DOCSLIB.ORG

Tanzania Environmental Threats and Opportunities Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Tanzania Environmental Threats and Opportunities Assessment TANZANIA ENVIRONMENTAL THREATS AND OPPORTUNITIES ASSESSMENT November 2012 This Report was produced for review by the United States Agency for international Development (USAID). It was prepared by the Environmental Threats and Opportunities Assessment Team under contract to the US Department of Agriculture Forest Service – International Programs. Cover photo: Rice fields in Mkula Village, Kilombero Valley, Morogoro Region. Water from the Udzungwa Mountains National Park is used by the village to irrigate two crops of rice per year. Photo by B. Byers, June 2012. TANZANIA ENVIRONMENTAL THREATS AND OPPORTUNITIES ASSESSMENT November 2012 AUTHORITY Prepared for USAID-Tanzania. This Tanzania Environmental Threats and Opportunities Assessment is made possible by the support of the American People through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) under the terms of a Participating Agency Partnership Agreement (PAPA) No. AEG-T- 00-07-00003-00 between USAID and the USDA Forest Service International Programs. Funds were provided by USAID/Tanzania and facilitated by the USAID Bureau for Africa, Office of Sustainable Development, Economic Growth, Environment and Agriculture Division (AFR/SD/EGEA) under the Biodiversity Analysis and Technical Support (BATS) program. The contents of this report are the sole responsibility of the ETOA Team and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government (USG). PREPARED BY ETOA Team: Bruce Byers (Team Leader), Zakiya Aloyce, Pantaleo Munishi, and Charles Rhoades. TABLE OF CONTENTS Abbreviations and Acronyms ..................................................................................................................... i Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................................................... v Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................... 1 1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 9 1.1 Purpose .......................................................................................................................................... 9 1.2 Methods....................................................................................................................................... 10 2.0 State of the Environment ................................................................................................. 12 2.1 Biophysical Setting ..................................................................................................................... 12 2.2 Ecosystems .................................................................................................................................. 13 2.3 Species ........................................................................................................................................ 22 2.4 Genetic Diversity ........................................................................................................................ 23 2.5 Agricultural Biodiversity ............................................................................................................ 24 2.6 Protected Areas and Conservation Priorities............................................................................... 25 3.0 Values and Benefits of Biodiversity ................................................................................ 29 3.1 Ecosystem Products .................................................................................................................... 29 3.2 Ecosystem Services ..................................................................................................................... 31 3.3 Non-Material Benefits of Ecosystems ........................................................................................ 32 4.0 Threats and Causes .......................................................................................................... 35 4.1 Habitat Loss and Degradation ..................................................................................................... 35 4.2 Overexploitation of High-Value Species .................................................................................... 41 4.3 Invasive Species .......................................................................................................................... 44 4.4 Pollution ...................................................................................................................................... 45 4.5 Climate Change ........................................................................................................................... 46 5.0 Laws, Policies, and Government Institutions ................................................................. 48 5.1 Laws and Policies ....................................................................................................................... 48 5.2 Institutions................................................................................................................................... 51 5.3 Land Tenure ................................................................................................................................ 56 5.4 Treaties ........................................................................................................................................ 56 5.5 Institutional Issues ...................................................................................................................... 57 6.0 NGO and Donor Programs and Activities ..................................................................... 59 6.1 Non-Governmental Organizations .............................................................................................. 59 6.2 Donors ......................................................................................................................................... 59 7.0 Actions Needed to Conserve Biodiversity, Forests, and Environment ........................ 60 7.1 Actions Needed as Identified by the Government of Tanzania .................................................. 60 7.2 Actions Needed According to Key Informants ........................................................................... 62 8.0 Contribution of Proposed USAID-Tanzania Programs ................................................ 67 8.1 USAID Context ........................................................................................................................... 