CRAG Intervention Plan (CIP)

Home , Agriculture in Burundi, Bubanza Province, Bugarama, Communes of Burundi, Mitumba Mountains, Mount Karisimbi

Developed by BirdLife International, in collaboration with the Wildlife Conservation Society, the Appalachian State University – USA and stakeholders in the Kivu-Rusizi basins

November 2017

Nairobi, Kenya

Table of Contents Acknowledgements ...... 5 Acronyms and abbreviations ...... 6 Summary ...... 9 BACKGROUND ...... 10 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ...... 10 1.1 Background ...... 10 1.2 The CRAG Concept ...... 13 1.2.1 Why CRAGs? ...... 13 1.2.2 How does the CRAG framework relate to other Landscape and Adaptation Plans? ...... 13 1.2.3 Why the Lake Kivu and Rusizi River Catchment? ...... 14 1.3 Summary ...... 15 References ...... 15 STATE ...... 16 CHAPTER 2: THE KIVU-RUSIZI LANDSCAPE ...... 16 2.1 Introduction ...... 16 2.1.1 Geophysical charcteristics ...... 16 2.1.2 Geological history ...... 16 2.1.3 Soils ...... 20 2.1.4 Hydrology ...... 20 2.1.5 Land and Vegetation Cover ...... 22 2.2 Urban settlements and significant infrastructure ...... 25 2.2.1 Urban Settlements ...... 25 2.2.2 Hydropower and Irrigation ...... 25 2.2.3 Transportation ...... 26 2. 3 Summary ...... 28 References ...... 28 CHAPTER 3: SOCIO-ECONOMIC, POLICY, AND INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT ...... 30 3.1 Introduction ...... 30 3.2 Demography ...... 30 3.3 Socio-economic context ...... 31 3.4 Political Situation ...... 33 3.5 Global and Regional Policy Frameworks for the Environment ...... 34 3.5.1 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Development Goals...... 34 3.5.2. Biodiversity – Convention on Biological Diversity ...... 35 3.5.3 UNFCCC - Climate Change ...... 36 3.5.4 Disaster Risk Reduction – Sendai Framework ...... 39 3.5.4 Regional Agreements ...... 40

3.6 National Policies and Legislation Concerning the Environment ...... 42 3.6.1 Overview ...... 42 3.6.2 Burundi ...... 44 3.6.3 DRC ...... 45 3.6.4 Rwanda ...... 46 3.7 Institutional Context ...... 46 3.7.1 Environment-related government agencies ...... 46 3.7.3 Civil Society ...... 49 3.8 Summary ...... 50 References ...... 51 CHAPTER 4: BIODIVERSITY IN THE BASIN ...... 52 4.1 Diversity and richness of species ...... 52 4.2 Aquatic biodiversity ...... 52 4.3 Threatened and endemic species ...... 54 4.4 Economically important species ...... 55 4.5 KBAs 56 4.6 Protected Areas ...... 57 4.7 Corridors...... 58 4.8 Summary ...... 59 References ...... 59 BENEFITS...... 62 CHAPTER 5: ECOSYSTEM SERVICES ...... 62 5.1 Introduction ...... 62 5.2 Biological (pest) control ...... 63 5.3 Pollination ...... 64 5.4 Watershed services ...... 64 5.5 Fisheries ...... 67 5.6 Climate regulation and carbon sequestration ...... 68 5.7 Nature-based tourism and recreation ...... 68 5.8 Summary ...... 69 CHAPTER 6: HIGH-RESOLUTION CLIMATE AND ENVIRONMENT PREDICTIONS...... 71 6.1 Model selection and modelling approach ...... 71 6.2 CESM Environmental Predictions for the Lake Kivu-Rusizi CRAG ...... 73 6.2.1 Temperature ...... 73 6.2.2 Precipitation ...... 73 6.2.3 Evapotranspiration ...... 74 6.2.4 Hydrological Runoff ...... 76 6.2.5 Net Primary Production ...... 77

6.2.6 Total Ecosystem Carbon ...... 78 6.2.7 Crops – Tropical Maize and Rice ...... 78 6.3 Comparison to IPCC multimodel consensus ...... 80 6.4. Next steps in CESM modelling ...... 81 6.5 Summary ...... 81 CHAPTER 7: THREATS ...... 83 7.1 Introduction ...... 83 7.2 IUCN-CMP Framework for Threat Analysis ...... 83 7.3 Transboundary Threat Analysis in the Lake Tanganyika Authority Strategic Action Plan (LTA SAP) 86 7.4 Climate Change Related Threats ...... 88 7.4.1 Erosion ...... 89 7.4.2 Sedimentation ...... 93 7.4.3 Landslides ...... 97 7.4.4 Pollution ...... 99 7.4.5 Crop Failure ...... 100 7.4.6 Habitat Destruction and Altitudinal Shifts ...... 101 7.4.7. Extreme Climatic Events ...... 102 7.4.8 Shifting patterns in Human and Livestock Diseases ...... 103 7.4.9 Invasive Species ...... 103 7.5 Human Footprint (Contributed by James Allan, James Watson, Sean Maxwell, Oscar Venter) 104 7.6 Summary and Conclusion ...... 105 CHAPTER 8: INTERVENTIONS ...... 109 8.1 Introduction ...... 109 8.2 Erosion ...... 109 8.2.1 Vulnerable sites ...... 109 8.2.2 Recommended Interventions ...... 111 8.3 Sedimentation ...... 114 8.3.1 Vulnerable sites ...... 114 8.4 Landslides ...... 119 8.5 Pollution ...... 120 8.5.1 Vulnerable sites ...... 120 8.6 Food security ...... 122 8.6.1 Vulnerable Sites ...... 122 8.7 Habitat Destruction and Altitudinal Shifts ...... 124 8.7.1 Vulnerable sites ...... 124 8.8. Extreme Climatic Events ...... 127

8.8.1 Vulnerable Sites ...... 127 8.9 Shifting Patterns in Human and Livestock Diseases...... 128 8.9.1 Vulnerable Sites ...... 128 8.10 Invasive Species ...... 129 8.10.1 Vulnerable Sites ...... 129 8.11 Making it all happen: The Role of the LTA and ABAKIR ...... 130 8.11.1 General considerations...... 130 References ...... 131

Acknowledgements

The CRAG Intervention Plan was prepared by BirdLife International, with the technical support from different partners, and under the auspices of MacArthur Foundation – Conservation and Sustainable Development Program.

Chapter’s principal authors

Chapter # Chapter name Principal Institution author 1 INTRODUCTION Ian Gordon BirdLife International 2 THE KIVU-RUSIZI LANDSCAPE Ian Gordon BirdLife International 3 SOCIO-ECONOMIC, POLICY AND Edward Perry BirdLife International INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT 4 BIODIVERSITY IN THE BASIN Albert Schenk BirdLife International 5 ECOSYSTEM SERVICES Michel Wildlife Conservation Masozera Society 6 HIGH-RESOLUTION CLIMATE AND Anton Seimon Appalachian State ENVIRONMENTAL PREDICTIONS University, USA 7 CLIMATE CHANGE RELATED THREATS IN Ian Gordon BirdLife International THE BASIN 8 INTERVENTIONS Ian Gordon BirdLife International

With considerable contribution from individuals of countries and institutions in the Great Lakes Region:

- In Burundi: Association Burundaise pour la Protection de la Nature, AGROBIOTECH, GIZ, World Vision - In Rwanda: Association pour la Conservation de la Nature au Rwanda, Rwanda Integrated Water Security Program, Rwanda Natural Resources Authority - In the Democratic Republic of Congo: Horizon Nature, Université Officielle de Bukavu, South Kivu Region - In Tanzania: The Nature Conservancy - Lake Basin Authority: ABAKIR and LTA

Special thanks to Edward Perry, Ademola Ajagbe, Albert Schenk from BirdLife for reviewing all the chapters.

Acronyms and abbreviations

A.b.s.l Above Sea Level

ABAKIR Authorité du Lac Kivu et de la Rivière Rusizi

ABN Association Burundaise pour la Protection de la Nature

ACNR Association pour la Conservation de la Nature au Rwanda

AfDB African Development Bank

AfSIS Africa Soil Information Service

AMCEN African Ministerial Conference on the Environment

ARC African Risk Capacity

ARCOS Albertine Rift Conservation Society

AZE Alliance for Zero Extinction

CBD Convention on Biological Diversity

CBFP Congo Basin Forest Partnership

CEPF Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund

CESM Community Earth System Models

CIAT International Centre for Tropical Agriculture

CIP CRAG Intervention Plan

CMP Conservation Measurements Partnership

CMP Conservation Measures Partnership

COP Conference of Parties

CRAGs Climate Resilient Altitudinal Gradient (s)

DRC Democratic Republic of Congo

EAC East African Community

EAM Eastern Afromontane

EbA Ecosystem Based Adaptation

GCF Green Climate Fund

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GEF Global Environment Facility

GLR Great Lakes Region

GLRCS Great Lakes Region Conservation Strategy

HFA Hyogo Framework for Action

HFP Human Footprint

HN Horizon Nature

IBA Important Bird Area

ICPAC IGAD Climate Predictions and Applications Centre

ICRAF World Agroforestry Centre

IGAD Intergovernmental Authority on Development

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature

IWRM Integrated Water Resources Management

KBA Key Biodiversity Area

KW Kilowatt

LAFREC Landscape Approach to Forest Restoration and Conservation

LTA Lake Tanganyika Authority

MIDIMAR Ministry of Disaster Management and Refugee Affairs, Rwanda

MINAGRI Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources, Rwanda

MODIS Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer

MW Megawatt

NAPAs National Adaptation Programmes of Actions

NAPs National Adaptation Plans

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NBSAPs National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans

NDC Nationally Determined Contributions

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

NPP Net Primary Productivity

PES Payment for Ecosystem Services

RCP Representative Concentration Pathway

REC Regional Economic Communities

REMA Rwanda Environment Management Authority

RENGOF Rwanda Environmental NGOs Forum

SAP Strategic Action Plan

SDG Sustainable Development Goal

SINELAC Société Internationale d’Electricité des pays des Grands Lacs

SME Small and Medium Enterprises

SNEL Société Nationale d’Electricité

SoE State of Environment

SPHY Spatial Process in Hydrology

TEC Total Ecosystem Carbon

UMD University of Maryland, Department of Geography

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNFCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

UNOSAT United Nations Operational Satellite Applications Programme

WCS Wildlife Conservation Society

WRI World Resource Institute

Summary

The CRAG Intervention Plan was developed with the stakeholder participation, to build on previous work and bring together established conservation strategies and activities. The plan is organised in five sections: (i) the BACKGROUND comprising of chapter 1, (ii) the STATE covering chapter 2 and 3, (iii) the BENEFIT detailed in chapter 4 and 5, (iv) the PRESSURES in chapter 6 and 7, (v) the last is the INTERVENTIONS section detailed in chapter 8. The entire document starts with a brief history of the CRAG concept as a product of the MacArthur Great Lakes Region Conservation Strategy. It also justifies the CRAG approach and why the Lake Kivu and Rusizi River basins were selected to pilot the CRAG initiatives. The Kivu-Rusizi landscapes are then described, the biodiversity, institutional and social context and ecosystem services well underlined – considering Rwanda, Burundi and the Democratic Republic of Congo. The last chapters of the CIP focuses on climate change predictions in the Kivu- Rusizi, climate change impacts on ecosystem services and possible interventions. The CRAG Intervention Plan developed in this document, provides guidance to actions for increasing the climate change resilience in targeted watersheds of the Great Lakes Region – all these actions being implemented with the support of the MacArthur Foundation. At the end of every chapter, there is a summary and there are also boxes giving the main message for each chapter.

BACKGROUND

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION Principal Author: Ian Gordon 1.1 Background

The CRAG framework that is central to this plan emerged during a meeting at Entebbe in 2012, funded by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation as part of a process that developed a ten-year Conservation Strategy for the Great Lakes Region (GLR) of East and Central Africa (MacArthur Foundation, 2013). BirdLife International (BirdLife) was contracted to lead on the formulation of this strategy, following its successful completion of a five year strategy for CEPF investment in the Eastern Afromontane (EAM) Biodiversity Hotspot, which overlaps with the GLR (Map 1.1). Both strategies identify Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) as focal sites for action, but the former gives more emphasis on freshwater ecosytems and ecosystem services, and includes lowland areas that fall outside the EAM.

Map1.1 Geographical overlaps between the CEPF Eastern Afromontane Biodiversity Hotspot and the MacArthur Great Lakes Region

Twenty-nine experts from 11 institutions contributed to the GLR Strategy, backed by consultative workshops in Entebbe and Nairobi, involving over 60 stakeholders from 30 governmental and non- governmental institutions. In the final plenary session at the Entebbe workshop, the idea of developing Climate Resilient Altitudinal Gradients (CRAGs) was proposed.

Altitudinal Gradients host important biodiversity and provide vital ecosystem services that are highly vulnerable to climate change. They are vulnerable because altitudinal gradients influence air flows and precipitation on a landscape scale and are frequently associated with extreme climatic events (floods and droughts). They also act as biotic thermometers as organisms shift their altitudinal ranges in response to temperature change. The CRAG approach aims to build their resilience to such events, as detailed in Chapters 5 and 8 of the GLR Strategy.

Climate Resilient Altitudinal Gradients (CRAGs) can be defined as multi-scale landscape units with a minimum altitudinal range of 1,000 meters that are characterized by climate resilient biodiversity and ecosystem service values. The application of this concept is called for under Strategic Direction (SD) 1 in the GLR strategy: “Understand and respond to increased environmental pressures from development and climate change impacts”. Action Priority (AP) 1.3 under this Strategic Direction requires the development of “local management networks, innovative projects and shared plans to protect biodiversity and Ecosystem Services and to enhance climate change resilience in CRAGs”. In response to this Action Priority, BirdLife received funding from MacArthur for a proposal on “Enhancing Climate Change Resilience in Great Lakes Region Watersheds: the Lake Kivu Catchment and Rusizi River CRAG”. Key partners include the WildLife Conservation Society, Horizon Nature (DR Congo), and the national BirdLife Partners, Association pour la Conservation de la Nature au Rwanda (ACNR) and the Association Burundaise pour la protection de la Nature (ABN). The goal “is to help to understand and respond to increased environmental pressures from climate change, and to create and expand incentives to conserve biodiversity and ecosystem services in the South Kivu and Rusizi River catchments.” There are 3 conservation targets:

 Enhanced resilience of aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems to climate change through the application of the CRAG concept to the South Kivu and Rusizi Basins;  Increased preparedness and capacity of the Lake Tanganyika Development Authority (LTA) and Lake Kivu/Rusizi Basin Authority (ABAKIR, Autorité de Bassin du Lac Kivu et de la Rivière Rusizi), the private sector, national NGOs and local communities to adapt to climate change impacts;  Improved knowledge-base, monitoring and information-management mechanisms for the Lake Basin Authorities and other stakeholders.

A key step towards the achievement of these conservation targets is the drafting and approval, through LTA and ABAKIR, of a CRAG Intervention Plan (CIP). This document (the Kivu/Rusizi CIP) recommends what must be done and where within the South Kivu/Rusizi River catchment, in order to increase the resilience of its biodiversity and ecoystem services to climate change. More generally the CIP describes what is needed to turn an AG into a CRAG and provides a tool for turning policy into action. The Kivu/Rusizi CIP has four key features that add value to existing and future basin level plans developed by the LTA and ABAKIR:

 It is spatially explicit and designed to identify site specific and landscape level actions to increase resilience;  It is informed by the best available understanding of past, present and future climates using the latest climate change computer models to predict future climate change and its impacts (currently Community Earth System Models, or CESM);  It is evidence-based and uses the best available information (e.g. on land use, erosion, sedimentation, biodiversity, Protected Area status and mangement, freshwater services, development priorities and local livelihoods) and modeling tools in order to formulate its recommendations;

 It is an open document that is based on stakeholder and expert input and incorporates a mechanism for regular review in the light of new research, technical, political and socio- economic developments.

A comprehensive, evidence-based, and credible CIP has the potential to leverage significant funding for environmentally sound actions to improve resilience at multiple levels of scale, from Payment for Ecosystem Service schemes for local communities to large transboundary infrastructural projects. Multilateral funding opportunities (e.g. the Green Climate Fund) already exist, new initiatives are being explored (e.g. a recent scoping mission1 by the Government of Rwanda and the African Development Bank for the World Bank Pilot Program for Climate Change Resilience) and are emerging following the Paris Agreement on Climate Change in December 2015. The CIP is strongly in line with government policies (Chapter 4) and can help to guide governments’ actions to enhance climate change resilience for communities, national economies and biodiversity and to deliver on international commitments (e.g. under CBD and UNFCCC). It is also strongly science-based, using the best currently available evidence on threats to resilience and for modelling techniques for the projected impacts of climate change (Chapter 6). Ultimately, however, its recommendations will only be owned and acted on if they are adopted through a participatory process at local community/village level, in addition to being endorsed by government and District/Provincial agencies (Chapter 8).

Equally, the CIP has to recognise that socio-economic, demographic and political constraints can severely limit, or even undermine, desired interventions, and these constraints must be taken into consideration in a challenging balancing act. Much of the necessary action must take place in what Minang et al. (2015) have termed “negotiated spaces” where sub-optimal solutions to different sets of problems must be identified. This clearly applies to plans for the Kivu/Rusizi CRAG where rural population densities are high, land degradation is already severe, the pressures from poverty are great and the development imperative is intense. The CIP recognises these challenges, and has been formulated through extensive consultations during regional and national workshops including local communities. It attempts to deal with them through a negotiated process, and proposes long term solutions to future problems.

BOX 1. Why focus on altitudinal gradients?

Altitudinal gradients with ranges of 1,000m+ generally occupy only small portions of larger landscapes that are affected by climate change. The CRAG framework focuses on these gradients because they:

 Generate extreme climatic events. Mountains form a barrier to air movements, moisture and rain clouds. As air rises over a mountain it cools and releases its mosture as tainfall and mists. On the other side the air is dry. So one side of a mountain can bring floods and the other bring droughts as

a result of a rain shadowe

 Act as biotic thermometers and early warning systems. Changing temperatures cause altitudinal

shifts in species ranges that are quickly detectable on a local scale.

 Are vulnerable to biodiversity losses. Habitat degradation may block the upward movements of plants and animals in response to warming, leading to their local extinction, and suitable habtats for cold-adapted species may disappear altogether (summit traps).  Are most amenable to observation and management relevant to increasing resilience to climate change. Both monitoring of climate change impacts and environmentally sound interventions are faciltated by concentrating on smaller land scape units that generally have lower human densities.  Are most directly of concern to both public and private sectors. Building ecosystem service resilience in altitudinal gradients is vital for domestic water supplies, urban settlements, food security, hydro - power, irrigation dams, and the interests of industries and insurance companies. 1http://www Create-cif.climateinvestmentfunds.org/sites/default/files/meeting ‘sky islands’ with high endemism and biodiversity. -Sky islands are ‘isolated mountains documents/rwanda_scoping_mission_fip_and_ppcr_tosurrounded by radically different lowland envir.pdfronments’, and provide refugia for montane species and habitats isolated by earlier periods of warming. 12

1.2 The CRAG Concept 1.2.1 Why CRAGs?

The chief value of the CRAG concept lies in its focus on altitudinal gradients in the context of climate change (Box 1, Figure 1). The ideal CRAG encompasses a water catchment (or a suite of catchments) for an important river, lake, delta or estuary in addition to montane or sub-montane forests or wetlands with high biodiversity and carbon-storage values. The minimum 1000 m altitudinal range is somewhat arbitrary and could be less; it was chosen to allow early detection of climate change impacts and multiple options for resilience interventions. Evidence suggests that the climatic ‘envelope’ of conditions supporting a KBA of specific habitat may shift by 6-700m altitude in the next 100 years.

Figure 1.1 CRAG Scenario Infographic. A country that has turned its AGs into CRAGs has gone a long way to achieving national climate change resilience.

1.2.2 How does the CRAG framework relate to other Landscape and Adaptation Plans?

The CRAG framework is nested within and overlaps with a variety of established landscape level planning processes, such as Ecosystem-based Adaptation, Integrated Water Resource Management, Catchment Management, and Land Use Planning. It is best regarded as an additional landscape management tool that borrows elements and practices from all of these approaches; it is not a substitute, rival, or alternative to any of them. It brings together a variety of components that are especially relevant to altitudinal gradients and that are sometimes neglected in other landscape/catchment/adaptation plans. For example, biodiversity concerns such as range shifting are seldom, if ever, considered in Catchment Management programs, whereas they are central to EbA. Similarly EbA focuses on using nature to reduce climate change vulnerability, and treats infrastructural developments such as urban areas, dams and resevoirs as complementary rather than integral to planning, whereas they are critical for water resource management. Both biodiversity and infrastructure are essential considerations in a CRAG Intervention Plan.

A CRAG Intervention Plan aims to provide a holistic “climate-smart” approach to the management of critical elements in landscapes that takes due account of their multiplicity in function (Minang et al., 2015). The CRAG idea is similar to the Ridge to Reef concept2 that has been pioneered by IUCN, but it is broader without the limiting emphasis on coral reefs, and with a specific reference to building climate change resilience.

Climate change is at the heart of this CIP, and the threats that are exacerbated by climate change provide the framework for the interventions proposed in Chapter 8. Although recent water resource management policies and documents in the region (e.g. Republic of Rwanda, 2011, 2014) all recognise the importance of climate change, the data on which they are based are average figures from the last 2-3 decades. As Chapter 6 makes clear, increased temperatures and rainfall will profoundly affect water supplies in the near future.

1.2.3 Why the Lake Kivu and Rusizi River Catchment?

Working criteria for identification of CRAGs are identified in the GLR stategy. CRAGs should ideally:

i. Be manageable areas at landscape scale with boundaries pragmatically based on watersheds/catchments, resource management boundaries and encompassing freshwater KBAs; ii. Have a major river lake exit at the base of the landscape, with important resources linked to the outflow, such as fish breeding or feeding areas and /or KBAs, and a stretch of lakeshore; iii. Include high altitude KBAs with forested areas that are important for sustaining water provision, as well as one or more freshwater KBAs in the high catchment; iv. Contain priority KBAs (both terrestrial and freshwater) judged on the basis of threat and biological importance which may also be Alliance for Zero Extinction (AZE) sites; v. Have potential to deliver important ecosystem services, especially water provision, Non- Timber Forest Products, forest carbon, fisheries; vi. Include existing or planned dam(s) that concentrate ecosystem services at particular points in the landscape, and provide opportunities for optimizing service delivery; vii. Offer the prospect of developing and implementing Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) for carbon and freshwater provision; viii. Are not too complex in political composition – ideally following, not including, international and local regional boundaries, except where transboundary collaboration is well established and is required for effective ecosystem service delivery; ix. Offer the prospect of functional local institutions in government and/or local civil society for partnerships in implementation of policy programs or development work; x. Ideally already have resources flowing to some of the KBAs so CRAG development work can be incremental, catalytic and focus on linkages rather than on resource finding at site level.

The Kivu/Rusizi catchment, with an altitudinal range of 2,700 m, satisfies all ten of the above criteria, with a caveat re political complexity: i.e. transboundary collaboration is in place but it is acknowledged that the three countries are very different particularly with respect to governance and peace and security. It was identified in the GLR strategy as one of 11 potential CRAGs. Its selection was justified as follows:

2 https://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/water/wp_our_work/wp_our_work_ridgetoreef/

“This is a complex area with significant conurbations (including Bujumbura [the headquarters of the Lake Tanganyika Lake Authority] and Bukavu), which intersects three countries. It includes areas of high forest on the ridge crests which lie in very important terrestrial KBAs (Kahuzi-Biega and Itombwe) and other high biomass-density forests. The whole area is above 1200 metres above sea level but has high altitudinal gradients and is very important for water catchment into Lakes Kivu and Tanganyika and water provision to both Bujumbura and Bukavu. The outlet to Lake Tanganyika in the Rusizi Delta is important for fisheries.”

The Lake Kivu-Rusizi River water catchment is the first of a series of anticipated CRAGs approach initiatives in the GLR that will integrate the management of biodiversity and human needs in the face of climate change. This document aims to develop a CRAG Intervention Plan to guide actions that will increase Climate Change resilience in the Kivu-Rusizi watersheds. It adopts the standard State- Pressure-Benefits-Response framework that is increasingly used to analyze and design conservation actions. 1.3 Summary

This Chapter gives a brief history of the CRAG concept as a product of the MacArthur Great Lakes Region Conservation Strategy (GLRCS). The GLRCS was developed through aparticipatory process modelled on that used to develop the CEPF Ecosystem Profile for the Eastern Afromontane Biodiversity Hotspot (EAM). CRAGs are defined as multi-scale landscape units with a minimum altitudinal range of 1,000 meters that are characterized by climate resilient biodiversity and ecosystem service values. The MacArthur Foundation subsequently funded BirdLife International to pilot the CRAG concept in the Lake Kivu.

A justification for the CRAG approach is provided, which rests mainly on the role of altitudinal gradients in providing ecosystem services (particularly water regulation and provision), hosting unique biodiversity, and being a focus for detecting and managing the impacts of Climate Change. Its relationship to other landscape planning frameworks (such as Integrated Water Resource Management and Ecosystem-based Adaptation) is explained and reasons for piloting the concept in the catchments of Lake Kivu and the Rusizi River are provided. The purpose of this document is to develop a CRAG Intervention Plan (CIP) that will guide actions to increase Climate Change Resilience in a vitally important watershed within the Great Lakes Region. The document follows the standard State-Benefit-Pressure-Response framework for analyzing and designing conservation actions. References

MacArthur Foundation, 2013: Conservation Strategy for the Great Lakes Region of East and Central Africa. pp265. http://www.birdlife.org/sites/default/files/attachments/AUTHORISED-GLR-STRATEGY_0.pdf

Minang, P. A., van Noordwijk, M., Freeman, O. E., Mbow, C., de Leeuw, J., & Catacutan, D. (Eds.) 2015: Climate-Smart Landscapes: Multifunctionality In Practice. Nairobi, Kenya: World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF).

