation may be augmented by landscape management (terraces or micro
catchments), which slow surface runoff and promote water infiltration. Dryland farming and irrigation have an
impact on sub-surface water, the first through infiltration effects and the second through withdrawal. Pasture
management also impacts significantly on water infiltration and run off. The capacity of land management practices
to reduce or increase water infiltration by even small amounts thus has obvious implications for both local water
supply as well as for mitigating the threat of run off and flash flooding.
Climate Regulation takes place at both global and local scales. At local scale, climate is regulated through surface
reflectance and evaporation, determined to a large extent by vegetative cover, which is determined in turn by solar
radiation and rainfall. Vegetation cover in drylands can reduce albedo (reflectivity), resulting in increased surface
and near-surface temperatures, but can also shade the surface leading to low surface temperatures, which in turn
impact on rainfall. Loss of vegetation cover can influence local climate directly through its effect on albedo and
indirectly through generation of dust. It also affects evaporation if denuded soils form cryptogamic crusts.
At global scale, climate is regulated through carbon sequestration in the drylands. Grasslands (which include some
but not all drylands) store approximately 34% of the global stock of CO2 and cover 1.5 times more of the globe than
forest. Although the standing carbon store of forests is much greater than that of grasslands, some forests add
only about 10 per cent to their total weight each year, whilst savannas can reproduce 150 per cent of their weight
annually (Reid et al. 2008), and tropical savannas have a greater potential to store carbon below ground than any
other ecosystem (IPCC 2000). Plant biomass per unit area of drylands is low compared with many terrestrial
ecosystems, but the large surface area of drylands gives dryland carbon sequestration a global significance.
Whereas organic carbon (in above-ground vegetation and soil) declines with aridity, inorganic soil carbon
increases with aridity. Dryland soil organic and inorganic carbon reserves comprise, respectively, 27% and 97% of
the global soil organic and soil inorganic global carbon reserves. Management practices that increase organic
matter inputs to soils or that decrease losses from soil respiration and erosion can therefore sequester significant
amounts of carbon.
Pollination and Seed Dispersal are important regulating services, but the extent to which changes in land use in
the drylands affect the pollination service has not been fully explored. For example, the impact of habitat
destruction on fruit-eating migratory birds which are responsible for dispersal of seeds of many dryland plant
species. Herbivores (domestic and wild) also play a significant role in seed dispersal, which attach to hair or are
transported in the gut, and data from outside the region indicates that this services is extremely high value in
maintaining biodiversity.
Provisioning services
Important provisioning services in the drylands of Eastern and Southern Africa include provisions derived from
biological production, such as food (and fibre such as cotton), wood fuel and biochemicals, as well as freshwater
provisioning. The combination of low and variable rainfall and low biological productivity in dryland ecosystems
imposes a limit on rainfed crop cultivation, but large areas of semi-arid and dry-sub humid land nevertheless
support crop cultivation, and large areas are also coveted for irrigation agriculture. However, many dryland areas
are notorious for food insecurity and dryland farming is often practiced at the climatic threshold for crop farming
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
9
and can therefore be highly susceptible to very small changes in climate or relatively minor climatic events. Efforts
to develop dryland farming systems often focus on water harvesting and irrigation, which can have major
implications for ecosystem function and downstream water quality and supply. Development, and by extension
food security, in the drylands is constrained poor infrastructure, low access to markets and growing population and
Table 3 illustrates how poorly dryland countries have performed in raising food output in recent years.
Table 3: annual change in food production in selected dryland countries
Country
Botswana
Ethiopia
Kenya
Namibia
Tanzania
2000
98.8
98.4
97.1
95.8
100.5
2001
106
105.6
100.9
103.7
99.8
2002
105.4
106
102
109.1
100.7
2003
98.4
100.5
103.9
123
98.3
2004
99.6
101.6
98.6
122.2
99.4
16
2005
99.3
100.1
97.8
121
98.1
In many dryland areas livestock provide the only viable form of agricultural production. Across the region, the type
of livestock production systems varies considerably, from transhumant and almost nomadic systems that are
prevalent in parts of Eastern Africa and Northern Namibia to mixed pastoralism-crop cultivation (sometimes
referred to as agropastoralism) to private ranching that is most prevalent in Southern African countries. The main
(though not sole) provisioning services needed for keeping livestock in drylands are fodder and water. Fodder is
obtained from natural pastures and from crop residues (in cultivated areas) as well as browse from dry forests: in
Sudan it is estimated that 33% of feedstock requirements come from dry forests.
Dryland forests, or woody vegetation, are also critical to the livelihoods of dryland people, including many urban
people who reside in or near the drylands. Trees contribute to national economies by providing woodfuel and
charcoal for energy: for example 70 percent of national energy in the Sudan and 74 percent of total energy
consumption in Kenya, where charcoal is equal in value to horticultural products and only second to tea among
marketed agricultural products (ILRI 2007). Part of this renewable energy is consumed by rural populations
themselves, but urbanization and the growth of ‘million cities’ in the drylands, such as Khartoum, have generated
large and growing markets, with geographically extended supply chains from remote sources.
Many non-timber forest products (NTFPs) are important to dryland livelihoods, although their value is frequently
overlooked in national accounts and policy making. In fact, the term NTFP can be misleading and some of the
dryland resources could be better classified as Non-Pasture Rangeland Products. Aloes for example are
increasingly marketed in Eastern Africa and are demanded by cosmetics companies, with local value addition
increasingly taking place in the region. In southern Africa, Hoodia and Devils’ Claw are two of a growing number of
dryland products that have medicinal value and a growing demand in the industrialised world. Gums and resins
also command a global market, over half of which is supplied from Sudanese drylands, but also have high local
value in many dryland countries (Table 4).
Table 4: Household income from Gums and Resins in Kenya
Average per person per day
(Kg)
Average collected per month
(Kg)
Sale price Per Kg ($)
Monthly income per collector ($)
Gum Arabic
5
Myrrh
5
Hagar
5
Frankincense
3
100
150
150
90
0.35
34
0.75
110
0.25
40
0.35
30
Cultural services
Cultural services are particularly challenging to quantify, but their protection may be the most important motivation
for some dryland stakeholders. Cultural Ecosystem Services include Cultural Identity and Diversity, Cultural
Landscapes and Heritage Values, Servicing Knowledge Systems, Spiritual Services, Aesthetic and Inspirational
Services and Recreation and Tourism. The diversity of dryland ecosystems leads to great diversity in dryland
cultures and ecosystem functions and diversity generate cultural identity and diversity that in turn conserve
ecosystem integrity and diversity. It has been noted that this creates a negative feedback loop between land
degradation and cultural degradation in drylands.
In Eastern and Southern Africa tourist revenues are or great importance to the drylands and tourists are
particularly attracted to the wildlife (large game) and the scenic beauty of the drylands, and in Eastern Africa the
cultural artefacts of pastoralists are additionally attractive. Tourist interest in wildlife has led to parks, reservations
16
FAO 2006 Statistical Yearbook.
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
10
and conservation projects having conflicts of interest with rapidly expanding agricultural or ranching interests.
Tourism brings substantial revenues to the national economies of many dryland countries, although the benefits do
not always flow to dryland communities. In some cases, local resentment over loss of land to conservation and
failure to derive benefits from tourism has led to exaggerated conflict between people and wildlife. There are
growing efforts to enable local communities to engage directly in the tourist sector, for example through community
conservancies and investment in ecotourism. Approaches based on the engagement and participation of local
communities in co-managing protected areas (e.g., CAMPFIRE in southern Africa) have also made progress.
Table 5: value of tourism in dryland countries (Mortimore et al. 2009)
Botswana
Namibia
Kenya
Tanzania
Ethiopia
2.
US$ millions
2000
2006
234
539
288
473
304
1182
739
950
24
639
Percent of exports
2000
2006
7.7
10.2
17.9
29.6
11.3
19.8
57.7
29.6
2.4
29.1
Stakeholders and institutions
2.1.
People and livelihoods
According to the UNCCD approximately 2.6 billion people (44% of the earth’s population) are affected by
desertification, population growth was 18.5 % in dryland areas in the 1990s, and GDP in dryland areas is 50%
lower than in non-dryland areas. Figures for Eastern and Southern Africa are likely to be higher: a greater
proportion of people living in drylands and affected by desertification; higher population growth rates and; higher
levels of poverty than elsewhere. However, data is poorly disaggregated and it is difficult to produce reasonable
estimates for the region. Dryland People are ethnically diverse and also engage in a diverse array of livelihood
activities, of which the most notable are crop farming, pastoralism, and hunting/gathering. Some of these livelihood
groups have commonalities that go further than their shared dryland environment, although some livelihood groups
also compete with each other over resources. It is frequently necessary to reconcile these competing interests in
the interests of pursuing more sustainable natural resource management.
Dryland cultivators
Crop cultivation is possibly the most widespread livelihood activity in the drylands, particularly in the least arid parts
(dry sub humid and semi arid), although small and large scale crop production exist and are expanding in more
arid zones, assisted by investment in irrigation infrastructure and the development of more drought resistant crops.
Crop cultivation has a first order conflict with wildlife management and therefore crop farming is not generally
compatible with wildlife conservation. Nevertheless, different cultivation practices have different degrees of
environmental impact and sustainability and there is considerable interest in promoting various forms of
‘conservation agriculture’ in order to promote ecosystem services and species diversity.
Small scale crop farming in the drylands is notable for its innovative adaptations to the vagaries of dryland
climates, including innovative water harvesting techniques, such as sand dams or micro catchments, or
agroforestry practices that spread risk and boost soil productivity. Crop farming is generally “low-input low-output”,
with emphasis on minimising risk rather than maximising output. In certain Southern African countries, a greater
extent of drylands is under some form of more capital-intensive crop production.
Large scale irrigation projects continue to be proposed in drylands of the region, particularly in Eastern African
countries (Ethiopia, Sudan, Kenya, Tanzania), yet there is mounting evidence that these schemes annex critical
resources from the wider dryland landscape and lead to an overall environmental, social and even economic cost.
Nevertheless, drylands are coveted by private investors who often see an opportunity to acquire land relatively
cheaply, since local residents rarely have secure tenure over their resources. Recent years have seen a growing
number of large-scale land acquisitions by foreign interests for production of food for foreign consumption and
there appears to be no significant change in policy to mitigate the environmental (and other) costs of such projects.
The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment states that “transformation of rangelands and other silvipastoral systems
to cultivated croplands is leading to significant, persistent decrease in overall dryland plant productivity…
Transformation of rangelands to cultivated systems (approximately 15% of dryland grasslands, the most valuable
dryland range, were converted between 1950 and 2000), in combination with inappropriate dryland irrigation and
cultivation practices has led to soil salinization and erosion. These processes reduce the provision of water-related
services, which affects the provision of many other significant dryland services and goods, culminating in persistent
reduction of primary production.”
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
11
Livestock keepers
The vast majority of dryland livestock farmers in the ESARO region are pastoralists, which within the region is
generally assumed to imply transhumant and nomadic livestock production. The number of pastoralists in the
region is unknown and data from pastoral regions is weak, but it is estimated that at least 40 million pastoralists
live within the Greater Horn of Africa region (Davies et al 2010). When agro-pastoralists are added to the equation
the number is significantly greater, but definitions start to become blurred. However, it is safe to say that
pastoralism represents the second most widespread livelihood in the region’s drylands.
Livestock development projects of the 1970s and 1980s, particularly in Eastern Africa, are notorious for having
caused widespread impoverishment and environmental degradation in pastoral areas (see Table 6). In general
livestock development has been hampered by a combined lack of understanding of the climatic demands of the
drylands and a lack of understanding of the adaptations that livestock keepers have made to these climatic
constraints. However, the drive for capital intensification of the livestock sector continues to be strong because of
both the opportunity to export meat and also the burgeoning demand for livestock products within the region itself
as the region steadily urbanizes and disposable incomes rise. In the Southern part of the region, Ranching
systems, based on private tenure and more capital-intensive production, are widespread. Ranching models have
often been blamed for widespread degradation due to the adoption of inappropriate management techniques and
restrictions on herd mobility. However, recent research illustrates that these systems can be employed
successfully if the managers understand rangeland dynamics and manage them effectively. An increasing number
of ranchers now rear wildlife, either for game viewing, for specialist meat markets, or for sale to conservancies and
other protected areas.
Table 6: Comparisons between ranching and pastoral production systems (Scoones, 1995)
Country
Botswana
Ethiopia
Mozambique
South Africa
Tanzania
Uganda
Zimbabwe
Observations
Communal area production exceeds returns from ranches by at least three times per hectare, with
negligible difference in soil erosion despite differences in stocking rate.
Australian Northern Territory ranches only realise 16% of the energy and 30% of the protein per
hectare compared to the Borana pastoral system.
Traditional systems have higher overall returns per hectare because of the multiple benefits of
draft, transport, manure, milk and meat compared to the single beef output from ranches.
Cattle production systems in the Transkei show higher returns per hectare, but lower productivity
indicators (per head), compared to ranches in the commercial white farming sector.
The productivity of pastoral herds in the Ngorongoro Conservation Area were comparable to
commercial herds, but multi-product outputs are higher than ranches on a per hectare basis.
Dollar returns per hectare under pastoralism are two times higher than for ranching. Dollar returns
per animal are a third higher.
All studies show that the value of communal area (CA) cattle production far exceeds returns from
ranching. If actual stocking rates are used, CA returns are ten times higher per hectare.
Extensive livestock systems potentially provide environmental services when managed effectively, for example
accelerating nutrient cycling, promoting distribution and fecundity of seeds, improving water infiltration and
recharge rates. They also have the potential to degrade land and act as vectors for the spread of invasive species.
Herd mobility is central to the most environmentally beneficial herding strategies and there is evidence that
transhumant practices and other forms of planned grazing can increase biodiversity, boost soil fertility, and
improve carbon sequestration (IUCN-WISP 2007). Pastoralism has been shown to be highly compatible with
wildlife conservation, and a growing number of community conservancies have been developed in the region to
exploit this complementarity. However, some pastoral areas face weak land tenure, weakening local governance
arrangements, low public and private investment and fragmentation of rangelands, and wildlife conservation is
minimal. Conversely, many of the more remote and underdeveloped areas also display a high degree of
ecosystem health and integrity, bearing testimony to the environmental friendliness of the production system.
Hunter gatherers
Hunter gatherer groups are widespread throughout the region but face significant constraints in protecting their
resources and maintaining their lifestyle. Many have adopted crop cultivation to some extent, but often continue to
hunt and harvest provender as well, whilst other groups, such as pastoralists, pursue hunting and gathering as a
supplementary activity that takes on greater significance during times of stress. Hunters and gatherers are seen by
some in the conservation sector as key allies in the protection and sustainable management of biodiversity.
Pure hunter-gatherers may be fewer in numbers than some other natural resource users in the region, but are
nevertheless important resource managers in a number of sub-regions and their geographic range is large. As with
pastoral communities, these societies tend to be relatively mobile given their reliance on a highly variable and
unpredictable resource base, although some communities have become more or less settled (whether by force or
by choice), for at least part of the year.
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
12
Hunter Gatherer societies in the south of the region include the San, who are also referred to as 'Bushmen',
Basarwa and Abathwa or by their ethnic designations, and non-San hunter-gatherers such as the Damara of
Namibia and the Vadema of Zimbabwe. They also include the Ogiek, Sengwer, Dahalo-Aweer-Waata, Elmolo, Ik,
Yaaku, Hadzabe, Aasax, Akie and so called ‘Dorobo’ in Eastern Africa. Over the past half century many of these
peoples have steadily switched to farming as a result of government-mandated modernization programs as well as
the increased risks of a hunting-gathering lifestyle in the face of technological development.
Although hunting and gathering is considered by many governments to be archaic and backward, there is a
growing awareness of the important role that these societies can play in conservation of biodiversity. Many such
communities face environmental challenges such as deforestation, drought, climate change, access to safe water
and destruction of plants and animals. Yet they also have an intimate knowledge about their environment that
enables them to manage them sustainably, given enabling conditions. Furthermore, it is steadily being discovered
that hunting and gathering communities use dryland products that have global value and could play a role in
boosting sustainable investment and reducing poverty.
Urbanites
The term “Urbanite” here implies people living in settlements in the drylands, who do not primarily live from
agricultural or gathering practices. However the term is used loosely and the definition of an urban centre remains
open to debate. This challenge of categorisation is a contributing factor to the weak data that is available on this
category of dryland residents. The group includes many people who retain a foot in both camps – for example
spending part of their year farming or herding and part of the year engaged in employment in an urban centre.
Despite the uncertainties in measurement, this may be the fastest growing drylands population group, placing
heavy demands on ecosystem services, but at the same time presenting a growing market for drylands goods and
services.
Dryland urbanites in this context include people living in many of the region’s major Cities, such as Khartoum,
Johannesburg, Nairobi, Harare and Mogadishu. They also include inhabitants of the plethora of small dryland
settlements that have grown more than three fold in countries such as Kenya and Tanzania in recent decades.
Although drylands are usually discussed in terms of rural employment and natural resource management, an
important area of growing concern will be the phenomenon of urban dwellers who do not manage natural resource
but who depend on dryland ecosystem services for their wellbeing.
2.2.