67 8.2 Overview of USAID-Tanzania Programs ................................................................................... 69 8.3 Extent to Which USAID’s Proposed Programs Could Contribute to Actions Needed ............... 72 9.0 Recommendations............................................................................................................. 76 Annex A: References and Websites Consulted ............................................................................... 86 Annex B: ETOA Statement Of Work (SOW) ................................................................................. 93 Annex C: Biographical Sketches of the ETOA Team ..................................................................... 98 Annex D: Persons Contacted, Their Institutional Affiliation, and Contact Information ......... 100 Annex E: Summary of NGO Programs ......................................................................................... 108 Annex F: Summary of Donor Programs ....................................................................................... 111 Annex G: Actions Needed According to Key Informants ............................................................ 114 Annex H: Actions Needed Grouped by Theme ............................................................................. 120 Annex I: Zanzibar Laws, Policies, and Government Institutions .............................................. 124 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ABCG Africa Biodiversity Collaborative Group ADB African Development Bank ASDP Agricultural Sector Development Project AWF African Wildlife Foundation BMU Beach Management Units BTC Belgium Technical Cooperation CBD Convention on Biological Diversity CBNRM Community-Based Natural Resources Management CDCS Country Development Cooperation Strategy CIA Central Intelligence Agency CFR Code of Federal Regulations CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species COTS Crown-of-Thorns Starfish CSO Civil Society Organizations DDT Dichloro-Diphenyl-Trichloroethane DRG Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone EIA Environmental Impact Assessment ETOA Environmental Threats and Opportunities Assessment EU European Union FAA Foreign Assistance Act FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations FTF Feed the Future GDP Gross Domestic Product GIZ German Agency for International Cooperation GOT Government of Tanzania IGF Intergovernmental Forum on Mining, Minerals, and Metals IOTC Indian Ocean Tuna Commission IRA Institute for Resource Assessment IRS Indoor Residual Spraying IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature Tanzania Environmental Threats and Opportunities Assessment i iWASH Integrated Water, Sanitation¸ and Hygiene JECA Jozani Environmental Conservation Association JGI Jane Goodall Institute LEAT Lawyers' Environmental Action Team MACEMP Marine and Coastal
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Selous Game Reserve Tanzania
    SELOUS GAME RESERVE TANZANIA Selous contains a third of the wildlife estate of Tanzania. Large numbers of elephants, buffaloes, giraffes, hippopotamuses, ungulates and crocodiles live in this immense sanctuary which measures almost 50,000 square kilometres and is relatively undisturbed by humans. The Reserve has a wide variety of vegetation zones, from forests and dense thickets to open wooded grasslands and riverine swamps. COUNTRY Tanzania NAME Selous Game Reserve NATURAL WORLD HERITAGE SITE 1982: Inscribed on the World Heritage List under Natural Criteria ix and x. STATEMENT OF OUTSTANDING UNIVERSAL VALUE The UNESCO World Heritage Committee issued the following Statement of Outstanding Universal Value at the time of inscription: Brief Synthesis The Selous Game Reserve, covering 50,000 square kilometres, is amongst the largest protected areas in Africa and is relatively undisturbed by human impact. The property harbours one of the most significant concentrations of elephant, black rhinoceros, cheetah, giraffe, hippopotamus and crocodile, amongst many other species. The reserve also has an exceptionally high variety of habitats including Miombo woodlands, open grasslands, riverine forests and swamps, making it a valuable laboratory for on-going ecological and biological processes. Criterion (ix): The Selous Game Reserve is one of the largest remaining wilderness areas in Africa, with relatively undisturbed ecological and biological processes, including a diverse range of wildlife with significant predator/prey relationships. The property contains a great diversity of vegetation types, including rocky acacia-clad hills, gallery and ground water forests, swamps and lowland rain forest. The dominant vegetation of the reserve is deciduous Miombo woodlands and the property constitutes a globally important example of this vegetation type.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Malawi Destination Guide
    Lake Malawi Destination Guide Overview of Lake Malawi Occupying a fifth of the country, Lake Malawi is the third largest lake in Africa and home to more fish species than any other lake in the world. Also known as Lake Nyasa, it is often referred to as 'the calendar lake' because it is 365 miles (590km) long and 52 miles (85km) wide. Situated between Malawi, Mozambique and Tanzania, this African Great Lake is about 40,000 years old, a product of the Great Rift Valley fault line. There are fishing villages to be found along the lakeshore where residents catch a range of local fish including chambo, kampango (catfish), lake salmon and tiger fish. The export of fish from the lake contributes significantly to the country's economy, and the delicious chambo, similar to bream, is served in most Malawian eateries. Visitors to Lake Malawi can see colourful mbuna fish in the water, while there are also occasional sightings of crocodiles, hippos, monkeys and African fish eagles along the shore. The nearby Eastern Miombo woodlands are home to African wild dogs. Swimming, snorkelling and diving are popular activities in the tropical waters of the lake, and many visitors also enjoy waterskiing, sailing and fishing. There are many options available for holiday accommodation at the lake, including resorts, guesthouses and caravan or camping parks. All budgets are catered for, with luxury lodges attracting the glamorous and humble campsites hosting families and backpackers. Cape Maclear is a well-developed lakeside town, and nearby Monkey Bay is a great holiday resort area. Club Makokola, near Mangochi, is also a popular resort.