STATE

CHAPTER 2: THE KIVU-RUSIZI LANDSCAPE Principal Author: Ian Gordon 2.1 Introduction

The entire Kivu-Rusizi catchment (Map2.1) covers over 7,000 km2. It stretches over some two degrees of latitude (around 1.25 to 3.27o South) and about one degree of longitude (between 28.7 and 29.33o East), and rises over 2,500 m in altitidinal range (MacArthur Strategy 2013). Its northern portion comprises Lake Kivu and its catchment (around 5,000 km2, including the lake with a surface area of 2,416 km2) and covers parts of western Rwanda and eastern DRC. Lake Kivu drains into Lake Tanganyika via the 117 km long Rusizi River. The southern portion hence covers the Rusizi catchment, with about half (1005 km2) in Rwanda, and the rest in DRC (368 km2) and Burundi (638 km2) (Republic of Rwanda, 2014). 2.1.1 Geophysical charcteristics

The catchment is enclosed by mountain ranges, to the north and east by the Virunga Mountains, to the northwest by the Ruwenzori Mountains, and southwest by the Mitumba Mountains range. The highest points are found in the Ruwenzoris (Mount Margherita at 5,109m, Mount Gessi at 4,715 m, and Mount Karisimbi at 4507m) in DRC, and in the Virungas (Karisimbi at 4,507m and Nyirigonogo at 3,469 m), and in the Mitumba range (Itombwe at 3,475m). To the southeast it is bounded by lower range mountain ranges within the Virunga range, mostly up to around 2,500 m, but reaching 2,950 m at Mount Bigugu in the Nyungwe and 2,660 m in Kibira National Parks (Map 2.2). The surface elevation of Lake Tanganyika is 773 m a.s.l., but this rapidly plunges down to its deepest point at almost 700m below sea level.

Map 2.3 shows slopes within the catchment. The largest stretches of flat land (with slopes of between between 0 and 5o) are found to the north of Lake Kivu (broken by the three volcanic mountain blocks in the Virunga and Volcans National Parks) and along most of the Rusizi Valley (from 40 km south of the river’s inlet from Lake Kivu to its oulet to Lake Tanganyika). Most of the rest of the landscape within the catchment is rugged, with slopes ranging up to 75 o (at 1 km resolution) in the mountain ranges. The flatter areas and the rivers and streams are largely recipients of eroded soil, and the steeper ones are donors, with erosion rates depending on whether they face south, north, east, or west, and on vegation cover. Steep slopes with little vegetation cover have either already lost most of their topsoil or are highly vulnerable to erosion risk and landslides. 2.1.2 Geological history

The entire Kivu-Rusizi watershed sits on top of the Eastern Rift that is slowly splitting Africa in two. Its geological history, dominated by rifting and volcanic activity, is complex, and dates back to the Miocene (7-8 million years BP) with more recent tectonic events between 1 and 0.4 million years ago (MacArthur Strategy, 2013). Lake Kivu in its current form is generally regarded as having originated

16 around 12000 years ago when lava flow from the Virunga volcanoes blocked its northern outlets, forcing its southern end to spill over to Lake Tanganyika and creating the Rusizi River3.

Since this time further climatic and tectonic events have acused the Rusizi to open and close on several occasions. Lake Tanganyika has a more ancient history, dating back to around 9 to 12 million years, during which its structure, basins, shorelines and depth have changed on numerous occasions (LTA SAP, 2011). Basaltic volcanic rocks predominate in the Kivu basin, giving way to metasedimentary rocks in the south (Felton et al., 2007). Granitic rocks and pegamatite are found in the east, especially around Nyungwe in Rwanda (Republic of Rwanda, 2014). The fault lines are composed largely of quartz rich rocks (schists) with a large band of quartz occupying the centre.

Shale is also found in the centre and the west, with allows for good groundwater drainage (recharge rate) and storage, in contrast to the granitic basement] rocks which have lower recharge, faster runoff and less storage capacity.

Map 2.1 Base Map of the Kivu-Rusizi CRAG

3 http://surface.syr.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1051&context=thesis

Map2.2 Elevations in the CRAG

Map 2.3 Slopes in the Catchment

2.1.3 Soils

Detailed soil maps are available at www.labsoilscience.ugent.be for DRC and Rwanda and through http://isabu-bi.org for Burundi. Alluvial material produces classic floodplain, clay and mineral, grey soils with low infiltration rates in the central valleys. Young transitional cambisols, characteristic of early soil formation, are found throughout the catchment, together with pockets of red/orange ferralsols and well drained red clayish soils that are typically found in old and weathered tropical situations. Humic ferralsols dominate along the catchment shores of Lake Kivu and along rivers that carry high sediment loads, while haplic acrisols occur on the eastern side in Rwanda (Muvundja, 2010). These soils all have high infiltration rates leading to rapid drainage on the slopes. While under forest cover they are porous and stable, but once the forest is removed the surface becomes hard and crusty and highly vulnerable to erosion by surface runoff under heavy rains. The older ones are generally suitable for agriculture given adequate rainfall. More organic histosols with low fertility and infiltration rates occur in high altitude valleys (Republic of Rwanda, 2014). 2.1.4 Hydrology

The Rusizi River marks the boundary between DRC and Rwanda/Burundi and descends from around 1,500 m above sea level (a.s.l.) in Lake Kivu in the north to 770 m at its southern delta with Lake Tanganyika. Its steepest gradients are found in the first 40 km along the border between Rwanda and DRC, where it descends through a narrow gorge, dropping some 500 m to just north of Bugarama City. At 940 m it is joined by the Ruhwa River from Burundi, which forms the southern boundary between Rwanda and Burundi. Thereafter the river slows and adopts a more meandering path through the flatter Rusizi lowlands down to the Rusizi National Park floodplains in Burundi and DRC to the delta.

There are 41 sub-catchments within the overall Kivu-Rusizi catchment (the major ones are shown in Map 2.4). Hydrological data for the region are limited and of poor quality with the notable exception of Rwanda, where groundwater sources have been identified and mapped, and recharge, storage and inter basin transfer resources have been assessed for all major water bodies (Republic of Rwanda, 2014). Ground water storage for the whole of Rwanda is estimated at 62,175 million cubic metres, and can be accessed through natural springs or boreholes, particularly in the lava deposits in the west and the alluvial deposits along the Rubyiro and Ruhwa River valleys. The Rusizi District has more renewable water resources than any other District in the country (1,135 m3 per capita per year), making it the most important catchment for national water security. Only the eastern Districts come close (1,101 m3/p/yr), with the rest of the country having around half as much or less. Surface water resources are also widely available in the Rusizi District from the short water courses that drain either directly into the Rusizi River or the Rubyiro or Ruhwa Rivers.

Lake Kivu has a complex hydrology and is fed by over 120 rivers and streams (Muvundja, 2010). It functions as a reservoir for the Rusizi River and its inflow to Lake Tanganyika. Fluctuations in the levels of Lake Kivu therefore provide a key indicator for the changing state of the watershed. These have been modelled over the last seven decades with special attention to hydropower potential (Muvundja et al., 2014). The results suggest that 55% of the lake water comes directly from precipitation, 25% from surface inflows and 20% from subaquatic groundwater discharge. Twenty-five percent of the total precipitation ends up as surface run-off and baseflow into the lake with the remainder being lost as evapotranspiration. Lake water losses were estimated at 58% from surface evaporation and 42% from outflow through the Rusizi River. Precipitation records (using both ground gauge and satellite- based data from the Tropical Rain-fall Measuring Mission) show a switch to wetter conditions after 1961.

Map 2.4 Hydrology of the CRAG

Muvundja et al.’s 2014 study showed that lake levels closely tracked annual precipitation but with a 1-2 month lag period, and that the patterns for Kivu matched those for Victoria. Lake levels peaked in 1963 and their averages fluctuated by almost half a meter over three more or less internally homogenous time periods (1941-1960, 1961-93 and 1994-2011). The average level for 1994-2011 (1462.41 m a.s.l.) differed from that for the first period (1462.40 m a.s.l) by only 1 centimetre, but fluctuations from year to year in the former were twice as much as in earlier years (Muvundja et al., 2014). Low rainfall in 2005-6 resulted in a serious drop in hydropower generation from the Rusizi dams (SNEL and SINELAC, 2006). Very similar trends were also recorded from Lake Victoria, indicating similar meteorological variations over much of the Great Lakes Region. While most of the water in the Rusizi River comes directly from Lake Kivu, it is also fed by various tributaries of which the most important are Nyamagana, Muhira, Kaburantwa, Kagunuzi, Rubyiro and Ruhwa, some of which (notably the Muhira) are significant sources of sedimentation.

In terms of water quality, Lake Kivu (and therefore also the Rusizi River) has a relatively high pH (above 9); fluoride levels are marginally above the critical threshold for human health; chemical and biological oxygen demands are high in Rubyiro River as a result of the decomposition of organic matter; and, again in the Rubyiro, cadmium, zinc and copper levels are elevated, possibly as a result of mining and municipal effluents. While none of these water quality issues currently pose risks to human health, they need to be monitored (Republic of Rwanda, 2014).

For management purposes, the overall catchments in the region are divided into four Levels. (Republic of Rwanda, 2014). Level 0 divides the Nile and Congo River basins, with Kivu-Rusizi belonging to the latter. Level 1 defines catchment management units within the Kivu-Rusizi watersheds, and is based on the two major river and lake basins (Kivu and Rusizi) (Republic of Rwanda, 2014). Level 2 subdivisions are determined by management challenges; in Rwanda, three are recognised for Lake Kivu (Kivu North, Kivu Centre and Kivu South), and two for Rusizi (Rusizi Rubyiro and Rusizi Nyungwe). Kivu North faces massive sedimentation problems, especially from DRC. Kivu Central comprises steep catchments with high population densities. Kivu South is similar to Kivu North despite its headwaters in the Nyungwe Forest. Rusizi Rubyiro is heavily used for rice production and includes a narrow stretch along the Rusizi with short water courses draining into the river. This subdivision has been targeted for hydropower, agriculture, irrigation, water supply, peat production, and natural land use. Rusizi Nyungwe includes the catchments for the Ruhwa and Kaburantwa Rivers, and faces problems of artisanal mining with subsequent erosion and pollution of forest areas. Level 3 units are based on uniform water resource characteristics with an area of at least 25 km2 and ideally around 100 km2. Several hundreds have been recognised in Rwanda, many having homogeneous characteristics corresponding in some cases to single valleys. Capacity issues currently restrict their practical management at this scale. 2.1.5 Land and Vegetation Cover

Map 2.5 shows land cover in the catchment based on visual interpretation of Landsat images from the Africover Project in 2000-2001. There are major differences between the three CRAG countries, resulting from differences in population densities (see section 2.3) and the proportions of the landscape covered by Protected Areas. The number of people per square kilometre in DRC is less than a tenth of those in Rwanda and Burundi. The relative proportions of land devoted to subsistence/rain- fed agriculture (shrub crop and herbaceous crop) in Burundi and Rwanda are thus much higher than in DRC.

Map 2.5 Land Cover in the CRAG (Africover Project in 2000-2001)

Map 2.5 Land Cover in the CRAG (Land Cover Type 2 UMD from 2009 AfSIS)

Shrub savannah is found in the southern portion of the Virunga National Park, and is most extensive in DRC and in the north-central portion of the Burundi share of the catchment. Tree savannah is largely restricted to the east of the Rusizi National Park. The greater forest cover in Rwanda is exceptional as a result of Protected Area coverage. Here 50% (503 km²) of the Rusizi watershed in Rwanda is occupied by the forest in Nyungwe National Park, while rain-fed agriculture takes up 399 km² (40%), forest plantations 38 km² (4%) and agricultural wetland 46 km² (5%) (Republic of Rwanda, 2014). A smaller proportion of forest cover is found in Burundi in the southern extension of the Nyungwe National Park and in Kibira National Park. In DRC, forests are found along the western edges of the catchment, particularly in association with the Kahuzi-Biega National Park in the north and the Itombwe mountains in the south.

Map 2.6 shows land cover (Land Cover Type 2 UMD) from 2009, as created by the Africa Soil Information Service (AfSIS), using the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) imagery from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). The different categories of land cover used in this map complicate comparisons with Map 2.5, but the broad picture remains similar, particularly with respect to Protected Areas and forests. The greatest apparent change is in the extent of cropland in DRC, indicating an expansion of subsistence agriculture at the expense of shrub savannah. 2.2 Urban settlements and significant infrastructure

2.2.1 Urban Settlements

Within the CRAG area there are 7 major urban settlements in DRC (from Bukavu in the north to Uvira in the South), 4 in Rwanda (Cyangugu to Bugurama City), and 11 in Burundi (Rukana to Bujumbura) within 5 km of Lake Kivu, Rusizi River and Lake Tanganyika. Of these, Bukavu, Bujumbura and Uvira have the highest populations and are lakeside settlements and by implication have the greatest effects on the catchment. Bukavu sits just to the west of the beginning of the Rusizi from Lake Kivu, Bujumbura to the east of its exit, and Uvira stretches along the north-western edge of Lake Tanganyika. The Rwandan city of Bugurama lies immediately next to the Rusizi River near the Rwanda- Burundi border, and Cibitoke in Burundi within 5 km. Urban centres upstream of the project area (especially Goma in DRC and Gisenyi in Rwanda) also have significant impacts on Lake Kivu. Figure 2.1 gives data on population numbers for cities and settlements with over 10,000 people within the catchment. A 2012 DRC census yielded estimates of around 807,000 persons in Bukavu, and 170,000 in Uvira. Censuses in 2008 in Burundi and Rwanda estimated the populations of Bujumbura at around 500,000, followed by 24,000 in Cibitoke and about 25,000 in Bugarama City. All trends within the region and beyond predict that these urban populations will increase not only rapidly but also disproportionately in relation to rural areas in the near future, with the greatest growth in the bigger cities of Bukavu and Bujumbura. Total population numbers within the area are only available for Rwanda; the Republic of Rwanda (2014) report estimates the total number within the Rusizi catchment to be around 318,000, rising to over 700,000 by 2040. A conservatively estimated doubling of current populations within the next 20 years can be expected throughout the CRAG. 2.2.2 Hydropower and Irrigation

Existing and planned hydropower dams are impacting in a major way on the Rusizi and Kivu catchments. Two are already in place, and two more are planned. Rusizi I, at the mouth of the river from Lake Kivu and owned by DRC, has an installed capacity of 28.2 MW and was built in 1958. Rusizi II, built in 1989 and owned by all three countries, has a capacity of 39.9 MW.

Rusizi III is planned to add 147 MW and Rusizi IV another 287 MW. The plans for both of these dams are however on hold as even Rusizi II is currently operating substantially below capacity (Chapter 7). In addition to these large dams, several other sites in Rwanda have been identified as having smaller scale hydropower potential, i.e. in the range of 50-500 KW. Water quality issues, mostly related to erosion and sedimentation, have restricted the use of water for irrigation, although the Rusizi River downstream is exploited for this purpose in Burundi (particularly in the Delta) and DRC, and further irrigation in Rwanda in the Bugarama valley has been proposed for about 555 ha of rice cultivation (Republic of Rwanda 2014). Official documents paint a mixed picture of irrigation potential. The Master plan for the Rusizi catchment notes that ‘The fact that Lake Kivu waters are nowhere used for irrigation is an ominous signal’ (Republic of Rwanda 2014). In contrast, the Master Plan for Irrigation (ICRAF/MINAGRI 2010) identifies Lake Kivu as a source of irrigation waters, particularly for the Rutsiro District, despite noting that a pH above 8.0 is unsuitable for irrigation purposes.

Figure 2.1 Population numbers in Cities and major Urban Areas within the Catchment

(Data from www.citypopulation.de/Africa.html accessed 15.01.2015

600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000

DRCUvira

DRCGoma

DRCBukavu

Rwanda Rwanda Kibuye

Rwanda Rwanda Gisenyi

Burundi Cibitoke Burundi

Burundi Burundi Bubanza

Rwanda Rwanda Bigogwe

Burundi Burundi Gatumba

Rwanda Rwanda Mabanza

Rwanda Rwanda Cyangugu

Rwanda Rwanda Bugarama Rwanda Rwanda Mukamira Burundi Burundi Bujumbura…

2.2.3 Transportation

Two poorly maintained 2-lane roads run along either side of the catchment from Bukavu in the north to Bujumbura (the RN5) in the south east in Burundi, and to Uvira (the N5) in the south west south in DRC. Other more minor roads are in even worse condition. Apart from the RN5 and N5, and the ports in Bukavu, Uvira and Bujumbura, transport infrastructure is relatively undeveloped. This situation is unlikely to persist. There are major plans to improve road and rail systems throughout Africa in order to support 33 Development Corridors on the continent. The Northern Development Corridor encompasses Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi and DRC. Road and routes will be upgraded and opened up from Mombasa to Bujumbura and from Kampala through Kigali to Goma, Bukavu and

Bujumbura4. The Goma-Bukavu-Bujumbura route will pass to the East of the CRAG, while a Central Corridor from Dar-Es-Salaam will pass to the South and East. While neither highway is likely to pass through the CRAG itself, their developmental impacts will be felt throughout the region, with major benefits and costs accruing to different constituencies and interests.

Map2.7 Infrastrusture in the CRAG

4 http://www.ttcanc.org/page.php?id=28

2. 3 Summary

The Kivu-Rusizi landscapes have a turbulent geological history, driven by rifting and volcanic activity, dating back to the Miocene 7-8 million years BP, with more recent major tectonic events between 1 and 0.4 million years ago and volcanic erruptions continuing to this day. Throughout this period the structure and hydrology of the two catchments have undergone significant changes. Today they present a complex and rugged landscape of hills, mountains, volcanoes and gorges with altitudes ranging from from well over 3000m to around 770 m in the Rusizi estuary (Map 2.2. Steep slopes (up to 75o) are found throughout (Map 2.3). Heavy rains cascade down these slopes into 130 rivers and tributaries in at least 41 sub-catchments (Map 2.4).), rendering the Kivu and Rusizi catchments highly prone to erosion (Chapter 7) and sensitive to land degradation when natural vegetation is cleared.

Flat land is found only between the three volcanic blocks, north of Lake Kivu and along the Rusizi. Fertilised by runoff and sedimenation, much of this flatter land is devoted to shrub and herbaceous crops, especially in the north and the east (Map 2.5), while in DRC, west of the Rusizi, expansion of agricultural activities is converting natural cover into farmland. Evergreen forest is confined mostly to the western and northern slopes of the catchments and the National Parks (margins of Volcans and Kahuzi Biega, bits of Gishwati, and almost the whole of Nyungwe and Kabira). Deciduous forest is found scattered in smaller fragmented patches throughout the lower slopes and areas (Map 2.6). Once forest is removed, the soils beneath (previously porous and stable) develop a hard and crusty surface that is highly vulnerable to erosion by runoff under heavy rains.

There are 22 significant urban settlements in (7 in DRC, 4 in Rwanda, and 11 in Burundi) within 5 km of Lake Kivu, Rusizi River and Lake Tanganyika, of which 5 have total populations above 100,000. Three of these (Bukavu, Bujumbura and Uvira) are by the lake and are responsible for domestic and industrial discharges into Kivu and Tanganyika. Other than these cities, the two Rusizi dams are currently the most important developments within the CRAG in terms of climate change resilience and ecosystem services. Transportation services are relatively undeveloped at present, but this situation will change as the Northern Development corridor is devleoped. There are also ongoing initiatives in the energy sector (oil and methane) which are likely to major infrastructural impacts in the future. References

Felton A.A., Russell J.M, Cohen. A.S., Baker, M.E., Chesley, J., Lezzar, K.E., McGlue, M.M., Pigati, J.S., Quade,J., Stager, J.C., and Tiercelin, J.J., 2007: Paleolimnological evidence for the onset and termination of glacial aridity from Lake Tanganyika, Tropical East Africa. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 252, 405-423,

ICRAF/MINAGRI 2010: Rwanda Irrigation Master Plan. World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF), United Nations Avenue, Gigiri. P. O. Box 30677– 00100. Nairobi, Kenya. Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINAGRI), Rwanda. http://www.worldagroforestry.org/downloads/Publications/PDFS/B16738.pdf

Lake Tanganyika Authority Secretariat, 2011: Strategic Action Programme for the Protection of Biodiversity and Sustainable Management of Natural Resources in Lake Tanganyika and its Basin, Bujumbura, Burundi, 136 pp.

MacArthur Foundation, 2013: Conservation Strategy for the Great Lakes Region of East and Central Africa. pp265. http://www.birdlife.org/sites/default/files/attachments/AUTHORISED-GLR-STRATEGY_0.pdf

Muvundja, A. , 2010: Riverine nutrient inputs to Lake Kivu. MSc Thesis, Makerere University. https://news.mak.ac.ug/documents/Makfiles/theses/Muvundja_Amisi.pdf

Muvundja, F.A., Wüest, A., Isumbisho, M., Kaningini, M.B., Pasche, N., Rinta, P., and Schmid, M., 2014: Modelling Lake Kivu water level variations over the last seven decades. Liminlogica, 47, 21-33.

Republic of Rwanda, RNRA, 2014: Master Plan Report Final Version. pp 250. http://www.minirena.gov.rw/fileadmin/Land_Subsector/Water/Rwanda_Water_Resources_Master _Plan.pdf

SNEL and SINELAC, 2006: Compte Rendu de la réunion sur l’évaluation du comportement du niveau du lac Kivu, Mururu (Rwanda). In https://pure.fundp.ac.be/ws/files/12605619/Muvundja_Fabrice_Thesis_extraits_internet.pdf

CHAPTER 3: SOCIO-ECONOMIC, POLICY, AND INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT Principal Author: Edward Perry 3.1 Introduction

This chapter provides background on the demography, socio-economic context, policies, legislation, management authorities, and civil society organisations in the three CRAG countries. Comprehensive recent reviews of these issues throughout the Great Lakes Region can be found in Chapters 5, 6, and 7 of the CEPF Eastern Afromontane Ecosystem Profile (2012) and in Chapter 3 of the Great Lakes Region Conservation Strategy (MacArthur 2013). This chapter does not attempt to repeat this material. Instead, it provides supplementary information, URLs for important documents and websites, and a perspective on the key institutional and economic factors most relevant to the CRAG Intervention Plan for the Kivu-Rusizi CRAG. 3.2 Demography

Populations are growing in all three countries at a rate well above the global average. From 2010- 2015, annual growth averaged 3.2% in Burundi, and 2.7% in DRC. DRC is one of the most populated countries in Africa, with 75 million inhabitants5. While Rwanda and Burundi have much smaller populations, they are the first and second most densely populated countries in mainland Africa with 354 and 435 people/km2 respectively in 20126. In the absence of effective and widespread adoption of family planning, these densities will double within the next 25 years. Densities are lower (28 people/km2) in DRC as a whole, but are much higher in the part that falls within the CRAG, owing to disproportionate settlement of people in eastern DRC (especially in and around Goma and Uvira) compared to the rest of the country, largely fuelled by insecurity. Such population densities (Figure 3.1A) put huge pressure on natural resources and increase vulnerability to climatic hazards7. Within the CRAG, at the provincial and district level, densities are highest in Rubavu in Rwanda near Goma on the north-east of Lake Kivu at over 1000 people/km2, and lowest in the South Kivu Province in DRC at around 68 (Figure 3.1B and Map 3.1). Chapter 2 (Figure 2.1) gives additional data on the populations of urban centres within the CRAG.

Figure 3.1 Population Densities in (A) Countries, (B) Provinces and Districts

A. Density (people/km2) 500 400 300 200 100 0 DRC Burundi Rwanda Country

5 www.worldbank.org/en/country/drc 6 https://data.un.org/ 7 www.preventionweb.net/english/professional/maps/v.php?id=7864

B. Density (people/km2) 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0

Province/District

3.3 Socio-economic context

The CRAG countries are low income countries, with Burundi and DRC among the poorest in the world. After the stagnant economic period of the 1980s and 1990s – due largely to civil conflicts – the three CRAG countries have generally enjoyed much improved economic growth over the last decade. From 2010-2013, annual growth in GDP averaged 4.15% in Burundi, 7.4% in DRC and 7.2% in Rwanda8. GDP growth in DRC and Rwanda has continued (DRC 9.0% in 2014 and 8.0% in 2015; Rwanda 7.0% and 7.4%), but political problems in Burundi reduced GDP growth from 4.6% in 2014 to -2.3% in 20159.

Agriculture remains a key industry for all three countries, and is the dominant influence on the landscape (Chapter 2, Map 2.5). In DRC agriculture employs about 70% of the population and produces 40% of GDP, while trade accounts for 22% of GDP and mining 12% (AfDB, 2013). In Burundi this percentage is even higher, with agriculture – principally smallholdings – accounting for 43% of GDP and employing 90% of the workforce (AfDB, 2011). The contribution of agriculture to GDP in Rwanda is 35%, with 73% of the workforce largely self-employed in food production (AfDB, 2013).

However, recent economic growth in the three countries has been driven by other sectors. In Burundi, for example, the service industry, which now accounts for 32% of GDP, saw a 5.1% growth rate between 2006 and 2010 compared to less than 3% for agriculture (AfDB, 2011). This trend is similar in Rwanda, where the services industry has surpassed agriculture as the largest share of GDP (47% from 1995-2010), resulting largely from an expansion in trade, transport, telecommunications, finance and insurance, and a decline in agricultural productivity (AfDB 2013). The major drivers of growth in DRC include private investment in mining and trade sectors, as well as an increase in public investment (AfDB, 2013).

Rwanda has seen dramatic improvements in its business environment as well as private sector investment. The private sector employs over 90% of Rwanda’s workforce. Small and medium enterprises (SME) account for 98% of all business and 84% of private sector employment.

8 http://data.worldbank.org/country/ 9 http://data.worldbank.org/country/

In Burundi, on the other hand, the private sector is nascent with 3000 registered companies, mostly SME. Private investment in GDP remains limited, but rose from 2.2% in 2000 to 13% in 2010. It is constrained by poor infrastructure, political instability, corruption and weak legal systems alongside a lack of human resources (AfDB, 2011).