National Governments
Of the 23 countries in the ESARO region, four (Comoros, Mauritius, Seychelles, Somalia) have not published their
priorities with regards to the drylands in the form of a National Action Plan to Combat Desertification (NAP), which
is the standard tool for countries that have ratified the UN Convention to Combat Desertification. Additionally, the
National Action Plan for Namibia is not available, although an equivalent document was written in 1992 and
therefore pre-dates ratification if the convention. Of these countries, both Somalia and Namibia are particularly
important dryland countries, in terms of both the proportion of dryland cover and also the importance of dryland
biodiversity. Summaries of each ESARO country’s strategic priorities for dryland degradation and combating
desertification are included in the Annex.
A common theme in all the published NAPs is poverty reduction and livelihoods development, to the extent that
these documents are explicitly more than environmental plans. For example, the Djibouti NAP states that “the NAP
is an instrument for the implementation of the UNCCD which is both an environmental convention and also a tool
for fighting poverty…The NAP therefore has two overall objectives: the fight against desertification; the fight
against poverty”. Social dimensions of poverty are raised in some of the NAPs, including health (Mozambique) and
education (Zimbabwe). Other dimensions of poverty are also raised, such as access to energy (Malawi,
Madagascar), drought preparedness (Botswana, Lesotho), and infrastructure (Swaziland). Infrastructure is also
partially addressed through priorities on water provision in many of the NAPs, although water emerges as an area
where greater knowledge and understanding is required to guide investments.
Other common issues in the NAPs are the importance of greater participation, particularly from communities, and
the need for more research, richer knowledge and a more coherent understanding of drylands and the causes of
desertification. Territorial rights, land tenure and customary institutions all receive a number of mentions.
Environmental concerns are not very prevalent, although rehabilitation of degraded lands is widely mentioned,
along with sustainable management of natural resources such as forest, water and soil. There is little on dryland
species protection, even in countries where dryland wildlife is critical for tourist revenues. There is also very limited
discussion of ecosystem services and water catchments, highlighting a potentially important area for IUCN to raise
awareness. Resource mobilisation is prioritised in a number of the NAPs, highlighting the fact that drylands are not
typically an investment priority, and monitoring and evaluation and improved data gathering are raised in a number
of the NAPs.
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
13
Agricultural policy
The emphasis on poverty and environment together in relation to the desertification discourse reflects the fact that
the majority of drylands are under productive use, through various forms of agriculture. With ongoing concerns
over food security in Eastern and Southern Africa, there is an ever present demand for higher productivity, and
since the sector is poorly capitalised (in terms of financial capital), expansion has predominantly been through
clearance of new land. Additionally, agricultural development has sometimes been carried out to the detriment of
the ecosystem services that support it, leading to long term un-sustainability, and downstream degradation and
impoverishment. Kenya’s NAP states that the “unplanned shift from pastoralism to arable agriculture as well as
subdivision of land has resulted in widespread environmental degradation and blockage of the natural migration
routes of both livestock and wildlife.”
The Zimbabwe National Action Plan states that “Deforestation in many parts of the country is also a result of
clearance of vegetation for agriculture and settlement purposes, use of trees for construction and fencing
purposes, overgrazing and burning. Currently Zimbabwe loses some 70 – 100 000 hectares of forests per year.
This has contributed to soil erosion, biodiversity loss and to desertification…soil erosion has in turn led to siltation
of rivers and other water bodies resulting in negative effects on economy and living standards of local
communities.” Conservation agriculture, and practices such as low-tillage and use of plant fertiliser, get scant
coverage in the NAPs, even in Zimbabwe which has been a regional pioneer in the field.
Livestock policy
The livestock sector is a subset of agriculture, but due to its prevalence in the drylands it warrants specific focus.
One of the most contentious issues in sustainable drylands management is that of appropriate stocking rates and
rangeland carrying capacity, with growing realisation that calculation of stocking rates is not a practicable
management tool because of the challenge of adapting quickly enough to track seasonally-available forage. Some
NAPs recognise the importance of herd mobility and maintaining rapidly reproducing (usually indigenous) stock,
but it is unlikely that these considerations are in line with national livestock policies. Ethiopia’s NAP for example
states that “traditional systems of resource use ensure a balance between grazing and the natural environment
and prevent overgrazing and depletion of water resources.” This differs from the position of the country’s PRSP
and livestock development policy.
Eritrea’s NAP more closely reflects the common position of the livestock sector: “The most crucial problem facing
range management is over-grazing. Proper stocking levels must be introduced in order to balance livestock
numbers with the productive capacity of the land, thereby halting further land deterioration.” “In communal grazing
lands, livestock numbers now almost always exceed the potential stocking capacity.” In most of the Greater Horn
of Africa, including Eritrea, this position is common, but not well founded: livestock populations are rarely proven to
have increased as believed and fixed stocking-rate approaches have invariably failed, leading to impoverishment
and environmental degradation. There is clearly need for much stronger awareness of the realities behind overgrazing, the link to sedenterisation and land fragmentation, and the most suitable options for solving the problem.
The dangers of under-stocking are not reflected in the NAPs of Eastern Africa, although there is greater
awareness of this risk in the South of the region. Swaziland’s NAP states that “On Title Deed Land, the most
prevalent problem is bush encroachment which is generally caused by low stocking densities.” The role of
herbivores in maintaining rangeland health is an area for significant attention in the region and misunderstanding
on this point may be instrumental in creation of policies that drive land degradation.
Water policy
Since water scarcity determines productivity in the drylands, planners often identify water infrastructure as a
priority, although deeper consultations with local land users do not always reach the same conclusion. Studies in
Kenya and Ethiopia have shown that dryland women often prioritise water, because of the shortage or low quality
of water for domestic use, but men tend not to give it such a priority – particularly in pastoral communities. Water
development, along with livestock sedenterisation, has caused serious land degradation and disruption of dryland
biodiversity in the region and it remains an area of deep misunderstanding and highly divergent policies,
particularly between wildlife and agricultural sectors. In general, throughout the region, not much attention is paid
to the interaction between range management and water catchment and there is little understanding of integrated
rangelands-water resource management.
Ethiopia’s NAP states that “soil and water conservation is to be promoted through the expansion of scientific
livestock production which eliminates uncontrolled expansion of livestock population and movement” – this
appears to contradict the statement, quoted above, that traditional livestock systems are effective in maintaining
ecological balance, but it is a common position. “Scientific livestock production” has a particularly poor track record
in the region and new science, based on disequilibrium theory, has yet to make significant inroads to government
planning and policy making.
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
14
Ethiopia, like other countries in the region, faces the challenge that water policy is handled by a Ministry of Water
Resources Development, which may not share objectives with the ministry (or ministries) responsible for land
degradation and drylands development. There is need to reach consensus on appropriate landscape scale land
use planning across a number of sectors in order to ensure that planning and investment is appropriate. Similarly
in Kenya “there are over 30 institutions, both governmental and non-governmental, that play various roles in the
water sector. These institutions lack policy guidelines, elaborate legal framework, human and fiscal capacity to
effectively undertake their respective responsibilities. This situation has potential to manifest in duplication of
efforts, conflicts, and non-accountability.” “The Water Apportionment Board has gazetted certain areas as
groundwater conservation areas in order to prevent over-abstraction. In all cases, authorisation from the Board is
required for sinking boreholes and abstraction of groundwater from deep and shallow aquifers.” It is important that
such institutions are aware of the goals and strategies of local land users and are accountable to them in terms of
how resources are managed.
Protected Area policy
Protected Areas get scant coverage in the NAPs, reflecting the fact that the UNCCD focuses much more on
poverty and sustainable land management. Similarly, species diversity does not get significant discussion despite
the fact that wildlife plays an important role in dryland livelihoods in many countries (Namibia and Kenya in
particular). Ethiopia’s NAP does discuss protected areas to some extent, particularly in relation to the risk of
encroachment by neighbouring land users, and recommends “promoting benefit sharing with people living inside
and at the peripheries of natural resources requiring special management (e.g. protected forests and national
parks) and introducing incentive schemes.”
2.3.
International institutions
UNCCD
The UN Conference on Desertification (UNCOD) was held in 1977 in the aftermath of the Sahel Drought of 196874, with a major output being the Plan of Action to Combat Desertification (PACD), which was to be implemented
by the UN Environment Programme. The Rio Earth Summit of 1992 (the United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development) then raised the profile of desertification again, in the form of the UN Convention to
Combat Desertification (UNCCD), which has now been ratified by 193 countries, with a permanent secretariat, a
funding agency (the Global Mechanism), and a programme of activities centred on Conferences of the Parties
(COPs) every two years.
UNCCD was created to fight desertification, reverse trends in land degradation, and improve living conditions and
alleviate poverty in rural drylands. The UNCCD therefore focuses on the poverty of people as well as on the
environment and it is the first international treaty to recognise the linkages between poverty and environmental
degradation and to emphasise the need for an integrated approach to natural resource management and rural
development. The key instruments in the implementation of the Convention are the National Action Programmes
(NAP), which are strengthened by action programmes at sub-regional (SRAP) and regional (RAP) levels. The
UNCCD states that National Action Programmes should be developed through a participatory approach, involving
the local communities and Civil Society, although the quality of consultation varies greatly between States.
In 2007 the UNCCD adopted a new ten-year strategy (Decision 3 of the Conference of Parties No 8) to address
the role of the convention in the various geographical and ecological areas as well as the approach to its
implementation. The 10 year plan includes a 4 Point Strategic Plan:
1. Improvement of living conditions of affected populations;
2. Improvement of the condition of affected ecosystems;
3. Generation of global benefits;
4. Mobilization of resources through effective partnership.
The 10 year plan also includes 5 Operational Objectives:
1. Advocacy, awareness raising and education;
2. Policy framework;
3. Science, technology and knowledge;
4. Capacity building;
5. Financing and technology transfer.
In the ESARO region, Seychelles has not signed the Convention and the situation for the Comoros have not been
ascertained. All remaining countries have signed the convention, although on which countries have ratified the
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
15
convention have not yet been ascertained. Most countries have also produced National Action Programmes as
well as national reports to the Convention outlining their progress in tackling desertification.
Designated Focal Points for the UNCCD are within the Ministry of Environment in some countries and in the
Ministry of Agriculture in others, highlighting inconsistencies in the way that the convention is viewed between
countries. Annex 4 to this report includes details of each country’s National Action Program to Combat
Desertification.
During consultation with IUCN members, a significant interest was raised in linking with the UNCCD, although
there was scepticism over the role and the future of this convention. Some members considered the future of
UNCCD to be more of an advisory arm of the UNCBD, rather more like RAMSAR. A number of members
recommend that IUCN makes a strong link with the UNCBD.
NEPAD
The New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) is an economic development program of the African
Union, established with the formal adoption of The NEPAD Strategic Framework at the 37th Summit of the
Organization for African Unity (OAU) in July 2001, as a programme of the OAU. NEPAD aims to provide an
overarching vision and policy framework for accelerating economic co-operation and integration among African
countries.
NEPAD’s Primary Objectives are:
1. to eradicate poverty;
2. to place African countries, both individually and collectively, on a path of sustainable growth and
development;
3. to halt the marginalization of Africa in the globalization process and enhance its full and beneficial
integration into the global economy;
4. to accelerate the empowerment of women.
NEPAD has eight Priority Sectors, all of which are relevant to discussions of sustainable drylands development
and conservation:
1. Agriculture & Food Security
2. Infrastructure (Water & Sanitation, Transport, Energy, ICT)
3. Human Resources Development (Education and Health)
4. Science and Technology
5. Trade & Market Access
6. Environment & Climate Change and Culture & Tourism
7. Governance and Capacity development
8. Gender Development
Issues of desertification are picked up through NEPAD’s Environment Initiative, which has targeted eight subthemes for priority interventions. Combating Desertification is the first of these priority interventions, with a current
focus on rehabilitating degraded land and addressing the factors that led to such degradation, although it remains
unclear how these factors will be isolated or addressed. The influence of NEPAD over drylands development and
investment at country level is unclear, and therefore it is difficult to assess the relevance of influencing NEPAD’s
understanding and research on drylands.
Terre Africa
TerrAfrica is a “partnership that aims to address land degradation by scaling up harmonized support for effective
and efficient country-driven Sustainable Land Management (SLM) practices in Sub-Saharan African countries”.
TerrAfrica is therefore intended to catalyze an operational coalition to support the implementation of the UNCCD
NAPs and SRAPs. TerrAfrica was created to complement the Global Environment facility (GEF) and allow the GEF
to be applied more strategically, cost effectively and with greater impact. TerrAfrica was designed as an
operational mechanism through which the SLM objectives of the UNCCD, NEPAD Environment Action Plan (EAP)
and NEPAD Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) can be pursued. In particular
NEPAD seeks to use TerrAfrica as the platform for delivering on the land management pillar (Pillar 1) of the
CAADP: “extend the area under sustainable land management and reliable water control systems”.
Currently, TerrAfrica partners include African governments, NEPAD, regional and sub-regional organizations, the
UNCCD Secretariat, the UNCCD Global Mechanism (GM), the World Bank, GEF, IFAD, FAO, UNDP, UNEP, AfDB
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
16
as well as multilateral organizations including the European Commission, bilateral donors, civil society and
scientific organizations including FARA and CGIAR centres. TerrAfrica partners are implementing a wide range of
activities under the umbrella of a joint annual work program, itself a key tool for driving the coalition building and
harmonization process critical to succeeding in TerrAfrica’s mission. Activities under the work program are
organized around three mutually reinforcing Activity Lines:
1. Coalition Building;
2. Knowledge Management;
3. Investments
These activity lines are designed to generate the coalitions, advocacy, ‘know-how’, policies and investment
packages necessary for full and effective mainstreaming, up-scaling and financing of SLM.
As IUCN develops its drylands strategy it should identify how the strategy mirrors the National Action Plans
adopted by Heads of State and other strategies within CAADP.
Southern African Development Community (SADC)
SADC’s Sub-Regional Action Programme to Combat Desertification in Southern Africa was published in July 1997.
according to the SRAP, in southern Africa, the process of desertification is marked by forage and soil degradation
especially in arid and semi-arid lands, which are used beyond their capacity for sustained production. Whereas
over-cultivation, overgrazing and deforestation have previously been identified as the three major causes of
desertification in the sub-region, they are now seen as the result of much deeper underlying forces of a socioeconomic nature, such as a general overdependence on natural resources.
Based on a consultative process, the SRAP identifies a number of issues that require action at the sub-regional
level. They include policy and legal frameworks; public awareness and community empowerment; financial
mechanisms to support community action, applied research and the development of sub-regional strategies;
environmental monitoring and information networks; and research, development and transfer, acquisition and
adaptation of technology. The following priority programme areas were agreed upon for the SADC-SRAP:
1. Capacity Building and Institutional Strengthening
2. Strengthening of Early Warning Systems
3. Cooperation in the Sustainable Management of Shared Natural Resources and Ecosystems
4. Information Collection, Management and Exchange
5. Development and Transfer of Appropriate Technology to the Community Level
6. Development of Alternative Sources of Energy
7. Socio-economic Issues
A number of pertinent national and sub-regional programmes and activities are incorporated in the SADC-SRAP,
including the Land Degradation and Desertification Control Programme, the Kalahari-Namib Action Plan, the
SADC-ELMS Programme on Environmental Education, the SADC Environmental Information Exchange
Networking Programme, the development of Guidelines and Techniques for Environmental Monitoring, and the
Communicating the Environment Programme (CEP). SADC also proposed to establish a Multidisciplinary Scientific
and Technical Consultative Committee (MSTCC) to articulate the role of science and technology in the SRAP
process and provide SADC-ELMS with guidance and advice on scientific and technical aspects of programme
execution.
Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD)
The IGAD region encompasses 6 countries of the Greater Horn of Africa (Eritrea is temporarily suspended) and
was created in 1996 to supersede the Intergovernmental Authority on Drought and Development (IGADD) which
was founded in 1986. The institution was initially created in response to recurrent drought in this largely dryland
region. The IGAD Sub-Regional Action Programme (SRAP) for the implementation of the United Nations
Convention to Combat Desertification was published in June 1998 after four years of consultation. IGAD’s work on
desertification was integrated within the existing IGAD programmes, and particularly in food security and
environmental protection. The Sub-regional Action Programme’s long-term development objective is to arrest land
degradation caused by desertification and therefore improve the potential for achieving food security and
sustainable livelihoods.
The SRAP targets the following four priority outcomes:
1. effectively address land degradation issues;
2. improve food security by reversing deterioration/loss of productive land to aridity and desertification;
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
17
3. reverse or minimize the forces that make people move as the carrying capacity of the land is severely
reduced because of desertification and drought;
4. prepare National Action Programmes to combat desertification more effectively.
2.4.
IUCN Members: analysis from members survey and other consultations17
In January 2010 the Secretariat consulted with members who had expressed an interest in drylands and from this
consultation some general conclusions can be drawn. Overall, the challenges of dryland conservation and
sustainable management are not well understood or agreed upon, and there is a general feeling that many
agencies are unaware of the uniqueness of the drylands, in terms of the way they need to be managed. This point
was emphasised by one respondent who pointed out that “a lot of damage is done in drylands, because we don’t
understand them”. The misunderstanding extends to misperceptions over dryland ecology and climate, for
example the distinction between dry seasons and droughts, the concept of “greening the desert”, the risks and
benefits of water development, the rationale that underlies dryland livelihood systems, and the realities of dryland
poverty.