    [Show full text]
  • Combining Airborne Laser Scanning and Landsat Data for Statistical
    Egberth et al. Carbon Balance Manage (2017) 12:8 DOI 10.1186/s13021-017-0076-y RESEARCH Open Access Combining airborne laser scanning and Landsat data for statistical modeling of soil carbon and tree biomass in Tanzanian Miombo woodlands Mikael Egberth1* , Gert Nyberg2,6, Erik Næsset3, Terje Gobakken3, Ernest Mauya3, Rogers Malimbwi4, Josiah Katani4, Nurudin Chamuya5, George Bulenga4 and Håkan Olsson1 Abstract Background: Soil carbon and biomass depletion can be used to identify and quantify degraded soils, and by using remote sensing, there is potential to map soil conditions over large areas. Landsat 8 Operational Land Imager satel- lite data and airborne laser scanning data were evaluated separately and in combination for modeling soil organic carbon, above ground tree biomass and below ground tree biomass. The test site is situated in the Liwale district in southeastern Tanzania and is dominated by Miombo woodlands. Tree data from 15 m radius feld-surveyed plots and samples of soil carbon down to a depth of 30 cm were used as reference data for tree biomass and soil carbon estimations. Results: Cross-validated plot level error (RMSE) for predicting soil organic carbon was 28% using only Landsat 8, 26% using laser only, and 23% for the combination of the two. The plot level error for above ground tree biomass was 66% when using only Landsat 8, 50% for laser and 49% for the combination of Landsat 8 and laser data. Results for below ground tree biomass were similar to above ground biomass. Additionally it was found that an early dry season satellite image was preferable for modelling biomass while images from later in the dry season were better for modelling soil carbon.
    [Show full text]
  • A Study on the Plant Communities in the Vegetation of Eastern Miombo Woodlands Eco-Region in Tanzania
    International Scholars Journals African Journal of Ecology and Ecosystems ISSN: 9428-167X Vol. 4 (2), pp. 242-250, February, 2017. Available online at www.internationalscholarsjournals.org © International Scholars Journals Author(s) retain the copyright of this article. Full Length Research Paper A study on the plant communities in the vegetation of eastern Miombo woodlands eco-region in Tanzania 1 1 2 Mbwana F. Patrick *, Mizengo Ali Pinda and Steven Fredrick Werema 1 Department of Forest Biology, Sokoine University of Agriculture, P.O. Box 3010, Morogoro, Tanzania. 2 Department of Wildlife Management, Sokoine University of Agriculture, P.O. Box 3010, Morogoro, Tanzania. Accepted 15 January, 2017 This study assessed the plant communities and species associations in the eastern Miombo woodlands eco- region of the Lake Rukwa basin southern Tanzania. Information was collected from 288 temporary sample plots in 32 sampling sites established randomly in the area and covering as much variation in the landscape as possible. Detailed analysis of the vegetation identified six tree communities of conservation importance, which included Brachystegia boehmii-Pericopsis angolensis woodland, Julbernardia globiflora woodland, Combretum molle-Sclerocarya birrea-Combretum zeyherii-Acacia seyal var fistula woodland, Bridelia cathartica-Diospyros mespiliformis woodland, Brachystegia bussei-Pterocarpus tinctorius woodland and Brachystegia microphylla-Isoberlinia tomentosa-Hymenocardia acida- Syzygium owariense woodland. Majority of the described plant communities are typical of Miombo ecosystems dominated by trees belonging mainly to the genera Brachystegia and Julbernardia. A mixture of non-legume species but typical of the Miombo ecosystem, however, dominates two out of six described plant communities. Apparently, there is high variability of plant communities in the Miombo ecosystem of southern Tanzania, an indication of the diverse nature of the Miombo ecosystem, also, an implication of high species diversity.