Map 3.1 Population Densities in the three CRAG countries

Poverty is rife in all three countries (Table 3.1). In Rwanda, 63% of the population lives on less than USD 1.25 per day, and in Burundi and DRC, over 80% of the population. Rural poverty is particularly high in Burundi, where it is closely linked to environmental degradation and low agricultural productivity and high vulnerability to climate change and other disasters. Unequal access to or ownership of land and natural resources in all three countries has played a significant role in inequities, environmental degradation and conflict (IIED 2014; AfDB, 2011, 2013). Rwanda has taken important steps to address this, but it remains an issue in Burundi and DRC (see 3.6).

Government commitment and strong donor support has led to improved Human Development Indicators (HDI) over the last decade, particularly for health and education. Despite these improvements, Burundi’s HDI remains one of the lowest in the world, ranked 180th out of 187 countries and DRC is ranked even lower at 186th. Rwanda’s HDI, on the other hand, has improved in both real terms and relative to other countries, placing them 151st. Gender inequality has also been greatly reduced in Rwanda, where the number of women heading government ministries is now higher than that of men10.

Table 3.1 Socioeconomic Parameters for the three CRAG Countries

Population GDP in USD HDI Percentage of Gender Life millions11 billions12 (country population inequality expectancy rank)13 living below index14 at birth15 $1.25 a day (country rank) Burundi 10.16 2.715 0.389 81.32 0.501 (104) 56 (180/187) DRC 67.51 32.69 0.338 87.72 0.669 (147) 52 (186/187) Rwanda 11.78 7.521 0.506 63.17 0.410 (79) 65 (151/187)

3.4 Political Situation The political context today in the CRAG has its roots in the colonization of East Africa by European powers between 1881 and 1914. DRC, Burundi and Rwanda were each colonized by Belgium, after a short period of German rule. The Europeans introduced intensive agricultural and forestry practices accompanied by political and legal systems to govern them, which has impacted the use of land and natural resources in the countries. Decolonization began after the Second World War: DRC became independent in 1960, and Burundi and Rwanda shortly afterwards in 1962. The post-independence period has been characterized by unstable political situations, characterized by authoritarian regimes or dictatorships that retained the instruments of state control and security put in place by colonial governments. More recently, there has been a challenging transition to more democratic systems of governance.

10 http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SG.GEN.PARL.ZS 11 http://data.worldbank.org 12 http://data.worldbank.org 13 2013 data http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-index-hdi-table 14 2013 data http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-index-hdi-table 15 http://gamapserver.who.int/gho/interactive_charts/mbd/life_expectancy/atlas.html

All three of the CRAG countries have faced considerable civil and political unrest, as well as ethnic tension since independence. This has had largely negative impact on ecosystems16. Burundi is recovering from a Civil War, which lasted from 1993 to 2005 and is estimated to have cost Burundi two decades of revenue growth17. The last two years have seen a resurgence of violence and unrest in the country following the decision to extend the term limits of its current president. DRC experienced armed conflicts from 1996-2000, and have subsequently restored a degree of peace and security after the signing of the Global and All-Inclusive Agreement in 2002 and the adoption of a new Constitution by referendum in 2005. Rwanda recently marked two decades since the Genocide, and has made ambitious political and economic reforms to strengthen the economy and establish national peace and security. This progress is likely to be tested in the next few years over issues of governmental continuity. More generally, although all three countries are making progress to improving political and social security, and revive their economies, governance remains a challenge, particularly in Burundi and DRC18. 3.5 Global and Regional Policy Frameworks for the Environment

Climate change has already had impacts on socio-economic and ecological systems, and how they interact (IPCC, 2014). It puts direct pressure on biodiversity and also exacerbates existing pressures, such as invasive alien species and overexploitation19. However, biodiversity and ecosystem services are not just victims of climate change; they are also part of the solution. Conserving, restoring and sustainably managing ecosystems can help mitigate climate change and reduce the vulnerability of communities to its impacts. Such ecosystem-based approaches are particularly relevant in the context of the CRAG, where there is a large rural population directly dependent on biodiversity for their livelihoods. An effective policy response is needed at multiple levels to guide and promote actions that build the resilience of communities and the ecosystems upon which they depend, and that reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

At the global level, the United Nations provides a unique forum for building consensus around global priorities and establishing commitments from national governments. The conventions of the UN provide global frameworks to promote coherence and coordination in policy-making and guide actions taken by governments nationally. The CRAG Intervention Plan seeks to guide and support the three countries to implement global priorities and deliver on their commitments. This section provides an overview of and linkages between the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the major global policy frameworks for biodiversity, climate change and disaster risk reduction: the Convention on Biological Diversity, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction.20 3.5.1 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Development Goals

In September 2015 governments adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development with 17 Sustainable Development Goals and 169 associated targets, which are intended to build on the

16 www.unep.org/dewa/Africa/publications/AEO-2/content/203.htm 17 http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTWDRS/Resources/WDR2011_Full_Text.pdf 18 www.eda.admin.ch/deza/en/home/countries/great-lakes-region.html 19 climatechange.birdlife.org 20 This is not an exhaustive list. Other global agreements, such as the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, may also be of direct relevance to the CIP.

Millennium Development Goals. The targets are global in nature, aspirational and universally applicable. They reflect a broad range of economic, social and environmental objectives.

Each government is tasked with setting targets at the national level – guided by the global level ambition and taking into account national circumstances – and to decide how to achieve these targets through national planning, policies and strategies.

A number of goals and targets address the issues of climate change resilience and biodiversity conservation, reflecting the cross-cutting nature of the issues and the integrated approach adopted in establishing the SDGs. Two goals specifically address these issues and are of most relevance to the CRAG Intervention Plan: Goal 13 “Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts” and Goal 15 “Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestiral ecosystems, sustianably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss.” 3.5.2. Biodiversity – Convention on Biological Diversity

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) was created after the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, with three main objectives: 1) the conservation of biological diversity; 2) the sustainable use of the components of biological diversity; 3) the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources. It has helped to stimulate considerable policy reform and legislation throughout the GLR, supported largely by donor funding. In 2010 at the 10th Conference of the Parties (COP), governments adopted a revised and updated Strategic Plan for Biodiversity for the 2011-2020 period. Parties also agreed to translate this overarching international framework into revised and updated national biodiversity strategies and action plans (NBSAPs) within two years. Additionally, the COP decided that the fifth national reports should focus on the implementation of the 2011-2020 Strategic Plan and progress achieved towards the Aichi Biodiversity Targets. As of June 2016, the three CRAG countries have all submitted their 5th national report and Burundi has submitted their revised NBSAP. The NBSAPs of DRC and Rwanda are pending (Table 3.2).

Table 3.2 NBSAPS and national reports to the CBD in the CRAG region21

Country Latest NBSAP: URL and Date Latest National Report: URL and date Burundi http://www.cbd.int/doc/world/bi/bi- http://www.cbd.int/doc/world/bi/bi-nr- nbsap-v2-p1-fr.pdf (2015) 05-fr.pdf (5th Report 2014) http://www.cbd.int/doc/world/bi/bi- nbsap-v2-p2-fr.pdf (2015) DRC http://www.cbd.int/doc/world/cd/cd- http://www.cbd.int/doc/world/cd/cd- nbsap-v2-fr.pdf (2002) nr-05-fr.pdf (5th Report 2014) Rwanda http://www.cbd.int/doc/world/rw/rw http://www.cbd.int/doc/world/rw/rw- -nbsap-01-en.pdf (2003) nr-05-en.pdf (5th report 2014)

The links between climate change and biodiversity and ecosystem services are well-recognized by the CBD. At COP5 in 1999, the CBD encouraged Parties “to take measures to manage ecosystems so as to maintain their resilience to extreme climate events and to help mitigate and adapt to climate change” (Decision V/15). A number of relevant decisions have since been adopted, and the scope has broadened to include disaster risk reduction22.

21 URLS and details downloaded on 04-10-2014 from www.cbd.int/reports/search/ 22 For an overview of CBD decisions on climate change see www.cbd.int/climate/decision.shtml

For example, at COP12 Parties adopted Decision XII/20 which “Encourages Parties and invites other Governments and relevant organizations to promote and implement ecosystem-based approaches to climate change related activities and disaster risk reduction, in both terrestrial and marine environments, and to integrate these into their policies and programmes.”

Climate change and resilience have also been addressed in decisions in other thematic areas pertinent to the CIP, such as Decision X/30 on Mountain biological diversity and Decision X/28 Inland waters biodiversity, and are entrenched in the Strategic Plan 2011-2020 and accompanying Aichi Biodiversity Targets (e.g. Targets 11, 14, and 15). However, an assessment of progress on biodiversity and climate change prepared for the 18th meeting of CBD’s Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice found that only a few countries have integrated climate change into NBSAPs, or integrated biodiversity and ecosystem services into climate change mitigation and adaptation policies, plans and strategies23. Awareness of the issues is growing, nonetheless, for example, in Rwanda reported in their 5th National Report that wetlands and water bodies (small lakes) at the summit of volcanic mountains are drying up due to climate change and that some species have migrated to higher altitudes in search of suitable habitats as a result of climate change, and that they are implementing a project titled “Landscape Approach to Forest Restoration and Conservation (LAFREC)” that promotes a landscape approach to biodiversity conservation and sustainable use, climate change adaptation, and combating land degradation.

3.5.3 UNFCCC - Climate Change

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) originated in 1992 with the objective “to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system”. In December 2015, governments adopted the Paris Climate Change Agreement under the auspices of the UNFCCC. The Agreement represents an evolution in the global climate regime: firstly, the Agreement is applicable to all countries, putting an end to the strict differentiation between developed and developing countries of its predecessor, the Kyoto Protocol; secondly, it departs from top-down goal setting to a bottom-up approach in which governments are required to make pledges called “nationally determined contributions” (NDCs). The Agreement commits countries to regularly report on progress made in implementing and achieving these NDCs and to submit new and more ambitious NDCs every five years.

Governments were required to submit intended NDCs (iNDCs) prior to the Paris Conference of Parties in 2015, and these will be updated before the Agreement enters into force. The iNDCs of the CRAG countries outline adaptation as well as mitigation actions they intend to undertake. Burundi sets both an unconditional mitigation target as well as a target conditional on international support, whereas DRC and Rwanda present only a conditional one. Burundi’s and DRC’s iNDCs also provide estimates of funding requirements for undertaking the proposed actions. Many of the programmes or activities outlined in the iNDCs involve elements of conservation, restoration and sustainable use of ecosystems, particularly in the context of agriculture, forestry and water (see table 3.3).

23www.cbd.int/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-18/official/sbstta-18-13-en.pdf

Table 3.3: Summary of CRAG countries’ iNDCs

Country Unconditional Conditional Adaptation Examples of Mitigation Target Mitigation Target Priorities ecosystem-related actions Burundi Reduction of GHG Reduction of GHG Implement - Integrated H20 emissions by 3% emissions by 20% adaptation management compared to compared to programmes - Protection of business-as-usual business-as-usual identified in terrestrial scenario for 2030: scenario for 2030: National Strategy & ecosystems - Reforesting - Reforesting Action Plan on - Research & 4000ha/year 8000ha/year Climate Change extension of 2016-2030 2016-2030 (2012) drought- - Completing - Replacing 100% resistant forest construction of of charcoal species 3 hydroelectric kilns & - REDD+ power plants traditional - Reforestation of ovens by 2030 terrains on - Replacement steep slopes of 100% of - Colonization of mineral terrains on mild fertilizers with slopes through organic agroforestry fertilizer by 2030 DRC None Reduction of GHG Implement - Protection & emissions by 17% priorities outlined preservation of by 2030 with 2000 in NAPA (2006): ecosystems as a baseline. - Securing - Rational Mitigation efforts livelihoods & management of will be taken in 3 lifestyles of forest resources sectors: rural & urban - Afforestation & agriculture, energy communities reforestation & forestry (3 - Rational million ha of management re/afforestation by of forest 2025). resources - Protection & preservation of vulnerable ecosystems. These are currently being reviewed as part of the NAP process, which commenced in 2014. Rwanda None To deviate Implement - National emissions from the priorities identified integrated H20 business as usual in Rwanda’s Green resource path by 2030. Growth & Climate management

Mitigation actions Resilient Strategy - Integrated to cover five (2011). These are approach to sectors: energy, on-going & will be Sustainable transport, industry, partially or fully Land Use waste & forestry. achieved by 2050. Planning and Management 8 Programmes of - Ecotourism, Action on Conservation & Adaptation identified. PES Promotion in Protected Areas - Soil conservation & land husbandry - Sustainable forestry & agroforestry - mainstreaming agro-ecology techniques

Adaptation is a core part of the Paris Climate Change Agreement. Article 7 articulates a global goal on adaptation and provides a framework for national adaptation action, acknowledging that “adaptation action should follow a country-driven, gender-responsive, participatory and fully transparent approach, taking into consideration vulnerable groups, communities and ecosystems”. The Agreement builds on existing structures and processes under the UNFCCC, reaffirming the role Cancun Adaptation Framework adopted in 2010 (Decision 1/CP.16) and the Nairobi Work Programme24 on impacts, vulnerability and adaptation to climate change.

The two major instruments under the UNFCCC for guiding adaptation in the CRAG countries are the National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPAs) and the National Adaptation Plans (NAPs). National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPAs) were developed in Least Developed Countries – a grouping which includes the three CRAG countries – to address “urgent and immediate needs to adapt to climate change”. Each NAPA provides short descriptions for adaptation activities and projects, ranked by priority and designed to guide the development of proposals to implement the National Adaptation Programmes (table 3.4). While the NAPAs were developed almost a decade ago with support from the Least Developed Countries Fund of the GEF, only a few of the programmes of action have been successfully implemented due primarily to a lack of financial support.

The National Adaptation Plan process was established in 2010 as part of the Cancun Adaptation Framework, and further endorsed by the Paris Climate Change Agreement. The objective of National Adaptation Plans is to reduce vulnerability to the impacts of climate change by building adaptive capacity and resilience, and facilitating the coherent integration of climate change adaptation into new and existing policies, programmes and activities.

24 www3.unfccc.int/pls/apex/f?p=333:1:4091845050286992

Whereas NAPAs are priority projects to address short-term vulnerability, NAPs are intended to provide a more comprehensive, cross-sectoral approach for treating medium to long-term vulnerability The process of developing, implementing and updating NAPs in the target countries of the CRAG is directly relevant to the CRAG Intervention Plan (Chapter 8). Burundi, DRC and Rwanda have all initiated this process.

Table 3.4 NAPAs, National Communications and Intended Nationally Contributions to the UNFCCC in the CRAG countries

Country NAPA: Latest National Intended Nationally URL and Date Communication: URL and Determined Contributions date Burundi http://unfccc.int/resourc http://unfccc.int/resource/ www4.unfccc.int/submissio e/docs/napa/bdi01e.pdf docs/natc/burnc2.pdf ns/INDC/Published%20Docu (2007) (2010) ments/Burundi/1/Burundi_I http://unfccc.int/resource/ NDC-english%20version.pdf docs/natc/burnc2exsume.p df (2010) DRC www.adaptationlearning. http://unfccc.int/resource/ www4.unfccc.int/submissio net/sites/default/files/co docs/natc/rdcnc2.pdf ns/INDC/Published%20Docu d01.pdf (2006) (2009) ments/Democratic%20Repu http://unfccc.int/resource/ blic%20of%20the%20Congo docs/natc/rdcnc2exsume.p /1/CPDN%20- df (2009) %20R%C3%A9p%20D%C3% A9m%20du%20Congo.pdf Rwanda http://unfccc.int/resourc http://unfccc.int/resource/ www4.unfccc.int/submissio e/docs/napa/rwa01e.pdf docs/natc/rwanc2f.pdf ns/INDC/Published%20Docu (2006) (2012) ments/Rwanda/1/INDC_Rw http://unfccc.int/resource/ anda_Nov.2015.pdf docs/natc/rdcnc2exsume.p df (2012)

3.5.4 Disaster Risk Reduction – Sendai Framework

Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) aims to reduce the damage caused by natural hazards through an ethic of prevention. It involves reducing exposure to hazards, wise management of land and the environment, and improving preparedness and early warning for adverse events. Disasters range from disease epidemics such as Ebola, through earthquakes, tsunamis, floods and droughts, to humanitarian emergencies arising from civil conflicts. In the two decades up to 2005, a global average of over 200 million people had been affected by disasters every year25. The most frequent result from hydro-meteorological events.

Following the World Conference on Disaster Reduction (2005), the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005- 2015 (HFA) was developed as part of the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction. Burundi26,

25 www.unisdr.org/2005/wcdr/intergover/official-doc/L-docs/Hyogo-framework-for-action-english.pdf 26 www.preventionweb.net/files/16326_bdi_NationalHFAprogress_2009-11.pdf

DRC27 and Rwanda28 have reported on their progress in addressing these actions. The HFA was updated in March 2015 with the adoption of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015- 2030, which outlines four priorities for action: 1) understanding disaster risk; 2) strengthening disaster risk governance to manage disaster risk; 3) investing in disaster risk reduction for resilience; 4) enhancing disaster preparedness for effective response, and to “Build Back Better” in recovery, rehabilitation and reconstruction. The links between DRR and sound management of ecosystems is reflected throughout the framework. Priority area 3, for example, emphasizes that it is “important to strengthen the sustainable use and management of ecosystems and implement integrated environmental and natural resource management approaches that incorporate disaster risk reduction”.

In 2010, Rwanda established the Ministry of Disaster Management and Refugee Affairs (MIDIMAR). This was followed by Cabinet approval of a revised National Disaster Management Policy in 2012, and the development of a 5 Year Strategic Plan (2012-2017) with clear objectives in line with the five priorities of the Hyogo Framework for Action. Inadequate funding, resources and capacity remain major constraints to effective implementation. These constraints are even more severe in Burundi and the DRC. All three CRAG countries participate in the Regional Disaster Management Centre for Excellence, based in Nairobi, which aims to enhance Disaster Risk Reduction. This Centre suffers the same constraints, resulting in limited sharing of risk reduction information and inadequate risk assessment mechanisms. A related initiative is the African Risk Capacity (ARC), a Specialized Agency of the African Union to help Member States improve their capacities to better plan, prepare and respond to extreme weather events and natural disasters29. Weather-related issues such as flood and drought monitoring and warning are dealt with at a regional level under the IGAD Climate Prediction and Applications Centre (ICPAC). 3.5.4 Regional Agreements

The three CRAG countries are members of one or more Regional Economic Communities (RECs) (Table 3.5). The principal focus of these communities is to facilitate trade and economic cooperation between their member states, and in many cases they started their activities with trade and custom agreements. They also often present an important arena to deal with security issues and peace- building. Some of the RECs have also developed initiatives in the field of environment, providing a framework for developing common positions regarding international agreements and for holding high-level meetings and conferences as well as developing protocols or regional regulations on sustainable management of natural resources that have to be enforced by their member states.

The East African Community (EAC), for example, provides an overall context for the collaboration of the five countries involved in the management of the Lake Kivu and Tanganyika Basins. Burundi and Rwanda are already members, and DRC has indicated interest in joining30. The EAC Legislative Assembly passed a law in February 2011 to secure transboundary ecosystems along their borders31. This may open up new opportunities for the management of Lakes Kivu and Tanganyika under the GLR strategy and the CIP.

27 www.preventionweb.net/files/36425_36425planorsecversionfinale1.pdf 28 www.preventionweb.net/english/policies/v.php?id=28725&cid=143 29 www.africanriskcapacity.org 30www.eac.int/sg/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=110:the-furue-of-eac&catid=40:sgs- blog&Itemid=1 31www.birdlife.org/community/2012/02/birdlife-welcomes-passing-of-law-to-secure-transboundary-ecosystems-in- east-africa/

There are also several regional initiatives that aim to foster regional cooperation specifically for the environment. Among the regional initiatives, the African Ministerial Conference on the Environment (AMCEN) has been perhaps the most influential. All CRAG countries are members of this permanent forum, where African ministers of the environment discuss matters of relevance to the environment of the continent. The objectives of AMCEN’s Flagship Programme on Sustainable Land Management, Desertification, Biodiversity and Ecosystem-based Adaptation to Climate Change overlap with those of the CIP.

Table 3.5 Regional Economic Communities

Name and Description Burundi DRC Rwanda Regional Economic Communities Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) developed a climate change initiative that started X X X in 2010, encompassing various transnational activities. COMESA also develops agricultural programs.

Southern African Development Community (SADC) has a natural resources management program dealing with regional

issues on fisheries, forestry, wildlife management and transfrontier protected areas. The SADC Protocol on Wildlife X Conservation and Law Enforcement aims to promote the conservation of the shared wildlife resources through the establishment of transfrontier conservation areas.

East African Community (EAC) works primarily on common market and custom issues. EAC has developed a climate change strategy for the period 2011-2015 and has X X passed a Transboundary Ecosystems Management Bill in 2012. Communauté Économique des Etats d’Afrique Centrale (CEEAC) developed interventions on natural resources X X X through the creation of a specialized organ, COMIFAC, to enhance regional cooperation on forest issues. Economic Community of Great Lakes Countries hosts

different bodies on energy and finance, but has no specific interventions on environment. Its support to large energy X X X infrastructures could potentially have important environmental repercussions. Regional Environmental Agreements The Algiers Convention, signed in 1968, introduced innovative approaches for the conservation of nature. It acknowledged early on the principle of common responsibility for environmental management by African states. It was revised X X in 2003 (known as the Maputo Convention), but that version has not yet reached the necessary number of ratifications to put it into force.

Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) was established in 1999 and involved nine countries that share the Nile River and its sources. The initiative‘s vision is to achieve sustainable X X X socioeconomic development through the equitable utilization of, and benefit from, the common Nile Basin water resources. African Ministerial Conference on the Environment (AMCEN) is where African ministers of the environment discuss matters of relevance to the environment of the continent. AMCEN was established in 1985 and convenes X X X every second year for regular sessions. It prepares statements and positions for the international conferences and provides heads of state with recommendations regarding the environment. Central Africa Forest Commission (COMIFAC) has the objective to enhance regional cooperation on forest issues, working for a better convergence of forest management X X regulations, developing transnational protected areas and other regional programs on issues such as capacity building for REDD. Convention on the Sustainable Management of Lake Tanganyika was signed in 2003 and ratified in 2007. It legally binds Burundi, DRC, Tanzania, and Zambia to cooperate and X X to implement harmonized laws and standards to protect biodiversity and sustainably use the natural resources of Lake Tanganyika and its basin.

3.6 National Policies and Legislation Concerning the Environment

3.6.1 Overview

Table 3.6 summarizes the key policy and legal documents in each of the countries. Environmental problems are multi-sectoral, involving different government agencies for land-use, energy, agriculture, forestry, water and fisheries, often with conflicting mandates. A robust and coherent policy framework that addresses potential synergies and trade-offs is imperative for supporting biodiversity conservation and economic growth in the face of climate change. There is considerable unevenness in the national policy and legal frameworks both within and across the CRAG countries. The situation is particularly concerning in DRC, where environmental policy is almost non-existent. As a result, legislation has been developed in an ad-hoc manner and is often contradictory32. Even where policies are coherently developed and meet international standards for good practice and provide a sound basis for legislation their implementation is another issue all together. This chapter confines itself to the policies as written and endorsed by government; it does not deal with problems of implementation (which are addressed to some extent in Chapter 7 and 8). Discussion of instruments of the CBD and UNFCCC were addressed in section 3.5 of this chapter.

32 www.unep.org/DRcongo/

Table 3.6 Summary of key policy and legislation on climate change, land and environmental management for the CRAG countries.

Country Policy Document Date (Revision) Burundi Policies Vision Burundi 2025 2011 National Adaptation Programmes of Action 2007 National Climate Change Policy 2013 National Strategy and Action Plan on Climate Change 2013 National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan 2015 Growth and Poverty Reduction Strategy Framework (CSLPII) 2006 (2012) National Strategy and Action Plan for Combatting Soil Degradation 2011- 2011 2016 National Programme of Action to Combat Land Degradation 2005 National Agricultural Strategy 2008-2015 2008 National Agricultural Investment Plan 2012-2017 2012 National Forest Policy of Burundi 2012 National Water Resources Management Policy and Action Plan 2001 Legislation Constitution 2005 Environmental Code 2000 Water Code 1992 (2012) Ministry of Land Planning and Environment Sectoral Policy 1999 Creation and management of Protected Areas 2011 Mining Code enacted by Law 1/21 2013 DRC Policies Growth and Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper 2011 Agricultural policy reform document 2003 Legislation Constitution of the third Republic 2006 Draft Energy Code 2005 Forest Code 2002 Land Law No. 73-021 1973 DRC, 2010. Journal Officiel de la RDC Numéro Spécial. Code foncier 2010 Law 011/30003 pertaining to the Forest Code passed 2002 Mining Code enacted by Law No. 007/2002 2002 New Environmental Law 2011 Draft Water Code 2010 Rwanda Policies Rwanda Vision 2020 2000 EDPRS 2 (2013-2018) 2013 National Environment Policy 2003 Rwanda Biodiversity Policy 2011 National Land Policy 2004 National Policy for Water Resources Management 2011

National Forest Policy 2004 (2010) National Energy Policy and National Energy Strategy 2008-2012 2008 Mining Policy 2010 National Policy and Strategy for Water Supply and Sanitation Services 2010 National Industrial Policy 2011 Strategic Plan for the Transformation of Agriculture in Rwanda Phase III 2013 National Strategy for Climate Change and Low Carbon Development 2011 Legislation The Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda 2003 Law No 70/2013 governing biodiversity in Rwanda 2013 Environment Organic Law No 04/2005 determine modalities of 2005 protection, conservation and promotion of environment in Rwanda Law No 43/2013 of 16 June 2013 Governing Land in Rwanda 2013

3.6.2 Burundi

Vision "Burundi 2025" clearly articulates the role of environmental protection in the development of Burundi. It highlights several factors causing environmental degradation and potential solutions such as efficient management of land issues, protection of fauna and flora, better use of energy resources, controlled water management, ecosystem restoration by reforestation, and awareness-raising of the populations and governments on issues of the environment. It also advocates that the general environment is integrated into all socio-economic policies as essential component of sustainable development. The Strategic Framework for Growth and the fight against poverty (CSLPII) reflects this, with a section on the protection of forests, woodlots and biodiversity. It recognises the important role of the NBSAP and promotes activities such as agroforestry to improve the socio-economic and environmental conditions in Burundi.

