Final report: Biosphere reserves Managers’ Workshop in the preparation of the Management Manual for UNESCO biosphere reserves in Africa 29 – 31 July 2014, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania Main results: For 3 days, 32 experts from 8 countries from Africa and Germany discussed the draft version of the Management Manual for UNESCO biosphere reserves in Africa. The project of elaborating this Manual is supported by the German government in response to an inquiry and a decision of the AfriMAB Bureau. The Manual will be applicable to all of Africa, including the region addressed by ArabMAB. The project had received critical input from two previous workshops – on the conception of the manual in Mombasa, Kenya, in February 2013; as well as a first revision workshop in May 2014 in Accra, Ghana. Three authors from Egypt, Ghana and Benin had elaborated a first draft of about 150 pages over the course of one year until April 2014 and revised after the Accra workshop. Among the participants of the Dar es Salaam workshop were the managers of all UNESCO biosphere reserves in Tanzania, Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda, Sudan, and Nigeria. In three full-day sessions, the participants discussed almost all sections of the draft Management Manual. Several working group sessions had the added effect of facilitating the exchange of experience among the participants, and thus contributing to improving management effectiveness in African biosphere reserves. In all, the participants agreed that the draft Management Manual addresses in a helpful manner most issues of daily relevance of managers, that several helpful additions still need to be made and that the workshop overall contributed to strengthening the MAB programme in Africa. After extensive discussions, the participants proposed the following additions, among many other items: how to reduce human-wildlife conflicts and how to compensate unavoidable losses, how to better differentiate between direct and indirect benefit-sharing, how to ensure non-donor funding, how to address invasive species, reasons for conserving nature, rezonations due to climate change, the approval process of a Management Plan and whether it should or shouldn’t be an integrated plan, how to address differing zonations due to different protected area designations, as well as monitoring and evaluation as a separate sub-section of the Manual. Also, it was agreed to clarify some sections in the Manual, e.g. the section on Marine and Island BRs and Islands which cover both fresh and marine water. The annex should contain a glossary, the key messages as well as the participants’ lists of the four workshops. As in the previous workshop in Accra, it was again suggested Page 1 of 6 to produce a very short “field version” of the Manual. More case studies from Africa would be needed. Participants agreed to share more case studies and examples of management plans. Detailed report of the workshop: The workshop was opened on Tuesday 29 July 2014 by Dr Vedast Makota, Director of Environmental Information, Communication & Outreach of the National Environment Management Council (NEMC) of Tanzania, and Chairman of the MAB National Committee; followed by keynote speakers H.E. Mr Egon Kochanke, Ambassador of Germany to Tanzania; and Mr Florian Carius of the German Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN). In his opening remarks, Dr Makota laid out the goals of the workshop and the Management Manual - providing managers of UNESCO biosphere reserves in Africa with a toolkit addressing day-to-day challenges, with a special emphasis on participatory approaches and methods, e.g. when drafting a management plan together with stakeholders and the local population, or when periodically reviewing the biosphere reserve. In his speech, he also mentioned challenges to sustainable BR management and he pointed out that the development of the Manual is coming at the right time. Ambassador Kochanke emphasized the uniqueness of UNESCO biosphere reserve and their ideal suitability as an instrument for German development cooperation, as they address, inter alia, both conservation and sustainable development, climate change adaptation, the empowerment of local communities, the inclusion of traditional and scientific knowledge and the exchange of experiences in the World Network. An example is the partnership with the Tanzanian government to preserve Serengeti and Selous, for altogether more than 30 million Euro since 2011. Mr Carius paid special gratitude to the National Commissions for UNESCO from Tanzania and Germany, NEMC and the Tanzanian MAB National Committee, to AfriMAB, ArabMAB and UNESCO as well as, of course, to the authors and workshop facilitators. He reiterated the long-standing cooperation of Tanzania and Germany on conservation in biosphere reserves, starting from the largest Tanzanian tree nursery, established in 1902, through the commitment to preserving the Serengeti since the 1950’s, up until a BfN workshop on a tourism vision for the Serengeti in 2008. He mentioned the recent references to UNESCO biosphere reserves in the 5th IPCC report and the German strategic guidelines for cooperating with Africa. Mr Joel Samuel of the Tanzania National Commission for UNESCO was designated as a moderator of the workshop, in cooperation with Dr Lutz Möller of the German Commission for UNESCO. Dr Thomas Schaaf, the former global MAB Secretary, and Ms Sheila Page 2 of 6 Ashong, currently AfriMAB Secretary and one of the authors of the Manual, were welcomed as workshop facilitators. On the first day, Dr Möller presented the Manual and its objective and laid down the goals of the Dar es Salaam workshop. Dr Schaaf in his overview presented biosphere reserves as the critical part of the UNESCO MAB programme. As “food for thought”, the participants discussed whether a certain tourism development and a certain hydropower project would be sustainable. In a first break-out session, four working groups discussed the notion of sustainable development as well as concrete challenges in African biosphere reserves. Among the most frequently mentioned challenges were human population growth, poverty, local conflicts (including human-wildlife conflicts, encroachment and poaching), climate change, inadequate participation and depletion of resources. In this workshop, participants did not present their individual biosphere reserves through PowerPoint slides (with the exception of a short overview of the Malindi-Watamu biosphere reserve). Instead, the participants were asked to present their biosphere reserves in groups of two, using interview questions. The biosphere reserves were then presented by the “interviewer”. The moderator encouraged participants to use the interview questions to improve upon communication and education, including through brochures, flyers and website. Ms Ashong continued to present content of the draft Manual, focusing on the role of communities and stakeholders, including vulnerable groups. Her elaborate presentation started by photographs of actual stakeholders in Ghanaian biosphere reserves. She also discussed in detail ongoing processes of stakeholder involvement in the prospective Lake Bosumtwe biosphere reserve in Ghana. A plenary SWOT analysis ensued on reasons why biosphere reserves in practice are - or are not - good at realizing participation. On the second day, Ms Amina Kibola of NEMC introduced the three Tanzanian biosphere reserves and the way that the Tanzanian MAB National Committee is organized. Ms Ashong presented the authors’ work on conflict management. In a second break-out session, four working groups discussed experiences with conflict management. Participants enumerated a long list of conflicts of high relevance to African biosphere reserves including crop raiding by wildlife, overly grazing, logging and poaching, conflicts over resources such as water, inadequate benefit-sharing, competing land uses incl. land tenure and migratory routes, encroachment and mining. As ways out, participants identified forming resource user groups, clearer zonation, formulation and implementation of land use plans and management plans, harmonization of policies, compensation schemes, diversification of income opportunities, education and awareness raising, better law enforcement including against corruption, setting up local collaborative platforms for improving dialogue and conflict resolution. Dr Schaaf presented the structural elements of a biosphere reserve, i.e. the three functions, the three zones and the management plan. He emphasized that MAB is first of all about education and changing mindsets and mentioned a project in a biosphere reserve in Burkina Faso in reaching Page 3 of 6 parents through their children. He also introduced practical approaches to zonation as from the Spanish El Hierro biosphere reserve. Whether mining can be admissible is often not a clear yes/no question. He reiterated that elaborating good management approaches including through nomination, zonation and management plans requires time in each case. It was also mentioned that biosphere reserves can further differentiate the zonation model. The Jordanian Dana biosphere reserve was introduced as an interesting case study to bring tourism income to local communities. Mr Schaaf also discussed under which conditions tourists should be allowed to visit core areas – and that the MAB ICC today is very reluctant to designate biosphere reserves with population living in the core area. Another issue is that staff in charge of protected areas typically is not mandated to be in charge of the transition area – such mandate must be accepted by communities. UNESCO cannot publish freely examples of management plans, since several governments are concerned about the disclosure of maps with sensitive information. In the subsequent presentation, Ms Ashong presented how topics such as “the role of knowledge”, climate change, and adaptive management are reflected in the Manual. She referred to examples from Ghana as well such as the inclusion of a remote sensing expert into the MAB National Committee through whom it has access to time series of satellite-taken land-use maps, for example. Using maps also greatly improves working with communities. She also mentioned that knowledge is considered as important in all religions. She closed in re-emphasizing that good research can be an important catalyst to improve management. The ensuing discussion revealed that UNESCO cannot have one calendar for all periodic reviews because of the workload related to more than 600 biosphere reserves; UNESCO can also exert only moral, not legal pressure in cases where biosphere reserves are threatened e.g. by fossil fuel extraction. Experience has shown that biosphere reserves larger than 100.000 square kilometers are quite impossible to manage and that some dozen hectares are clearly too small. The final day was kicked off by a presentation of Mr Carius on the occasion of World Rangers’ Day. Participants recalled that some 50.000 elephants are poached in Africa each year and that the ivory price is multiplying quickly. More than 85 rangers have died in 2013. A minute of silence ensued. Dr Schaaf presented how legal and administrative frameworks of biosphere reserves are reflected in the Manual. He touched upon possible mechanisms for the management board, for the advisory board and the secretariat staff. He mentioned examples for inadequate office facilities, e.g. in a West African biosphere reserve. He also discussed what national and international policy instruments could be