    [Show full text]
  • Southern Africa
    #1 #1 Southern Africa | 11 #1 Table of contents >0 _ Executive Summary 20 >1 _ Special features of the Southern African region 24 1.1 Conservation features of Southern Africa 24 1.2 Status of wildlife in Southern Africa 26 1.2.1 Large mammals 26 1.2.2 Forests and woodlands 28 1.2.2.1 Overview 28 1.2.2.2 Miombo 30 1.2.3 Wetlands and rivers 33 1.2.3.1 Flooded grasslands 33 1.2.3.2 Rivers 35 >2 _ Conservation issues and challenges 38 2.1 Demand for land 38 2.1.1 Subsistence farming 38 2.1.2 Commercial farming 38 2.2 Alienation of the majority population 38 2.3 Fences and habitat fragmentation 40 2.4 Demand for ivory 42 2.5 Demand for rhino horn 42 2.6 Drivers of wildlife decline 45 2.7 Conservation of bird and mammal migrations 47 2.7.1 Mammals 47 2.7.2 Birds 48 >3 _ Ongoing conservation efforts 52 3.1 Review of strategic approaches to wildlife conservation 52 3.1.1 National parks 52 3.1.2 Biodiversity hotspots 54 3.1.3 Ecoregions and the biogeographic approach 54 3.1.4 Water basins 57 3.1.5 Conservation for development 57 3.1.6 Biosphere reserves 58 3.1.7 Transfrontier conservation 59 3.2 Conservation of elephants and rhinos 59 3.2.1 Elephant 59 3.2.2 Rhino 60 3.2.2.1 Criminal investigation 60 3.2.2.2 Consumptive use 61 3.2.2.3 Investment in protected areas 62 3.3 Pioneers of conservation 63 12 | LARGER THAN ELEPHANTS | Inputs for an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa – Regional Analysis – Southern Africa #1 >4 _ Lessons learned and promising approaches 66 4.1 Lessons learned 66 4.1.1 Relating to protected areas 66
    [Show full text]
  • Tropical Grasslands--Trends, Perspectives and Future Prospects
    University of Kentucky UKnowledge International Grassland Congress Proceedings XXIII International Grassland Congress Tropical Grasslands--Trends, Perspectives and Future Prospects Panjab Singh FAARD Foundation, India Follow this and additional works at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/igc Part of the Plant Sciences Commons, and the Soil Science Commons This document is available at https://uknowledge.uky.edu/igc/23/plenary/8 The XXIII International Grassland Congress (Sustainable use of Grassland Resources for Forage Production, Biodiversity and Environmental Protection) took place in New Delhi, India from November 20 through November 24, 2015. Proceedings Editors: M. M. Roy, D. R. Malaviya, V. K. Yadav, Tejveer Singh, R. P. Sah, D. Vijay, and A. Radhakrishna Published by Range Management Society of India This Event is brought to you for free and open access by the Plant and Soil Sciences at UKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in International Grassland Congress Proceedings by an authorized administrator of UKnowledge. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Plenary Lecture 7 Tropical grasslands –trends, perspectives and future prospects Panjab Singh President, FAARD Foundation, Varanasi and Ex Secretary, DARE and DG, ICAR, New Delhi, India E-mail : [email protected] Grasslands are the area covered by vegetation accounts for 50–80 percent of GDP (World Bank, 2007). dominated by grasses, with little or no tree cover. Central and South America provide 39 percent of the UNESCO defined grassland as “land covered with world’s meat production from grassland-based herbaceous plants with less than 10 percent tree and systems, and sub-Saharan Africa holds a 12.5 percent shrub cover” and wooded grassland as 10-40 percent share.