A National Climate Change Policy was adopted in 2012 along with a National Strategy and Action Plan on Climate Change with an overarching objective of promoting climate-resilient development. They are built around 9 strategic pillars and form the basis of Burundi’s iNDC to the UNFCCC (see section 3.5.3). The National Strategy and National Action Plan for the Fight against degradation (SP- LCD) devotes its second strategic priority to the restoration and preservation of soil productivity and other ecosystem goods and services including through the protection of watershed slopes and improvement of the ecological conditions of degraded lands and strengthening of protected areas. The National Agricultural Strategy (SAN) promotes several actions related to biodiversity, such as forest and watershed protection, and participatory management of fisheries.

The goal of the forest policy is the perpetuation of existing forest resources and the development of new resources for socio-economic and ecological functions of the populations and future. It has four general objectives and provides guidance related to the preservation and sustainable use of forest resources including mitigation of human pressure on forest resources and promotion of participatory forest management.

Key environmental legislation in Burundi includes Law No. 1/02 of March 25, 1985 under the Forest Code of the same year, which establishes protective forests and reserves, provides for conservation and sustainable use, regulates forest and agricultural fires, and requires land owners to plant trees on their land. Law No. 1/010 of June 30, 2000 on the Environmental Code promotes biodiversity conservation and wilderness reserves, with a special emphasis on threatened species. The Fishery Law

44 is badly outdated, having been promulgated in 1937 with amendments in 1957 and 1960. In 1961 a Ministerial Order regulated fishing permits on Lake Tanganyika and in 1982 another Ministerial Order set new fees for fisheries. A decree law No. 141 of 1992 on Water Resource Management is also outdated, while Law No. 1/008 of 1 September 1986 on the Land Law of Burundi is even more in need of revision in the light of the post conflict situation and the large numbers of displaced people. A law on Creation and Management of Protected Areas in Burundi was adopted in 2011, which among other things outlines different types of governance for PAs (including State, private, co-managed, and community managed), demands management and development plans. Various By-Laws on the Delimitation of National Parks, Nature Reserves, Aquatic Landscapes, and Protected Natural Sites from 2000 to 2011 have consolidated the PA status on many of the KBAs in Burundi (e.g. Rusizi and Bururi Forest Nature Reserve, Kibira National Park, and the Rwihinda Lake Managed Nature Reserve). 3.6.3 DRC

There has been a push to develop and update environmental policy and legislation in DRC since the elections of 2006. This is ongoing, while environmental degradation continues. DRC’s Growth and Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (2011-2015 GPRSP)33 provides the overall policy framework and direction for development and environmental protection in DRC. It includes four objectives of which the fourth specifically addresses the environment: 1) strengthening of governance and consolidation of peace; 2) economic diversification, acceleration of growth and employment promotion; 3) improved access to basic social services and building human capital; and 4) environmental protection and climate change control.

A framework Law on the Environment was drafted in 2007 and included provisions for EIAs, but there has been little progress on this since then. The DRC Forest Code 2002 recognizes three classes of forest and grants community rights to manage their traditional forests in the protected forest category. These rights include small scale farming and logging concessions up to 25 years with 40% of the fees going to support local infrastructure. Implementation of the Forest Code, however, is weak to non- existent and there was little or no consultation with civil society during its formulation: several donors (including GEF) and NGOs are assisting in reviewing and revising this and other environmental legislation in the DRC. A draft water code was presented to Parliament in 2010, based on an integrated Water Resources Management Framework. Emerging legislation on energy will be based on the Energy Code published in 2005 currently undergoing revision. Other legislation is extremely outdated: the 2009 National Report to the CBD cites legislation on fisheries from 1932 and 1937, on water, lakes and rivers from 1952, on nature conservation from 1969, on protected areas from 1975, and on hunting from 1982. It also notes that the laws on fisheries and nature conservation are under review.

In DRC, existing land acquisition systems favour the wealthy and the elite (USAID, 2011). The legislative framework for land ownership is incomplete, as key decrees have not yet been adopted (IIED, 2014), and inconsistencies between written and customary laws remain (Leisz, 1998). Land tenure and property rights for certain segments of the population, particularly Batwa, women and other disadvantaged groups have been impaired by constraints from discriminatory land tenure systems (IIED, 2014).

33http://www.afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/Project-and- Operations/Democratic%20Republic%20of%20Congo%20-%202013-2017%20- %20Country%20Strategy%20Paper.pdf

3.6.4 Rwanda

Rwanda’s Vision 2020 outlines the country’s main priorities which include environmental protection and management, and poverty reduction. To address these objectives, a number of sectoral policies have been implemented for example on land, energy, agriculture, and environment. Rwanda has taken efforts to improve policy coherence and mainstream biodiversity conservation and climate change into sectoral policies. While sectoral policies are starting to better integrate considerations of bioidversity conservation, they are driven by an over-riding priority to achieve development objectives, an imperative that may come at the cost of the environment if strong mitigation and monitoring measures are not respected. Particularly noteworthy is the development of a National Strategy for Climate Change and Low Carbon Development – an ambitious and forward-thinking strategy that recognises the links between mitigation, development and adaptation and integrates consideration of biodiversity and ecosystem services, ecotourism, conservation and payments for ecosystem services, sustainable forestry, agroforestry and biomass.

The legal framework for environment and biodiversity conservation is established by the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda. Further provisions are provided through the Organic Law determining modalities of protection, conservation and promotion of environment in Rwanda of April 2005, the law determining the mission, organization and functioning of Rwanda Environment Management Authority (REMA) of August 2013, and the law governing biodiversity in Rwanda of September 2013.

3.7 Institutional Context

3.7.1 Environment-related government agencies

Table 3.7 lists the Ministries most centrally involved in the governance of biodiversity, freshwater resources and their catchments, and identifies the major sectors for which they are responsible. The focal Environment Ministries are the lead organizations for the implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Rwanda has a specific ministry to address Disaster Risk Reduction – Disaster Management and Refugee Affairs – while in DRC and Burundi, DRR is housed within the Ministry of Internal Affairs.

Table 3.7 Ministries with responsibility in priority sectors for the CRAG Intervention Plan

Country Ministries Major Sectors

EIA Authority Biodiversity conservation Climate change DRR Water Fisheries Forests Agriculture Energy Burundi Water, Environment, Territory Management X X X X X and Urban Planning (MEEATU)

Agriculture and Livestock X X

Energy and Mines X X

Ministry of the Interior and X Public Security

DRC Environment, Nature Conservation and X X X X X Tourism

Agriculture, Fisheries and Livestock X X

Mines and Energy X X

Minister of the Interior X

Rwanda Water, Energy and Natural X X X X X X Resources (MINERENA)

Agriculture and Animal X X Resources (MINAGRI)

Disaster Management X and Refugee Affairs

The focal Environment Ministries are also the lead organizations for Environmental Impact Assessment in all the CRAG countries, but administer the EIA process in consultation with the concerned ministries34. Given the relatively short time that EIA legislation has been in place and the scarcity of funds, it is inevitable that the requisite capacity is often lacking and that there is high reliance on external consultants financed by interested parties. In practice, Environmental Impact Assessments have often been ignored or conducted inadequately. This is particularly the case where powerful interests are at stake. Burundi’s NBSAP (2013) for example, explicitly acknowledges the lack of effective EIAs as an important contributor to biodiversity loss in Burundi. Despite poor implementation, the instruments for EIAs remain an important resource for environmental protection in the GLR and capacity building in the relevant Ministries and Departments is a worthwhile investment.

Water, fisheries, forestry, agriculture and energy are the sectors most relevant to the management and conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services in the GLR. They come under various Ministries in different combinations and sometimes with overlapping mandates. For example, the Water Resources sector is shared with the focal Ministries for Environment in Burundi, DRC and Rwanda. In Burundi and DRC, energy is combined with mines, while in Rwanda it sits under the focal environment Ministry (MINIRENA). A common feature for all the Ministries and their institutions is that they are under-resourced, a problem which worsens as you go further down the government hierarchies.

3.7.2 Transboundary arrangements and management in the CRAG The CRAG includes watersheds and water bodies that span national boundaries, requiring transboundary governance and management structures. Transboundary management authorities have been established for both the Lake Kivu and Lake Tanganyika basins. The Convention on the Sustainable Management of Lake Tanganyika provided the framework for establishing the Lake Tanganyika Authority (LTA), which coordinates the implementation of the Convention. The LTA was launched in December 2008.

As part of its first phase it implemented two projects under a Strategic Action Plan that had been developed in 2000 by the governments of Burundi, Democratic Republic Congo, Tanzania, and Zambia.

34 E.g. see www.pumpsea.icat.fc.ul.pt/downloads/Rebelo_IAIA06_Article.pdf for Tanzania, Kenya and Mozambique

This original plan was revised to reflect the changing situation in the lake and its basin over the last ten years (LTA Secretariat, 2011).

In 2011 the ministers in charge of water in Burundi, DRC and Rwanda, established a similar management structure for the Lake Kivu Basin and the Rusizi River (ABAKIR). The mission of ABAKIR is to facilitate cooperation between Member States and ensure the sustainability of water resources for harmonious socio economic development of the sub-region. It was established to address the need to manage water resources of the basin more sustainably through the protection, conservation and regulation of the use of resource for the generation of hydroelectric power on the cascade of Rusizi. The Authority facilitates cooperation between the Member States for the Integrated Management of Water Resource (IWRM) in the Basin and ensures equitable and sustainable development in all sectors requiring use or having an impact on water resources. Its mission is to promote cooperation between Member States and ensure the sustainability of water resources for harmonious socio-economic development of the sub-region. 3.7.3 Civil Society

The history of relationships between civil society organizations and governments within the CRAG has been mixed, but is marked by increasing levels of co-operation and the recognition of mutual benefits, in keeping with the gradual democratization of society and its institutions. The largest area of activity for NGOs is by far poverty reduction and rural development, but there is also considerable involvement of civil society in environmental and conservation issues. Historical factors, especially long-running civil conflicts, have severely impeded the development of civil society in Burundi and DRC, and NGOs are most strongly developed in Rwanda.

Rwanda and Burundi both have a high number of active development organizations for the size of their population. Rwanda also has many NGOs and initiatives in the environment sector, while Burundi and DRC have fairly moderate numbers relative to their size and biological importance.

The conservation community in DRC and Burundi is weaker than in Rwanda. They are less active in science and data production, as well as in advocacy and raising awareness. Most of the conservation activities still remain with a few international NGOs, whose activities focus on a limited number of key protected areas, particularly in DRC. National NGOs mainly implement community-based actions, and have more limited experience and capacity to address advocacy and participate in national decision making processes. The political situation and the remoteness of local NGOs from the capital city, in DRC, poses further constraints.

Countries have also created forums or networks that involve the most influential conservation NGOs, often also associating national authorities in charge of protected areas. Examples include Plan d’action pour la gestion intégrée des ressources en eau in Burundi, Rwanda Environmental NGOs Forum (RENGOF) and Union of Associations for Gorilla Conservation and Community in DRC. Community forestry networks have also been established in DRC to support communities, share information and conduct advocacy.

There are also a number of international or regional organisations or coalitions operating in the CRAG. One of the most active is the Albertine Rift Conservation Society (ARCOS), which was established to champion collaborative conservation and sustainable development in the Albertine Rift region through biodiversity monitoring, information exchange, networking, capacity building, conservation action and policy work. Another is the Congo Basin Forest Partnership (CBFP), which consists of governments of the Congo Basin countries, representatives of the donor community,

49 conservation NGOs, forest research centres and private sector associations. Launched in Johannesburg in 2002, CBFP is the regional body in charge of forest and environmental policy, coordination and harmonization, with the objective to promote the conservation and sustainable management of the Congo Basin‘s forest ecosystems. Rwanda, Burundi and DRC are each members of this initiative.

Several international NGOs carry out conservation work in the CRAGS, often working with local partner NGOs or through local branches managed primarily by nationals in the countries where they are represented. These have been described in the Eastern Afromontane Ecosystem Profile (2012) and the GLR Strategy (2013). A recent addition is The Nature Conservancy which promises to bring considerable resources to bear on the GLR in general and to the Lake Tanganyika Basin in particular. 3.8 Summary This chapter provides background on the demography, socio-economic context, policies, legislation, management authorities, and civil society organisations in the three CRAG countries.

Population growth in the three CRAG countries is well above the global average. High population densities, particularly in Burundi and Rwanda put huge pressure on natural resources and increase vulnerability to climatic hazards. Within the CRAG, at the provincial and district level, densities are highest in Rubavu in Rwanda near Goma on the north-east of Lake Kivu.

The CRAG countries are Least Developed Countries, but have enjoyed a high rate of annual GDP growth over the past decade after the economically stagnant period of the 1980s and 1990s. They are heavily dependent on agriculture, which accounts for between 35% (Rwanda) and 43% (Burundi) of GDP, employing between 70% (DRC) and 90% (Burundi) of the population. Recent growth has come from other sectors. In Rwanda, for example, the services industry now accounts for the largest share of GDP. Over 80% of the populations of Burundi and DRC live on less than $1.25/day and about 60% of Rwanda’s population.

An effective policy response is needed to guide and promote actions that build the resilience of communities and the ecosystems upon which they depend. The conventions of the UN – such as the CBD, UNFCCC and Sendai Framework – provide global frameworks to promote coherence and coordination in policy-making and guide actions taken by governments nationally. There is considerable momentum and opportunity generated by the successful adoption of the SDGs and the Paris Climate Change Agreement. The focus is now on national implementation. Processes and instruments of particularly relevance for the CIP include: NBSAPs, NAPs, and the development, implementation and 5-yearly revision of the Nationally Determined Contributions that countries committed to as part of the Paris Agreement. Regional Economic Communities and other regional initiatives such as AMCEN could also provide an important framework and target for the CIP.

Environmental problems are multi-sectoral, involving different government agencies for land-use, energy, agriculture, forestry, water and fisheries, often with conflicting mandates. A robust and coherent policy framework that addresses potential synergies and trade-offs is imperative for supporting biodiversity conservation and economic growth in the face of climate change. There is considerable unevenness in the national policy and legal frameworks both within and across the CRAG countries. This chapter outlines the most important policies and legislation governing land and environmental management in the three CRAG countries.

This major Ministries most centrally involved in the governance of biodiversity, freshwater resources and their catchments, are identified, together with the major sectors for which they are responsible.

A common feature for all the Ministries and their institutions is that they are under-resourced. The chapter also outlines relevant transboundary arrangements and management such as the AKABIR and LTA, and provides an overview of civil society engagement across the CRAG. References

AfDB, 2011: Burundi Country Strategy Paper 2012-2016. http://www.afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/Project-and-Operations/Burundi%20- %20CSP%202012-16.pdf

AfDB 2011: Rwanda Bank Group Country Strategy Paper 2012-2016. http://www.afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/Project-and-Operations/Rwanda%20- %20CSP%202012-2016.pdf

AfDB 2013: Democratic Republic of Congo Country Strategy Paper 2013-2017. http://www.afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/Project-and- Operations/Democratic%20Republic%20of%20Congo%20-%202013-2017%20- %20Country%20Strategy%20Paper.pdf

Burundi’s NBSAP (2014) Stratégie Nationale et Plan d’Action sur la Biodiversité 2013-2020. https://www.cbd.int/doc/world/bi/bi-nbsap-v2-p1-fr.pdf

CEPF 2012: Ecosystem Profile: Eastern Afromontane Biodiversity Hotspot. Washington D.C. Pp 268. http://www.cepf.net/Documents/Eastern_Afromontane_Ecosystem_Profile_FINAL.pdf.

IIED, 2014: Building Bridges for Sustainable Development, Annual Report 2013/2014 thttp://pubs.iied.org/pdfs/G03844.pdf

IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment- report/ar5/syr/AR5_SYR_FINAL_All_Topics.pdf

MacArthur Foundation, 2013: Conservation Strategy for the Great Lakes Region of East and Central Africa. pp265. http://www.birdlife.org/sites/default/files/attachments/AUTHORISED-GLR-STRATEGY_0.pdf

CHAPTER 4: BIODIVERSITY IN THE BASIN Principal Author: Albert Schenk

4.1 Diversity and richness of species

The African Great Lakes Region includes extremely high species diversity and endemism in both terrestrial and freshwater biomes, as extensively described in the MacArthur Great Lakes Strategy (2012) and the Eastern Afromontane Ecosystem Profile (2010). Within this Region, the Albertine Rift Valley, which forms the western branch of the East African Rift, covering parts of Uganda, the DRC, Rwanda, Burundi and Tanzania from Lake Albert in the north to Lake Tanganyika in the south, is recognized as one of the most species rich regions of Africa (Plumptre et al., 2007). It is part of the Conservation International/CEPF Eastern Afromontane Biodiversity Hotspot, one of the 200 World Wildlife Fund for Nature Global Ecoregions and a BirdLife International Endemic Bird Area. The Albertine Rift contains 402 mammals, 1,061 birds, 175 reptiles, 118 amphibians, 400 fish and 5,800 plant species (Laundry and Fund, 2012) which represent over 50% of birds, 39% of mammals, 23% of amphibians, and 14% each of reptiles and plants found in mainland Africa (Carr et al., 2013). The Lake Kivu – Rusizi River Basin, with its varied geographic features in the central-north portion of the Albertine Rift Valley (Chapter 2), harbors much of this rich biodiversity.

4.2 Aquatic biodiversity

A principal reason for the outstanding biological distinctiveness of the Great Lakes Region is the biogeographic history of the lakes themselves. The Rift valley contains some of the oldest and largest lakes in the world. Lake Tanganyika is nine to 12 million years old (Fryer, 1991; Cohen et al., 1993), and is also the world’s second largest in terms of volume, and second deepest at 1,470m (Stiassny et al., 2010; Darwall et al., 2011). A large number of species, about 1,400 species of animals and plants, have evolved in Lake Tanganyika (West et al., 2003; Darwall et al., 2011). This includes large numbers of endemic fish, crabs, molluscs, radiations of sponges, and all eighty species of ostracod crustaceans (Stiassny et al., 2010). There are at least 337 species fish, 225 of them endemic to the lake, 103 of them native to the great lakes and one (Oreochromis leucostictus) introduced35.

Much less is known regarding the biodiversity of Lake Kivu. Darwall et al. (2005) report a total of only 43 fish species, of which 35 are listed in Fishbase2. All the 15 recorded endemics in Fishbase are Haplochromis species. Four species are introduced and 14 native. This relatively low ichthyological biodiversity may result from Lake Kivu’s relative isolation, its recent origin, its high salinity, and the high tectonic activity in the area, resulting in the upwelling of poisonous gases (Chapter 2) and past extinctions due to lava flows entering the lake (Snoeks et al. 1997).The same may apply for the species diversity of other aquatic taxonomic group; e.g. four crab species (Cumberlidge and Mayer, 2011) compared to 16 in Lake Tanganyika.

The Rusizi River seems to be intermediate between Lake Tanganyika and Lake Kivu in species diversity with an IUCN assessment conducted in 2009-2010 (IUCN Project No. 76458-00936) reporting 145 fish species, 49 mollusc species, and 6 crab species. Ntakimazi et al. (2000) found 90 species of fish and 9 mollusc species (7 of them from dead shells) in the delta but suggest there may be many more as their species accumulation curves did not reach an asymptote.

35 http://www.fishbase.org/tools/region/FB4Africa/FB4Africa.html, accessed 07.03.2016. 36 https://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/final_rusizi_full_report_with_publications.pdf

The dominant fish families throughout the CRAG are the Cichlidae (including Oreochromis niloticus, the second most frequently bred fish in the world) and Cyprinidae. Only 28 species are listed in Fishbase2, 26 of them native, and one (the Critically Endangered catfish, Chiloglanis ruziziensis) endemic.

A number of fish species are known to undergo seasonal spawning migrations. The Rusizi River (as part of the Burundi -Malagarasi basin) is among the East Africa catchments holding the greatest numbers of known migratory fish species (Darwall et al., 2005). Migratory species are at risk if their migration routes are blocked. With two existing and two more planned hydropower dams in the Rusizi River, this is a very real threat for the fish species relying on the river for their annual migration. An ESIA for the Rusizi III dam37 claims that the barbell (Barbus altianalis) is the only fish (pace Darwall et al.) known to migrate between Kivu and Tanganyika and notes the need to monitor this species and take appropriate measures to ensure its safety.

The terrestrial biodiversity (especially for birds and mammals) of the Lake Kivu – Rusizi River Basin has been extensively researched. However, knowledge gaps remain, especially for plants and invertebrates. BirdLife international report that within the CRAG boundary 610 bird species are listed for Burundi, 738 species for DRC and 649 species for Rwanda with a notable increase in species richness in the montane regions of eastern DRC (Map 4.1). This increase is a product of the greater habitat diversity in these areas and of the meeting of eastern and western African avifauna.

Map 4.1 Bird Species richness in the CRAG

Several species within the CRAG, are threatened, i.e. IUCN red-listed as Critically Endangered, Endangered, or Vulnerable.

37http://www.afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/Environmental-and-Social- Assessments/Multinational_-_Burundi-Rwanda-RDC-projet_hydro%C3%A9lectrique_de_Ruzizi_III- Resume_EIES_-_EN-_08_2015.pdf

Table 4.1 shows their distribution among major taxa and Figure 4.1 illustrates their representation in 15 KBAs that fall within or are touched by the Kivu-Rusizi catchments (some of these KBAs, e.g. Kahuzi Biega, Virunga, and Itombwe Mountains, lie largely outside the CRAG)

4.3 Threatened and endemic species

The threatened taxa include various iconic species such as the Mountain Gorilla (Gorilla beringei), Common Chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes), the African wild dog (Lycaon pictus), and the Shoebill (Balaeniceps rex); species which also attract foreign tourists to the region (see below). The Single Site Endemic species include the frog Hyperolius leleupi, (Itombwe Mountains in eastern DRC); Schouteden's swift (Schoutedenapus schoutedeni, five specimens to the east and north-east of the Itombwe Mountains); Mount Kahuzi climbing mouse (Dendromus kahuziensis, two specimens from a single location on Mount Kahuzi); Hill's Horseshoe Bat (Rhinolophus hilli, Nyungwe National Park); Kivu Shrew (Crocidura kivuana, Kahuzi Mountains; Kivu Screeching Frog (Arthroleptis pyrrhoscelis); and the Kivu Long-haired Shrew (Crocidura lanosa). Among the aquatic fauna, the Critically Endangered Rusizi Suckermouth (Chiloglanis ruziziensis, a member of the upside-down catfish family Mochokidae, is endemic to the Rusizi River where it is restricted to the rocky fast flowing stretches of the river38 and is highly threatened by erosion.

Table 4.1 Number of Threatened Terrestrial Species from 5 major taxa in the CRAG

Taxa group Critically Endangered Vulnerable Total Of which Single Site Endangered Endemic Plants 0 0 1 1 0 Amphibians 0 3 9 12 1 Reptiles 0 1 0 1 1 Birds 0 5 10 15 1 Mammals 2 7 11 20 3 Totals 2 16 31 49 6

Figure 4.1 Distribution of Threatened Species in 15 KBAs in the CRAG 30 25

No.of 20 threatened 15 species 10 5 CR 0 EN VU

LakeKivu

Mukura Mukura FR

Idjwi Island Idjwi

Rusizi River Rusizi

Gishwati Forest… Gishwati

Lake Tanganyika Lake

Rusizi National Park NationalRusizi

Kibira National Park National Kibira Park… National Kibira

Cyamudongo Cyamudongo Forest

Itombwe Mountains Itombwe

Volcans National Park National Volcans

Virunga National Park Virunga National

Kahuzi-Biega National… Kahuzi-Biega Nyungwe National Park National Nyungwe KBA

38 http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/60804/0

Threats affecting biodiversity within the basin are various and numerous (Chapter 6). Of the species found within the Lake Kivu – Rusizi River Basin, at least 71 are threatened (Critically Endangered, CR; Endangered, EN; or Vulnerable, VU) according to the IUCN Red List (CEPF 2012). This number is likely higher as many species had not yet been assessed by IUCN. In addition, as research progresses new species will be discovered. Recent work in Lake Tanganyika has resulted in the description of new species of freshwater molluscs (Darwall et al., 2011), some of which some might eventually turn out to be threatened. In addition, other threatened species are likely to be found in less intensively studied habitats outside protected areas.

4.4 Economically important species

The human population of the CRAG relies heavily on the natural (biological) resources that the landscape provides. This includes the use as food, woodfuel, medicine, fiber, and construction material. In times of food scarcity and insecurity, natural resources (especially indigenous wild plants and bushmeat) become essential for survival. A study by WCS, IUCN and Traffic (Carr et al, 2013) on climate change vulnerability and human use of wildlife in Africa’s Albertine Rift, identified species believed to be important to people’s livelihoods. Freshwater fish, plants and mammals emerge as the most heavily utilized taxa, supplemented with species of birds, reptiles and amphibians. Although the study covers the whole Albertine Rift Valley, it can be expected that the same applies for the smaller Lake Kivu – Rusizi CRAG.