There is little consensus on what is best practice in the drylands and there is great need to develop and share
experiences with innovative approaches to sustainable drylands management, including innovative approaches to
communal land management, livestock mobility, and eco-friendly agriculture (e.g. Conservation Agriculture). There
is a role for IUCN in getting greater clarity and consensus over what constitutes best practice and mainstreaming
this thinking in school and university curricula. However, a number of members consider the drylands programme
to offer an opportunity to gather learning on drylands community conservation approaches (including
CBNRM/Conservancy approaches, collaborative agreements and other incentives for conservation).
IUCN should also play a role in raising the profile of drylands as attractive places for sustainable investment, and
demonstrating what determines sustainability. In particular there is need for greater awareness of the value of
dryland ecosystem services and ways in which they can be protected and maintained. Degradation of drylands is a
concern in some countries and IUCN should play a role in support of rehabilitating degraded land, although this
also needs to be examined in light of the early comment about the lack of consensus as to what constitutes good
practice and what constitutes degradation.
A number of IUCN members are engaged in species conservation in the drylands and there is scope for more work
in this area. There is particular interest in developing a greater focus on the sustainable management of communal
lands and unprotected areas, with attention to the importance of dispersal areas and migration corridors as well as
revenue/benefit sharing. IUCN should also play a role in changing the attitude of decision makers with regard to
co-management and community management of wildlife. Although some actors think that a large portion of the
drylands is already protected, a great deal more work is needed to improve landscape connectivity as well as to
strengthen dryland livelihoods to ensure sustainable ecosystem management at scale.
The drylands programme should exploit opportunities for collaboration with other thematic areas, such as the water
programme which has a number of projects in the drylands (e.g. Cobweb and Pangani). The programme should
link up with the forest programme over the sustainable management of non-timber products, and should work
across themes on community based natural resource management. Given the importance of drylands poverty and
food insecurity, the drylands programme should also find ways to support conservation agriculture and related ecoagriculture systems.
Overall, IUCN’s niche is seen to be in capacity building, knowledge generation, data collection, participatory
approaches, monitoring of natural resources, revenue sharing, information sharing and awareness-raising. The
secretariat is therefore recommended to emphasise knowledge creation and sharing for the sake of policy
dialogue, training and capacity strengthening, and to place greater emphasis on networking between members
and sharing expertise.
The secretariat should identify ways to link more effectively with the commissions, including the Environmental Law
Centre, the Species Survival Commission and the Commission on Ecosystem Management. It is recommended
that the best way to approach commissions is to approach at a high level by communicating initially with the chairs
and regional sub-chairs. The IUCN secretariat should also play a role in linking IUCN with other drylands actors,
including the UNDP Drylands Development Centre and the UNCCD.
17
Members who responded to the survey: Uganda Environmental Education Foundation; Southern African Wildlife College, South Africa;
Environment Africa, Zimbabwe; Uganda Wildlife Society; IIED.
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
18
3.
Environmental status in the drylands
3.1.
Land degradation and desertification
Desertification, or land degradation in drylands, is considered by many experts as one of today’s greatest
environmental challenges, and is a major impediment to meeting basic human needs in drylands and elsewhere.
Desertification refers to the degradation of land through the persistent loss of ecosystem services in drylands,
including for example soil development, primary production, climate regulation or provisioning services. Globally
there is an overarching trend toward further water scarcity, exacerbated by aridity, with reductions in the annual
per capita supplies of surface runoff (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005).
Globally, there is evidence that 10-20% of the world’s drylands are degraded, with the higher figure based on
expert opinion and the lower figure based on an empirical study (Lepers 2003). In fact, the empirical study of
Lepers found that 17% of drylands in Asia were degraded but in the Sahel region of Africa (where desertification
was alleged to be rampant) few localities with degradation were found. These estimates contrast vividly with the
figure of 70% put forward by Dregne and Chou (1992), although the authors used a range of secondary and
anecdotal sources that they acknowledged to be poor.
At the heart of this seemingly confused estimation is the lack of consensus over what constitutes desertification,
married to the fact that drylands are in constant flux and therefore their “healthy” condition is not static, and
exacerbated by the weak data available from the drylands. The term ‘desertification’ has been used by different
authors to refer to a range of changes in the state of ecosystems, such as rangeland degradation, deforestation in
dry woodlands, soil nutrient depletion and erosion under farming, salinisation under irrigation, a decline in biomass
productivity (or net primary productivity, NPP) and hydrological desiccation, either on the surface or underground.
Box 3: Desertification or ecological flux?
The implicit basis of the desertification paradigm is the idea of an ecosystem at equilibrium in which a perturbation
is followed by a natural readjustment back to a stable state. In this paradigm, vegetation always progresses,
through natural succession, towards its ‘climatic climax’ unless human intervention (such as over-cultivation,
overgrazing, deforestation, or excessive irrigation) dislodges the ecosystem irreversibly from its former equilibrium.
In its new state, there is an implicit assumption that the land’s ‘carrying capacity’ - of livestock or of humans – is
reduced, and that restoration is not economically possible within an acceptable time-frame (Mortimore et al. 2009).
The reality of the drylands is somewhat different from this idealised view of plant succession. Drylands are in
constant flux and no single climax vegetative state exists: rather, drylands shift continuously from one state to
another in response to short, medium and long term climate changes, impacts from fire and herbivory, and the
impacts of human management (and mismanagement).
In Africa, the desertification narrative has been particularly influential in debates about dryland management. Early
surveys claimed that 332 million ha of dryland Africa (25.8 percent of the continent) were affected by soil
degradation. These data were published along with annual data on the depletion of chemical nutrients and the
ensuing narrative continues to guide policy makers. Nevertheless, there are many critics of this line of thinking
(Faerge and Magid 2004, Mortimore 1998, Mortimore and Harris 2005, Scoones and Toulmin 1998). In parallel
with the dominant desertification narrative, recently published evidence illustrates a reverse trend, with parts of
Africa becoming steadily greener and less ‘desertified’. Whilst localised pockets of land degradation are frequently
evident around settlements and infrastructure (often created in efforts to prevent perceived environmental
mismanagement), evidence of degradation in the open rangelands is much less common (Niamir Fuller 1999).
Despite the overwhelming attention to perceived desertification, there remains a debate in the region over the true
extent of dryland degradation. For example, a survey of Turkana in North Western Kenya in the late 1990s showed
that despite the claims of pervasive degradation, the only pockets of degradation that could be identified were
around urban centres, markets and UN feeding centres: precisely the sites that were most typically visited by
policy makers, donors and other influential decision makers.
South Africa has amongst the richest data on land degradation within the region, which has been compiled into “A
National Review of Land Degradation in South Africa”18. South Africa is also one of six sites for the FAO led Land
Degradation Assessment project (LADA), although data does not appear to have been published yet. As with
much of the region, most of the attention in South Africa is focused on soil erosion, although there may be many
other types of land degradation including salinisation, acidification, water logging, soil pollution, soil mining and
compaction. The map in Figure 3 gives an indication of the distribution of land degradation, and although many of
18
http://www.sanbi.org/landdeg/webpage/literature.htm
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
19
the driest areas are relatively unaffected, the overall picture justifies the attention given to land degradation in the
country but raises questions about which climatic zones to focus on.
Figure 3: Extent of soil degradation in South Africa (modified from UNEP/ISRIC 1990 by Garland et al.
1999)
According to the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, the more arid the drylands the more fragile they are.
Conversely, the less arid they are, the higher the population density and hence the higher the human impact. As a
result the most affected drylands are thought to lie at the mid-point of the aridity gradient. However, there are other
complicating factors, such as the increasing insecurity of tenure as land becomes more arid, higher marginalisation
of populations in drier zones, and a possible correlation between aridity and poverty. Such correlations say nothing
about causality and the drivers of land degradation are complex. In fact recent satellite evidence suggests that,
globally, there is little correlation between land degradation and the aridity index: 78 percent of degrading areas
are in humid regions, 8 percent in the dry sub-humid, 9 percent in the semi-arid, and 5 percent in arid and hyperarid regions. These findings appear to question the common perception of the “fragile drylands” as the major focus
of land degradation. However, since degradation is cumulative it is possible that areas degraded before 1981
(when satellite data begins) may have stabilised at low levels of productivity (Helldén and Tottrup 2009).
Land degradation is closely related to poverty, since impoverished dryland communities rely more heavily on
unsustainable natural resource extraction and are more likely to over-extract resources. Furthermore, both
environmental degradation and poverty share at least part of their root in the marginalisation of dryland people and
undermining of local governance institutions. Land degradation is also influenced by, and contributes to, Climate
Change. As land degrades it is less capable of absorbing atmospheric carbon, although albedo effect (reflectivity)
may increase with denudation of soil, so the net outcome of degradation on climate change remains uncertain.
Satellite data have been used to examine vegetation changes over time in the drylands, based on the use of
reflectance/absorption patterns to give indicators of biological productivity. This can be used to provide a
“Normalised Difference Vegetation Index” (NDVI), or ‘greenness’ index – in other words maps that show whether
vegetation has increased or decreased over a period of time. NDVIs for the Sahel have shown, contrary to
expectation, that a strongly significant increase in vegetation took place between 1982 and 2006 – correlated not
so much with land use practices as with increasing rainfall (Hermann et al. 2005). However, land use practices in
the Sahel may have contributed to the greening and there are striking data to show the increase in tree cover in
parallel with increasing farming intensity (Mortimore et al. 2009). Similar data for eastern and southern Africa have
not been seen, but a multi-regional study that included Southern Africa concluded that ‘a strong general
relationship between NDVI and rainfall over time is demonstrated for considerable parts of the drylands [and] a
‘greening up’ seems to be evident over large regions’ (Helldén and Tottrup 2009).
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
20
3.2.
Species loss
The most serious threat to dryland biodiversity comes from the degradation of habitat due to changes in land use
practices. These changes primarily affect wild biodiversity, but growing populations also put pressure on
agricultural land, leading to agro-habitat degradation as well. The natural uncertainty of dryland climates ensures
that dryland ecosystems are relatively resilient to a degree of environmental flux, but the rate and scale of humaninduced changes are now causing ecosystem degradation that far exceeds the adaptive capacity of the drylands.
The roots of these changes are population increase, decades of market distortions, and disincentives that
encourage natural resource exploitation and mono-cultures, at the expense of sustainable development. Loss of
biodiversity caused by changing land management is further exacerbated by climatic factors at both local and
global scales (as discussed later) (Bonkougou 2001).
The status and trend in dryland biodiversity have been summarized as follows:
• The status of biodiversity loss in wild species is poorly documented; it may be that endemism is still healthy in
pockets and hotspots, but the viability of these populations is not known.
• Most likely, genetic diversity has decreased as specific populations have been wiped out.
• Species diversity in traditional production systems is relatively well retained in farmers’ crop fields and family
herds (Bonkougou 2001).
Like any rural inhabitants, dryland people are largely dependent on natural resources for their livelihoods, and
indeed, biodiversity may be comparatively more important for drylands communities due to the high level of
dependence on natural resource extraction and utilisation. However, this does not imply that dryland farmers
necessarily overexploit biodiversity and small-scale farming is far less destructive of biodiversity than large-scale
mechanised systems. At the same time, agrodiversity is particularly highly valued and protected by dryland
farmers, where higher yielding exotic strains (of crops or livestock) fail to survive, or do not guarantee a minimum
income in times of stress (Mortimore et al. 2009).
Although protected areas cover a considerable portion of the drylands in Eastern and Southern Africa, there are
suggestions that they are not widespread enough. However, with increasing tenure security and growing respect
for citizens’ rights, the traditional approaches to conservation – of evicting people and erecting fences – are
unlikely to be a major part of the solution in most countries. Protecting species diversity in the drylands increasingly
depends on enabling rural communities to manage their resources more sustainably, and using that diversity to
strengthen their livelihoods and reduce poverty. Part of this sustainable management is to enable communities to
derive financial benefit from tourism and to use this as motivation for conserving wildlife – an approach that has
been particularly successful in Namibia and Kenya and Zimbabwe.
3.3.
Loss of ecosystem function
The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment discusses dryland ecosystem function at some length, but does not
provide data on loss of ecosystem function in Africa, which possibly reflects the paucity of such data. The MEA
discusses loss of ecosystem function in general terms, for example stating that “the transition of grasslands to
shrublands is widely reported around the world” and that “this transition generated a mosaic of plant clumps within
a ‘‘matrix’’ devoid of much vegetation, which encourages surface runoff, topsoil erosion, and exposure of rocky
surfaces”. There remains significant disagreement over the extent of land degradation in the drylands, which
translates into significant knowledge gaps over the health of ecosystem function.
Likely drivers of ecosystem degradation have been identified despite the low evidence of their impact, and
population increase is cited as the main driver of land use change in Africa, particularly in the savannah and in
areas where drylands can be used for crop cultivation and irrigation. Recent work by IUCN in Kenya bears this out,
highlighting the cost of water off take for irrigation. Reduction in the flow of the Ewaso Ngiro River in Northern
Kenya has significantly reduced the size of the Lorian Swamp where the river terminates, reducing seasonal
pasture and degrading habitat, but as yet no studies have been carried out to effectively measure the impact.
Anecdotal evidence from Eastern Africa highlights loss of ecosystem function as a result of the invasive species
Prosopis. This species causes obvious species loss by forming thick coppices along river banks and other key
resources and inhibiting growth of other plants, as well as being unsuitable as habitat for much wildlife. Prosopis is
so successful partly because its roots penetrate very fast and deep and are alleged to cause serious damage to
aquifers. At the same time, river bank stability is undermined because the root system is comparatively narrow and
does not buttress against river flow, leading to rapid change in the course of rivers and loss in water quality.
Empirical studies have not yet been found to support the persuasive anecdotal evidence.
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
21
4.
Drivers of change
Bonkoungou (2001) identifies the following five causes of biodiversity loss in the drylands: fragmentation,
degradation or outright loss of habitats; overexploitation; pollution; introduction of non-native (alien, or exotic)
species; climate change. These causes also have underlying drivers, such as economic development, or
impoverishment of dryland communities, although the drivers and proximate causes of biodiversity loss overlap
considerably. A range of specific drivers of environmental change in the ESARO region are discussed in the
subsequent section, although no effort is made to categorise them since they are interlinked and overlapping.
4.1.
Drylands as frontiers
Many of the international boundaries within Eastern and Southern Africa bisect the drylands, creating a major
hurdle for sustainable ecosystem management. There are numerous transboundary rivers within the region’s
drylands as well as a number of rivers which mark the border between two countries, and many river basins span
more than one State. This imposes constraints on sustainable ecosystem management and in some cases can
generate competition and potentially conflict over water and rich patch vegetation sources. Other rangeland
resources span national boundaries and there are numerous instances of pastoralists and wildlife migrating
seasonally across borders to access resources. Loss of access to these resources has increased vulnerability of
the natural resource users and has led to environmental degradation as a result of lost mobility and increased
congregation of users.
4.2.
Knowledge gaps and un-reconciled knowledge systems
The high levels of climatic uncertainty in the drylands demand unique forms of management that have been
generally poorly understood by scientists, extension workers and government planners. Drylands are not unique in
demanding connectivity between ecosystem components, but their uniqueness lies in the high degree of variability
between patches, and also in the scale of the drylands which increases the opportunities for fragmentation.
Misunderstanding is linked to the low level of consultation with local resource users, whose land use practices
have often been swept aside in the pursuit of the outsider’s vision of development. For example, the UNCCD
identifies severe disruption of the traditional pastoral and rainfed cropping systems as among the main contributors
to desertification.
There is a large armoury of technical innovations and techniques that can be used to sustainably manage the
drylands, but extension agents often lack the social, cultural and political sensitivity to identify, and promote the
sustainable adoption of, the best ideas. Adoption by dryland natural resource managers is further constrained by
low levels of education, weak property rights, marginalisation, poor consultation and in some cases poor access to
financial capital. As a result it is common to find solutions proposed that are either the wrong solution, or are
resisted because they have not taken social and political constraints into consideration.
It is clear that most national governments prioritise capital intensification of land use, with a view to maximising
output, as their development goal. However, this may not be appropriate in drylands where there the diversity of
values is high but the potential returns through intensification are comparatively limited. The value of ecosystem
services in the drylands is still poorly understood throughout the region, and as a result those services are
frequently squandered in pursuit of economic development. Much richer knowledge is needed to understand how
to optimise production across a diverse range of goods and services in the drylands, as opposed to intensifying
production of one or other good in isolation.
The low appreciation of the value of drylands goods and services leads many governments to label the drylands as
wastelands, allowing them to pursue intensification and commercialisation of individual products regardless of the
opportunity cost. Conversion of richly bio-diverse lands into monocultures continues to threaten the region’s
drylands, and not only in the patches of land that are converted, but in the wider landscape within which those
converted parts lie. Stronger valuation would provide a foundation for attracting investment and enabling rural
communities to capitalise on and protect biodiversity.
4.3.
Low consultation and institutional accountability
Marginalisation of dryland people in decision making processes manifests itself in many ways, but not least in the
over-reliance on outside-driven development agendas and top down approaches. The environmental and
developmental challenges of the drylands frequently require socio-political solutions rather than technical solutions
in the first instance, and dryland resource managers don’t so much lack the management strategies as the
institutions to apply them effectively. Research and development interventions are often guilty of a top-down
approach that ignores local priorities and experiences and marginalises local knowledge. In some cases
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
22
‘technologies’ are prescribed that are well known to local land users, who only abandoned such practices in the
recent past due to breakdown in local governance that left them unable to enforce management rules on
communal resources: an example is the enclosure of pasture reserves in many of the pastoral communities in
eastern Africa.
4.4.