    [Show full text]
  • A Spatial Analysis Approach to the Global Delineation of Dryland Areas of Relevance to the CBD Programme of Work on Dry and Subhumid Lands
    A spatial analysis approach to the global delineation of dryland areas of relevance to the CBD Programme of Work on Dry and Subhumid Lands Prepared by Levke Sörensen at the UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre Cambridge, UK January 2007 This report was prepared at the United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC). The lead author is Levke Sörensen, scholar of the Carlo Schmid Programme of the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD). Acknowledgements This report benefited from major support from Peter Herkenrath, Lera Miles and Corinna Ravilious. UNEP-WCMC is also grateful for the contributions of and discussions with Jaime Webbe, Programme Officer, Dry and Subhumid Lands, at the CBD Secretariat. Disclaimer The contents of the map presented here do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of UNEP-WCMC or contributory organizations. The designations employed and the presentations do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNEP-WCMC or contributory organizations concerning the legal status of any country, territory or area or its authority, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. 3 Table of contents Acknowledgements............................................................................................3 Disclaimer ...........................................................................................................3 List of tables, annexes and maps .....................................................................5 Abbreviations
    [Show full text]
  • The World Heritage Convention and the Protection of Biodiversity Hotspots
    The World Heritage Convention and the Protection of Biodiversity Hotspots The Netherlands, Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality, Department of Knowledge, 2007 Foreword The Dutch Government fully supports the aims of the Convention on Biodiversity hotspots can be used as indications for the identification of Biological Diversity and the Programme of Protected Areas under the potential WHC-sites under criterion X. The natural sites, thus selected for the Convention of Biological Diversity, aiming at the protection of nature in the World Heritage List, are among the most important sites for the conservation world, counting up to a possible 10% of the worlds’ land-area’s. of biodiversity in the world. The World Heritage Convention (UNESCO) is a powerful instrument for the The aims of the Dutch Government for international nature protection as a protection of nature, with strong relations to the national protective contribution to the realisation of the aims of the Convention on Biological instruments. In a positive contrast with other global conventions, the World Diversity (CBD) are written down in the “International Policy Programme Heritage Convention provides a strong legally binding instrument for the Biodiversity 2002-2006”, and its’ follow up: the “International Policy protection of natural sites all over the world. From the analysis in this book Programme Biodiversity 2007-2011”. In these policy programmes, the it becomes clear that the protection regime of the WHC provides very good protection of (semi-)natural sites within systems of protected area’s is possibilities to protect global biodiversity. Important and positive aspects of identified as a very high priority.
    [Show full text]
  • Fire Management Assessment of Eastern Province, Zambia
    Technical Report Fire Management Assessment of Eastern Province, Zambia January 2015 Citation: Hollingsworth, L.T., D. Johnson, G. Sikaundi, S. Siame. 2015. Fire management assessment of Eastern Province, Zambia. Washington, D.C.: USDA Forest Service, International Programs. Cover Photo: Recently burned indigenous forest near Msipazi in Chipata District, Eastern Province. Photo by D. Johnson Acknowledgements The assessment team would like to acknowledge the following organizations and individuals: Catherine Tembo (USAID, based in Lusaka) who travelled with us and attended many of the community meetings, Chief Nyalugwe, Smart Lungu, George Phiri, Haggai Banda, Frackson Phiri, Alfonso Phiri, Benson Banda, Febiano Banda, Marianna Banda, Ivis Banda, Zacharia Luhanga, Fidelis Chileshe Musonda, Alikangelo Zulu, Friday Jere, Ignatio Banda, Raphael Banda, Michael Mbewe, Peter Zulu, Rodgers Moyo, Lyson Zulu, Brother Alfonso Zulu, David Likokelo, John Phiri, Janet Palukani, Michael Pwete (House of Chiefs), Richard Mfumu Lungu (Ministry of Lands, Natural Resources, and Environmental Protection), Moses Kaumba (Ministry of Lands, Natural Resources, and Environmental Protection), Nkumbu Siame (Ministry of Local Government and Housing), Peter Ngoma (Ministry of Local Government and Housing), Manda Daka (Ministry of Local Government and Housing), Raymond Ngulube (Zambia Forestry Department, FD), Lottie Katebe (FD), Lydia Luatula (FD), Zebron Chitotobwe (FD), Gift Nyawali (FD), Charles Banda Mchotsa (FD), Emma Sakala (FD), Christopher Gondwe (FD), Amikena