With the high population densities in Burundi and Rwanda, and displaced peoples in DRC, the pressure on those natural resources becomes excessive and unsustainable. For some freshwater fish and mammal species, levels of exploitation are high, and trade occurs locally, nationally and internationally. No figures have been found on estimates of the total value of the natural biological resources used but the figures must be substantial. A UNDP/FAO socio-economic study of Lake Kivu Fisheries39 (Hanek et al, 1991) reports that “the annual production of Lake Kivu artisanal fishery has been estimated at approximately 7,000 tons” and “The artisanal fishery on Lake Kivu provides employment to a total of 6,563 fishermen; if one includes their dependents the total number of persons directly benefitting from Lake Kivu fishery amounts to 56,952.” Further south, the 2011 LTA Frame Survey reports that around 165,000-200,000 tons of fish (mainly pelagic clupeids) are caught by 95,000 fishers on Lake Tanganyika a year. The most important commercial fish species in both lakes is the Lake Tanganyika sardine, Limnothrissa miodon, commonly known as sambaza and artificially introduced in Lake Kivu.

Figures on the non-extractive use of wildlife species in the form of eco-tourism are more readily available and generate national and local economic benefits, especially around biodiversity rich National Parks with charismatic species such as the Mountain Gorilla (Gorilla beringei). In 1998, Rwanda’s gorilla tourism industry was estimated to contribute USD3–5 million per year to the national economy (Spenceley et al. 2010) while nature tourism industry, of which the vast majority stemmed from highly lucrative mountain gorilla trekking, was valued at USD33 million (REMA, 2009). The 2005 government-initiated revenue sharing scheme prescribes that 5 percent of tourism revenues from park fees in Rwanda has to be injected into local community projects around national parks (Nielsen and Spenceley, 2010)40. The eco-tourism potential in Burundi and DRC is substantially less developed due to security issues and a less developed tourism infrastructure.

39 http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/ac761e/ac761e00.htm 40 http://siteresources.worldbank.org/AFRICAEXT/Resources/258643-1271798012256/Tourism_Rwanda.pdf

4.5 KBAs

Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) are sites of global significance for the conservation of biodiversity. They are identified nationally using simple, globally standardized criteria and thresholds, based on the needs of biodiversity requiring safeguards at the site scale (Eken et al. 2004, Langhammer et al. 2007). Species that meet the threshold criteria are called trigger species as they ‘trigger’ the qualification of a site as a KBA. As the building blocks for designing the ecosystem approach and maintaining effective ecological networks, Key Biodiversity Areas are the starting point for landscape-level conservation planning. Governments, inter-governmental organisations, NGOs, the private sector and other stakeholders can use KBAs as a tool to identify and augment national systems of globally important sites for conservation (Langhammer et al. 2007).

The Lake Kivu – Rusizi River Basin contains 12 terrestrial and 3 aquatic KBAs (table 4.1) with a total of 71 unique trigger species, a good indication of the outstanding biodiversity of the area. Several of the KBAs in the Basin are also qualified as Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas (IBA) by BirdLife International41. IBAs are areas, identified using an internationally agreed set of criteria, as being globally important for the conservation of bird populations and other biodiversity. In addition, three KBAs have the additional qualification of Alliance for Zero Extinction42 (AZE) site which is an area where the species evaluated are Endangered or Critically Endangered under IUCN-World Conservation Union criteria and are restricted to a single remaining site. Virunga National Park has UNESCO World Heritage Site status, while Rusizi National Park is also recognized as a Ramsar site which is a wetland of international importance designated under the Ramsar Convention.

Table 4.2. KBAs in the Lake Kivu – Rusizi River Basin.

No. Name Terrestrial / Country Total area Other aquatic (ha) qualifications 1 Kibira National Park Terrestrial Burundi 37,870 IBA 2 Rusizi National Park Terrestrial Burundi 6,200 IBA, Ramsar site 3 Idjwi Island Terrestrial DRC 27,000 - 4 (small part of) Terrestrial DRC 820,000 AZE, IBA Itombwe Mountains 5 (small part of) Kahuzi- Terrestrial DRC 560,000 AZE, IBA Biega National Park 6 (small part of) Virunga Terrestrial DRC 780,000 IBA, UNESCO National Park World Heritage Site 7 Cyamudongo Forest Terrestrial Rwanda 300 IBA 8 (part of) Gishwati Terrestrial Rwanda 27,000 - Forest National Park 9 Nyungwe National Terrestrial Rwanda 90,000 AZE, IBA Park 10 Mukura Forest Terrestrial Rwanda 12,000 IBA Reserve43 11 (small part of) Terrestrial Rwanda 15,000 IBA Volcanoes National Park

41 http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/site 42 http://www.zeroextinction.org/sitesspecies.htm 43 Now included with Gishwati National Park but still a separate KBA

12 Kibira National Park Terrestrial Burundi 98,000 IBA Catchment and Rwanda 13 (small part of) Lake Aquatic Burundi 3,280,000 - Tanganyika and DRC 14 Rusizi River Aquatic Burundi, 500,000 - DRC and Rwanda 15 Lake Kivu Aquatic DRC and 268,000 - Rwanda

4.6 Protected Areas

Of the fifteen KBAs in the Basin, 9 are listed by IUCN as having a formal designated or proposed protection status (Table 4.3). The level of actual protection varies substantially between those protected areas depending on site specific pressures and available resources for protected area management, with some parks, e.g. Nyungwe National Park and Virunga National Park, attracting substantial funding and support from international donors and conservation organziations such as WCS and WWF.

Table 4.3. Designated and proposed protetced areas in the Lake Kivu – Rusizi River Basin (Source: online interface for the World Database on Protected Areas)44

No. Name Country Status IUCN category45 1 Kibira National Park Burundi Designated IV 2 Rusizi National Park Burundi Designated IV 4 (small part of) Itombwe DRC Proposed Not reported Mountains 5 (small part of) Kahuzi-Biega DRC Designated Not applicable National Park 6 (small part of) Virunga National DRC Designated Not applicable Park 7 (part of) Gishwati (and Mukura) Rwanda Designated IV Forest National Park 8 Nyungwe National Park Rwanda Designated IV 9 (small part of) Volcans National Rwanda Designated II Park

44 http://www.protected planet.net 45 The classification of IUCN Management Category (Ia, Ib, II, III, IV, V or VI) adopted for national protected areas. For reporting on international protected areas the option of listing ‘Not Applicable’ is accepted. For national protected areas where an IUCN category has not been adopted ‘Not Reported’ can be listed.

4.7 Corridors

Large parts of the Lake Kivu – Rusizi River Basin are highly fragmented, particularly in Burundi and Rwanda, consisting of high biodiversity islands in a sea of human habitation and economic and agricultural activities. Measures that enhance connectivity and create linked networks of habitat are crucial to ensure long-term survival of species, particularly under climate change. As habitats change, species will have to move horizontally and/or vertically through the landscape to stay within the range of climate conditions (i.e. their climate envelope) they need to survive; a fundamental attribute of the CRAG concept. A well designed network of corridors throughout the landscape, connecting a full representation of key habitats and areas, can facilitate these movements. Some species however may not be sufficiently mobile to take advantage of such corridors. Others may still disappear altogether from the landscape as a result of climate change in those cases where functional corridors simply cannot be established, e.g. in the case of species confined to isolated water bodies or the upper range of mountains (summit traps).

Currently the only explicit example of connected KBAs are Kibira and Nyungwe National Parks, which together form a montane forest block of approximately 130,000 ha. However, if the habitats within this forest block would change substantially as a result of changing climatic conditions, the surrounding anthropogenic landscape may prevent the migration of the less vagile species.

Some research has been conducted on identifying corridors within the landscape. Hole et al. (2009), conclude that the persistence of individual bird species, in general obviously among the most mobile of taxa, across the existing network of IBAs in sub-Saharan Africa under projected 21st century climate change is remarkable high but that there is a need to increase permeability within the matrix dominated by human land-use, e.g. through the provision of stepping stones and active management of current land uses to render them less inimical to biodiversity. On a smaller scale, Ayebare et al. (2013) identified potential corridors in the Albertine Rift Valley based upon modelling of current and predicted (2080) distributions of 93 endemic and threatened large mammals, birds, plants and key vegetation types, using gradients in abiotic conditions that were judged most likely to support a diverse set of habitat types. Results of the corridor analyses indicate that many of the geophysical corridor areas are already within altitudinal gradients in the Protected Areas in the Albertine Rift. In the Lake Kivu – Rusizi CRAG, the results of the modelling highlights three main areas where species and vegetation types are most likely to be resilient to climate change and which include a diverse array of locally available environmental conditions. These are 1) the area north of Lake Kivu (Virunga and Volcanoes National Parks), 2) a smaller area immediately south of Lake Kivu, and 3) the Kibira – Nyungwe Protected Areas. The study concludes that the identified high priority areas for the establishment (or maintenance) of corridors, does not mean that those areas would be the most practical corridor network for the region. A more complete story would also include an understanding of the cost of establishing a corridor an area, an understanding of what management action will be required to maintain the ecological value of that area, and what socio-economic impacts this would have. Clearly more research is required.

As the study mainly identifies 3 large corridor blocks in the CRAG, an additional important element that would benefit from more study, is the potential and usefulness of the establishment and maintenance of a landscape wide ‘micro-corridors’ network which would serve, in addition to the more threatened species, also the more common and/or smaller species. Both Burundi and Rwanda have legislation that prohibit any human permanent activities and structures, e.g. agriculture, construction, along lakes, streams and rivers: in Rwanda this strip is 10 meter wide, while in Burundi this strip is 150 meter wide for Lake Tanganyika, 50 meter for the other lakes in the north of the country, 25 meter for rivers and 5 meter for streams.

If these laws would effectively be enforced, which they are currently not, this would, in addition to considerably contributing to the reduction of erosion, also substantially increase the micro-corridors network from which many species would benefit.

4.8 Summary

The African Great Lakes Region includes extremely high species diversity and endemism in both terrestrial and freshwater biomes. Within this Region, the Albertine Rift Valley, which forms the western branch of the East African Rift, covering parts of Uganda, the DRC, Rwanda, Burundi and Tanzania, is recognized as one of the most species rich regions of Africa with over 50% of birds, 39% of mammals, 23% of amphibians, and 14% each of reptiles and plants found in mainland Africa. The Lake Kivu – Rusizi River Basin CRAG, which is located in the central-north portion of the Albertine Rift Valley, harbours much of this rich biodiversity though a detailed inventory of the basin only has not (yet) been conducted. However, 49 species of plants, amphibians, reptilian, Aves and mammals, recorded within the CRAG are known to threatened, i.e. IUCN red-listed as Critically Endangered, Endangered, or Vulnerable, of which 6 are Single Site Endemics. Many species are considered economically important though detailed information is scarce with some monetary value available on fisheries and ecotourism. However the likely huge ecosystem service value of biodiversity including the importance of biodiversity as a direct natural resource for a large proportion of the human population in the CRAG is largely unquantified.

Although biodiversity is obviously not restricted to confined areas, the CRAG has 15 Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) which are sites of (particular) global significance for the conservation of biodiversity. Of the fifteen KBAs in the Basin, 9 are listed by IUCN as having a formal designated or proposed protection status. Connectivity (corridors) between the KBAs is very limited at best, largely due to high human population density, intense land use, and inadequate land use planning which poses a particular constraint for species to react on climate change. References

Ayebare, S., Ponce-Reyes, R., Segan, D.B., Watson, J.E.M., Possingham, H.P., Seimon, A., and Plumptre, A.J., 2013: Identifying climate resilient corridors for conservation in the Albertine Rift. Unpublished Report by the Wildlife Conservation Society to MacArthur Foundation.

CEPF 2012: Ecosystem Profile: Eastern Afromontane Biodiversity Hotspot. Washington D.C. Pp 268. http://www.cepf.net/Documents/Eastern_Afromontane_Ecosystem_Profile_FINAL.pdf.

Carr, J.A., Outhwaite, W.E., Goodman, G.L., Oldfield, T.E.E. and Foden, W.B., 2013: Vital but vulnerable: Climate change vulnerability and human use of wildlife in Africa’s Albertine Rift. Occasional Paper of the IUCN Species Survival Commission No. 48. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.

Cohen, A., Bills, R., Cocquyt, C.Z., & Caljon, A.G., 1993: The impact of sediment pollution on biodiversity in Lake Tanganyika. Conservation Biology, 7: 667-677

Cumberlidge, N., and Meyer, K. S., 2011: A revision of the freshwater crabs of Lake Kivu, East Africa. Journal Articles. Paper 30.

Darwall, W, Smith, K, Lowe, T, & Vié, J-C. 2005: The Status and Distribution of Freshwater Biodiversity in Eastern Africa. IUCN SSC Freshwater Biodiversity Assessment Programme. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. Viii+36pp.

Darwall, W.R.T., Smith, K.G., Allen, D.J., Holland, R.A, Harrison, I.J., & Brooks, E.G.E., (editors) 2011: The Diversity of Life in African Freshwaters: Under Water, Under Threat. An analysis of the status and distribution of freshwater species throughout mainland Africa. IUCN, Cambridge, United Kingdom and Gland, Switzerland. Xiii+347pp.+4pp cover.

Eken, G., Bennun, L., Brooks, T. M., Darwall, W., Fishpool, L. D. C., Foster, M., Knox, D., Langhammer, P., Matiku, P., Radford, E., Salaman, P., Sechrest, W., Smith, M. L., Spector, S. and Tordoff, A., 2004: Key biodiversity areas as site conservation targets. BioScience 54: 1110–1118.

Fryer, G., 1991: Comparative aspects of adaptive radiation and speciation in Lake Baikal and the great rift lakes of Africa. Hydrobiologia 211, 137-146.

Hanek, G., K. Leendertse, and B. Farhani, 1991: Socio-Economic Investigations of Lake Kivu Fisheries. UNDP/FAO Regional Project for Inland Fisheries Planning (IFIP), RAF/87/099-TD/23/91 (En).

Langhammer, P. F., Bakarr, M. I., Bennun, L. A., Brooks, T. M., Clay, R. P., Darwall, W., De Silva, N., Edgar, G. J., Eken, G., Fishpool, L. D. C., da Fonseca, G. A. B., Foster, M. N., Knox, D. H., Matiku, P., Radford, E. A., Rodrigues, A. S. L., Salaman, P., Sechrest, W. and Tordoff, A. W. (2007) Identification and gap analysis of key biodiversity areas: targets for comprehensive protected area systems. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN (Best Practice Protected Area Guidelines Series 15).

MacArthur Foundation, 2013: Conservation Strategy for the Great Lakes Region of East and Central Africa. pp265. http://www.birdlife.org/sites/default/files/attachments/AUTHORISED-GLR-STRATEGY_0.pdf Nielsen H. and Spenceley. A., 2010: The success of tourism in Rwanda – Gorillas and more. Background paper for the African Success Stories Study. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/AFRICAEXT/Resources/258643- 1271798012256/Tourism_Rwanda.pdf

Ntakimazi, G., Nzigidahera, B., Nicayenzi, F. et West, K., 2000: L’Etat De La Diversite Biologique Dans Les Milieux Aquatiques Et Terrestres Du Delta De La Rusizi. http://www.ltbp.org/FTP/RUSIZI.PDF

Ntakimazi, G., 2006: Chiloglanis ruziziensis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.3

Plumptre, A.J., T.R.B. Davenport, M. Behangana, R. Kityo, G. Eilu, P. Ssegawa, C. Ewango, D. Meirte, C. Kahindo, M. Herremans, J.K.Peterhans, J.D. Pilgrim, M. Wilson, M. Languy and D. Moyer, 2007: The Biodiversity of the Albertine Rift. Biological Conservation, 134: 178–194.

REMA, 2009: Rwanda State of Environment and Outlook Report. Rwanda Environment Management Authority P.O. Box 7436 Kigali, Rwanda http://www.rema.gov.rw/soe/summary.pdf.

Saundry, P., & Fund, W., 2012:Albertine Rift. http://www.eoearth.org/view/article/149958

Snoeks, J., L. De Vos & D. Thys van den Audenaerde, 1997: The ichthyogeography of Lake Kivu. South African Journal of Science 93: 579–584.

Spenceley, A., Habyalimana, S., Tusabe, R. and Mariza, D., 2010: Benefits to the poor from gorilla tourism in Rwanda. Development Southern Africa 27: 647–662.

Stiassny, M.L.J., Revenga, C. & Comer, P., 2010: Aquatic ecosystems: diversity and dynamism. In: Fresh water: the essence of life (Mittermeier, R.A., Farrell, T.A., Harrison, I.J., Upgren, A.J., and Brooks, T.M., editors), pp. 93-116. CEMEX & ILCP, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

West, K., Michel, E., Todd, J., Brown, D. & Clabaugh, J., 2003: The gastropods of Lake Tanganyika, Diagnostic key, classification, and notes on the fauna. Centre for African Wetlands, Ghana.

BENEFITS CHAPTER 5: ECOSYSTEM SERVICES Principal Author: Michel Masozera

5.1 Introduction The Lake Kivu- Rusizi River CRAG is home to some of the richest concentrations of biodiversity and some of the poorest people in the world. The major challenge facing governments, conservation and development organizations working in the Great Lakes Region is how to promote sustainable development that simultaneously meets the Sustainable Development Goals to provide a decent standard of living to all of its peoples, while conserving its biodiversity and the ecosystem services on which long-run prosperity depends. In this human dominated landscape, agriculture is the major form of land use and agricultural ecosystems cover nearly 60 per cent of the terrestrial surface of the region. Both humans and agroecosystems depend strongly on a suite of ecosystem services provided by ecosystems in the Lake Kivu and Rusizi River CRAG.

Ecosystem services are defined as those functions of ecosystems that support (directly or indirectly) human welfare (Costanza et al. 1997, Daily 1997). Table 5.1 is a list of ecosystem services and their corresponding ecosystem functions. Ecosystem services occur at multiple scales, from climate regulation and carbon sequestration at the global scale, to flood protection, soil formation, and nutrient cycling at the local and regional scales.

Table 5.1 List of ecosystem services and functions (from Costanza et al. 1997)

Ecosystem service Ecosystem functions

1 Gas regulation Regulation of atmospheric chemical composition.

2 Climate regulation Regulation of global temperature, precipitation, and other biologically mediated climatic processes at global or local levels.

3 Disturbance Capacitance, damping, and integrity of ecosystem response to regulation environmental fluctuations.

4 Water regulation Regulation of hydrological flows.

5 Water supply Storage and retention of water.

6 Erosion control and Retention of soil within an ecosystem. sediment retention

7 Soil formation Soil formation processes.

8 Nutrient cycling Storage, internal cycling, processing, and acquisition of nutrients.

9 Waste treatment Recovery of mobile nutrients and removal or breakdown of excess or xenic nutrients and compounds.

10 Pollination Movement of floral gametes.

11 Biological control Trophic-dynamic regulations of populations.

12 Refugia Habitat for resident and transient populations.

13 Food production That portion of gross primary production extractable as food.

14 Raw materials That portion of gross primary production extractable as raw materials.

15 Genetic resources Sources of unique biological materials and products.

16 Recreation Providing opportunities for recreational activities.

17 Cultural Providing opportunities for non-commercial uses.

In the face of global climate change which is resulting in more unpredictable weather patterns, sea level rise and more frequent and extreme storms (Chapter 6), ecosystems services are critical for climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction. Examples of these services include climate and water regulation, protection from natural hazards such as floods and avalanches, water and air purification, carbon sequestration, and disease and pest regulation. These services determine the central role of ecosystem management in climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction. Healthy ecosystems act as buffers, increasing the resilience of natural and human systems to climate change impacts and disasters. Therefore, managing ecosystems to conserve and improve their health is crucial for sustaining the various ecosystem services important to human well-being.

In this chapter we describe the benefits of six selected key ecosystem services (biological pest control, pollination, watershed services, fisheries, climate regulation and carbon sequestration, and nature- based tourism) that (1) are important to a broad swathe of Lake Kivu and Rusizi river CRAG population and to the region’s economy, and (2) if altered by climate change could substantially impact the well- being of local communities.

5.2 Biological (pest) control Biological control of pest insects in agroecosystems is an important ecosystem service that is often supported by natural ecosystems. Non-crop habitats provide the habitat and diverse food resources required for arthropod predators and parasitoids, insectivorous birds and bats, and microbial pathogens that act as natural enemies to agricultural pests and provide biological control services in agroecosystems46. These services reduce populations of pest insects and weeds in agriculture, thereby reducing the need for pesticides, which may be difficult and expensive to obtain, and more importantly are bad for the environment. For a region where the majority of population relies on subsistence agriculture as a major source of income, biological control of pests is a critical ecosystem service. Climate change is projected to overall decrease yields of cereal crops in Africa through amplifying water stress and increasing incidence of diseases, pests and weeds outbreak 47. Also, in areas with excess of water and heat due to climate change, it is projected that pathogen, weed, insect infestation will further damage the agriculture systems48 (Chapter 7).

46 Tscharntke, T., Klein, A. M., Kruess, A., Steffan-Dewenter, I. & Thies, and C. 2005 Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity: ecosystem service management. Ecol. Lett. 8, 857–874.

47 Niang et al. (2014). Africa. Pp. 1199-1265 in V.R. Barros et al. eds. Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. 48 Ziska et al. (2011). Invasive species and climate change: an agronomic perspective. Climate change, 105:13-42.

5.3 Pollination Pollination is another important ecosystem service to agriculture that is provided by natural habitats in agricultural landscapes. According to Klein et al. (2007), approximately 65 percent of plant species require pollination by animals, and an analysis of data from 200 countries indicated that 75 percent of crop species of global significance for food production rely on animal pollination, primarily by insects. In addition to domesticated honeybees, over 40 percent of animal-pollinated crops depend on wild pollinators.

A study by Gallai et al. (2009) estimated the economic impact of insect pollination on world food production in 2005 in the 162 FAO member countries at 153 billion euro. According to the same study the leading pollinator-dependent crops are vegetables and fruits followed by edible oil crops, stimulant crops (coffee, cacao, etc.), nuts, fruits and spices. Major crops grown in the Lake Kivu and Rusizi CRAG such as coffee, macadamia, fruits, banana, and tomatoes, are predicted to be particularly vulnerable to the loss of pollination services affecting the livelihoods of the majority of population dependent on agriculture. Millions of people depend on these crops and most of the countries’ export coffee which contributes significantly to foreign exchange earnings.

Animal pollination of both wild and cultivated plant species is under threat as a result of multiple environmental pressures acting in concert (Schweiger et al. 2010). Invasive species (Bjerknes et al. 2007), pesticide use (Kremen et al. 2002), land-use changes such as habitat fragmentation (Aguilar et al. 2006) and agricultural intensification (Tscharntke et al. 2005; Ricketts et al. 2008) have all been `pollination services (Schweiger et al. 2010). 5.4 Watershed services Of the many ecosystem services that healthy watersheds provide, hydrological services constitute the most economically and socially valuable (Daily, 1997). These services largely fall into four broad categories: water filtration/purification, seasonal flow regulation; erosion and sedimentation control; and flood and storm protection.

Mountain protected forests in the Lake Kivu and Rusizi CRAG play a vital role in intercepting precipitation and channelling run-off into Africa’s two largest hydrological networks (Nile and Congo basins). Rivers and streams that originate from these forests are critically important for hydropower facilities, agriculture, and businesses such as tea estates and breweries downstream and rural communities, all of which require significant amounts of clean water. A recent study by the WCS in collaboration with US Forest Service49 aimed to quantify the degree to which the forests Nyungwe- Kibira landscape are providing clean, sufficient water supplies to the country of Rwanda and Burundi. It revealed that very little sediment is currently eroding from Nyungwe and Kibira with estimates ranging from 0 to 9 tons/ha of sediment loss (see Chapter 7). The parts of the study area with the lowest mean sediment export (0-1.5 tons/ha per year) under baseline conditions were dominated by forest vegetation and located in the core interior of the landscape (see Figure 5.1). To simulate the impacts of changes in land use on sediment loss, a hypothetical scenario was used in which 20% of forest cover in Nyungwe and Kibira was converted to crop cover. Under simulated conditions of deforestation, the mean sediment exported increased substantially, with some areas of the park losing up to 60 tons/ha of sediment per year (see Chapter 7 and Figure 5.1).

Figure 4.1 Mean sediment exported from sub-watersheds in tons/ha for the baseline scenario and land use conversion scenario

49 Erika Cohen, Ge Sun, Steve McNulty, Carter Ingram, and Michel Masozera (2014) Assessing the Hydrologic Systems Present and Effects of Land use Practice on those Hydrologic Systems. Technical Report.

Figure 4.2 Percent difference in stream flow from the baseline time period to the future time period.

The same study used the Water Supply Stress Index (WaSSI) model to estimate the role of the forests in Nyungwe and Kibira for regulating water quantity as measured by water yield.

Flow, also referred to as water yield, represents the amount of precipitation that becomes available in rivers and streams for human uses after it has been intercepted and used by trees and vegetation. The WASSI model was used to estimate water yield for a baseline time period (1981-2000) to assess the accuracy of the model when compared to field-based measurements and, then, a future time period (2041-2060). For the future period, increases in temperature and precipitation associated with predictions of climate change were simulated to explore how these changes would impact water yield in Rwanda. The model showed that in the future, as a result of climate change, the majority (68%) of watersheds in Rwanda will have a 1% to 11% decrease in water yield, 15% of watersheds will experience a 1% to 3% increase in water yield, while 17% of watersheds will have no change in water yield. The mean annual stream flow averaged across the study area decreased by 2% from the period of 2041-2060 (see Figure 2). Thus, climate change could cause shortages in much of Rwanda’s water supply. The study also revealed that forests of Nyungwe-Kibira landscape represent the ‘Water Tower’ of Rwanda. The forests produce the highest water yield in the country, converting 39% (approximately 500 mm) of the precipitation falling in the area into water yield in rivers.

The provision of sufficient quantities of clean water is an essential ecological service provided to agriculture, energy generation and human health. For instance, the Bugarama rice producing scheme plays a critical role in supplying rice to urban areas of Rwanda because it ranks high in terms of productivity per ha, due to a regular and permanent water flow from Nyungwe. With a potential average yield of 7 tons/ha the annual production of rice on 1,500 ha of marshland in Bugarama is estimated to more than 21,000 tons of rice. Similarly, the Imbo plain in Burundi and Kiringe in DRC, rice cultivation support the livelihoods of a large number of local farmers.