Devolution, decentralization and participation
Many countries in the ESARO region have at some time in the recent past adopted policies of decentralisation,
which opens up opportunities for conservation and sustainable development and can counterbalance some of the
challenges of the drylands mentioned previously (such as marginalisation and social exclusion). These processes
can pose some new challenges where local communities are poorly informed about the process and are unaware
of how to ensure representation in local government. They can also create confusion when different resources are
managed with different levels of subsidiarity – for example where wildlife reserves continue to be managed
centrally whilst dispersal areas fall under the authority of local government.
Nevertheless, decentralisation offers many opportunities to restore effective governance to natural resources and
there are a number of good experiences that can be drawn upon. Community Based Natural Resource
Management (CBNRM) approaches have received a lot of interest in the region, and there are numerous ways in
which they can be used to boost local ownership and control and to restore sustainable management rules.
Community conservancies are a related means of strengthening local governance and enabling communities to
derive greater income from conservation activities. These broad approaches have been linked to benefit sharing,
for example where community conservancies operate in wildlife dispersal zones. CBNRM approaches have the
dual outcome of enabling pragmatic conservation in practice, and simultaneously empowering communities (see
Section 5.7).
4.5.
Drylands Poverty
A major challenge for biodiversity conservation in the drylands in most of the region is the high level of poverty,
which in some areas may still be deepening, and which may deteriorate as a result of climate change. In many
ways, poverty and environmental degradation create a vicious circle and many of the outcomes are interrelated.
Poverty in the drylands is complex and has multiple roots and manifestations, but in general poverty levels are
higher in the drylands than in other parts of the region. In many countries investment in the drylands is below par
and there is a tendency to ignore the drylands until crisis strikes, at which point considerations of sustainability and
equity often take a back seat. There is mounting pressure from national governments and the international
community to significantly and rapidly raise productivity, with a new thrust coming from the association between
global conflict and dryland poverty (Sachs 2008). Raising productivity is technically feasible, but the track record in
the drylands is that these improvements are generally pursued without consideration of the environmental or social
impacts, and they are often detrimental to biodiversity.
Population growth contributes to (and stems from) poverty in most drylands, placing growing pressure on
ecosystem services and contributing in some cases to weakening of natural resource governance and growing
levels of conflict. Greater awareness is needed of the trade-offs between biodiversity conservation and economic
development in drylands, which in turn requires much deeper knowledge and communication of the value of
dryland ecosystems. Supporting sustainable development requires greater attention to access to resources,
markets and transport. Infrastructural developments frequently come with an environmental hazard, but the hazard
of leaving the drylands under-invested is arguably much greater.
At least three forms of poverty should be considered in the drylands:
1. Income poverty: dryland inhabitants depend heavily on their natural resource base, for food production, fuel,
construction, and for a range of other consumptive uses (e.g. medicines and cosmetics), although access to
markets, levels of investment, relevant skills and many other factors are all low in the drylands.
2. Capability poverty: many drylands communities lack the capabilities to influence government, policy and
planning, and to influence development processes, which often reflects sustained underinvestment in
education and other basic services.
3. Rights or social exclusion: many drylands communities are ethnically different from those in government, and
in many cases in the past they have historically had a conflictual relationship with the ethnic groups in power,
resulting in low attention to the needs of the drylands, low attention to human rights, and poor understanding of
what is relevant in the drylands context.
Poverty is discussed here as a driver of change and many of the outcomes have been discussed previously. The
most frequently debated outcome of impoverishment is the increased reliance on least sustainable coping
strategies, such as the sale of firewood of charcoal, which leads to over exploitation of resources. However,
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
23
poverty also places new pressures on the institutions that govern and regulate natural resource use leading to
break down in management and resulting in natural resource misuse. Local institutions are required to manage
conflict, over natural resources as well as general insecurity, and their breakdown leads to aggravation of conflict
with diverse negative environmental outcomes. Poverty is also driving a transition in the division of household
labour, which brings both benefits and constraints. Benefits include the remittance of money from wage
employment and the creation generation of new ideas and new sources of income. Constraints include a hollowing
out of the workforce, which is exacerbated through conflict or HIV-AIDS, and which can undermine agricultural
production and increase the reliance on natural resources.
4.6.
Energy
For most drylands residents, wood and charcoal continue to be cheaper and more reliable than higher technology
alternatives, such as kerosene, gas or electricity. In the past a number of countries have pursued a policy of Statedirected forest management, large investments in plantations, and policies to promote alternative energy sources
with a view to controlling woodfuel consumption. In Sudan this policy continues, with state forestry departments
controlling large areas of plantation forest and simultaneously subsidising liquid petroleum gas appliances as an
alternative for domestic use. Charcoal represents a significant, if controversial, economic value of the drylands and
over 40% of Kenya’s 200,000 charcoal producers come from the drylands. However, production methods in the
dryland areas are inefficient and charcoal is produced more as a by product of other forms of land use change
(e.g. clearing), and felling of whole trees, rather than more sustainable lopping of branches or coppicing of trees as
is the more customary dryland practice for wood harvesting (Mutimba & Barasa 2005).
4.7.
Governance, rights and tenure
Many dryland societies have strong traditions of natural resource governance and management, but these
traditions have become strained in recent years. Governance over resources depends on the strength of
institutions for resource allocation and control, and in many dryland societies these institutions have become
weakened. The reasons behind this weakening are diverse, including: emergence of the State as an alternative
power; emergence of local “elites” that challenge customary authorities; increase in conflict; population growth and
expansion of poverty; deliberate efforts on behalf of State actors to weaken local power bases. However, the
drylands are geographically remote and government is typically weak, so statutory governance mechanisms are
not generally well developed: they may weaken customary institutions but are seldom in a position to substitute
them, leading to widespread governance failures.
Local government generally lacks the capacity, and often the will, to engage with customary leadership and local
(traditional) rules and regulations are not codified or recognised in Law. In some countries, legal avenues may not
exist, but increasingly there is scope to combine statutory and customary governance. There is a gulf between
customary decision making and statutory decision making. The latter is often poorly enforced, but the existence of
dual systems leads to “institution shopping” by some people and weakening of customary institutions. Marginalised
members of society have particular challenges in terms of negotiation skills, representation and even physical
access to planning processes. As a result, relevant governance solutions are not widespread. Unfortunately, there
is generally a poor understanding amongst drylands advocates of policy/planning processes and bottlenecks and
of how to strategically influence policy and planning. Non-governmental advocacy fora exist in some countries, e.g.
National Land Alliances, but Civil society in dryland areas is often poorly linked to these networks. Some countries
have local level planning fora with varying degrees of subsidiarity/autonomy but the strength and legitimacy of
these fora varies widely.
Governance over natural resources has frequently been undermined where the State has adopted land reform
policies, for example through nationalisation of land, or through promotion of private land title. The scale of the
drylands and the challenges of climatic variability renders communal management particularly suitable, yet
communal tenure requires particularly strong institutions for effective governance. The Tragedy of the Commons
theory (Hardin 1966) led to the assumption that drylands were not managed, and this has led in the past to policies
to correct this perceived failing. The outcome has ironically been the creation of unmanaged commons where such
phenomenon did not exist before.
Undermining of local management institutions has contributed to both environmental degradation and poverty in
the drylands. At the same time, the assumption that land is not governed, or even owned, by dryland residents,
and the favouring of private title, has led to significant problems of land acquisitions. This has been further aided
by the political marginalisation of dryland communities and has resulted for example in the in-migration of nondryland farmers to pastoral areas, and the expansion of crop farming in ecologically fragile areas where crop
cultivation is less sustainable and less profitable than existing land uses. In recent years the issue of land
acquisitions has received increasing notoriety as a result of large scale acquisitions of land by foreign interests for
food and biofuel production. The economic benefits of these investments are questionable at the national scale
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
24
and the social equity of such acquisitions is often highly questionable. The environmental impacts are also a major
concern and investors are seldom required to cover the costs of associated environmental externalities, such as
the large scale deforestation and tillage, or the risk of imported crop cultivars becoming invasive.
4.8.
Resource competition and conflict
Population growth, low investment, weak tenure rights and reliance on natural resource extraction all contribute to
resource competition in the drylands. Competition in some countries is between existing resource users in a
locality (e.g. between pastoral communities), between resource users in neighbouring localities (e.g. between
pastoralists and cultivators), and between local communities and emerging interest groups, including immigrants,
private investors and conservationists. Competition is aggravated by the low respect afforded to the existing value
of the drylands and the assumption by many governments that any new use of the drylands must be better than
the old. It is further aggravated by government policies towards intensification of agricultural production (e.g.
irrigation agriculture and agrofuel production).
Open, armed conflict, as opposed to competition over resources, is widespread in some of the more remote
drylands of Eastern Africa and is another driver of environmental degradation and poverty. Armed conflict is
sometimes related to resource competition, but in many cases is now understood to have other root causes. A
significant factor is the underinvestment in security by government combined with weakening of the local
institutions that have traditionally managed conflict, which leaves local communities to provide their own security
but increasingly incapable of doing this effectively. Conflict can be aggravated by general hostility in some
countries between government and dryland communities and a low sense of Statehood in the drylands. Conflict
leads to disruption of natural resource management patterns, such as seasonal use of grazing resources, and
contributes to poverty and to the increased reliance on less sustainable resource extraction.
4.9.
Invasive species
Invasive species drive major changes in dryland management in some parts of the region. Parthenium
hysterphorus, or congress weed, is spreading in parts of Eastern Africa, for example the Awash Valley of Central
and Eastern Ethiopia, whilst Lantana camara is a problem in the less arid parts of the drylands. Both species
compete with grazing and browse, and in the case of Parthenium also bring human and animal health
consequences. New World cactuses, or Opuntia spp., are another dryland set of invasive species, including
Opuntia stricta, Opuntia ficus-indica and several others, and although some of these are edible to livestock, their
thorns also make them undesirable. Specific invasive species also inhabit specific countries of the region and more
information is needed to understand their spread and their risk, particularly in the context of climate change which
will allow them to shift their range and further compete with indigenous species.
Mesquite, or Prosopis species, receives considerable attention in many parts of the region, and was introduced to
Africa in the 1970s, in many cases as part of a desertification control program. The species concerned are native
to Central and South America, and the main species found in Eastern and Southern Africa are P. juliflora (originally
from Mexico and Southern USA) and P. chilensis (from Chile). Although Prosopis species have a range of uses,
they become serious invading weeds when introduced into non-native areas without proper management
(Shiferaw et al., 2004). According to local communities in Ethiopia, prosopis invasion has resulted in multiple
negative effects on food security, livelihoods and on the environment (Dubale, 2006) in some areas completely
excluding pastoralists from former grazing lands. The invasion of prosopis has caused considerable declines in
livestock production and productivity due to the loss of dry season grazing areas, since Prosopis is less palatable
than some of the indigenous trees it replaces and can grow into impenetrable thickets that excluded all livestock.
Many other environmental and social outcomes have been reported, and the scale of impact, particularly in highly
valuable riverine zones, demands urgent attention to improve understanding of the costs and benefits as well as
the most effective means for management or control.
4.10.
Climate Change
Climatic variability and change are defining features of drylands and therefore current global climate change will
manifest itself differently to other areas. The drylands have been exposed to ongoing fluctuations at different time
scales – oscillations over short spaces of a few years, cycles that stretch over several decades, and longer term
patterns over centuries and even millennia – and this flux has historically led to periods of drying out, when deserts
expanded into surrounding semi-arid grasslands, and periods of desert retreat, when human activities such as
hunting, grazing and fishing spread into hyper-arid environments.
This constant flux makes it difficult to state with certainty whether recent drought cycles are attributable to current
anthropogenic global warming, and it makes long range predictions particularly challenging. Southern Africa has
seen an increase in the number of warm spells and a decrease in the number of extremely cold days in recent
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
25
years, whilst in East Africa temperatures have fallen in some areas. Even within a country the predictions vary
considerably, as in Kenya where some northern dryland areas are predicted to become drier and some southern
drylands are predicted to become wetter. Available evidence suggests that Africa as a whole is warming faster
than the global average and is likely to continue to do so.
Climate change is likely to become an important driver of ecological change in the world’s drylands, which are
already subject to water stress, high temperatures, low and erratic rainfall, land degradation and therefore high
levels of vulnerability. There is limited research on the current impacts of climate change in drylands, but in general
it is projected that climate change will lead to a decrease in water availability and quality in the next 40 years by
10-30%, while extreme weather events such as droughts and floods will increase in number and/or intensity (IPCC
2007, Stern 2007, MA 2005). Rising temperatures and changing precipitation patterns are predicted to lead to an
expansion of drylands worldwide, and particularly in Africa. These changes have important ramifications for
adaptation: rather than adapting for a particular scenario, dryland Africa must adapt for future uncertainty. Most
dryland land use systems have this sort of adaptability in-built, but many development interventions have
misunderstood adaptive capacity and have actually weakened it, for example by constraining herd flexibility and
mobility for livestock keepers, or promoting higher yielding but less resilient plant species for crop farmers.
Climate change will affect the range of many species, enabling some and disabling others – with the more
adaptable invasive species likely to be the first to benefit in many cases. There are fears that the rate of climate
change may be too fast for some species to adapt their range, leading to their extinction. In the drylands, these
risks may be greater since many species already exist at the climatic threshold for survival, and since
temperatures in Africa are projected to increase faster than the global mean. Furthermore, the ongoing process of
land fragmentation is likely to impede the adaptive spread of species into new ranges.
Climate change impacts on the environment through its impact on dryland natural resource users, for example
affecting the way they utilise seasonally available pastures, or influencing their choice of cropping system.
Agricultural productivity is expected to decrease overall in drylands (IPCC 2007, Stern 2007, MA 2005) which will
have severe impacts on food security, especially in dryland subsistence systems (IPCC 2007). Increased rainfall in
some dryland areas could encourage the spread of extensive livestock keeping, particularly where rainfall is too
unpredictable to support crop farming. However, unpredictability will also encourage more water harvesting and
irrigation which has important implications for ecosystem health. Increased household vulnerability in the face of
climate change will drive more and more people to rely on wild products for food and income leading to greater
risks of over-exploitation and degradation. Climate change is also projected to increase the rate of urbanisation,
with associated links to environmental impact (both negative and positive).
Particular Climate Change challenges for the drylands include:
• Rapid demographic changes, which will be exacerbated by climate change, make resource management more
problematic, for example increasing pressure on ecosystem services;
• Land use changes, driven by poor understanding of current land use practices, will lead to further ecosystem
damage, through habitat change, invasive species of plants or animals, biodiversity loss, or pollution;
• In the face of growing populations, land is becoming comparatively scarce and landholdings are diminishing in
size, which curtails some opportunities for adaptation to changing climate;
• Disputed or insecure property rights contribute to a lack of investment and land degradation;
• State fragility and armed conflict is current in many dryland areas leaving people yet more vulnerable and
rendering States poorly equipped to deal with climate change.
4.11.
Adaptive capacity
The debate around adaptive capacity currently receives significant attention due to the surge of interest in climate
change, although for dryland people climate change is one amongst many threats to which they are struggling to
adapt. Other challenges include volatile markets, political marginalization and conflict. Given the extreme
uncertainty of dryland climates, adaptive capacity is crucial for sustainable livelihoods and much dryland poverty
can be linked to weakening of the capacity to adapt.
Understanding adaptive capacity, and how it has been weakened, remains a challenge. In dryland communities,
adaptive capacity has been lost where the capacity to make decisions, particularly communally, has weakened,
and where power has been stripped. Adaptive capacity has also been lost as a result of loss of resources, or loss
of access to resources, and as a result of lost adaptation options, such as the freedom to move to drought
contingency reserves. Some of these losses are irretrievable, whilst others may be restored. At the same time,
new options for adapting to threats may exist, but since people in the drylands are generally less well educated
than other populations, their access to these new options is poor, whether due to lack of knowledge or lack of
resources.
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
26
With the pressure of climate change, many researchers are developing ‘adaptation options’, including for drylands,
but if the causes of lost adaptive capacity are not well understood, this research may not have the desired impact.
It is doubtful that the lack of technology is the principle cause of weak adaptive capacity, although there are clearly
areas where technology could provide part of the solution, such as in the development of more drought resistant
crops. In order to genuinely strengthen adaptive capacities in the drylands it is necessary to be clearer about the
fundamental determinants of adaptive capacity, which depends on at least the following four capacities: being able
to make an informed assessment of imminent threats; being able to make an informed choice, from a range of
options, about the best response measure; being capable of deploying the preferred option (skills, money,
infrastructure); being free to implement this option (policy, governance, rights).
Figure 4: Co-dependency of ecological and social systems (Marshall et al. 2009)
Exposure
Potential Impact
Sensitivity
Adaptive capacity
Ecological
vulnerability
Ecological
Resource
Dependency
The basic capabilities to pursue an adaptive measure may hinge on the degree of exposure and sensitivity to a
Potential
Impact in the first two
Adaptive
Capacity
given threat. Exposure and sensitivity are particularly
important
capacities,
both of which relate to
knowledge management: assessment of a threat and weighing up of options. Alternatively, sensitivity to a
particular threat may be greatly influenced by the lack of the capacities outlined above. As the debate around
adaptive capacity proceeds, it is possible that adaptive capacity, or adaptability, may emerge as one of the
Vulnerability
fundamental indicators of sustainable development: an Socioeconomic
indicator that is more
sensitive to the context and realities
of poor people than the more typical income and asset measures of poverty.
Socio-economic
4.12.