    [Show full text]
  • A Land Grab for Pulp: New Mill Project by Portucel Mozambique
    A Land Grab for Pulp New mill project by Portucel Mozambique Discussion Document November 2017 Environmental Paper Network A Land Grab for Pulp New mill project by Portucel Mozambique Discussion Document EPN, Sergio Baffoni, Mandy Haggith ADECRU, Mozambique Quercus, Portugal ARA, Germany KKM, Germany © November 2017 This discussion document is intended to foster dialogue regarding a key issue of concern or an opportunity for advancing the goals of the Environmental Paper Network's Global Paper Vision. The information contained in this document is the sole responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily indicate a consensus viewpoint or formal position of the members of EPN. The discussion document compiles information and concerns about large-scale land acquisition for eucalyptus tree plantations by The Navigator Company to supply a pulp mill in Mozambique. It assesses the scale and location of the project and some of its known or likely environmental and social impacts, and it concludes with suggestions for how these impacts should be addressed. Contact: [email protected] Phone: +49-162-381 252 8 Cover photo: ADECRU 2 EPN - The Environmental Paper Network is an international collaborative project of 146 non-governmental organisations (NGOs) from six continents that have endorsed the Global Paper Vision and are working for social and environmental transformation in the production and consumption of pulp and paper. Regional network leadership is provided by steering committees in North America (www.environmentalpaper.org), Europe/International (www.environmentalpaper.eu) and China (www.environmentalpaper.cn). ADECRU - Accão Académica para o Desenvolvimento das Comunidades Rurais is a Mozambican civil society organization with a popular identity composed by members and rural activists organized in community based- groups.
    [Show full text]
  • Mapping Knowledge Gaps of Mozambique's Terrestrial Mammals
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Mapping Knowledge Gaps of Mozambique’s Terrestrial Mammals Isabel Queirós Neves 1,2,3*, Maria da Luz Mathias 2,3 & Cristiane Bastos-Silveira 1,4 A valuable strategy to support conservation planning is to assess knowledge gaps regarding primary species occurrence data to identify and select areas for future biodiversity surveys. Currently, increasing accessibility to these data allows a cost-efective method for boosting knowledge about a country’s biodiversity. For understudied countries where the lack of resources for conservation is more pronounced to resort to primary biodiversity data can be especially benefcial. Here, using a primary species occurrence dataset, we assessed and mapped Mozambique’s knowledge gaps regarding terrestrial mammal species by identifying areas that are geographically distant and environmentally diferent from well-known sites. By comparing gaps from old and recent primary species occurrence data, we identifed: (i) gaps of knowledge over time, (ii) the lesser-known taxa, and (iii) areas with potential for spatiotemporal studies. Our results show that the inventory of Mozambique’s mammal fauna is near-complete in less than 5% of the territory, with broad areas of the country poorly sampled or not sampled at all. The knowledge gap areas are mostly associated with two ecoregions. The provinces lacking documentation coincide with areas over-explored for natural resources, and many such sites may never be documented. It is our understanding that by prioritising the survey of the knowledge-gap areas will likely produce new records for the country and, continuing the study of the well-known regions will guarantee their potential use for spatiotemporal studies.
    [Show full text]
  • An Initiative-Wide Study Using Remote Imagery and Matching Methods
    Do community-conserved areas in Tanzania achieve conservation goals? An initiative-wide study using remote imagery and matching methods Anthony Dancer A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science and the Diploma of Imperial College London September 2013 I confirm that all this work is my own, except where indicated. Anthony Dancer Table of Contents Abbreviations .................................................................................................................................... iii Abstract ............................................................................................................................................. iv Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................... v I. Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 1 1 Problem statement ..................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 The need for rigorous evaluation of (area-based) conservation ......................................... 1 1.2 A brief introduction to WMAs ............................................................................................. 1 2 Aims and objectives .................................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Aim ......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]