leveraged for lobbying for the biosphere reserve; in particular he presented the biosphere reserve and the World Heritage designation as mutually enforcing. A plenary discussion ensued about “two models” of biosphere reserve management, the “NGO model” and the “authority model”. The discussion showed that almost all countries present in the workshop (with the exception of Ethiopia) were working with the “authority model” although with different schemes on how to include the communities. There was broad agreement for increasing the stakeholder participation although it was not in each case clear how to do it. The Kenyan biosphere reserves use a particular form of co-management. Participants agreed that the rate of rotation of employed staff must be reduced. Page 4 of 6 The final break-out session into working groups was devoted to management plans. The main messages were that they can also serve as a code of conduct and reduce conflict; allocating as well clear responsibilities. Most biosphere reserves have such a plan, but not all. Too many plans only address the core area, but they should really address all zones, incl. the buffer zone and the transition area. The Manual should put a stronger emphasis on management and evaluation of management plans and should also stipulate a budget for implementation. The formulation of such management plans should be self-financed as much as possible, co-funding from government and (international) NGOs could be recommended. Communities need to participate much more effectively in the formulation. Dr Schaaf continued with a presentation on do’s and don’ts of participation. Mr Möller and Mr Schaaf presented the MAB ICC’s “exit strategy” and which biosphere reserves might be particularly under the spotlight. Mr Carius presented an overview of options for GermanAfrican cooperation as regards biosphere reserves. A final interactive session identified examples of participation success stories. In a wrap-up session, the participants discussed once more each section of the Manual one by one and what should be improved as regards each individual section. Participants also made overarching recommendations in order to make the Manual even more user-friendly. In the closing ceremony, Mr Samuel, on behalf of the Secretary-General of the Tanzanian National Commission for UNESCO, as well as Mr Carius, thanked all participants for their very strong commitment and intensive exchange of experiences, as well as the authors, facilitators and organizers. They urged all participants to contribute to the online review of the Manual. The German sponsors, AfriMAB and NEMC and the two National Commissions for UNESCO from Germany and Tanzania were acknowledged once more. Thereafter, Ms. Yustina Kiwango delivered vote of thanks on behalf of all invited BR Managers. More than 80 percent of the participants took part in the evaluation of the workshop. They were anonymously asked to rate several statements on a scale of “I strongly agree” up to “I strongly disagree”. A clear majority “strongly agreed” that they expect the Management Manual to be a very useful tool and that the workshop inspired active discussion. Also, all but one “strongly agreed” that they were satisfied with having participated. Especially strong support was given to the conduct of the workshop as leading to true dialogue, to time management as well as to the relevance of presentations. The feedback on all other questions was almost as good; in terms of organization, the workshop was on average rated very strongly “better than expected”. For future workshops, it was suggested to always organize an excursion. List of participants (in alphabetical order): Name Institution Mr Abadir Abagisa ABAJOBIR Kafa Biosphere Reserve, Ethiopia Mr Olukayode AKINYEMI Omo Biosphere Reserve, Nigeria Ms Sheila ASHONG Author of the Management Manual, E.P.A. Ghana Page 5 of 6 Dr Vedast Makota Director of Environmental Information, Communication & Outreach, NEMC Mr Dereje Jenbere BEYENE Yayu Biosphere Reserve, Ethiopia Dr Kamukasa Adonia BINTOORA Mount Elgon Biosphere Reserve, Uganda Mr Ali Shebwana BWANA Kiunga Biosphere Reserve, Kenya Mr Florian CARIUS Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN), Germany Mr Adisalem DAKITO Sheka Biosphere Reserve, Ethiopia Mr Nelson GUMA Queen Elizabeth Biosphere Reserve, Uganda Mr Abdalla Khalifa Haroun ISHAG Dinder Biosphere Reserve, Sudan Mr Justin Kitsao KENGA Malindi-Watamu Biosphere Reserve, Kenya Ms Amina KIBOLA National Environment Management Council, Tanzania Ms Mwanaidi KIJAZI East Usambara Biosphere Reserve, Tanzania Ms Yustina KIWANGWA Lake Manyara Biosphere Reserve, Tanzania H.E. Mr Egon KOCHANKE German Ambassador to Tanzania Mr Noman Abdl Kirrem KPOORE Radom Biosphere Reserve, Sudan Mr Janvier KWIZERA Volcans Biosphere Reserve, Rwanda Mr Titus LEOKOE Mount Kulal Biosphere Reserve, Kenya Mr Kwilasa LUSHANGA National Environment Management Council, Tanzania Ms Claudia MARGGRAF German Commission for UNESCO Mr Ben Naibei MASIBO Mount Elgon Biosphere Reserve, Kenya Dr Lutz MOELLER German Commission for UNESCO Mr Izumbe MSINDAI Ngorongoro-Serengeti Biosphere Reserve, Tanzania Ms Rose Sallema MTUI MAB Focal Point, Tanzania Mr Julius Oldapash MUNKE Amboseli Biosphere Reserve, Kenya Mr Edward Waweru MUTITU Mount Kenya Biosphere Reserve, Kenya Mr Joshua MWAMKUNDA Ngorongoro-Serengeti Biosphere Reserve, Tanzania Ms Angela MWATUJOBE National Environment Management Council, Tanzania Mr Ali A. MWINYI Jozani Chwaka Bay National Park (prospective BR), Tanzania Mr Domician NJAU Lake Manyara Biosphere Reserve, Tanzania Ms Beatrice Yawingi NTAMBI Saadani National Park (prospective BR), Tanzania Mr Joel SAMUEL National Commission for UNESCO, Tanzania Dr Thomas SCHAAF Terra-Sana environmental consulting, Germany Page 6 of 6
© Copyright 2024