Resilience
Resilience is defined as "the capacity of an ecosystem to tolerate disturbance without collapsing into a qualitatively
different state that is controlled by a different set of processes. A resilient ecosystem can withstand shocks and
rebuild itself when necessary. Resilience in social systems has the added capacity of humans to anticipate and
plan for the future" (Holling 1973). Poor understanding of Dryland Resilience, even in academic circles, is a major
handicap to sustainable development, since there is a tacit assumption that to define ecosystem resilience, the
ecosystem must be in a steady state prior to perturbation. Drylands are in constant flux, sometimes transitioning
between distinct states, and resilience must be assessed accordingly. Resilience is conferred in human and
ecological systems by adaptive capacity (see previous section), which may be a more useful concept for
understanding how drylands change in response to stimuli.
Sustainable Drylands Development also faces the challenge of understanding how natural resource managers
approach risk. It is often assumed that managers automatically aspire to decrease risk and that this drives their
management strategies. However, in drylands, where environmental risks are high and the consequences can be
catastrophic, it has been argued that natural resource users are active managers of risk, accepting uncertainty in
their natural resource base and constructing their livelihoods accordingly (Roe et al. 1998). This local
understanding of risk requires deeper understanding if efforts to strengthen adaptive capacities and resilience are
ultimately to be successful.
4.13.
Urbanisation
Data on dryland population dynamics is generally very poor, although the few estimates made in Eastern Africa
show alarming growth rates. National data is seldom adequately disaggregated into urban and rural populations
yet there are plenty of data pointing to a proliferation in dryland settlements. Urbanisation impacts on the wider
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
27
drylands through habitat loss and localised resource pressures on peri-urban as well as rural areas (State of World
Population, 2007). However, the process of urbanisation also creates opportunities for growth and economic
diversification that have a highly complex feedback effect on the rural economy, and hence on natural resource
management.
Emerging dryland issues related to urbanisation include environmental factors that contribute to rural-urban
migration, equitable investment in dryland areas that has the potential to reduce migration pressure, remittances
and growing communication networks which play an important role with regards to dryland markets, the emerging
role of dryland farmers as producers for the burgeoning urban consumers in the dryland countries and beyond,
and the debate over the role of urbanisation as a sustainable solution for dryland development.
4.14.
Refugee hosting areas
A number of countries in the ESARO region host significant populations of refugees and internally displaced, and
invariably these populations are put in dryland areas, because those areas are seen as unoccupied and low value,
and also because those are often the areas at the borders where refugees arrive. The environmental issues
surrounding refugee centres are similar to those of urbanisation, but with additional challenges of conflict and
complexities over natural resource governance, which are exacerbated by the rapid rate of population growth in
the aftermath of a crisis. Refugees are often impoverished, and the least capable households are those that
remain in refugee centres, so they rely disproportionately on natural resources, particularly ground water or wood
fuel. Additional challenges arise when refugees return home, since returnee populations often have to restructure
social institutions for natural resource governance from scratch, whilst the vacated areas need to be rehabilitated
in the aftermath of local governance breakdown and alienation of local (original inhabitant) resource managers.
5.
Opportunities for drylands conservation and sustainable development
In the 2009 IUCN publication “Dryland Opportunities: A new paradigm for people, ecosystems and development”
(Mortimore et al. 2009), a new strategy is proposed to achieve the following three aims: enhance the economic
and social well-being of dryland communities; enable them to sustain their ecosystem services; strengthen their
adaptive capacity to manage environmental (including climate) change. This strategy proposes five building
blocks, which are used to structure the following discussion:
1. Upgrade the knowledge base;
2. Re-evaluate and sustain dryland ecosystem services;
3. Promote public and private investment in drylands;
4. Improve access to profitable markets;
5. Rights, reform, risk and resilience.
This strategy, however, focuses on people and ecosystems to the exclusion of species diversity. The following
section therefore elaborates on these five broad issues, in addition to a number of more specific opportunities that
arise in the ESARO region, particularly related to species conservation.
5.1.
Upgrade the knowledge base
As a science based organisation, IUCN has a major leadership role to play in upgrading the drylands knowledge
base. In general drylands research in the region is scarce and dryland teaching focuses on out-dated and in some
cases disproved lessons. Researchers are inadequately driven to innovate and to challenge traditional science.
Furthermore, the science that is used reflects the top-down nature of research and there is a dangerous disregard
for local knowledge and practitioner knowledge. IUCN is uniquely placed to tackle the combination of knowledge
gaps, inadequate communication, and poorly informed policy and planning in dryland conservation and
development. Additionally IUCN should emphasise promoting knowledge use, which has been relatively neglected
compared with knowledge generation:
1. Generate more comprehensive data on dryland ecosystems and species diversity and on the unique
characteristics of the drylands that demand specific approaches to their conservation and sustainable
management;
2. Foster greater recognition and understanding of local and indigenous knowledge and greater sensitivity in
the use and strengthening of this knowledge, bringing together scientists and practitioners (e.g. farmers) in
a process of mutual validation, decision making and risk taking;
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
28
3. Promote “Knowledge Partnerships” that bring together communities, policy makers, institutional and
commercial stakeholders and scientists, and promote community-based action learning processes (for
example natural resource management contracts and ‘local conventions’);
4. Place significant emphasis on the dissemination or research-based knowledge, including through
upgrading university and other education curricula, and through targeted communication at policy and
community levels, including building capacity at these levels to understand and use new knowledge.
Box 4: Restoring woodland ecosystems using local knowledge in Shinyanga, Tanzania
Ngitili forest and grazing reserves are a culturally established practice among the Sukuma of Tanzania. The ngitili
provides dry season forage, fuel and poles, medicinal plants, wild fruits and other foods (especially during food
shortages), shade and quiet. The revival of this traditional practice was made possible by a revised forest policy
that placed a strong emphasis on participatory management and decentralisation. Taking advantage of this policy
shift, a forest conservation project in Shinyanga region, which supported boundary mapping and title deeds,
enabled the restoration of over 200,000 hectares of semi arid woodland in 833 villages, leading to significant
increases in local incomes and soil and biodiversity conservation. This experience shows the value of a customary
resource management system in mobilising local knowledge against degradation and of social institutions to
implement improvements and changes, as well as for regulating access to grazing (Barrow 1996, Ghazi et al.
2005).
5.2.
Re-evaluate and sustain dryland ecosystem services
The total economic value of ecosystem services is rarely factored into national accounting or local level planning in
any ecosystem. However, the drylands are particularly poorly represented in national planning and are therefore
particularly susceptible to damaging investments that focus only on benefits without any consideration for the
environmental costs. In many countries this is exacerbated by the historical classification of drylands as
‘wastelands’: lands without existing value that are waiting to be put to some good use. IUCN has added significant
value to recent discourse over the value of drylands and should continue to promote more effective use of
Economic Valuation methodologies. Using the Ecosystem Approach, and using new tools for Landscape-scale
land use planning IUCN is in a strong position to assist multiple stakeholders, at local, national and regional levels,
to plan for sustainable drylands ecosystem management.
Ecosystem services underpin the livelihoods of many millions of drylands inhabitants as well as many national
economies within the region. IUCN can help to strengthen understanding of the nature of these ecosystem
services (in particular their variability) and the adaptations that local natural resource managers make to manage
them effectively. These local adaptations need to be better understood as resources on which to build, rather than
impediments to remove, and greater efforts are needed to promote land use options that deliver tangible
environmental benefits , for example through the use of Payments for Ecosystem Services. Since many ecosystem
services are obtained from land under open access tenure arrangements, appreciating market values may provoke
destructive exploitation. So a compelling reason for a correct valuation is to provide a sound basis for conservation
policies and regulation.
IUCN is in a unique position to enable agencies from different interest groups and perspectives to put forward a
joint case for protecting and managing ecosystem services:
1. Provide stronger valuation of the regulating services of dryland ecosystems, including water filtration,
subsurface storage and cycling;
2. Strengthen valuation on the supporting services provided to agricultural production by the ecosystem (soil
fertility and soil moisture in particular, which includes input from scarce and valuable wetlands);
3. Improve understanding of the diversity of provisioning services that are critical for resilient livelihoods in
the drylands, including pasture, water and forest goods (including timber, fuelwood and non-timber forest
products), and strongly make the link to food security;
4. Identify and promote goods and services with emergent market value, including opportunities for clean
energy provision such as solar or wind power;
5. Recognise the high cultural value of the drylands (scenery, animals, etc.) and support tourism-based
activities that can act as an incentive for sustainable biodiversity management.
Box 5: restoring ecosystem health in Machakos district, Kenya
Machakos District, in Kenya, was reported in the 1930s and 1940s to be heavily degraded, with widespread
erosion on hillside farms and clearance of dry woodland. Yet a study in the 1980s identified a sevenfold increase in
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
29
the value of output per square kilometre and a doubling of per capita output, despite a fivefold increase in the total
population. This improvement was achieved through a fundamental transformation in farming practices, including
reversal of erosion through the construction of thousands of kilometres of farm terraces and field drains ,improved
productivity through integrated crop-livestock production systems, new or adapted farm technologies, increased
labour inputs, and increased private investments, which were financed in part from off-farm incomes. However, the
secrets to the dramatic socioeconomic improvements in Machakos District were improved systems of land tenure,
better dissemination of knowledge through women’s groups and other flexible institutions, improved technology,
access to urban markets and the relaxing of farm legislation (Tiffen et al. 1994).
5.3.
Promote investment and improve access to markets
IUCN should recognise, and draw much greater attention to the fact, that whilst public policy ignores the
investment potential of the drylands, poor resource users struggle to invest their own small resources in
sustainable management of natural resources. There are many opportunities for investment in the drylands, and
experiences from China and India illustrate how drylands can give much higher returns to investment, precisely
because they have received underinvestment for so long. Promoting public investment is a risky necessity:
necessary because as long as poverty prevails in the drylands, unsustainable management will be the norm, but
risky because of the current weaknesses in property rights, institutional accountability and governance (this is
addressed below).
Promoting private investment and improving the benefits of local investment require transformation of markets in
many drylands. However, as mentioned previously, in the absence of secure property rights and effective
governance, natural resource management and marketing needs to be better regulated in order to ensure that
biodiversity-based livelihoods become compatible with conservation rather than antagonistic. Opportunities
particularly arise in the following areas:
1. Support the identification, development, value addition and marketing (locally, nationally and overseas) of
new products from natural resources and niche products with specific biodiversity credentials, for example
through the development of trademarks;
2. Build the capacity and the institutional framework for greater tourism-based incomes for dryland
communities and promote complementarity between existing livelihood strategies and tourism;
3. Promote appropriate and sustainable agricultural practices that make better use of the investments of
drylands resource users, for example through conservation agriculture, pastoralism, and deliver tangible
and commensurable environmental benefits;
4. Improve understanding of the dynamics of urbanisation and globalisation and the implications for natural
resource management and marketing;
5. Assist governments to improve the collection of data on the economic values of drylands and to
incorporate more effective valuation into National and Local Economic Planning;
6. Provide advice to governments and communities over emergent investment opportunities such as biofuels
and the associated costs and benefits.
Box 6: Improved crop cultivation practices
Numerous innovations can be found around the region for both improving small scale agricultural production and
sustaining ecosystem function. Low-tillage conservation agricultural practices have been developed in Zimbabwe
and spreading to other countries such as Kenya, where it is also referred to as Low External Input Agriculture.
Sand dams in Kenya have been highly effective in transforming dryland farming landscapes and raising the
sustainability of crop production. In Tanzania, traditional agro-forestry practices have been revived and developed
to transform land, degraded through State farming, into healthy and productive community land. Many of these
techniques have been shown to dramatically increase food production whilst restoring ecosystem health and
function.
5.4.
Rights, reform, risk and resilience
Underpinning many of the biodiversity challenges in the drylands are a number of social and political factors.
Current demographic, economic, political and social trends in the drylands impose new challenges on the
institutional frameworks for ecosystem management and Governments have struggled to implement land
legislation or to sustain policies over land and other natural resources. Policies have not always worked efficiently
or equitably, and some have met with resistance, particularly where they have encountered existing institutions for
natural resource governance. At the same time, a process of decentralisation of natural resource governance has
been going on around the region, although in some countries there may now be a process of reversing
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
30
decentralisation. Decentralisation can create opportunities for empowerment of local communities, but the
ambiguities lead to challenges in embracing the opportunities. Nevertheless, there are a number of important
areas where IUCN has a role to play:
1. Create an enabling environment for indigenous methods of managing risk, building trust amongst decision
makers and confidence amongst local communities to achieve effective decision making, and tailoring
local services to boost capacities for indigenous risk management;
2. Reinforce the capacity of customary institutions to govern natural resources, manage conflict and mitigate
other risks, and work with government and other institutions to create the space for local decision making
and biodiversity ownership;
3. Build stronger relations between local communities, non government institutions and local communities to
give local practitioners greater voice in policy dialogue, and to enable government to elicit this voice and to
be confident enough to listen;
4. Identify opportunities in existing land laws and related policies to strengthen environmental governance
systems, taking advantage of an increasingly educated, capable and astute rural population and in some
countries the additional opportunities offered by decentralisation;
5. Use IUCN’s expertise in CBNRM and Landscape and Ecosystem level analysis to mainstream adaptive
capacity as a pre-eminent indicator of sustainable development, at both the individual and the institutional
level.
Box 7: reforming protected area approaches
An estimated 8.5% of the African continent is designated as protected area, and drylands have the highest share
of this. Approximately 16% of the continent’s population live within 20km of protected areas and population growth
in these buffer zones has been found to be higher than elsewhere. Many of the dryland Protected Areas occupy
land and resources that were historically of great cultural and economic significance for local land users, and the
loss of these areas has created significant conflict and animosity towards the conservation sector in general. To
compound the issue, a number of countries derive significant revenues from wildlife tourism to protected areas, yet
these revenues seldom benefit the dispossessed communities.
Around the region there is a great diversity of approaches to rectify this balance, and the conservation industry has
shifted significantly in its attitude towards communal land managers. In countries such as Kenya and South Africa,
Community Conserved Areas are promoted on land adjacent to parks as a means of protecting the dispersal
zones outside the parks, or as a way of boosting wildlife incomes in those areas. In Zimbabwe, Namibia and
elsewhere there are notable successes in Community Conservancies as a means of generating income directly
from private tourism.
5.5.
Invest in Multifunctionality
Drylands are multifunctional and provide residents with a stream of benefits that are often mutually supportive,
providing sources of income and subsistence, in times of plenty and times of hardship. This Multifunctionality is
often built on the biodiverse nature of dryland environments and promoting this diversity of natural resource use is
an important tool for enabling environmentally sustainable land use. However, this Multifunctionality is usually
poorly measured, and this leas to investments that aim to maximise one particular value at the expense of many
others – usually with no recognition of the cost that this implies. This is starkly illustrated in drylands when riparian
areas are converted to mono-culture irrigation, leading to loss of habitat and dry season grazing areas that enable
both conservation and pastoralism in vast surrounding landscapes. By encouraging investment in these multiple
land uses, including the marketing of Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFPs), or Non-Pasture Rangelands Products
(NPRPs), as well as marketing of ecosystem services that are enjoyed by external consumers, it is possible to
promote the most sustainable forms of land use that protect the environment as well as the resilience of local
livelihoods.
5.6.
Combating Desertification
As the dominant paradigm in drylands conservation, IUCN needs to engage critically with the Desertification
Agenda and with the UN Convention to Combat Desertification. However, the desertification narrative does not
provide adequate explanation for the dynamics of the drylands in Eastern and Southern Africa and the over-focus
on desertification may not be healthy and may engender a narrow approach to sustainable drylands management.
Based on the recommendations published in “Dryland Opportunities” IUCN should contribute to shifting attention
away from “combating desertification” per se and towards protecting ecosystem services as a foundation for the
economic and social well-being and adaptive capacity of dryland communities.
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
31
Whilst IUCN should sustain its call for a more positive and forward-looking drylands agenda, it should also be
aware of current challenges to the Convention to Combat Desertification, and the pressure from some quarters to
transform it into a convention on Land. Although there is strong justification for a Convention on Land Degradation,
since most of the world’s land degradation occurs outside the drylands, the importance of a Convention explicitly
on the drylands must not be ignored. There are risks associated with subsuming drylands in other biomes or
ecosystems, because of the uniqueness of drylands biodiversity and drylands ecosystem function, which respond
poorly to conservation efforts that are not tailored to this uniqueness. It is critical that attention remains focused on
the drylands, their unique characteristics, their contribution to global environmental wellbeing, and the
opportunities for their sustainable development.
5.7.
Community Based Natural Resource Management
As discussed earlier in Box 7, Community-Based Conservation, or Community Based Natural resource
Management (CBNRM) covers a range of conservation approaches that have emerged as alternatives to the
conventional conservation approaches that have typically disregarded the interests of local inhabitants. More
devolved models of conservation have gained popularity since the 1975 World Parks Congress recognized the
rights of indigenous people to protected areas and since resistance to traditional approaches, particularly from
indigenous peoples, has strengthened.
There is a great diversity of approaches to CBNRM, but in general, these approaches are taken to strengthen local
institutions for natural resource use and management and to enable communities to make better decisions about
the use of land and resources. CBNRM requires a transfer of authority over natural resources to local
communities, which often requires, or is supported by, institutional reforms and changes in power relations.
CBNRM typically involves a degree of co-management of resources between central authorities, local government,
and local communities which share rights and responsibilities through diverse institutional arrangements (Roe et al.