The economy of Lake Kivu and Rusizi River CRAG depends largely on the hydropower as a source of energy and the majority of hydropower plants are fed by rivers originating from intact forested ecosystems and the Rusizi River. In Burundi, Rwegura hydropower plant which supplies most of the energy (18 MW) to the country is located in Kibira National Park while additional power is projected to come from two major hydropower plants situated on Rusizi River in Congo and Rwanda territories (Rusizi I: 18.2 MW and Rusizi II: 40 MW). A third hydropower plant on the Rusizi River is being planned and will supply energy in Burundi, DRC and Rwanda. Chapter 7 notes how actual delivery falls short of projected delivery because of sedimentation.

In Rwanda, the production of the electricity from hydraulic origin comes especially from 8 plants in which 6 belong to Rwanda, the plants of Gihira and Gisenyi located in Gishwati catchment, Ntaruka and Mukungwa located in the Rugezi catchment, and Rukarara I and II located in Nyungwe catchment. The others belong to the CEPGL and are located on the Ruzizi whose hydroelectric potential is estimated at 500 MW.

Water quality, sedimentation, and soil erosion can reduce the storage capacity and water volume available for generating electricity (Chapter 7). These have already been affecting the capacity of many hydropower dams such as Gihira in Rwanda along the Sebeya River and Rwegura in Burundi to produce at their maximum capacities. In addition, seasonal shortages in water associated with natural climate variability will make it difficult to maintain peak generation capacity throughout the year and therefore will have negative impacts on region’s economy.

5.5 Fisheries Fish is a major source of food for the majority of poor and vulnerable communities in CRAG region. The sector also provides jobs to many men and women and is one of the most traded food commodities in the region. However, the benefits gained from the sector are often ignored or understated in national economic planning. This is mainly because the majority of the fish produced are from small scale artisanal fisheries which are often not accounted for in national statistics and thus their contribution to the economy and food security remains invisible.

Lake Kivu covers a total surface of some 2,370 km2 and stands at the height of 1,460 m above the sea level. Its total surface is 2370 km2, of which 42 per cent belongs to Rwanda. Lake Kivu has a very poor fish fauna. Currently, 28 fish species are known from the Lake Kivu and its tributaries, of which 19 are cichlids and 9 non cichlids (Snoeks et al., 1997, Chapter 4). One of the species, Limnothrissa miodon was introduced from Lake Tanganyika in 1958 and it has adapted perfectly to the conditions of Lake Kivu. Fishing has always been an occupation for people living alongside the shores of Lake Kivu in the Western Province of Rwanda and South Kivu in DRC. Fishing activities are generally done by registered union of fishermen representing cooperatives. Currently there are at last 6,500 fishermen on the Rwanda side of Lake Kivu grouped into different cooperatives. The annual production in Rwanda was estimated at 7,000 tonnes/year in 2013 (MINAGRI, 2013).

Lake Tanganyika represents the second largest lake in Africa, and is shared by the countries of Burundi, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Tanzania and Zambia. The lake covers a surface area of 32,600 km2. In terms of jurisdiction, the DRC has control of 45% of the surface area, Tanzania 41% of the area, with Burundi and Zambia having control of 8% and 6% respectively. In terms of management structures, while the riparian countries are responsible for the management of their waters, the Convention on the Sustainable Management of Lake Tanganyika provides for the Lake Tanganyika Authority (LTA) to act as the overarching management body for the lake system.

Lake Tanganyika fisheries resources play a vital role in the economy, peoples’ wellbeing and nutrition in the four riparian countries, Burundi, Democratic Republic of Congo, Tanzania and Zambia. The fisheries provide a direct source of income and livelihood for more than 44,000 fishermen including a wide range of various operational groups, but the indirect influences of the lake fishery reach about ten million people in the catchment and trade area in Eastern Africa. Overall collapses in other food production sectors of agriculture due to civil unrest, social conflicts and environmental degradation in the region have clearly increased the pressure on the utilization of the fish resources in the lake.

In 2011, the Lake Tanganyika Authority (LTA) undertook a lake-wide frame survey that revealed that there are currently 93,214 active fishers on the lake operating out of 738 landing sites. The majority of these fishers are Congolese (53.6%) followed by Tanzanians (28.6%), Zambians (9.0%) and Burundians (8.8%). Fish processing and trading at the landing sites directly employs 38,765 and 23,090 people respectively. At present there are 36,675 vessels in operation on the lake, using a total of 68,113 gears. Fifty-eight percent of the vessels are located in the DRC (21,327 vessels), followed by Tanzania (11,506 vessels), Zambia (2,327 vessels) and Burundi (1,515 vessels)50

50 Mölsä, Hannu. Management of Fisheries on Lake Tanganyika - Challenges for Research and the Community. Kuopio University Publications C. Natural and Environmental Sciences 236. 2008. 72 p.

The impacts of climate change on fish stocks can be classified as physical and biological changes51. Physical changes include sea surface temperature rise, sea level rise, changes in salinity and ocean acidification. Biological changes include changes in primary production, and fish stock distribution. These factors when combined together will have adverse impacts on the already strained resource and the livelihoods of millions of people dependent on these resources The most damaging threat to the lake’s biodiversity, however, appears to be an increased rate of sediment influx, especially from the heavily-impacted smaller watersheds, where deforestation and farming practices have caused a dramatic increase in the soil erosion rates, urban pollution. This situation will be exacerbated by the impacts of global climate change.

5.6 Climate regulation and carbon sequestration

Natural ecosystems help regulate local climate through their ability to contribute to and regulate rainfall and temperature (see Chapter 6). Local weather and climate are determined by the complex interaction of regional and global circulation patterns with local topography, vegetation, albedo, as well as the configuration of lakes, rivers, and bays. On a global level, forest vegetation absorbs atmospheric carbon dioxide and thereby reduces the potential for global warming. The services provided by this function relate to the maintenance of a favourable climate, both at local and global scales, which in turn are important for human health, crop productivity, recreation, as well as cultural activities and identity, amongst others. For instance, it is believed that tea plantations around Nyungwe and Kibira produce the best tea in the region and are harvested all year long due to favourable climate conditions created by the presence of Nyungwe-Kibira Landscape. Furthermore, tea production necessitates a considerable amount of water for growing and processing. For instance, the global average virtual water content of 1 kg of black tea is 10.4 m3 (Hoekstra and Chapagain, 2007; Chapagain and Hoekstra, 2007). This makes local humidity a strategic commodity for tea estates as it is a significant factor of production. 5.7 Nature-based tourism and recreation

Many ecosystem processes converge to provide society with nature-based recreation. Intact natural ecosystems that attract people who fish, hunt, hike, canoe or kayak, bring direct economic benefits to the areas surrounding those natural areas. People’s willingness to pay for local meals and lodging and to spend time and money on travel to these sites, are economic indicators of the value they place on natural areas. For instance, Nyungwe National park attracted approximately 9,000 visitors in 2014 generating close to 120,000 USD to the national park authority without including costs of lodging, transportation, visa and expenses in the country. Similarly, many visitors are attracted by the biodiversity of Kahuzi Biega national park in DRC, and the serenity of Lake Kivu and Tanganyika each year. The Virunga massif home of mountain gorillas attracted more than 25,000 visitors for the Rwanda side alone and generated 14.2 million USD. This amount could triple if we account for tourism multiplier effects. Kahuzi Biega National Park in the Democratic Republic of Congo while affected by political instability has seen the number of visitors increasing from 500 in 2008 to more than 1,000 visitors in 2015.

51 Essam Y. Muhamed and Zenebe B. Uraguchi (2013). Impacts of climate change on Fisheries: Implications for food security in Sub Saharan Africa.

5.8 Summary This Chapter introduces the concept of ecosystem services and places them in the context of human well-being in the Kivu-Rusizi catchments. It describes six key services provided by CRAG ecosystems: biological pest control, pollination, watershed services, fisheries, climate regulation and carbon sequestration, and nature-based tourism. Biological control of pest insects in agroecosystems is a vital service for food security that is provided by natural ecosystems and non-crop habitats. These habitats provide diverse food resources and living space for arthropod predators and parasitoids, insectivorous birds and bats, and microbial pathogens that act as natural enemies to agricultural pests and reduce the need for pesticides. Pollination is also provided by natural habitats in agricultural landscapes. Globally, 65 percent of plant species require pollination by animals, 75 percent of crop species rely on animal pollination, and the economic impact of insect pollination on world food production has been estimated at 153 billion euros. Within the CRAG crops such as coffee, macadamia, fruits, banana, and tomatoes, are vulnerable to the loss of pollination services. Threats to pollinators include invasive species, pesticides, habitat fragmentation and agricultural intensification and climate change.

Watershed services are vital to human livelihoods in the CRAG. They all into four broad categories: water filtration/purification, seasonal flow regulation; erosion and sedimentation control; and flood and storm protection. Protected Areas play a crucial role by intercepting precipitation and channelling run-off into the rivers and lakes. Details are provided for this role for the Nyungwe-Kibira forests which provide clean, sufficient water supplies with minimal sedimentation. They convert 39% of the precipitation falling in the area into water yield in rivers and serve as the water towers of Rwanda and Burundi. They are vital for sustaining rice production in Bugurama. Details are also provided for hydropower services from several major dams in the CRAG.

Fisheries provide food and livelihoods for large numbers of people, supporting more than 44,000 fishermen with indirect benefits reaching ten million people in the catchment and trade area in Eastern Africa. Climate change, erosion and sedimentation are significant threats to the fisheries in the CRAG. Climate regulation and carbon sequestration services are outlined and the recreational importance of natural ecosystems in the CRAG is described. References

Aguilar et al. 2006: Plant reproductive susceptibility to habitat fragmentation: review and synthesis through a meta-analysis. Ecological Letters, 9: 968-980.

Bjerknes, A.L., Totland, O., Hegland, S.J., Nielsen, A., (2007) Do alien plant invasions really affect pollination success in native plant species? Biological Conservation, 138:1–12.

Chapagain, A. K. & Hoekstra, A. Y. 2007: The waterfootprint of coffee and tea consumption in the Netherlands. Ecological Economics, 64, 109-112.

Costanza. R., d’Arge, R., de Groot R., Farberk, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O’Neil, R.V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R.G., Paul Sutton, P., and van den Belt, M., 1997: The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, 387:253-260.

Daily, G. C. (Ed.) (1997): Nature’s Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems. Island Press, Washington, D. C.

Daily, G.C., Alexander, S., Ehrlich, P.R.., Goulder, A., Lubchenco, J., Matson, P.A., Mooney, H.A., Postel, S., Schneider, S.H., Tilman,D., and Woodwell, G.M., 1997: Ecosystem Services: Benefits Supplied to Human Societies by Natural Ecosystems. Issues in Ecology, 2, 1-16. http://www.esa.org/esa/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/issue2.pdf

Gallai, N., Salles, J.M., Settele, J., Vaissière, B.E., 2009: Economic valuation of the vulnerability of world agriculture confronted with pollinator decline. Ecological Economics, 68:810-821.

Hoekstra, A. Y. and Chapagain, A. K., 2007: The Water Footprint of Coffee and Tea Consumption, in Globalization of Water: Sharing the Planet's Freshwater Resources, Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Oxford, UK.

Klein, A-M., Vaissière, B.E., Cane J.H., Steffan-Dewenter, I., Cunningham, S.A., Kremen, C., and Tscharntke, T., 2007: Restricted accessImportance of pollinators in changing landscapes for world crops. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 274: 303-313.

Kremen, C., Williams, N.M., Thorp, R.W., 2002: Crop pollination from native bees at risk from agricultural intensification. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 99, 16812–16816.

MINAGRI. (2013). Strategic Plan for the Transformation of Agriculture in Rwanda Phase III. Kigali: Republic of Rwanda, Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources.

Ricketts, T.H., et al. 2008: Landscape effects on crop pollination services: are there general patterns. Ecological Letters, 11: 499-515.

Schweiger, O., Biesmeijer. J.C., Bommarco. R., Hickler. T., Hulme, P.E. Klotz. S., Kühn, I., Moora, M., Nielsen, A., Ohlemüller. R., Petanidou, T., Potts, S.G., Pyšek, P., Stout, J.C., Sykes, M.T., Tscheulin, T., Vilà, M., Walther, G.R., Westphal, C., Winter, M., Zobel, M., and Settele, J. (2010). Multiple stressors on biotic interactions: how climate change and alien species interact to affect pollination. Biological Reviews 85: 777-795.

Snoeks, J., L. De Vos & D. Thys van den Audenaerde, 1997: The ichthyogeography of Lake Kivu. South African Journal of Science 93: 579–584.

Tscharntke, T., Klein, A., Kruess, A., and Steffan-Dewenter, I., 2005: Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity – ecosystem service management. Ecology Letters, 8: 857–874.

CHAPTER 6: HIGH-RESOLUTION CLIMATE AND ENVIRONMENT PREDICTIONS Principal Author: Anton Seimon

Anton Seimon PhD (Appalachian State University, Boone, North Carolina, USA)

Peter Lawrence PhD (National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder Colorado, USA)

Simon Nampindo PhD (Wildlife Conservation Society – Uganda Country Program)

Salvi Asefi-Najafabady PhD (University of Virginia/National Center for Atmospheric Research, USA)

6.1 Model selection and modelling approach Anthropogenic climate change and its associated impacts on biodiversity and humanity will be among primary determinants of the environmental futures in Lake Kivu-Rusizi CRAG region over coming decades. Comprehensive understanding of how humanity and earth systems will interact under increasing climatic stress is therefore essential for effective planning in the CRAG region to lessen negative consequences for developing societies and regional ecosystems. However, as highlighted in assessments on climate change adaptation performed by the Wildlife Conservation Society and the Africa Biodiversity Collaborative Group, effective adaptive planning for climate change in tropical Africa by conservation interests has been severely hindered by a lack of baseline data resources and inadequate resolution of climate modelling guidance to serve most planning needs (Seimon et al., 2011; 2012).

In an effort to address such shortcomings, we have conducted a climate and environmental modelling project for the Lake Tanganyika watershed region using the Community Earth System Model (CESM), an advanced environmental prediction system (Gent et al., 2011; Lawrence et al., 2012). Earth system models are the only scientific tools yet developed that are capable of integrating the multitude of physical, chemical and biological processes that determine past, present and future climate. By harnessing the computational capacity of extremely powerful supercomputers, these models generate the most complete information on changes in future climate and its physical impacts on time scales of decades, thus matching typical environmental planning time horizons. As a fully coupled modelling system, the CESM links atmospheric, oceanic and terrestrial processes directly, and is therefore designed to capture feedbacks realistically. This brings it closer to representing real-world conditions and dynamic change processes than conventional atmospheric general circulation models, though as with any predictive model offering projections of the future the CESM inevitably is constrained by how well its initialized state can capture real-world conditions, as well as an unavoidable dependence on approximations to represent parameters that are difficult to quantify.

Taken collectively, CESM outputs can provide a holistic, internally consistent package of information that can help in understanding and visualizing climate change-related impacts within a broader context of changing human demographic and developmental trends. The regional CESM simulations we present here are the most complete and detailed portrayal of future environmental states under anthropogenic climate change yet generated for the Kivu-Rusizi CRAG region (and very likely, for anywhere in tropical Africa). The model is run with climate forcing prescribed through annual changes in land cover, solar irradiance, greenhouse gas concentrations, natural and anthropogenic aerosol burden, and aerosol (black carbon and dust) and nitrogen deposition (Gent et al., 2011). For our regional simulations, the CESM was run at 0.10-degree resolution (i.e. with grid cells ~10-11 km on

71 each side) using boundary climate conditions from an existing global simulation run at 1 degree resolution out to 2100, but with terrestrial characteristics from 0.05 degree spatial data in the CESM’s Land Surface Model. Through this methodology, relatively localized environmental conditions are dynamically generated by the land model at fine scales, revealing spatiotemporal characteristics of change that would otherwise not be discernible in coarser modelling outputs.

The CESM Lake Tanganyika watershed simulations presented here cover the period 1980-2100. Among the multitude of outputs in the standard suite of outputs of the CESM are predictions of key climate variables of temperature and precipitation, net primary production (including crops, both fertilized and unfertilized), hydrological runoff, evapotranspiration, fire frequencies, carbon budgets and fluxes, and plant functional types. Gridded CESM outputs at high spatial resolution can also be utilized in other specialized models (e.g. lake models, hydrological models, species distribution models, crop models), so could replace the commonly used but often unrepresentative interpolated datasets (e.g. WorldClim) or coarse resolution products derived from statistically downscaled global climate model output (e.g. outputs from the WCS Albertine Rift Climate Assessment; Seimon and Picton Phillips, 2012) – modelling resources that very recently represented state-of-the-science inputs.

The suite of environmental variables thus generated in CESM simulations offer location-specific environmental predictions. We restrict our focus here to a single CESM simulation using one Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) global development and emissions scenario of several considered that we deem most likely to unfold over time. This is RCP 8.5, which is the most anthropogenically perturbed of four RCPs assessed in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report (IPCC 2013). RCP 8.5 represents a “business as usual” global emissions trajectory, where absence of globally coordinated mitigation strategies to curtail degradation causes inexorable intensification of anthropogenic stress to natural systems. Our rationale for using this rather severe perspective on coming changes is pragmatic: current global emissions levels are already trending even higher than those specified in RCP8.5 projections (Peters et al., 2012).

Our approach in this chapter, to consider a single simulation of a single model, as the basis for assessment and planning is somewhat unconventional. There are, however, no other models as yet available for comparison at similar spatial resolutions for the project region, making direct comparisons with other models impractical. We do have some capacity to assess model reliability and sensitivity through the use of two other simulations also performed. The first is a Historical Simulation, which simulates the recent past from 1980-2005 based on observed boundary conditions (e.g. measured levels of greenhouse gases, solar radiation, volcanic eruptions, deforestation and other land cover distributions and trends) thus providing a good indication of the models capacity to capture processes already underway. The second is an RCP4.5 Simulation, which is a more moderate “optimistic” emissions and development scenario based around global cooperation to reduce harmful practices.

We assessed the Historical outputs qualitatively against “verification” datasets offered by global gridded products. Many of these, however, are themselves severely hindered by inadequate data inputs in this data-sparse region of Africa. We found, for example, that the CESM Historical run offered a spatial map of regional rainfall far more in line with an independent data set measured by space- borne radar TRMM, the Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission), than the conventional “Reanalysis” data set, which incorporates multiple sources into an atmospheric model. Such disparities add some uncertainty as to the representativeness of both the Historical Run and the forward-looking RCP simulations. In general, however, we feel that the CESM output is both highly informative and of considerable utility as guide to environmental futures to serve the CRAG Implementation Plan.

In the forward-looking projections, the greatest differences evident between RCP8.5 and 4.5 outputs is a generally slowing of the rate of change, though changes of relatively high magnitude are still registered regardless by mid-century. The graphics and discussion we present below will be restricted to the RCP8.5 Simulation exclusively. We strongly caution users of the material we present here that this is but a single projection of change, whereas a broad ensemble comprising many simulations from a multitude of model simulations, once available, would offer a more statistically robust framework for planning and decision-making. An ensemble CESM modelling study is currently in development, and its outputs, expected in 2016-17, will offer a more refined set of prediction products than what is presented here. 6.2 CESM Environmental Predictions for the Lake Kivu-Rusizi CRAG We present results as regionally focused snapshots of change for the northern extent of the Lake Tanganyika watershed for the years 2030 and 2060 contrasted against a baseline set in 2000, representing the recent past. The maps presented in Figures 6.1-6.7 show these as differences of 10- year means. All variables are mapped at 10-km spatial resolution, with corresponding seasonal behavior displayed in included graphs for a ~2 latitude x1 degree longitude region centered upon the Rusizi Valley, presented graphically at monthly resolution. These products represent a very small subset of variables available in the complete set of CESM outputs for RCP8.5, with comparable sets similarly available for the other simulations conducted. The data are available for download at http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/staff/lawrence/riftvalley.html. Additional products will be placed online at this website as the project continues.

A second set of CESM output products, showing predicted changes in agricultural yield of tropical maize and rice crops, is derived from global scale simulations, so is of much coarser resolution (2x2 degree latitude-longitude grid cell size). For these, we present retrospective and forward-looking time series spanning 1900-2100 for a single grid cell centered on Latitude 2.25 deg. S, Lon 29.25 deg. W that covers much of the Kivu-Rusizi CRAG region. 6.2.1 Temperature

In common with virtually all climate model projections for continental Africa, the CESM output projects a continuance of multi-decadal warming already underway for more than a century now. At the 2030 time-step, (being the average of the 10-year period 2025-34), annual mean temperature has warmed approximately 1°C from the 2000 baseline period, with little evidence of spatial variability or seasonality changes. By 2060, considerable spatial variability is becoming apparent, with areas of greater and lesser degrees of warming quite apparent, including within the highlighted CRAG sub- region. Differences in temperature increase are also increasingly evident in the annual cycle, where by 2060 dry season (June-July) temperatures have increased by 2.3 °C whereas in the October-April pluvial period the increase averages 1.8°C over the 2000 baseline conditions.. So while the annual climate warms rapidly overall, the cooler months show the greatest increases such that by 2060, the coolest month of the year, July at 19.4°C is almost as warm as the warmest month, March at 19.7°C, of the 2000 baseline year. 6.2.2 Precipitation

A sustained trend for increasing precipitation rate is predicted under RCP8.5 climatic conditions in the CRAG region, with regionally-averaged annual rainfall increases of 10.2% and 19.5% over the 2000 baseline mean in 2030 and 2060, respectively. This amounts to an increase of 207 mm on average across the project region by 2060. The broader view presented in the regional maps show that the

CRAG project area occupies an especially wet region, whereas in some neighboring regions diminishing rainfall is predicted by 2030 in DRC west of Lake Tanganyika to the south and in southwest Uganda to the northeast. The annual pluviogram for the CRAG sub-region reveals that increases are restricted temporally to the already wet months of December-March, with almost no changes in other months. By 2060, all wet season months show substantial increases ranging from 1.3-2.6 mm/day, though the duration of wet and dry seasons remains unchanged. An intensifying east-west oriented gradient develops through time just south of the CRAG region, suggesting considerable instability and diverging outcomes between the CRAG region and parts of the Tanganyika basin lying immediately south.

Figure 6.1. The CESM RCP 8.5 predictions for Temperature for the northern extent of the Lake Tanganyika watershed encompassing the Lake Kivu-Rusizi Valley CRAG region.

24# 24#

)

C C 23# 23#

e e 22# 22#

(

$ $ 21# 21#

u u 20# 20#

r r 19# 19#

p p 18# 18# m 2030$ m 2060$

T T 17# 2000$ 17# 2000$

$ $ $ $ $ 16# $ $ $ $ $ 16# $ $

l l

r r

v y

p n

u u

a a

o o

a a

e e

J J

M M

The maps display the difference in annual mean temperature (°C) for ten-year periods centered in 2030 (left panel) and 2060 (right panel) from the 2000 baseline means. The inset graphs display the corresponding annual cycle in monthly mean temperature (°C) in the box centered on the Rusizi River valley.

It is important to note that precipitation mapping is derived directly from the global CESM atmospheric simulation rather than the specialized land model simulation. As such, the precipitation results do not fully reflect the local-level conditions and small scale processes resulting from atmospheric interactions with landforms, and the diurnal circulations generated by temperature differences between large water bodies and adjacent land surfaces, etc. These constitute very important factors in regional climatology, and will be addressed in work to follow conducted with higher resolution inputs from the CESM atmospheric model. 6.2.3 Evapotranspiration

Evaporative fluxes from the surface to the atmosphere exhibit relatively minor changes over land surface in both the 2030 and 2060 projections. The seasonal patterns within the CRAG sub-region remain remarkably constant across the 60-year period evaluated. This suggests that vegetation and

74 direct evaporation from the land surface are not balancing the intensifying rainfall regime, thus promoting large increases in runoff, discussed below. In marked contrast, evaporative flux over Lake Tanganyika is shown to increase rapidly, contributing an additional 0.5-1.0 mm per day of vapor flux to the atmosphere. This is almost certainly a response to the continued rapid warming of the lake surface that began more than a century ago (Tierney et al., 2010), and the increasing water vapor carrying capacity of the warming air above it. It is possible that the intensifying lake water contribution to the overlying atmosphere may partly explain the concomitant increases in rainfall over the CRAG region through intensification of the hydrological cycle. This could be investigated further by identifying moisture transport pathways in the CESM outputs to establish the contribution of the lake waters versus other source regions, though this is beyond the scope of the present study.

Figure 6.2 As in Fig 6.1 but for Precipitation, expressed as a daily rate in millimeters

16"

) 16"

14" $

)

y d 14"

a / 12"

m / 12"

m m 10"

(

m 10"

(

t 8"

a t 8"

r l 6"

a 6"

4" 2030$ f

i 4" 2060$

R 2" 2000$ R 2" 2000$

$ $ $ $ 0" $ $

v y

p n

$ $ $ $ $

0" $

v y

p n

Figure 6.3 As in Fig 6.1 but for Evapotranspiration, expressed as a daily rate in millimeters

5" 5"

$ 4" $ 4"

)

/ 3"

(

$ 2"

E E 2030$ 2060$ 1" 1" 2000$ 2000$

$ $ $ $ $

0" $

0" $ $ $ $ $

v y

p n

6.2.4 Hydrological Runoff

Hydrological runoff in the RCP8.5 CESM output exhibits amplified responses to changes in precipitation, bringing with it rapidly intensifying potential to upend many key aspects of the regional terrestrial and lacustrine ecology through enhanced erosion and sedimentation. Initially, in the 2030 projection relatively uniform increases are only present in the peak pluvial months from November- March, and little spatial variability can be discerned across the CRAG region. This, however, changes remarkably by 2060: a 50% increase in runoff in December over 2000 levels is so pronounced that its moves the annual peak one month earlier. Spatial variations are now quite evident, with a local runoff maximum within the CRAG region centered south of Bukavu, and a local minimum centered on Kibira National Park in northwestern Burundi. The potential increase in runoff predicted in 2060 could yield both positive and negative effects. The increases benefit hydroelectricity generation and some water- intensive agriculture such as rice cultivation, while on the negative side, flash floods and landslides presenting a potential risk to human lives, intensified erosion and loss of productive farmland. The impacts of such hydrological changes on fisheries, and also on the vast reservoir of potentially lethal gases stored in Lake Kivu waters, are uncertain and need to be investigated. In addition, more realistic spatial representations of rainfall, as outlined above, are needed in order to better represent local characteristics of runoff, and will be developed in future work.

