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