2009).
Box 8: CBNRM in ESARO (Roe et al. 2009)
In Namibia communal land conservancies have proliferated, and now cover more than 14% of the country,
involve over 200,000 people and earn US$ 2.5 million per annum. Key wildlife resources have recovered and
illegal use of wildlife has fallen.
In Zimbabwe, CAMPFIRE generated $20 million in revenues for local communities and district governments
from 1989 to 2001, and also resulted in over 40,000 km2 of communal land being managed for wildlife
production. More importantly, some stakeholders have adapted to the current economic and political crises by
forming new types of relationships to maintain wildlife production systems on communal land.
In Tanzania, more than 3.6 million hectares of forests and woodlands are now managed as Village Land
Forest Reserves, entirely under the control of locally elected village governments, or as co-managed forests
between villages and either local or central government.
In Kenya the development of community-level wildlife-based tourism ventures on communal and private land is
making a major contribution to the total national conservation estate.
CBNRM approaches are proliferating in Eastern and Southern Africa, although a number of challenges are
frequently encountered. A particular challenge is that communities often cannot take formal authority over lands
and natural resources, although there are nevertheless numerous examples of dryland communities using group
tenure arrangements as a vehicle for CBNRM approaches (e.g. Kenya). Natural Resources often remain centrally
governed and National POlicy often does not work in support of CBNRM approaches yet. There may even be
cases of central consolidation of the right to use and allocate valuable resources such as wildlife and timber.
Genuine political support for CBNRM is often lacking, particularly when local interests are at odds with the interests
of influential individuals. Such politics may be mirrored at local level, if local governance institutions are not
downwardly accountable to the community, or if benefits are disproportionately captured by local elites (Roe et al.
2009).
5.8.
Rangeland eco-tourism
Ecotourism can play a role in both conserving the environment and boosting rural incomes. It has great potential in
rangeland regions, and countries with a predominance of rangelands, such as Kenya and Tanzania, have been
among the world’s most popular ecotourism destinations. Ecotourism is one of the fastest growing sectors of the
tourism market and it offers many opportunities (as well as potential threats) for both economic development and
conservation of biodiversity (Honey 1999).
Ecotourism has been described as “environmentally responsible travel and visitation to relatively undisturbed
natural areas, in order to enjoy and appreciate nature (and any accompanying cultural features – both past and
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
32
present) that promotes conservation, has low negative visitor impact, and provides for beneficially active socioeconomic involvement of local populations” (Ceballos Lascurain 1996). Ecotourism is intended to: contribute to
conservation of biodiversity; sustain the well being of local people; include an interpretation/learning experience;
involve responsible action on the part of tourists and the tourism industry; be delivered primarily to small groups by
small scale businesses; require the lowest possible consumption of non-renewable resources; and be based on
local participation, ownership and business opportunities, particularly for rural people (Wood 2002).
Ecotourism is a way of promoting community-based conservation, by allowing local resource users to derive
additional benefits from their conservation skills and practices and their sustainable land use methods. Communitybased conservation has proven to be a very effective way of managing the environment, so long as the local
community benefits equitably from the revenues that conservation generates. There are, however, numerous
challenges in ensuring that the dual objectives of economic and conservation objectives are both attained.
Ecotourism has also been developed as a solution to the problem of residing adjacent to a protected area. In
Northern Kenya for example, Samburu communities have been confronted with the costs not only of losing land to
protected areas, but of coping with large numbers of wildlife moving across their remaining land to access the
protected areas. Their solution has been to develop their own eco-tourism projects to tap directly into tourist
revenues to turn the costs of conservation into benefits. Namibia has also promoted ecotourism widely in its
drylands in order to spread the benefits of tourism to rural households, establishing community conservancies to
assume responsibility for natural resource management which has contributed to significant increases in wildlife
populations and growth in wildlife tourism along with increased empowerment of the host communities.
5.9.
Payment for Ecosystem/environmental Services
Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES), and Payments for Environmental Services, are incentives to natural
resource users for managing their resources to provide some sort of ecological service. For example, payments by
users of clean water to the people upstream who manage the forests that ensures the sustainable flow of this
service. Charging for the benefits provided by natural ecosystems is a way to recognize their value and to
strengthen the livelihoods of land owners for whom environmental protection might otherwise pose a cost.
The main markets for ecosystem services are:
• Watershed protection – where markets depend on upstream proper land use and management for the benefit
of downstream users;
• Biodiversity Markets – these include ecotourism and payments for conservation of wildlife habitats and ecolabelled products;
• Carbon sequestration – buyers pay for the planting of trees that absorb carbon to offset their carbon emissions.
Demand for these three main services is predicted to continue to grow in future.
The aim of PES is to resolve environmental externalities through private bargaining between people who are
willing to pay in order to reduce an environmental hazard and people willing to accept compensation in order to
reduce the activity that generates the environmental burden. In PES programs the supplier of environmental
services usually holds the property rights over an environmental good that provides a flow of benefits to the
demanding party. Payments can take different forms, such as cash incentives, fees from resources users’
downstream, differentiated tax. Other types of incentives include modifying land tenure to improve property rights,
improving access to appropriate technology and improving access to markets.
5.10.
Disaster risk reduction19
Environmental sustainability often receives inadequate attention in development discourse, and the debate over
sustainability tends to focus on economic sustainability, and perhaps secondarily on social sustainability. There are
many possible reasons for this neglect, including the difficulty that many development actors face in identifying and
understanding issues of environmental sustainability. In some cases there is discomfort about being seen as
imposing conditionality over environmental sustainability when industrialised countries have developed at the
expense of their own natural resources. However, the current attention to global environmental issues helps to
highlight the importance of environmental sustainability as a fundamental requirement for growth.
If the environment is relatively under-represented in mainstream development discourse, it is widely neglected in
emergency assistance, and possibly considered as an unaffordable luxury when disaster has to be averted, or
viewed as being beyond our control. Yet the emerging discourse on Disaster Risk Reduction creates an entry point
19
See Sudmeier, K. and Ash, N. 2009. Environmental Guidance Note for Disaster Risk Reduction
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
33
for highlighting the inter-linkage between environmental sustainability and the risk of disaster. The 2005 World
Conference on Disaster Reduction delivered the Hyogo Framework for Action, which states the importance of
reducing the underlying risk factors (Priority 4). The Hyogo Framework highlights the importance of healthy
ecosystems and environmental management for Disaster Risk Reduction.
There is particular scope for using the lens of environmental sustainability to scrutinise drought management and
disaster risk reduction approaches in the drylands. In particular, a stronger understanding of ecosystem processes
would improve awareness of the human factors that underlie some disasters, notably drought and flood. Drought is
often not purely about a shortage of rainfall, but about what is happening to water after it has fallen as rain. Where
rangelands are degraded, particularly where they are denuded of pasture, or where trees have replaced pasture,
rain fall rapidly runs-off, leading to flash floods, failure to recharge aquifers, and concomitant drought. It must be
understood that in this scenario, drought is to a large extent anthropogenic.
Better incorporation of environmental protection would not only reduce the risk of disasters, but would also
reinforce the coping strategies of people living in the drylands, for example by protecting critical natural resource
reserves. A healthy environment is closely linked to the capacity of a community to withstand disasters and to
manage risk. Many disasters are social constructs, determined by how a society manages its environment. The
more assets people have, the less vulnerable they are, and this includes natural assets. There are four important
reasons why ecosystems matter: human wellbeing depends on ecosystems; ecosystems can provide natural
buffers; healthy and diverse ecosystems are more resilient to extreme weather events; ecosystem degradation
reduces carbon sequestration.
Most awareness of disasters is raised globally following extreme events, yet it is the more common and chronic
disasters that impose the greatest costs on poor populations, including drought, flood, and invasive species.
Climate change is predicted to lead to more frequent extreme events, yet even if the number and frequency of
extreme events increases, the magnitude of disaster can be reduced through adopting integrated approaches that
combine development processes, disaster risk reduction measures, and ecosystem management.
Integrating environmental concerns into Disaster Risk reduction is necessary to reduce the underlying risk factors,
and is particularly important in the drylands owing to the high degree of risk. Ecosystem-Based Disaster
Management refers to decision making activities that take into consideration current and future human livelihood
needs and biophysical requirements of ecosystems and recognise the role of ecosystems in supporting
communities to prepare for, cope with and recover from disaster situations. Within this approach, there is scope for
using Payments for Ecosystem Services, for example to convince a community to maintain forest cover in sensitive
water recharge areas, or on steep slopes to reduce the occurrence of landslides or down stream flooding.
5.11.
IUCN mandate for the drylands
IUCN’s mandate for work on drylands derives from a series of resolutions proposed and approved by IUCN
Members during IUCN’s General Assemblies and World Conservation Congresses. As a response to the Sahelian
drought of the 1970s, the 12th IUCN General Assembly in 1975 called for development programmes that consider
ecological factors and directly link biodiversity conservation to economic well-being in drylands. In 2000, the
congress passed a resolution calling for a full IUCN programme on drylands. Selected resolutions and
recommendations from IUCN members are listed in Box 9.
Box 9: Selected IUCN Resolutions and Recommendations relating to drylands
1952
GA 3 Res (Section II): Preservation of wild fauna in semi-arid regions
1975
GA 12 Res 7: Restoration of Semi-arid Environments and Wildlife
1990
GA 18 Rec 69: Conservation of Arid Zone Wetlands
1990
GA 18 Rec 12: IUCN Sahel Programme
1990
GA 18 Rec 23 : Land Degradation
1996
WCC Rec 1.74: Combating Desertification
2000
WCC Res 2.3: An IUCN Arid and Semi-Arid Lands Global Thematic Programme
2000
WCC Res 2.18: Strengthening actions for implementation of the UN Convention to Combat Desertification
2000
WCC Res 2.57: Preparation and adoption of guidelines for oil, gas and mineral exploration and exploitation
in arid and semi-arid zones
2004
WCC Res 3.43: Resource based conflicts in Darfur, Sudan
2008
WCC Res 4.053: Mobile indigenous peoples and biodiversity conservation
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
34
2008
WCC Rec 4.134: Responding to deforestation and land degradation related to climate change and
desertification
GA – General Assembly; WCC – World Conservation Congress; Res – Resolution; Rec - Recommendation
5.12.
IUCN past engagements in the Drylands
The ESARO region (and former ROSA and EARO) has a long history of engagement in the drylands of the region.
A comprehensive review is not feasible at this time, but a few notable projects include the following:
6.
•
Somalia Environmental Profile (Former EARO project);
•
Pastoralism as Conservation (EARO, funded by IUCN Netherlands);
•
Community Environmental Management Planning in Refugee Hosting Areas (funded by UNHCR, UNHCR
Sudan, Irish Aid, EC – work ongoing);
•
Improving governance to support better livelihood security and ecosystem management in the Drylands of
Africa (funded by DFID GTF);
•
Transboundary Integrated Land and Water Resource Management in the Kalahari Namib (funded by
UNEP-GEF, EC);
•
The World Initiative for Sustainable Pastoralism (UNDP-GEF, IFAD, Rockefeller, FORD and others)
•
Building African Civil Society Capacity to Influence the SLM Agenda (UNDP-GEF, Terre Africa)
•
Conservation as a Livelihood Asset: Linking Policy and Practice (IDRC)
Recommendations
6.1.
Priority Issues
Strengthen understanding of the uniqueness drylands ecosystem dynamics. A concerted effort is needed to
popularise understanding around the two key issues of climatic uncertainty and ecological flux. Attention should be
focused on practical application of non-equilibrium dynamics to improve identification of genuinely degraded land,
as well as on the implications of climatic uncertainty for drylands biodiversity and dryland livelihoods. Good
practice for sustainable development should reflect the improved understanding of land degradation and should
focus on reconciling different knowledge systems: enabling dialogue between natural resource users and advisors
to ensure greater coherence between indigenous and non-indigenous knowledge.
Mainstream an understanding of dryland Ecosystem Services in land use and development planning. A key
entry point is the role of Provisioning Services in underpinning food security and the cost of reduction in these
services in terms of increased poverty and vulnerability. Particular attention is needed to environmentally-friendly
agricultural practices, such as conservation agriculture or pastoralism, and the positive feedback that can be
stimulated between land use and ecosystem health.
Improve understanding of Regulating Ecosystem Services. Important gaps exist in understanding of how
dryland ecosystems regulate local and global climate and water cycling, which are critically linked to exposure to
environmental hazards. More effective systems of measurement need to be deployed and used for integrated
natural resource planning at the landscape scale and to ensure more effective monitoring of changes in land use
and ecosystem health.
Operationalise awareness on Ecosystem Integrity and Landscape Scale planning. Greater attention is
needed, in planning and policy implementation, to the inter-connectedness between ecosystem components, and
the system cost of removing these elements. An important entry point is in water and land management planning,
which are often poorly integrated but completely inter-linked. Strengthen the accountability of planners to the
demands of local resource users to ensure land use plans and decisions are made at the appropriate level to
mitigate significant environmental costs.
Raise awareness and capacities to use Payments for Ecosystem Services. Profile existing initiatives in PES
within the region and identify opportunities for learning and cross-fertilisation of ideas within and beyond the
region. Work with institutional partners to develop and implement appropriate incentive systems and strengthen
local governance capacities to ensure equity and sustainability.
Deeper understanding is needed of Climate Change and its implications for dryland populations and
biodiversity. Improve understanding of how climate change affects species, ecosystems and natural resource
users, what determines their capacity to adapt, and how environmental and livelihood adaptation are inter-related.
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
35
Expand the discourse to explore adaptation to a range of threats, beyond climate change, and explore the interrelationship between vulnerability to climate change and vulnerability to other threats and trends. Integrate this
understanding with better knowledge of social change and response to human population pressures (for example
the dynamics of urbanisation).
Strengthen governance and rights over natural resources, including land, trees and water, and work with
Dryland Communities to formalise tenure arrangements where appropriate. Use governance as an entry point for
building confidence between communities and State and developing appropriate institutional relationships.
Build capacity for more sustainable drylands management. Identify innovative ways to reach consensus on
and to operationalise best practice in sustainable drylands management, amongst researchers, government
extension workers, NGOs and dryland communities. Support the development or adaptation of appropriate
technologies and management approaches based on participatory research and integrated with efforts to
strengthen governance and empower dryland communities.
Promote investment in drylands diversity, including investment by external actors as well as increased
investment by dryland communities. Link local entrepreneurs with financial resources, technologies and markets to
boost investment opportunities and link outside investors through improved information/communication. Identify
opportunities to promote sustainable investment by linking producers with potential buyers, and ensure
sustainability through effective monitoring and evaluation systems.
Raise awareness of dryland species diversity and uniqueness. Enable dryland natural resource planners,
including communities and government form local to national levels, to access and use information on drylands
biodiversity. Build capacities to use species data in environmental planning and enable dryland managers to
identify opportunities for generating income through species conservation or managed use of biodiversity. Identify
entry points in the tourism sector for dryland communities to capitalise on and conserve wildlife. Work with
communities and conservation managers to address issues of resource access and benefit sharing.
Improve analysis of dryland endangered species. Further information is required to enrich this situation
analysis, particularly on Important Bird Areas, Important Plant Areas, Dryland Forms of Species and Important
Biodiversity Areas. Greater attention is required to unique dryland habitat including wetlands in the drylands, water
towers and high-altitude drylands.
Strengthen dialogue over the environmental costs and benefits of large and small scale agriculture. Raise
awareness of different mechanisms for internalising environmental costs and enable sharing of good practices.
Enrich discussions over large-scale agricultural investments with improved awareness of ecosystem costs and
benefits in addition to social and economic costs/benefits.
Improve recognition of the multi-functionality of drylands, and the importance of investing in multiple
complementary land uses. Elaborate the understanding of optimal productivity in multi-functional landscapes as a
more sustainable alternative to maximisation of production in specific sectors.
Strengthen the investment environment in drylands to enable broad-based (multi-functional) livelihoods and
expansion of markets that support sustainable use of drylands natural resources and species. Address knowledge
gaps, for example with potential external investors, as well as access to finance and skills for local entrepreneurs.
Pay particular attention to monitoring of investment initiatives to ensure that guidelines are developed and adhered
to for the sake of long term sustainability.
Improve knowledge of and investment in sustainable tourism, which is of particular importance to drylands in
eastern and southern Africa. Identify ways to ensure that the benefits of tourism are spread widely enough to
encourage conservation at an appropriate scale, and support community conservation initiatives and approaches.
Foster greater cooperation between communities and wildlife authorities with a view to greater and more effective
collaborative arrangements, and identify ways to improve landscape connectivity through community-led initiatives.
Increase attention to invasive species in the drylands. Contribute to dialogue over good practice in controlling
invasive species and identify opportunities for directly addressing key invasive species, though appropriate
interventions and through improved awareness of the costs of inaction.
Improve understanding of dryland population dynamics and urbanisation. Through research and dialogue
with multiple actors, raise awareness of the complexity of dryland demographics and the equally complex
relationship between drylands people and drylands natural resources. Identify entry points for engaging with the
issue of drylands urban growth and drylands out-migration.
Raise awareness of the environmental costs associated with conflict. Engage in dialogue on the different
levels and types of conflict found in different parts of the region, with consequences locally (directly on the affected
environment) and regionally (e.g. through movement of refugees). Ensure that environmental concerns are given
greater attention in dialogue over conflict management and in planning post-conflict interventions.
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
36
6.2.