Figure 6.4 As in Fig. 6.1 but for Runoff, expressed as a daily rate in millimetres

10" 10"

)

y y 8" 8"

a a 2060$ 2030$ d

m m 6" 2000$ 6" 2000$

(

f f 4" 4"

R R 2" 2"

$ $ $ $ $

0" $

$ $ $ $ $

0" $

v y

p n

v y

p n

a o

S N

The large lakes exhibit neutral values throughout since runoff is not calculated for these surfaces. 6.2.5 Net Primary Production

Among the variables considered in this assessment, Net Primary Production (NPP) exhibits the most pronounced spatial variations. Several different sub-regions show increases or decreases of relatively large magnitude, and this characteristic pervades the CRAG region itself. This behavior appears to reflect plant functional types in the model initializations, since different vegetation composites can be expected to display increasingly dissimilar productivity under changing climatic conditions over time. It is evident, for example, that heavily forested land surfaces such as in western DRC correspond with sub-regions exhibiting large increase gains in productivity, reflecting the propensity for enrichment of tropical broadleaf forests under a warming, moistening and CO2 enriched atmosphere. The Nyungwe- Kibira protected forest in Rwanda and Burundi also stands out markedly as a local NPP maximum in contrast to the heavily disturbed agricultural landscapes surrounding it. In contrast, the heavily populated Rusizi Valley corridor presents a local minimum. The seasonal cycles of monthly means for the CRAG sub-region shown in Figure 6.5 average the areas of increase and decrease, so does not effectively representative either.

Figure 6.5 As in Fig. 6.1, but for Net Primary Production, expressed in grams of carbon per meter- squared per day

6" 6"

) 5" ) 5"

/ 4" / 4"

/ 3" / 3"

(

P 2" P 2"

P 2030$ P 2060$

N 1" N 1" 2000$ 2000$

$ $ $ $ $ 0" $ 0" $ $ $ $ $

l l

v y v y

p n

u u

a a

o o

a a

e e

J J

S S

N N

M M

6.2.6 Total Ecosystem Carbon

The Total Ecosystem Carbon (TEC) variable sums both the above and below ground carbon fractions of organic material. As with NPP, the maps of TEC display high degrees of spatial variation, with areas trending strongly both positively and negatively within the CRAG region. Especially large increases in TEC are depicted west of Lake Kivu in DRC, including Kahuzi Biega National Park, in the range of +10 to +20 kg per square meter by 2060. In economic terms, this suggests that the park’s already rich carbon endowment should be viewed – and valued – as a resource likely to appreciate significantly over time. Meanwhile, significant losses in TEC characterize the western Rusizi valley south of Bukavu. Human land use choices have the potential to amplify, reduce or even reverse the signals shown in these projections. Removal of existing forest would greatly reduce the extant carbon endowment, whereas afforestation and reforestation could add to it. Agricultural expansion and the choice of cultivars developed, for example, through the replacement of dry field with rice paddies, would likewise bring the potential for substantially different carbon distributions across the CRAG project region. 6.2.7 Crops – Tropical Maize and Rice

At the time of preparing this report, CESM crop modules were in development for different cultivars, only a few of which are readily available and at relative coarse scale. In Figure 6.7 we present time series showing potential yield in the project region of two regionally important cultivars, maize and rice, under observed historical climatic conditions (1900-2005) and as predicted under RCP8.5 (2006- 2100). Results are given for both unfertilized plantings, which likely characterizes much of the farming practice in the CRAG region to the present day, as well as highly fertilized plantings using applications matching modern levels as utilized at present in the United States.

Figure 6.6 As in Fig. 6.1 for Total Ecosystem Carbon, in units of kilograms of carbon per meter- squared

65# 65#

$ 64# $ 64#

)

2 2

m m

/ 63# / 63#

(

$ $ 62# 62#

T T 2030$ 2060$ 61# 61# 2000$ 2000$

60# $ $ $ $ $

$ $ $ $ $

60# $

v y

p n

v y

p n

u a

e J

The rectangular project region features areas of both major gains and losses that largely cancel out when the region is averaged. Hence, the inset graphs, which average all the pixels in the rectangular project region, only show changes in the single units whereas the individual 10-km scale pixel values tend to be much larger.

The potential yields reflect plant responses to changing climate conditions and CO2 levels, and do not take into account factors such as losses due to pests or diseases, both of which may also change as the climate changes. Predictions for many other regionally important cultivars, such as sweet plantain (matoke), beans, coffee and tea are not yet available within the CESM modelling suite, though are currently in development.

The CESM yield results for maize suggest that a trend reversal may be in progress, if the RCP8.5 climate trajectory continues over the course of the century. The trend from 1900 to present suggests that potential yield for unfertilized maize has increased by approximately 50% due to changing atmospheric conditions, but that present day values are now near peak potential and declines are to be expected from mid-century onwards. Although starting from a much higher baseline, a similar pattern is shown for fertilized maize. This suggests that a warming and wetting 21st century climate is not likely to produce ever increasing yields across the CRAG region; rather, that changing cultivation practice, including the application of significant levels of fertilizer (i.e. Green Revolution techniques and technologies) will be required to augment maize yields.

Figure 6.7. (Left) CESM land model output for a 2x2 degree latitude-longitude grid cell centered on the project region giving time series of potential annual yield for maize and rice

. (Left) CESM land model output for potential annual yield in tonnes per hectare of Tropical Maize, both with and without fertilizer applications, under observed historical climate conditions (1900-2005), and as predicted under RCP8.5.

(Right) Potential yield changes for Rice, both fertilized and unfertilized, and also under irrigated and non-irrigated conditions. Fertilizer applications are prescribed at levels matching present day practice in the United States, so are far higher than likely to be encountered within the Rusizi Valley region at present. Moreover, rainfed agriculture in the region is dominated by a smallholder farming system with limited options for investment (e.g. use of fertilizers, pesticides, machinery) and small-scale irrigation, which makes it the most vulnerable agricultural system to climate change.

The predictions for rice contrast greatly with the projections for maize, and appear to have high potential to capitalize on the warming and wetting climate. The yield changes for unfertilized irrigated and unirrigated rice are modest in comparison to the values generated for fully fertilized rice crops. By 2060 fertilized rice fields are projected to yield 400% higher harvests than unfertilized fields, whereas in 1970 the difference was just 250%. Under the RCP8.5 climate change projection, rice therefore stands to become an increasingly important and productive commodity where environmental conditions allow its cultivation across the CRAG region. 6.3 Comparison to IPCC multimodel consensus The highly focused CESM sub-regional predictions presented here can be compared qualitatively to the much coarser resolution outputs available from continent-scale prediction systems such as the multi-model ensembles used in IPCC assessment reports. Specific predictions for tropical Africa in the Fifth Assessment Report (Niang et al., 2014) are restricted to the most basic atmospheric variables, annual mean temperature and precipitation52. For temperature, the IPCC model ensemble under RCP8.5 show strong agreement over the rate of warming to those shown in Figure 6.1, suggesting that the CESM temperature predictions reside close to the multi-model consensus. IPCC results for precipitation changes in and close to the project region are somewhat more ambiguous. By mid- century, areas north of Lake Tanganyika show a model consensus for precipitation increases of up to 10%, which increase further to 10-20% by late-century. These results compare well to the CESM projections shown in Figure 6.2.

Over northern Lake Tanganyika, precipitation trends among the IPCC models vary considerably, with

52 Graphic available at http://www.ipcc.ch/report/graphics/index.php?t=Assessment%20Reports&r=AR5%20-%20WG2&f=Chapter%2022)

80 some showing increases and others indicating decreases at both mid- and late-century. This is not necessarily at odds with the CESM predictions, which depict an intensifying precipitation gradient across northern Lake Tanganyika with areas displaying negative trends relative to the 2000 baseline at both the 2030 and 2060 time steps. Taken together, the correspondences in temperature and precipitation indicate that climate changes in the CESM under RCP8.5 are neither extreme nor outliers, and indeed, appear to fall well within the mainstream of the IPCC model ensemble for RCP8.5. 6.4. Next steps in CESM modelling

The results discussed above, developed for the Rusizi-Kivu CRAG in 2014, present a first-look at earth system predictions from a single CESM simulation. Newer work is now developing this much further, and will offer more refined results to inform environmental planning and decision-making. The CESM has the potential to identify areas with the future risk of extreme rainfall and runoff, combining such information with geological and topographical information can provide us with the ability to identify hotspots of possible landslides, erosion, habitat destruction, and many other applications. New simulations are currently being conducted to:

 Provide the ability to explore different future scenarios of climate change.  Explore the impact of transient land use/land cover change on climate.  Apply large ensembles of simulations and uncertainty analysis that help define the likelihood of outcomes according to a probability distribution.  Identify hotspots of change  Explore the changes in plant functional types in a changing climate as indicators of shifting biomes.  Explore environmental and economic cost/benefit derived from different afforestation and deforestation scenarios  Explore changes in yield of crops with and without fertilizer applications for a range of possible climate scenarios  Examine changes in the frequency and severity of climatic conditions promoting extreme events such as severe drought, flooding and landslides.

Adding even greater real-world complexity, the CESM future climate analyses can also be combined with future population projections and other socioeconomic variables to further explore the impacts of climate change on human beings and patterns of migration. Similarly, in combination with information on natural ecosystems and protected areas, projections on habitat change and species migrations can possibly be created as well.

6.5 Summary

The CESM model predictions presented here offer a regionally focused, internally consistent and comprehensive view on potential environmental changes likely to occur as a consequence of anthropogenic activities at global scales. It is important to keep in mind, however, that many non- climatic anthropogenic drivers of change such as deforestation, urbanization and other land surface conversion, as well as changes in cultivation practice and infrastructure developments such as dams, oil pipelines, railways and roads will also inevitably contribute considerably to environmental outcomes. Among important inferences that can be derived for the Lake Kivu-Rusizi Valley CRAG region from the CESM predictions under the high emissions and global development trajectory of RCP 8.5 are the following:

 By mid-late century, thermal conditions of the coolest months of the year will be approaching

levels found in the warmest months in the present day. This implies that chronic heat stress will become pervasive and negatively impact biodiversity, humanity and ecological systems.  Wet and dry season durations will be maintained relatively unchanged.  The October-April rainy season will become much wetter over time than in the recent past.  Peak monthly hydrological runoff will increase by 50% and will occur one month earlier in 2060 than the present. The strong increase in December runoff south of Bukavu may pose dangers of increased soil erosion in this area. This could benefit hydropower generation, but flooding presents a risk to agriculture and human lives  Biomes characterized by tropical broadleaf forest may be enriched by the combined warming- wetting CO2-enriched climate, with increases in net primary production and carbon, whereas more disturbed agriculture dominated landscape may experience net losses.  Increasing (and decreasing) carbon stock predictions could affect long-term valuations, so should be considered in REDD/REDD+ assessments and valuations. In particular, the Kahuzi- Biega forests stands out as a promising candidate for REDD interventions as do (to a lesser extent) Nyungwe-Kibira and the Itombwe Mountains.  Assessed broadly, maize cultivation is currently approaching its climatic optimum, and in the absence of Green Revolution interventions may experience yield declines by mid-century.  Rice cultivation will benefit considerably under the predicted climatic changes, and very highly so with fertilizer applications, suggesting that rice may continue to increase rapidly in significance as a regional food source and economic resource looking forward. Irrigated rice production in the Rusizi plains could be expanded with potential benefits for Lake Tanganyika fisheries arising from sediment trapping. The danger of increased methane emissions associated with rice paddies could be mitigated by using newly developed GM rice varieties.

References

Gent, P. R., G. Danabasoglu, L. J. Donner, M. M. Holland, E. C. Hunke, S. R. Jayne, D. M. Lawrence, R. B. Neale, P. J. Rasch, M. Vertenstein, P. H. Worley, Z.-L. Yang, and M. Zhang, 2011: The Community Climate System Model Version 4. Journal of Climate, DOI: 10.1175/JCLI-D-10-05011.1.

Lawrence, P. J., J. J. Feddema, G. B. Bonan, G. A. Meehl, B. C. O'Neill, S. Levis, D. M. Lawrence, K. W. Oleson, E. Kluzek, K. Lindsay, and P. E. Thornton, 2012: Simulating the Biogeochemical and Biogeophysical Impacts of Transient Land Cover Change and Wood Harvest in the Community Climate System Model (CCSM4) from 1850 to 2100. Journal of Climate, doi:10.1175/JCLI-D-11- 00256.1.

Peters, G. P., Andrew, R. M., Boden, T., Canadell, J. G., Ciais, P., Le Quéré, C., ... & Wilson, C., 2013: The challenge to keep global warming below 2 C. Nature Climate Change, 3(1), 4-6.

Seimon, A., J. Watson, R. Dave and J. Oglethorpe et al., 2011: A Review of Climate Change Adaptation Initiatives within the Africa Biodiversity Collaborative Group NGO Consortium, Wildlife Conservation Society, New York, and Africa Biodiversity Collaborative Group, Washington DC

Seimon, A., A.J. Plumptre and J.E.M. Watson, 2012a: Building consensus on Albertine Rift climate change adaptation for conservation: a report on 2011-12 workshops in Uganda and Rwanda. WCS Workshop Report, Wildlife Conservation Society, New York, 40 pp.

Tierney, J.E., M.T. Mayes, N. Meyer, C. Johnson, P.W. Swarzenski, A.S. Cohen and J.M. Russell, 2010: The unprecedented warming of Lake Tanganyika. Nature Geoscience, 3: 422-42.

CHAPTER 7: THREATS Principal Author: Ian Gordon 7.1 Introduction

A clear identification of threats to human livelihoods and their well-being is essential for any conservation and land management programme. As Joppa et al. (2016) note “Reducing rates of biodiversity loss and achieving environmental goals requires understanding what is threatening biodiversity, where risks occur, how fast threats are changing in type and intensity, and what are the most appropriate actions to avert them”. This document focuses on threats to biodiversity and ecosystem services that are arising from climate change. It is strongly focussed on where they occur (this Chapter and Chapter 8), how fast they are changing (Chapter 6), and the actions needed to avert them (Chapter 8). 7.2 IUCN-CMP Framework for Threat Analysis

A conventional and globally accepted framework for biodiversity threat analysis53 has been developed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and the Conservation Measurements Partnership (CMP) (Table 7.1). This was used during the 2014 Gisenyi Workshop as a prioritization tool. The analysis focussed on threats to particular sites that were judged to be especially sensitive to climate change. Sites were selected to equally represent four categories of habitat: Urban, Agricultural, Riparian and Protected Areas. Table 7.1 presents the prioritization results for all these sites for all three countries (Burundi, DRC and Rwanda) combined. Table 7.1 IUCN-CMP Threat Categories prioritised for all three CRAG Countries (Gisenyi Workshop, 2014)

IUCN – CMP Threat Category CRAG Priority (1 = High Priority)

1. Residential and Commercial Development 6 2. Agriculture & Aquaculture 3

3. Energy Production & Mining 3

4. Transportation & Service Corridors 8

5. Biological Resource Use 5

6. Human Intrusions & Disturbance 7

7. Natural System Modification 2

8. Invasive & problematic Species, Genes & Disease 11

9. Pollution 1

10. Geological Events 8

11. Climate Change & Severe Weather 5

12 12. Other

53 http://www.iucnredlist.org/technical-documents/classification-schemes/threats-classification-scheme

The relatively low ranking of risks from Climate Change (compared to e.g. Pollution and Energy Production and Mining) is commonly seen when the IUCN-CMP framework is administered in a workshop setting (e.g. CEPF 2013, MacArthur Foundation 2014). It reflects a greater awareness of contemporary threats, which are more immediate and currently more severe. As the projections in Chapter 6 show, problems from climate change are certain to increase in the future, demanding a proactive approach. The overall threat analysis for the CRAG differs from threat assessments developed at previous regional meetings (CEPF 2012, MacArthur 2013). The most startling difference is in the rank given to Pollution, with this ranked top in the overall CRAG ranking but 10th and 9th in the CEPF and MacArthur assessments, respectively. This reflects the greater attention given to freshwater and the inclusion of urban sites in the Gisenyi Workshop. Less easily explained is the lower ranking of Invasive Species in the CRAG (12th vs 5th in the others); invasives (both plants and fish) are a serious problem in and around the lakes, with freshwater invasives such as water hyacinth being particularly notorious54. Figure 7.1 compares the Workshop threat ranking for the three CRAG countries. The main conclusions were: 1) While Pollution ranked top overall, it was second in Burundi, 3rd in DRC and 6th in Rwanda; 2) Energy Production and Mining ranked top in Burundi but only 3rd= in Rwanda and 7th in DRC; 3) Climate Change and Severe Weather were judged to be relatively low threats at present, coming 6th= in DRC and Rwanda and 8th in Burundi; 4) Human Intrusions and disturbance were judged to be much more important in the high density countries of Burundi and Rwanda than in low density DRC; 5) Geological events ranked top in DRC but bottom in Burundi; 6) Residential and Commercial Development ranked high in the weaker economies of Burundi and DRC, but was bottom in Rwanda.

Not apparent in Figure 7.1, but of crucial importance in the context of threat management, are differences in governance between the three countries (Chapter 3). This could help to explain the differences in threat ranks for Residential and Commercial Development.

54 http://lta.iwlearn.org/new-guide-to-some-invasive-plants-affecting-lake-tanganyika

Figure 7.1 Threat Analysis for the 3 CRAG countries using IUCN-CMP Biodiversity Threat Categories (assessed at the 2014 Gisenyi Workshop; vertical axis shows relative threat level within each country)

BUR DRC RWA

12 10 8 Threat 6 Level 4 2 0

Unsurprisingly, biodiversity threats were ranked differently for the four habitat types. Figure 7.2 shows the total numbers of times the different IUCN categories were recorded as significant threats in each habitat. The main conclusions were: 1) Protected Areas register the greatest overall numbers and concentrations of threats (overall threat mention score of 58, vs 57 for Riparian, and 41 for Agricultural and Urban) reflecting heightened perceptions of, and sensitivity to, threats to them; 2) The greatest threats to Protected Areas were from Energy Production and Mining, Biological Resource Use, Human Intrusions and Disturbance, Invasive and Problematic Species, and Pollution. 3) Riparian threats ranked highest from Agriculture and Aquaculture, Energy Production and Mining, Natural System Modification, Pollution and Climate Change; 4) Agricultural threats ranked highest from Agriculture (interpreted here as unsustainable practices), Energy and Mining, Biological Resource Use, Natural System Modification, Pollution and Climate Change; 5) Urban threats ranked highest from Residential and Commercial Development, followed by Natural System Modification and Pollution.

Figure 7.2 Comparison of Threat Assessments for different kinds of sites (three countries combined, vertical axis shows relative threat rank within each site category)

Urban Riparian Agricultural Protected

8 7 6 5 4 3

Threratlevel 2 1 0

7.3 Transboundary Threat Analysis in the Lake Tanganyika Authority Strategic Action Plan (LTA SAP)

The Lake Tanganyika Strategic Action Plan (LTA SAP 2011) provides a detailed examination of transboundary threats for the entire lake. It identifies five root causes for these threats: Increasing Population Pressure, Poverty and Inequality, Inadequate Governance, Insufficient Resources, Inadequate Knowledge and Awareness. It emphasizes that the threats result from an increase in the intensity of human activities and that the pace of this increase is outstripping the adaptive and absorptive capacity of the resources in the lake basin. Although the analysis was targeted at the whole of Lake Tanganyika, its conclusions apply equally to the Kivu-Rusizi Basins The LTA analysis recognizes Insufficient Resilience to the Impacts of Climate Change as one of the main threats. It identifies 7 specific threats that arise from insufficient resilience (Table 7.2):  Droughts, fires, heavy rainstorms, flooding  Unpredictable lake levels  Increased erosion and sedimentation  Decrease in fisheries yields  Loss of agricultural productivity  Loss of biodiversity

The Strategic Action Plan did not formally rank the threats, but a rough and ready prioritization based on the number of times key threat-related words are mentioned in the document as a proxy tool for ranking is shown in Table 7.3. As in the Gisenyi Workshop survey, pollution emerges as the most serious problem. Sediments, mining and erosion come second, third and fourth respectively, roughly matching the second and third-equal places given to Natural System Modification, Agriculture and Energy and Mining in Table 7.1.

Table 7.2 Transboundary Threat Analysis in the LTA SAP

Governance and

Main Threat Proximate Causes Specific Threats Development Challenges

 Droughts, fires, heavy rainstorms,  Decreased and/or unpredictable flooding precipitation  Unpredictable lake  Increase in extreme weather events levels Insuficient  Increasing surface water temperature  Increased erosion Resilience to  Cross-cutting impacts on aquatic and and sedimentation Impacts of Climate terrestrial ecosystems that are  Decrease in Change already stressed fisheries yields  Insufficient knowledge and  Loss of agricultural socioeconomic capacity to adapt to productivity impacts  Loss of biodiversity  Lack of adaptation  Lack of sustainable preparedness livelihood  Increasing demand for protein  Lack of adequate alternatives  regulations Excessive fishing efforts in the pelagic  Insufficient zone  Insufficient capacity resources and  Excessive fishing efforts in the littoral for monitoring and financial Unsustainable zone control mechanisms for Fisheries  Use of inappropriate gear and mesh  Loss of pelagic adequately dealing sizes fisheries resources with integrated  Excessive extraction of ornamental  Loss of littoral water resources fish fisheries resources management  Loss of aquatic (IWRM) issues biodiversity  Inadequate  Unsustainable agricultural practices (e.g. updating, slash & burn)  Habitat degradation implementation,  Deforestation to meet timber and  Excessive erosion and enforcement and fuelwood needs sedimentation monitoring of Unsustainable  Encroachment on lake shore (e.g.  Loss of agricultural legislation Land Management settlements, agriculture) productivity  Lack of sufficient  Expansion of badly designed/uncontrolled  Loss of biodiversity mechanisms for human settlements  Loss of ecosystem institutional  Extraction of sand and rocks services coordination and  Poorly designed road development inter-sectoral  Expansion of human settlements governance  Encroachment (e.g. settlements,  Habitat degradation  Lack of human Critical Habitat agriculture)  Loss of biodiversity resources and Destruction  Environmental degradation resulting from  Loss of ecosystem technical capacity climate change, unsustainable fisheries, services in institutions sedimentation, invasions and pollution dealing with IWRM  Accidental introduction of invasive issues  Decrease of ecosystem species by natural dispersal Biological productivity  Introduction of invasive species through  Alteration of economic Invasions aquaculture use of invaded areas  Introduction of invasive species by  Loss of biodiversity humans (e.g. planting seeds)  Increased urbanisation and industrial activity  Decline in water quality  Decline in air quality Increasing  Lack of adequate wastewater treatment  Risks for human health Pollution  Inadequate collection, treatment and disposal of solid waste  Loss of biodiversity  Waste from boats (e.g. oil, garbage, etc.)  Mining activities

 Waste from petroleum exploration and exploitation  Agricultural runoff (fertiliser, pesticides)  Atmospheric emissions (e.g. bush fires, charcoal burning, industrial emissions)

Table 7.3 Number of mentions of threat-related words in the LTA SAP

Word No. of Further details mentions Pollution 116 Mercury, garbage, oil, pesticides, fertilizers, sewage Sediment 54 Poor land use and agricultural practices Mining 52 Artisanal gold mining Erosion 39 Poor land use and agricultural practices, deforestation Invasives 37 Freshwater crayfish, Water hyacinth, Mimosa Deforestation 26 Agriculture, fuel wood, charcoal, timber, encroachment Loss of soil fertility 17 Loss of topsoil to erosion Unsustainable (practices) 11 Fisheries, agriculture, land use, forest management Degradation 10 Widespread in aquatic, terrestrial, and wetland habitats Encroachment 7 On wetlands forests and lake shores Tectonic activity 6 Geological history, lake levels, landslides, mass erosion

7.4 Climate Change Related Threats

The IUCN-CMP framework is useful as a global standard, enabling the meta-analysis of threats to a variety of habitats and protection regimes across the world (Joppa et al., 2016). In the present context, a different framework is needed that focusses on threats from Climate Change and that explicitly includes threats to ecosystem services such as water regulation and soil formation (Chapter 5). The progressive loss of these services risks harm to human health through lowered drinking water quality, higher water costs that may burden the poorer populations in particular, and lower crop productivity, and hydroelectric output from reduced dry-season flows. In Rwanda, a study by SEI (2009) estimated that in the Nyabihu, Musanze and Rubavu districts, floods in 2007 led to fatalities, agricultural losses, building and infrastructure damage and population displacement as a result of Gishwati deforestation. The direct measurable economic costs of this event were estimated at $4 to $22 million (equivalent to around 0.1 – 0.6% of GDP) for two districts alone. However, this only includes the direct economic costs of household damage, agricultural losses and fatalities. It does not include the wider economic costs from infrastructure damage (including loss of transport infrastructure), water system damage and contamination, soil erosion and direct and indirect effects to individuals. Such events together with their associated costs are certain to increase in frequency with Climate Change. The objective of the CRAG approach is to reduce the damage they cause by increasing the resilience of biodiversity and ecosystem services. We have therefore adopted a framework that focusses directly on threats that are exacerbated by Climate Change, as shown in Box 7.1, rather than the IUCN-CMP categories, and we use it in the rest of this Chapter and in Chapter 8. A brief explanation of the links to climate change for each threat is included in the Box.

Box 7.1

Climate Change Related Threats in the CRAG

1. Erosion: Accelerated by extreme climatic events, especially by heavy rains after droughts, and by heavy rains on catchment slopes, deforested hillsides and degraded riparian habitats. 2. Sedimentation: Higher rates of sedimentation associated with increased erosion and rainfall, and more intense rainfall events as the climate warms.