Priority locations
Engage in work in the major Dryland Biodiversity Hotspots of the region. Expand work in the area around the
Succulent Karoo and Horn of Africa hotspots and identify entry points in remaining hotspots that overlap with
dryland areas, and ensure that specific biodiversity issues are addressed through such engagement.
Engage in work in a diversity of dryland classes and biomes. Assess current portfolio of work and identify
gaps and opportunities to fill gaps to ensure that IUCN has a balanced portfolio in different aridity zones and in
different biomes and ecosystem types.
Work with a range of different livelihood and socio-economic groups to ensure balance in the range of
lessons and experiences that IUCN draws upon and to strengthen IUCNs impartiality.
Link work on sustainable management of communal lands with Protected Areas. Identify opportunities for
strengthening species conservation outside designated protected areas and for increasing areas under nonexclusionary protection, particularly through community-based approaches, to explicitly tackle land fragmentation
and ecosystem integrity.
Identify opportunities to work in the full range of dryland biomes. Target interventions and learning in hyper
arid, arid, semi arid and dry sub humid lands as well as different dryland biomes, including Savannah, high altitude
drylands, Mediterranean drylands, dryland forests.
Improve awareness of “vulnerable drylands”. This requires emphasis on rich resource patches within the
drylands, on highly productive dryland landscapes, and on hyper-arid zones. It also requires attention to areas of
high population density or high poverty.
Engage in transboundary drylands management and coordination, to reflect the transboundary nature of
dryland ecosystems and the fact that many dryland resource users manage or rely on resources across
international and internal boundaries.
6.3.
Principles and Approaches
Ensure participation and empowerment of dryland communities. This is crucial considering that
marginalisation is the cornerstone of much dryland poverty. Participatory Environmental Management approaches
should be routinely used, including mainstreaming such approaches in the work of government departments.
Community Based Natural Resource Management, as a more elaborate participatory process, should be further
refined and used as basis for multi-stakeholder engagement in sustainable natural resource management. IUCN
should play a key role in bringing land users and planners together to improve dialogue and participation and
increase institutional accountability in order to strengthen local natural resource governance.
Respect local knowledge, local institutions, and community conservation. Building on participatory
approaches and Community Based Natural Resource Management, ensure that local knowledge is at the centre of
conservation and sustainable development and ensure that work contributes to the effective functioning of local
(customary) institutions.
Create opportunities to improve data on Drylands biodiversity. Disaggregate data on dryland species,
improve data collection on dryland ecosystems and on dryland habitat, and improve data on desertification.
Integrate biodiversity monitoring in dryland projects, particularly where Biodiversity Indicators can complement
sustainable land management.
Contribute to global, regional and national policy frameworks. Use IUCN’s unique characteristics to ensure
that UNCCD remains relevant to local land users, to align national and regional action plans to local priorities, and
to domesticate global and regional conventions in national planning and policy. Support governments to participate
effectively with resource users over creation of National Action Plans and over implementation of relevant policy.
Work with the right partners at different levels. Work with appropriate government departments and ministries
to enable effective influencing of policy. Work with local government to improve dialogue with local communities.
Work with Civil Society at local and national level to improve adoption of Good Practices, to influence government
planning and to input to policy making. Work with research and academic institutions to improve the mainstreaming
of new thinking on dryland ecosystems in research and academic curricula.
Work across IUCN’s thematic programmes. Create an operational approach that allows the specificities of
drylands to be mainstreamed in other thematic areas, including Water and Wetlands, Forests, Climate Change,
Species and Protected Areas work.
Continue to emphasise economic valuation as planning and advocacy tool. Low awareness of the value of
drylands continues to prevail and economic valuation is an important tool for enabling more effective planning of
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
37
natural resource use and investments. Continued emphasis on economic valuation is needed and greater
emphasis is needed to orient the arguments towards potential investors from the private sector.
Emphasise the role of effective communication at different levels. It is crucial to gain momentum in shifting
the debate over drylands from “wastelands” to valuable and productive environments. For this reason, innovative
communication means are still required and a more concerted and strategic effort is needed to identify opinion
leaders and to influence influential people as well as public opinion.
Improve intra-regional communication and dialogue. Attitudes and experiences are very different throughout
the ESARO region and there are great opportunities for interchange of experiences. This requires breaking out of
Eastern and Southern African sub-groups and creating opportunities for exchange between the two parts of the
region.
7.
Conclusion
There are a number of important reasons why a specific program on drylands is required by IUCN. A major driving
force behind land degradation in the drylands is the persistence of inappropriate policies at national and local level.
This includes policies in all sectors, not only those related to the natural resource sectors, and this contributes to a
wide range of other drivers such as population growth and land use change. Most drylands in the region are
characterised by poverty and associated socio-political drivers of environmental degradation. Addressing dryland
conservation therefore requires a uniquely broad-based approach to tackle the multiple dimensions of poverty.
Species-wise, the drylands contain quantitatively less biodiversity than other ecosystems, but possess biodiversity
of high qualitative value. Species endemism is high, and many species are adapted to exactly the sort of climatic
stresses that will become more widespread as a result of climate change. Drylands also cover vast areas, which
greatly increases the importance of dryland species. Conservation interest often focuses on areas where species
diversity is greatest, and when programmes or interventions span climatic zones, invariably it is the more humid
areas that draw the most attention.
Perhaps most important is the issue of environmental uncertainty. Conservation and development approaches that
have not been explicitly developed within the drylands context are often not directly transferable to the drylands.
However, in the absence of a drylands programme, programmes will often span climatic zones and are less likely
to pay heed to the ecosystem specificities of the drylands. A drylands programme should therefore be strongly
oriented towards mainstreaming understanding of drylands peculiarities, and appropriate ways of working, across
the full range of thematic programmes and sectors.
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
38
8.
Appendices
8.1.
Bibliography
Barrow, E.G.C. 1996. The drylands of Africa. Local participation in tree management Nairobi. Initiatives Publishers,
Nairobi, Kenya.
Birdlife International 2010. http://www.birdlife.org/
Bonkoungou, E.G. 2001. Biodiversity in the drylands: Challenges and opportunities for conservation and
sustainable use. Challenge Paper. The Global Drylands Initiative, UNDP Drylands Development Centre, Nairobi,
Kenya.
Ceballos Lascurain 1996. Tourism, Ecotourism and Protected Areas. IUCN, Geneva
Davis, S. D. Heywood, V. H. and Hamilton A. C. 1994. Centres of plant diversity: a guide and strategy for their
conservation. IUCN Publications Unit, Cambridge.
Dregne, H. E. and Chou, N. 1992. Global desertification and costs. In: Dregne, H.E. (ed.) Degradation and
restoration of arid lands. Texas Technical University, Lubbock, Texas. pp. 249-282.
Faerge, J. and Magid, J. 2004. Evaluating NUTMON nutrient balancing in Sub-Saharan Africa. Nutrient Cycling in
Agro-ecosystems 69(2): 101-110.
FAO 1998. FRA 2000 Terms and Definitions. FRA Working Paper 1, FAO Forestry Department. (Available at
http://www.fao.org/forestry/fo/fra/index.jsp under Publications)
FAO 2006. Choosing a forest definition for the Clean Development Mechanism. Forests and Climate Change
Working Paper 4
FAO 2008. Are grasslands under threat? Brief analysis of FAO statistical data on grassland and fodder crops.
Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.
Garland, G., Hoffman M.T. & Todd S.W. 1999. Chapter 6: Soil degradation. In: Hoffman M.T., S.W. Todd, Z.
Ntshona & S.D.Turner. A national review of land degradation in South Africa. DEAT, Pretoria. pp 69-107
Ghazi, P., Barrow, E., Monela, G. and Mlenge, W. 2005. Regenerating woodlands: Tanzania’s HASHI Project. In:
WRI et al. The wealth of the poor: managing ecosystems to fight poverty. World Resources Institute with UNDP,
UNEP, The World Bank, Washington, DC. pp. 131-138.
Hardin G. 1968. The Tragedy of the Commons. Science 162: 1243 – 8
Hatfield, R. and J. Davies 2006. Global Review of the Economics of Pastoralism. IUCN, Nairobi.
www.iucn.org/wisp/publications
Helldén, U. and Tottrup, C. 2009. Regional desertification: a global synthesis. Global and Planetary Change 64(34): 169-176.
Herrmann, S.M., Anyamba, A. and Tucker, C.J. 2005. Recent trends in vegetation dynamics in the African Sahel
and their relationship to climate. Global Environmental Change 15: 394-404.
Holling, C. S. 1973. Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 4:1-23.
Honey, M. 1999. Ecotourism and Sustainable Development: Who Owns Paradise? Washington D.C.: Island Press
Hyogo Framework for Action, 2005-2015: ISDR International Strategy for Disaster Reduction International Strategy
for Disaster Reduction www.unisdr.org/wcdr. Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters.
2005 World Conference on Disaster Reduction 18-22 January 2005, Kobe, Hyogo, Japan
ILRI. 2007. Nature’s benefits in Kenya. An atlas of ecosystems and human well-being. World Resources Institute
with ILRI, Washington, DC.
IPACC 2010. http://www.ipacc.org.za/
IPCC 2000. Watson R., Noble I., Bolin B., Ravindranath, N., Verardo D. and D. Dokken (Eds), Land use, Land-use
Change, and Forestry: A Special Report. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge
IPCC. 2007. Fourth Assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Summary for policy makers.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. www.ipcc.ch/
Lemons, J. 2006. Conserving dryland biodiversity: Science and policy. http://www.scidev.net/en/middle-east-andnorth-africa/policy-briefs/conserving-dryland-biodiversity-science-and-policy.html
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
39
Lepers, E., 2003: Synthesis of the Main Areas of Land-cover and Land-use Change. Millennium Ecosystem
Assessment, Final Report. Available at www.geo.ucl.ac.be/LUCC/lucc.html.
Marshall N. A., Marshall, P. A., Tamelander, J., Obura, D., Malleret-King, D. and Cinner, J. E. 2009 A Framework
for Social Adaptation to Climate Change: sustaining tropical coastal communities and industries.
Middleton, N. and D. Thomas, 1997: World Atlas of Desertification, Arnold, London.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005. http://www.millenniumassessment.org/en/Global.aspx
Mittermeier RA, Gil PR,Hoffmann M, Pilgrim J,Brooks T,Mittermeier CG, Lamoreux J, da Fonseca GAB. 2004.
Hotspots Revisited: Earth’s Biologically Richest and Most Endangered Ecoregions.Mexico City (Mexico): CEMEX.
Mortimore, M. 1998. Roots in the African dust: sustaining the Sub-Saharan drylands. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, UK.
Mortimore, M. and Harris, F. 2005. Do small farmers’ achievements contradict the nutrient depletion scenarios for
Africa? Land Use Policy 22: 43-56.Mortimore et al. 2009
Mortimore, M., Anderson, S., Cotula, L., Davies, J., Faccer, K., Hesse, C., Morton, J., Nyangena, W., Skinner, J.,
and Wolfangel, C. 2009. Dryland Opportunities: a new paradigm for people, ecosystems and development. IUCN,
Gland, Switzerland; IIED, London, UK and UNDP/DDC, Nairobi, Kenya.
Mutimba & Barasa 2005
Niamir-Fuller, M. (ed), 1999. Managing Mobility: The Legitimization of Transhumance. ITDG/FAO.
Reid et al. 2008
Roe D., Nelson, F., Sandbrook, C. (eds.) 2009. Community management of natural resources in Africa: Impacts,
experiences and future directions, Natural Resource Issues No. 18, International Institute for Environment and
Development, London, UK.
Roe E, Huntsinger L, Labnow K. 1998. High Reliability Pastoralism. Journal of Arid Environments 39: 39-55
Sachs, J. 2008. Common Wealth: economics for a crowded planet. Penguin Press HC
Sankaran, M., N. P. Hanan, R. J. Scholes, et al. 2005. Determinants of woody cover in African savannas. NATURE
438 (7069): 846-849.
Scoones, I. 1995. New Directions in Pastoral Development in Africa. Living with Uncertainty. IT Publications,
London.
Scoones, I. and C. Toulmin (1998). "Soil nutrient balances:what use for policy ?" Agriculture, Ecosystems and
Environment 71: 255-267.
IUCN-WISP 2007. Carbon Finance in Rangelands: an assessment of potential in communal rangelands.
http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/microsoft_word___carbon_finance_english.pdf
State of World Population 2007. http://www.unfpa.org/swp/2007/english/introduction.html
Stern, N. 2007. Stern Review on the economics of climate change. Executive Summary. HM Treasury, London,
UK.
Sudmeier, K. and Ash, N. 2009. Environmental Guidance Note for Disaster Risk Reduction: healthy ecosystems
for human security. Ecosystem Management Series No. 8, IUCN, Geneva.
Tiffen, M., Mortimore, M. and Gichuki, F. 1994. More people less erosion: Environmental recovery in Kenya. John
Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK.
UNCCD 2009. Benefits of Sustainable Land Management
Wood, M.E. 2002. Ecotourism: Principles, Practices and Policies for Sustainability. UNEP
World Resources Institute 2002. Drylands, People, and Ecosystem Goods and Services: A Web-based Geospatial
Analysis. Available online at: http://www.wri.org
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
40
8.2.
List of all conventions
Country
Title
Full
Text
Availability
Year
Botswana
National Environmental Health Policy
Botswana
National Plan of Action to Combat Desertification
Botswana
Forestry Extension Programme
No
Botswana
National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan Botswana
No
Botswana
National Water Master Plan (1991) Botswana
1991
No
Botswana
National Conservation Strategy Action Plan (1998)
1998
No
Botswana
National Wetlands Policy and Strategy Botswana
No
Botswana
Strategy for Water Conservation and Demand Management Botswana
No
Djibouti
National Plan of Action to Combat Desertification
2000
Yes
Djibouti
Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
2001
Yes
Eritrea
National Plan of Action to Combat Desertification
2002
Yes
Eritrea
National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan
2000
Yes
Eritrea
National Action Programme to Combat Desertification
Ethiopia
National Plan of Action to Combat Desertification
2000
Yes
Ethiopia
Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
2003-2004
Yes
Ethiopia
National Mines, Water, Energy & Geo-Information Science & Technology Policy
1994
Yes
Kenya
National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan
2000
Yes
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
Yes
2001
Yes
Yes
41
Kenya
Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
2005
Yes
Kenya
National Plan of Action to Combat Desertification
2002
Yes
Lesotho
Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
2004
Yes
Lesotho
National Environmental Policy
1994
Yes
Lesotho
National Sanitation Programme
2002
Yes
Lesotho
National Plan of Action to Combat Desertification
2000
Yes
Lesotho
National Environment Action Plan
1989
No
Lesotho
National Action Plan
1998
No
Lesotho
Biodiversity Strategy and Desertification (Lesotho)
Madagascar
National Environmental Action Plan
-
Yes
Madagascar
Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
2003
Yes
Madagascar
National Plan of Action to Combat Desertification
2001
Yes
Malawi
National Climate adaptation programme of action
2006
Yes
Malawi
Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (Draft)
2002
Yes
Malawi
National Environment Policy
Malawi
National Plan of Action to Combat Desertification
2001
Yes
Maldives
National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan
2002
Yes
Maldives
National Energy Policy
Mozambique
National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (Draft)
1997
Yes
Mozambique
Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
2001
Yes
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
No
Yes
Yes
42
Mozambique
National Plan of Action to Combat Desertification
2002
Yes
Namibia
Namibia Biosafety Action Plan
1998
No
Namibia
Namibia’s Programme to Combat desertification
1992
No
Seychelles
National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan
Seychelles
National Wetlands Conservation and Management Policy
Seychelles
National Environment Action Plan
Seychelles
Marine Protected Areas in the republic of Seychelles
2000
No
South Africa
National Water and Sanitation Programme
1994
Yes
South Africa
National Waste Management Strategy
1999
Yes
South Africa
National Plan of Action to Combat Desertification
2004
Yes
South Africa
White Paper on a Marine Fisheries Policy for South Africa
1997
No
South Africa
White Paper for a Sustainable Coastal Development in South Africa
2000
No
South Africa
White Paper on Integrated Pollution and Waste Management for South Africa
2000
No
Sudan
National Plan of Action to Combat Desertification
2002
Yes
Sudan
National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan
2006
Yes
Swaziland
Swaziland Environmental Action Plan
1997
Yes
Swaziland
The National Development Strategy, 1999
1999
No
Swaziland
National Plan of Action to Combat Desertification
2000
Yes
Swaziland
The
Swaziland
National
http://www.ecs.co.sz/policies.htm
2000
No
Yes
2002
Yes
No
Biodiversity
Strategy
and
Action
Plan-
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
43
Swaziland
National Environmental Health Policy, 2002
2002
No
Swaziland
The National Energy Policy, 2002
2002
No
Swaziland
The draft National Land Policy, 1999
1999
Yes
Swaziland
The Forest Policy, 2002
2002
Webpage
Tanzania
Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
2000
Yes
Tanzania
National Water Policy
2002
Yes
Tanzania
National Environment Action Plan A First Step
1994
No
Tanzania
National Plan of Action to Combat Desertification
2000
Yes
Tanzania, United Republic of
Tanzania National Conservation Strategy for Sustainable Development Proposal
Uganda
National policy and programmes on wetland conservation
1995
Yes
Uganda
National Plan of Action to Combat Desertification
2000
Yes
Uganda
National Capacity Self-Assessments
Zambia
Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
1994
Yes
Zambia
National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan
2000
Yes
Zambia
National Plan of Action to Combat Desertification
2002
Yes
Zambia
National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP)
1994
No
Zambia
National Water Policy
1994
No
Zambia
National Strategy for Community Water Supply Services
1999
No
Zimbabwe
National Plan of Action to Combat Desertification
2000
Yes
No
Yes
http://www.unep.org/dewa/Docs/Strategies%20Catalogue.doc
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
44
8.3.
List of IUCN ESARO members with drylands interest/focus
Drylands
Kalahari Conservation Society
Khama Rhino Sanctuary Trust
University of Botswana
Veld
Products
Research
&
Development
Ethiopian
Wildlife
Conservation
Organization
African Wildlife Foundation
Ministry of Environment and Natural
Resources
Nature Kenya – The East Africa Natural
History Society
Wildlife Clubs of Kenya
Malawi
Environmental
Endowment
Trust
Wildlife and Environmental Society of
Malawi
Namibia Nature Foundation
De Wildt Cheetah and Wildlife Centre
Endangered Wildlife Trust
Game Rangers Association of Africa
South African National Biodiversity
Institute
South African National Parks
Southern African Wildlife College
Wildlife and Environment Society of
South Africa
World Wide Fund for Nature - South
Africa
Swaziland
Environment
Authority,
Ministry of Tourism, Environment and
Communications
Yonge Nawe Environmental Action
Group
Environmental Alert
Uganda
Environmental
Education
Foundation
Uganda Wildlife Society
In-Service Training Trust
Participatory Ecological Land Use
Management Association for East and
Southern Africa
BirdLife Zimbabwe
Campfire Association
Environment Africa
Institute of Environmental Studies
Wildlife and Environment Zimbabwe
Zambezi Society
Zimbabwe
Environmental
Law
Association
Country
Semiarid
Arid
Hyperarid
Botswana
Botswana
Botswana
Botswana
Ethiopia
Kenya
Kenya
Kenya
Kenya
Malawi
Malawi
Namibia
South Africa
South Africa
South Africa
South Africa
South Africa
South Africa
South Africa
South Africa
Swaziland
Swaziland
Uganda
Uganda
Uganda
Zambia
Zambia
Zimbabwe
Zimbabwe
Zimbabwe
Zimbabwe
Zimbabwe
Zimbabwe
Zimbabwe
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
45
8.4.
Details of National Action Programmes and Priorities on Desertification
Country
Title of NAP
Year
Published
CCD
Ratified
Department / Ministry Responsible
Botswana
Botswana National Report on the
Implementation of the
United
Nations Convention to Combat
Desertification
April 2002
1996
The Ministry of Agriculture
Objectives
Improve coordination in the implementation and monitoring of existing programmes and policies towards eliminating
poverty and combating desertification.
Priority Areas
-
mobilizing resources for the implementation of the National Action Programme.
undertaking research on the processes of drought and desertification and exchange information to ensure
better understanding of those processes.
facilitating capacity building initiatives for stakeholders involved in efforts to combat desertification and
mitigating the effects of drought.
establishing alternative livelihoods projects, particularly for people living in marginal and degraded areas.
promoting awareness and understanding of the causes and effects of desertification and drought.
promoting coordination of interventions and approaches on combating desertification and drought among
stakeholders.
improving drought preparedness at local and national levels.
facilitating effective participation of women, farmers, resource users and representative organizations in policy
planning, decision-making, and implementation of the national action programme and to
controlling land and rangelands degradation
Comoros
No NAP
Djibouti
Programme d’Action National de
Lutte Contre la Desertification
June 2000
June
1997
Ministere de l’Agriculture, de l’Elevage
et de la Mer
Objectives
The NAP is an instrument for the implementation of the UNCCD which is both an environmental convention and also a
tool for fighting poverty.
The NAP therefore has two overall objectives:
-
the fight against desertification
the fight against poverty
Priority Areas
-
-
The need to recognize the achievements through earlier efforts to fight against desertification;
The need to combine the operational actions of the fight against Desertification with income generating
activities to fight against poverty and achieve food and energy security, which could reduce pressure on scarce
natural resources;
The need to strengthen the technical, organizational and operational capacities of state actors and NGOs,
associations and organizations of socio-professional people.
Eritrea
The National Action Programme for
Eritrea to Combat Desertification
and Mitigate the Effects of Drought
(NAP)
2002
1994
Ministry of Agriculture
Objectives
Priority Areas
NAP recognises five important steps to be taken. These steps should be taken sequentially, although in some cases
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
46
two or more steps could be taken simultaneously:
-
Improving knowledge;
Empowering people and institutions;
Addressing the concerns of vulnerable groups (women and pastoralists);
Reducing poverty through income-generation; and
Arresting land degradation and controlling desertification.
Ethiopia
National Action Programme
Combat Desertification
to
November
1998
Environmental Protection Authority
Goal
To increase human well-being in the arid, semi-arid and dry sub-humid areas of the country through the conservation
and sustainable utilization of land and other natural resources.
Objectives
-
Kenya
Enhancement of policies and strategies for the conservation and sustainable utilization of the natural
endowments of the arid, semi-arid and dry sub-humid areas.
Ensuring that tenure and access rights to land and other natural resources in these areas are conducive for
conservation and sustainable management.
Strengthening institutions and organizations for the conservation and sustainable utilization of natural
resources, particularly at the local level and promoting local coping strategies through better understanding.
Maintaining and, where possible, enhancing the state of the resource base in these areas.
Increasing income diversification opportunities within these areas and strengthening linkages of their
economies with non-agricultural sectors of the economy.
Promoting an improved productivity of land through rehabilitation of degraded areas, conservation and
sustainable management of soil and water resources leading to improved conditions for the dryland
communities.
National action programme: a
framework
for
combating
desertification in Kenya in the
context of the united nations
convention to combat desertification
Feb 2002
1997
Ministry of Environment and Natural
Resources
Objectives and Priority Areas
Its objectives are based on the objective of the CCD, which is stated as “to combat desertification and mitigate the
effects of drought in countries experiencing serious drought and /or desertification particularly in Africa”. This is to be
achieved through effective action at all levels, supported by international co-operation arrangements, integrated
approach which is consistent with Agenda 21, and the principles of sustainable development.
Its NAP priority goals aims at: reclaiming severely degraded areas, rehabilitating partly degraded areas, reducing
further degradation of affected areas and conserving areas that are not yet degraded.
The specific objectives include
a) Develop mechanisms for effective implementation of activities identified under NAP process in a flexible and iterative
process.
b) Mainstream the identified NAP priority areas into major national development initiatives, and frameworks.
c) Facilitate active participation of all stakeholders, particularly the local communities in the NAP process.
d) Establish a spirit of partnership among cooperating institutions.
e) Strengthen coordination by putting in place relevant policy, legal and institutional frameworks.
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
47
f) Ensure sufficient and sustainable financial resources and mechanisms.
Lesotho
National Action Programme
natural resource management,
in
January
1999
Septemb
er 1995
National Environment Secretariat
combating desertification and
mitigating the effects of drought
Objective
To structure and guide the process and define the elements of strengthening environmental capacities, enhance public
awareness and mobilize active participation in order to better manage the natural resources, combat land degradation
and desertification and mitigate the effects of drought. The objective also contains elements of strengthening the policy,
legal and institutional foundations for environmental management.
Priority Areas
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Equity, Poverty Alleviation, Solidarity & Participation
Technical Measures to Alleviate the Pressures on the Natural Resources Base
Institutions, Organization and Instrumentation
Knowledge Support, Learning and Communication
Drought Preparedness and Drought Relief Schemes.
The thematic focus of the NAP is desertification control and environmental rehabilitation. The core concern is
conservation and sustainable use of the natural resources, land, water and vegetation
Madagasc
ar
National Action Plan for Combating
Desertification
1997
Ministry of the Environment
Objective
The overall objective of the NAP is to improve the productive capital of water resources, natural resources and land to
allow sustainable development of the country through the participation of everyone in the fight against desertification,
from central government to local populations, via the autonomous provinces, local decentralized collectives, civil
society, NGOs and local advocacy groups.
Specific objectives
-
Gain a better understanding of the phenomenon of drought and desertification in the country to establish a
monitoring and evaluation system as an effective aid to decision making;
Promote sustainable management of natural resources especially forest, water and soil;
Promote the adoption by farmers of crop production that is more environmentally sensitive
Promote use and rational management of rangelands and livestock associated with an appropriate pastoral
water policy
Establish a regulatory and financial framework and incentives for community initiatives and the private sector
for effective implementation of the NAP.
Malawi
National Action Programme for
Malawi for the united nations
convention to combat desertification
June
1996
Ministry of Natural Resources and
Environmental Affairs
Objectives
The Government and communities should ensure that there is a suitable and safe environment for one to live in through
government departments and community based management groups, i.e. Village Natural Resources Management
Committees (VNRMC).
Priority Areas
1. Environment Management
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
48
2.
3.
4.
5.
Food Security
Water Resources Management and Development - To improve supply and sanitation of water
Renewable Energy - To diversify energy sources
Deforestation - to improve land productivity, instill sense of ownership in the people through participatory
management and restore powers of traditional authorities to manage forests.
6. Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Technologies - promote cultural values and heritage
7. Institutional Arrangements - empower local communities
8. Funding Arrangements - To enable programme implementation
Mauritius
No NAP
Mozambiq
ue
Plano de Acção Nacional de
Combate à Seca e à Desertificação
1996
Ministério para a Coordenação da
Acção Ambiental (MICOA)
Objectives
The principal objective is to establish a series of measures in close collaboration with local populations in arid, semi-arid
and dry sub-humid areas, leading to a reduction of the causes of drought and to combat and prevent desertification,
initially in the most critical regions – the south and center of the country – and gradually extend the NAP to target other
areas.
Specific Objectives
1. Raise national awareness in general and in particular affected rural communities, of the causes and effects of
drought and desertification, as well as involve them in the process of protecting the environment;
2. Keep the local and community leaders trained and informed of current legislation and technical standards;
3. Maintain regular collection, processing and dissemination of meteorological, hydrological forecasting, drought,
etc..;
4. Improve management and environmental monitoring/management capacity;
5. Provide or increase income of families living in rural areas;
6. Increase the investment capacity of small entrepreneurs, especially those that can generate jobs;
7. Ensure access of the rural population to safe water and promote the use of improved latrines for the population
living in rural areas;
8. To evaluate in an integrated way the earth's resources for further development of a plan of land use;
9. Ensure the protection and conservation of soil, in the most critical regions/places;
10. Provide increased storage capacity of water resources in the most critical rural areas;
11. Reduce the rampant exploitation of native forests and create alternative means of obtaining woody biomass
and strengthen mechanisms of control of hunting and combat poaching.
12. Facilitate access to conventional energy and promote the use of alternative sources;
13. Educate children and adolescents of school age to the effects of ecological imbalance;
14. Improve health care for populations in rural areas, caused by environmental change;
15. Ensure the implementation of the system of access to the use and benefits of land;
16. Train the different actors for the implementation of the NAP.
Namibia
NAP not available
Namibia’s National Programme to Combat Desertification (NAPCOD) was launched in 1994 prior to the ratification of
the UNCCD in 1997. NAPCOD was an umbrella programme, housed at the Ministries of Environment and Tourism
(MET) and Agriculture, Water and Rural Development (MAWRD), which also served as the National Action Programme
(NAP) for the UNCCD. The main focus of NAPCOD III (1999-2003) was on strengthening capacity and enhancing
drought preparedness amongst Namibia’s communal and commercial farmers, and diverse private and public service
organizations. In addition, phase III focused on the development of monitoring tools and methodologies, both at
national and local levels. In this process, local land and resource managers were fully involved and given skills to
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
49
monitor their own impacts.
Seychelles
No NAP
Somalia
No NAP
South
Africa
Combating Land Degradation to
Alleviate Rural Poverty
2004
1997
Department of Environmental Affairs
and Tourism
Vision
Prosperous and healthy South Africans living in an environment restored and maintained through universal
improvement in land management to its beautiful landscapes and productive ecosystems that sustain livelihoods and
ecosystem services for the benefit of current and future generations.
Goal
To promote sustainable land management throughout South Africa, through achieving the following in three years:
• Effective and efficient new institutional arrangements in the national, provincial, local and community spheres, that
will ensure the coordination and integration of land related policies and policy instruments that are needed for
sustainable rural development
• The establishment of effective and efficient partnerships between government departments, the private sector,
overseas development assistance partners, civil society and the owners and managers of land within a coherent
system for diagnosing and responding to land degradation and drought at national, provincial and local levels
• So that poverty is alleviated, sustainable livelihoods promoted and sustainable land management enhanced.
Sudan National Action Programme
(SNAP)
Sudan
March
2006
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry
National Drought and Desertification
Control Unit (NDDCU)
Priority Areas
1.
2.
3.
4.
Programmes and activities related to institutional building for coordination, monitoring and evaluation.
Programmes and activities related to capacity building and human resources development.
Programmes and activities related to priority programme areas at state levels.
Other priorities related to the implementation of the UNCCD.
5.
Pilot projects.
Swaziland
National Action Programme: details
of a strategy and programmes
aimed at the
implementation of the CCD
Priority Areas
1. Proper Institutional Framework for dealing with Desertification
2. Chieftaincy and Chiefdom Boundary Disputes
3. Awareness and Capacity Building
4. Community participation at grass-root level
5. Reclamation and rehabilitation of degraded lands
6. Sustainable utilisation of land resources
7. Research and Technology Development
8. Proper Siting And Construction Of Infrastructure
9. Indiscriminate Land Clearing and Veld Fires
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
50
10. Improvement of Livestock Management Practices.
11. Drought Mitigation and Poverty Alleviation
12. Land Policy
13. Settlement and Resettlement
14. Population Policy
Tanzania
Proposed
national
programme
to
desertification
action
combat
August
1999
Vice president’s office
Main Objective
The main objective of NAP is to identify the factors contributing to desertification and practical measures necessary to
combat desertification and mitigate the effects of drought. After consultations with stakeholders, the main objective was
to promote proper management and sustainable use of the resources of arid and semi-arid areas to meet both the local
and national needs sustainably
The overall strategy of NAP is based on:
(a) The participation of all stakeholders in the design and implementation of the programme.
(b) The creation of enabling environment at higher levels to facilitate action at national and local levels.
(c) The use of past experiences in combating desertification and/or mitigating the effects of drought in designing and
implementing NAP
After consultations it is proposed that the immediate goals of the NAP include the following;
a) To reduce the destruction of resources in arid and semi-arid areas and to promote their sustainable use for the
wellbeing of the inhabitants of these areas.
b) To strengthen the human resources participating in the NAP
c) To increase public awareness and participation in the NAP
d) To establish and support effective administrative structures for the implementation of the NAP
e) To introduce and/or improve intersectoral planning, management and monitoring approaches
f) To establish partnership with stakeholders and other partners in development and management of drylands
g) To identify and mobilize financial resources for the implementation of the NAP process.
Priority Areas
1. Areas that are not degraded or slightly degraded
2. Areas moderately degraded
3. Areas seriously degraded
Uganda
Framework For The National Action
Programme
To
Combat
Desertification And Drought In
Uganda
October
1999
1994 and
1997
Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry
and Fisheries,
Priority Areas
1. Information generation, exchange and dissemination
2. Awareness raising & training
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
51
3. Water development, Management and Conservation
4. Afforestation and Agro-forestry Promoting the development and use of affordable and environment friendly
Energy Sources
5. Institutional strengthening to support implementation of NAP
6. Support to Local Level Community Initiatives
7. Review of laws and policies relevant to combating desertification
8. Promotion of appropriate technology
Zambia national action programme
for combating
Zambia
February
2002
Septemb
er 1996
Ministry of Tourism, Environment and
Natural Resources
desertification & mitigating serious
effects of drought in the context of
the united nations convention to
combat desertification
Programme Vision
To restore land productivity by using sustainable means of conserving it in order to reduce poverty and foster
sustainable development
Programme Purpose
The purpose of NAP is to identify the factors contributing to desertification and put in place practical measures
necessary to combat desertification and mitigate the effects of drought.
Objectives
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Reduce the destruction of land resources in affected areas
Promote sustainable use of land resources
Increase public awareness and information dissemination on matters of land degradation
Provide a suitable policy and legislative framework for the implementation of NAP
Establish and support effective administrative and co-ordination of the NAP
Introduce and improve on assessments, planning and monitoring systems for the effective management of
NAP, and
7. Establish partnerships with multi-lateral and bilateral institutions in the management of arid areas.
Priority Areas
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Early Warning and Preparedness
Forestry, Ecosystems and Species Conservation
Water Catchment and Energy Conservation
Collaboration and Networking
Capacity Building of Programme Co-ordination Unit and Other Focal Persons
Extension, Public Awareness, and Information Dissemination
Land Degradation Assessments, Monitoring and Reporting
Easy to use environmentally friendly technologies including Indigenous Knowledge
Livelihood Improvement
Food Self Sufficiency and Food Security
Human Settlement Management, and
12. Legal and Policy Reviews
Zimbabwe
The National Action Programme
(NAP) In the Context of the UNCCD
in Zimbabwe
Ministry of mines,
tourism
environment and
Priority Areas
1. Water Resource Provision
2. Energy Provision
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
52
3. Provision of Alternative Livelihoods
4. Education, Public Awareness and Capacity Building
5. Land Rehabilitation
6. Environmental Information System for the NAP
IUCN-ESARO Drylands Situation Analysis. Draft 1: 19/04/2010. Comments to: [email protected]
53