3. Landslides: Risks increased by extreme climatic events and associated land degradation. 4. Pollution: Floods and heavy rains wash pollutants into rivers and lakes and cause spillage from industrial facilities. 5. Crop Failures: Too much, or too little, seasonal rainfall lowering crop yields. Early or late rains disrupt the timing of planting and harvest and pollination services. Increased evapotranspiration and drought reduces water availability. Higher levels of pest damage and arrival of new pests that reduce crop yields. 6. Habitat destruction and altitudinal shifts: Floods destroy habitats, droughts and extreme temperatures increase fire risks. Warming temperatures lead to altitudinal shifts in montane communities, disrupt spatial distributions and precipitate trophic cascades. 7. Extreme climatic events: Cross cutting as above, but also directly threatening to lives and livelihoods, especially in urban areas where human densities are high, and certain to increase under Climate Change. Increased fire risk during droughts 8. Shifting patterns in human and livestock diseases: increase in water-borne diseases, insect vectors expanding their range both horizontally and vertically. 9. Invasive Species: Changing environmental conditions disrupt ecosystems and provide opportunities for harmful alien and indigenous species to invade and spread in natural and agrarian habitats.

There is much potential for CESM simulations and other predictive modelling systems to address some of the issues mentions in Box 7.1. For example, CESM has the potential to identify areas with elevated future risk for extreme rainfall and runoff. Combining such information with geological and topographical information can provide us with the ability to identify hotspots of possible landslides, erosion, habitat destruction and the like.

7.4.1 Erosion

Anthropogenic erosion presents the biggest threat to climate change resilience in the CRAG. Climate change projections (Chapter 6) indicate that erosion rates are certain to increase as a result of more frequent extreme weather events and increased rainfall on steep slopes, accompanied by more persistent and turbulent run-off. Erosion dramatically reduces soil fertility through the loss of top soils that contain most of the nutrients for plant growth, and raises the risk of landslides which in turn can lead to mass erosion events. It is also the direct cause of sedimentation which reduces the productivity of commercial fisheries and the efficiency of irrigated agriculture and hydropower.

Erosion rates in the Rusizi escarpments are reported to be the highest in Rwanda, with severe effects on the catchment areas for Rusizi I-III dams (AfDB 2015). The high rates result from the clearing of land for agriculture and from urban development, aggravated by the steep slopes, heavy rainfall, earthquakes and landslides. They are particularly severe on the slopes bordering the Rusizi River and its tributaries. They are least severe for Rusizi I where the area that is susceptible to erosion is confined to a limited area 3km from the Lake Kivu outfall close to the water course. Erosion is mentioned as an important problem 75 times in the latest State of Environment (SOE) report for Rwanda (REMA, 2016). Soil loss estimates differ. The REMA SOE document for 2009 reported that total losses for Rwanda amounted to 1.4 million tons55 per year, giving an overall estimate of 0.61 tons/ha/year56, affecting the food security of 40,000 people in 2004. The World Bank (2014) gives an estimate that is ten times bigger at 14 million tons per year (6 tons/ha/yr), while AfDB (2015) puts the rate at a maximum (in the Rusizi escarpments) of 15.7 tons/ha per year. SAFEGE (2012) estimated soil losses in 2011 at between 50 and 100 t/ha/year, affecting 34-47% of the country. Karamage et al. (2016) put it at 250 tons/ha/yr. In Burundi, national erosion rates are estimated at between 150-200 tons/ha/yr (Wiesenhuetter, 2016; Huber et al., 2015). It is probably safe to assume that this Burundi represents a minimum rate for the CRAG as a whole. In Rwanda, the reduction in soil fertility due to erosion has been reported as affecting the food security of 40,000 people in 2004 (REMA, 2009), and leading to the loss of around 21,300 tonnes of nutrients between 2010 and 2012 from 400,000 ha of land (REMA 2016). This is estimated to have reduced cereal crop production by 406,700 tonnes/year with a value equivalent to 8.94% of Rwanda’s agricultural GDP). In 2009, REMA calculated that 37% of croplands required erosion protection measures before crops should be planted. By 2016 the REMA report states that anti–erosion practices were in place on 87% of agricultural land. This suggest considerable progress towards Rwanda’s Vision 2020 which targets 90% of agricultural land for erosion protection, but it must be noted that no data are yet available to monitor its effectiveness. Equivalent statistics are unavailable for DRC and Burundi, but the erosion problems for their portions of the CRAG are certain to be at least as severe as those for Rwanda and the effectiveness of remediation efforts likely to considerable less. The steep slopes in much of the landscapes in the CRAG ensure that erosion is widespread, occurring throughout the study area, including in Protected Areas. This is because although the PAs are largely forested, tree cover is not continuous and slope angles and rainfall are both very high. Anthropogenic changes in land use are driving increased erosion throughout the CRAG. Various databases and simulation models are available to estimate current and future erosion rates. Figure 7.4 shows data derived from WaterWorld, which uses global datasets at 1-square km and 1 hectare resolution to generate spatial models for biophysical and socio-economic processes along with scenarios for climate, land use and economic change. The Figure provides scenarios for changes in forest cover, using the average baselines (derived from current datasets) and change values for each 1-square km. Table 7.4 shows the land cover values used for the scenarios in Figure 7.4.

55 The units ‘tons’ and ’tonnes’ are used variably in different sources, but differ only by ~10%, so are treated as more or less equivalent and hereafter written as ‘tons’ in this document 56 National soil loss/yr = 1.4 million tons. Total area of country = 2,363,800 ha. Total area – wetlands = 2,292,886 ha.

Table 7.4 Values used in WaterWorld Land Use Change Modelling

Assumed 25% Increase in 25% Decrease in 100% Decrease in baseline (%) Forest Forest Forest

Tree 29.5 54.5 4.5 0

Herb 57.5 38.5 70 50

Bare 13 7.0 25.5 50

Other land cover values were explored using the WaterWorld module. For example, increasing tree cover to 36.9% did not produce an overall decrease in erosion. Increasing tree cover to 54.5% produces a reduction of erosion within Protected Areas, although erosion in some river channels still appears to increase slightly. Similarly, decreasing tree cover to 22.1% produced a negligible effect on erosion using this model and again is not shown (although if concentrated locally it would undoubtedly have an impact). These several different options within the WaterWorld land use change module were tested, but as the results do not alter the overall picture, the outputs are not further presented here. The values in Table 7.4 and Figure 7.4 were therefore used to summarize the model outputs. The simulations are constrained by factors of model resolution and the generalization of land cover to three basic classes, but they clearly show the dangers of erosion along the river channels and steep slopes at high elevations, especially on the western shore of Lake Kivu. Even when overall changes in erosion rates appear relatively minor (as in the +/-25% scenarios), there are locally significant effects that are likely to be amplified by human activities. For example, when tree cover is reduced to 4.5% (the 25% reduction in Figure 7.4), Protected Areas, mainly Nyungwe and Kibira, do not appear to be subject to an increase in erosion, but river channels at mid-elevations show a marked increase. The greatest effects are observed when the amount of bare ground is increased: replacing tree cover with a closed mat of herbaceous cover does not necessarily increase erosion, but replacing it with bare ground does. This is evident in the ‘doomsday’ scenario when all tree cover is replaced by 50% herb cover and 50% bare ground, resulting in a stark increase in erosion throughout the study area, as shown on the right hand map in Figure 7.4. Note that the importance of bare ground in accelerating erosion will be greatly elevated if seasonal changes in climate result in unusually heavy and early rains when land is cleared in preparation for planting. WaterWorld is one of several options for modelling erosion. In a study of erosion in the Mahale Mountains in Tanzania, south of the Kivu-Rusizi CRAG, The Nature Conservancy (Hunink et al. 2015) employed the hydrological model SPHY (Spatial Processes in Hydrology) to assess hydrological flows, erosion and sediment yield on a high spatial and temporal resolution. This enabled the analysis of the spatial and temporal variability of the erosion hazard, a better understanding of relationships with land use and management, and a preliminary assessment of priority areas for interventions. The analysis showed that differences in the area in protection status, wildfire frequency and rainfall were responsible for differences in vegetative cover, which in turn largely explained erosion susceptibility in the area. As in the WaterWorld simulations, priority areas were identified where vegetation cover was least, particularly on higher slopes.

Figure 7.4 Modelling Erosion in relation to Forest Cover

Figure 7.5 Water World projections of impacts of climate change on Gross Hilltop Erosion

The SPHY report concluded that a better understanding of high rainfall variability was needed to further identify areas at most risk of erosion, particularly in the light of climate change. Figure 7.5 presents WaterWorld simulations, using means of all models, of the effect of Climate Change on erosion under the A2 Scenario for greenhouse gas emissions57 used in the Third and Fourth Assessments of the IPCC. An increase in erosion rates is expected throughout the CRAG, even in Protected Areas. As noted in Chapter 6, increased erosion is especially likely south of Bukavu as a result of greatly elevated run-off rates. In a more holistic framework, future changes in landuse/land cover could be addressed using CESM, and in combination with CESM future projections of hotspots of extreme runoff and rainfall, potential future areas of increased erosion, sediment loading and landslides could be identified.

7.4.2 Sedimentation

The volume of sediments contributed to the lake by the Rusizi watershed is evident in Google Earth satellite images (Figure 7.6). The shortened sediment plumes apparent in these images also demonstrate that they quickly sink into the lake as they reach its sharply-sloping deeper parts. Sedimentation affects entire aquatic food chains by reducing light penetration and lowering primary productivity, ultimately impacting on fisheries. Feeding efficiency within food chains is reduced as animals have to deal with more sediment and less prey, and because reduced light levels affect vision- dependent predators. Sediments also damage fishery production by smothering the algae and plants on which fish graze, and the shelters in rock crevices that are critical for the protection of hatchlings in the spawning grounds. They clog and damage respiratory and feeding structures like the gills and gill rakers. At least one Critically Endangered fish within the Rusizi basin, Chiloglanis ruzuziensis, is directly threatened. According to the IUCN RedList “It has an extent of occurrence <100 km² and area of occupancy <10 km² both of which are declining in quantity and quality due to increased water turbidity due to erosion on watershed.”

Figure 7.6 Google Earth Image of Sedimentation entering Lake Tanganyika from the Rusizi River (2015)

57 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Report_on_Emissions_Scenarios

A further significant impact of sedimentation, with repercussions that extend beyond the CRAG, results from the siltation of hydropower dams. Global economic costs of sedimentation effects on hydropower were estimated in 2013 at between USD 15 and 20 billion a year, amounting to 30% of overall annual expenses and 10% of annual dam benefits58. Proportionate costs are much greater for those dams that are most prone to siltation as a result of poor management of catchment health. This is certainly the case for the Kivu-Rusizi CRAG: at the regional Gisenyi Workshop, a SINELAC engineer reported that the reservoir volume for the Rusizi II dam was only 40% of its original capacity59 (having declined from 1.75 million in 1989 to 0.7 million m3 in June 2013). In addition to their effects on reservoir volumes, sediments coarser than 0.1 mm diameter also cause significant abrasion to turbine parts. The ESIA report (AfDB 2015) for the Rusizi III dam notes that sedimentation is a significant problem for the Rusizi II dam and is anticipated from both the DRCC and Rwandan sides of Rusizi III, where erosion rates are high. Sedimentation in the Rusizi I reservoir started about 20 years ago, as a result of slope cultivation by refugees from the conflicts in the 1990s.

Contrasting the earlier situation with that prevailing in 2013, the engineer suggested that this was largely due to erosion from agricultural activities on the escarpment slopes between the two dams, displacing the previous natural vegetation cover. Other factors affecting the efficiency of the dam included detritus (including urban and rural trash), which blocked the grids to the turbines and clogged filters and cooling systems and interrupted operations, requiring constant clearance and adding to high maintenance costs. All of these problems had reduced plant operations during peak hours and, together with poor rains, were responsible for the dam’s underperformance, running at that time at 10% of its projected power output. A similar situation prevails in the Nyabarongo I dam in eastern Rwanda where only 4MW of power are currently being produced out of a projected output of 28 MW. The massive investment in these dams and their crucial importance for development should make water catchment health and climate change resilience a top priority for the governments of Burundi, DRC and Rwanda. Rwanda has already responded to the danger by instituting an innovative sediment fingerprinting approach to determine the major sources of sedimentation in the Nyabarongo dam (Manyifika, 2016). Birdlife partners in the CRAG project are using the same technique to investigate sediment sources in the Kivu-Rusizi catchments under separate funding from CEPF.

Google Earth images reveal a severe source of sedimentation into the Rusizi from the Muhira River (Figure 7.a) that was not detected by the WaterWorld models (most likely because these activities take place on the sand bars or gravel banks of river channels, which are already sparsely vegetated)60. Follow-up visits by ABN showed the source to be artisanal gold mining along the river banks. The Muhira River results from the confluence of the Nyamugerera which springs from Nderama to join the Rugogo River which has its source in the Rutabo Mountain. Both rivers carry a mild sediment load at this point (Figure 7.7b). Below this confluence there is a string of gold mining pits (Figure 7.7c) which results in extreme siltation along the rest of the Muhira (Figures 7.7d and e) until it enters the Rusizi (Figure 7.6).

58 http://www.hydrocoop.org/dams-with-significant-siltation-problems/ 59 http://www.birdlife.org/sites/default/files/attachments/crag_regional_workshop_16- 18sept2014_report.pdf 60 The erosion in the Muhira illustrates a general weakness of modelling approaches: models are hostage to disruptive future events, especially to those that are anthropogenic and/or inherently unpredictable, or whose effects are hard to quantify.

Figure 7.7a Sediments entering the Rusizi from the Muhira River in Burundi

A review of artisanal gold mining in Burundi61 reveals that Muhira is not exceptional. It reports that “there is considerable gold exploitation in the alluvial deposits along tributaries of Rusizi river such as Kaburantwa, Muhira and Nyamagana, located in Cibitoke province” and notes that “The Figure 7.7b Confluence of Nyamugerera and Rugogo Rivers

Figure 7.7c Artisanal and uncontrolled gold mining along the Muhira River

61http://ipisresearch.be/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/2015_04_Review-of-the-Burundian-Artisanal-Gold- Mining-Sector_V-20150619.pdf

Figure 7.7d Extreme sediment load in the Muhira River resulting from uncontrolled gold mining

Mabayi region is well-known for its gold deposits62.” The review provides Google Earth images showing the devastation of riparian areas as a result of the expansion of artisanal mining along the Kaburantwa River between 2005 and 2009. While it draws attention to several deleterious environmental effects, sedimentation in the Rusizi catchment is not registered as a significant problem in the review.

Regardless of whether sedimentation arises from mining or other human actions, it is clear that extreme climatic events will increase its severity, but the relationship of erosion to climate change within the CRAG is complicated, and impacts may differ between Lake Kivu and Lake Tanganyika. Lower soil fertility resulting from erosion reduces primary productivity and leading to less capture of carbon dioxide by plants. Erosion may therefore be expected to increase greenhouse gas levels. This effect is however offset by sedimentation in deep water bodies which buries particulate organic matter, so that sediments function as carbon sinks (Galey et al. 201563).

62The Mbayai operations currently fall within a concession owned by a Lebanese mining company http://www.africaintelligence.com/AMA/exploration-production/2013/05/14/jbeili-the-new-mining- kingpin,107959458-ART 63 Nature. Vol. 510: 204–207, May 2015.

As Lake Tanganyika is one of the deepest lakes in the world, with a maximum depth of 1471 m, erosion in the Kivu-Rusizi CRAG may thus help to slow global warming.

The situation may be different in Lake Kivu. Maeck et al. (2013) show that sediment trapping by dams creates methane emission hotspots, and can potentially increase global freshwater emissions of this potent greenhouse gas by up to 7%. They find that sediment accumulation correlates directly with methane production and subsequent release rates. The Rusizi I dam is at the mouth of the Rusizi on Lake Kivu, a lake that contains 60 cubic kilometres of methane (trapped by water pressure), so sediment-driven methane emissions are a clear danger. It also contains 300 cubic kilometres of carbon dioxide and has been described as a “Lake Full of Trouble” by Nayar (2009)64. The methane is produced by bacteria acting on carbon dioxide from molten rocks and on organic matter at the bottom of the lake. Methane levels in the lake increased by 15-20% between 1974 and 2004 (Schmid et al., 2005), and is estimated to be currently increasing at 3% a year. Nayar (2009) notes that “if this trend continues, the lake will be saturated within the century and, like Lake Nyos [in Cameroon], it could erupt with even the slightest disturbance”. To the extent that this trend is augmented by sedimentation, erosion control within the Kivu sector of the CRAG becomes an issue of considerable urgency. Analysis of nutrient inputs into Lake Kivu (Muvundja et al., 2009) shows, however, that area- speciﬁc nutrient mobilization is low, suggesting that external nutrient inputs are not the cause of the observed increases of methane in the last decades. 7.4.3 Landslides

Landslides have become a regular event within the CRAG in recent years. The State of the Environment report for Rwanda (REMA, 2016) reports 23 cases of landslides between 2011 and 2013, leading to the deaths of 74 people, 574 houses damaged or destroyed, and 656 ha of cropland destroyed or damaged. Landslides in Rwanda are typically associated with heavy rainfall on fragile slopes. As described in Chapter 1, the western side of Rwanda has a very hilly topography, with steep slopes that are prone to landslides, especially when the vegetation has been removed, there are no erosion preventions and in the presence of heavy rainfall.

Figure 7.8 a-c Google Earth Images of Landslides in Eastern DRC

a) 2 o52’49 South 28 o50’20 East

b) 2 o51’60 South 28 o50’21 East

64 Nature. Vol. 460: 321-323, July 2009.

o o c) 2 51’22 South 28 50’20 East

Like soil erosion and sedimentation, landslides can be seen on Google Earth. Figure 7.8 shows three examples from Eastern DRC. In the three DRC examples, the landslides occurred in areas with little or no human habitation. When they occur in populated areas, the damage to infrastructure can be catastrophic. The following account is taken from a UNOSAT website65: “On 29 March 2015, heavy rains caused floods and landslides in Muhuta, a commune of Bujumbura Rural Province, in Western Burundi on the edge of Lake Tanganyika, destroying 349 houses, health centre and two schools. The displaced population found refuge in the houses of their relatives and neighbours, which put the limited resources of the hosting population under high pressure. The areas where they used to live, as well as the common areas, were entirely covered by stones and mud. The affected population belong to very poor villages from one of the most vulnerable area of the cholera belt. Two bridges were also destroyed together with 5 km of the national road number 5 between Bujumbura and Rumonge. Heavy rocks, weighing up to 2 tonnes each, subsequently blocked the roads, preventing all commercial activities for the affected population.”

65http://unosat-maps.web.cern.ch/unosat- maps/BI/LS20150409BDI/UNOSAT_A3_LS20150409BDI_Rutunga_landscape.pdf

In the previous year, even more disastrous landslides had occurred in the Kinama/Kamenge neighbourhoods within the city limits of Bujumbura. As reported by IFRC: “During the night of 9 Feb 2014 torrential rains fell for around 10 hours and caused flooding, mudslides and landslides in five communes of Burundi’s capital, Bujumbura. By 12 Feb, two more areas, Kinyinya and Kijaga in Mutumbuzi commune, Bujumbura rural province had been affected. 64 people were reported dead. Over 940 homes were destroyed and nearly 12,500 people were made homeless. Most families lost everything they owned. Infrastructure, including roads and power supplies, as well as crops and livelihoods were also destroyed66. Subsequent reports stated that “69 people, many of them children, have been confirmed dead as flooding, mud and landslides caused by the rain, swept away homes or caused houses to collapse. More than 180 people have suffered broken arms and legs or fractures to the head. More casualties are expected as rescue teams reach all of the affected areas. So far, nearly 20,000 people have been displaced, and close to 2,200 families have been left homeless. Two bridges were swept away and infrastructure such as roads and power supplies has been damaged. So too have crops and livelihoods.”

Given the degraded state of much of the vegetation cover and the nature of the landscape (Map 2.3, Chapter 2) within the CRAG, together with the climate change projections for increased precipitation and higher frequencies of extreme climatic events (Chapter 6), the prevention of landslides will be a major component of the CIP (Chapter 8). 7.4.4 Pollution

Pollution results from the accumulation of sediments and pollutants (agrochemicals, domestic and industrial wastes) driven by agricultural and other developments in the basin. Climate change will exacerbate pollution problems through a greater frequency of extreme climatic events. Droughts degrade the landscape, enabling subsequent floods to flush pollutants into the rivers and lakes. Wind- driven currents distribute pollutants from expanding urban centres such as Bukavu, Uvira and Bujumbura throughout the lake. Cotton processing and sugar production ventures in Uvira and more than 80 industries (including paint, brewery, textile, soap, and battery factories) in Bujumbura discharge their wastes directly or indirectly into the lake (LTA SAP, 2011). Nickel deposits are known from the Burundi catchment and the SAP reports that there are plans for its exploitation. Artisanal gold mining is widely practised throughout the catchments, and, in addition to its effects on sedimentation (section 7.3.2), may also lead to mercury pollution67,68. REMA (2016) also notes high arsenic levels, from mine wastes, in the Sebeya River (Rutsiro District) which drains into Lake Kivu. Controlling effluents and pollution from these rapidly growing cities, urban settlements and industrial activities is essential if the health of the lakes is to be maintained. The SAP notes that the residence time (the average age of a given water particle in the lake) of water in Lake Tanganyika is 440 years. The great depth and volume of water in the Lake means that flushing time (the amount of time required to exchange all the water in the lake for new fresh water) is exceptionally long (estimated at 7,000 years) so that the natural removal of pollution is significantly slower than in most lakes. In Lake Kivu the flushing time is around 200 years and residence around 100 years (Descy et.al. 2012).

66 IFRC, 24 Oct 2014; http://www.unitar.org/unosat/node/44/1937 67 Artisanal gold mining is one of the most significant sources of mercury pollution into the environment, globally estimated at 1,400 tonnes per year. (http://www.unep.org/chemicalsandwaste/Metals/GlobalMercuryPartnership/ArtisanalandSmall- ScaleGoldMining/tabid/3526/Default.aspx) 68http://oarelogin.research4life.org/uniquesigwww.nature.com/uniquesig0/news/peru-s-gold-rush-prompts- public-health-emergency-1.19999

The water from Lake Kivu is flushed down the Rusizi into Lake Tanganyika, so inorganic and organic pollution from Goma, Gisenyi and Bukavu will add to the water quality problems of Tanganyika, in addition to contributions from Cibitoke and Bugurama.

There is danger of tipping points being reached, as has happened in the Great Lakes of the USA (e.g. with toxic algal blooms in Lake Erie in 201469), when ecological collapse follows the crossing of a pollution threshold. 7.4.5 Crop Failure

Gornall et al. (2010) provide a review of climate change impacts on global agriculture production. They classify impacts as direct and indirect. Direct impacts will arise through changes in mean climates, climate variability and extreme weather events (extreme temperatures, droughts, heavy rains and flooding). Indirect impacts will arise through changes in pests and diseases, changes in water availability from remote locations, and mean sea/lake level rises and storm surges. Gornall et al. also consider the effects of the changes in Greenhouse Gases (carbon dioxide and ozone). All of these changes, other than sea level rises, have potential effects on crop yields in the Kivu/Rusizi catchments.

The impacts of changes in mean climate, together with changes in carbon dioxide levels, for two of the most important crops in the CRAG are assessed in Chapter 6. Changes are projected for mean temperatures, with increases of 2.3oC in the dry season and 1.8oC in the wet season by 2060. Increased precipitation is forecast by 2060 for wet season months with increases of between 1.3-2.6 mm/day although in other months it is largely unchanged. Using these projections, potential crop yields from maize and rice were estimated from 2006 to 2100 under two scenarios: i), current practices in the region, with minimal fertilizer use; ii), high fertilizer inputs at levels equivalent to current practices in the US. For both crops, the potential gains from fertilizer applications, assuming it is possible (and desirable) to match US levels of agrochemical inputs, far outstrip any losses due to climate change. (A similar conclusion was reached by Gornall et al. for global agriculture). Subject to this caveat, the estimates suggest that maize yields will decline in the next seventy years under both scenarios. The prospects for rice cultivation are more encouraging, especially with fertilizer use, leading to the conclusion that rice “stands to become an increasingly important and productive commodity where environmental conditions allow its cultivation across the CRAG region.”

These estimates are based purely on known plant responses of two crops to mean changes in climatic and atmospheric conditions up to 2060. In the longer term, global warming poses serious threats to food security. Using observational data, historical records, and output from 23 global climate models, Battisti and Naylor (2009) conclude that extreme seasonal temperatures will have significant negative impacts by 2100 on agricultural productivity, farm incomes and food security. They call for political prioritization and major funding for climate adaptation strategies based on genetics, genomics, breeding, management, and engineering capacity. Similarly Gornall et al. (2010) observe that “Changes in the mean climate away from current states may require adjustments to current practices in order to maintain productivity, and in some cases the optimum type of farming may change”.

The projections in Chapter 6 for maize and rice production are based on mean climates. They do not take account of potential effects of climatic variability and extreme climatic events (7.3.2, 7.3.3, 7.3.6) or indirect impacts such as crop losses due to pests or diseases and reductions in soil fertility due to climate-induced erosion (7.3.1). Climatic variability is a major problem for the farmers who depend on rain-fed agriculture. The key issue here is the variance in seasonality rather than the mean durations of seasons or their average times of onset (both expected to remain relatively unchanged under the CESM projections in Chapter 6).

69 http://lakeeriealgae.com

100

Changes from year to year in the starting dates for the rains cause great difficulties in the timing of clearing and planting, and a sufficiently long growing season is essential for a successful harvest. These problems are all too familiar to smallholders in the CRAG and beyond. They survive by using well- established coping mechanisms based on generations of experience of the conditions on their land. Nonetheless, periods of hunger and famine occur far too often in the region, and the possibility of greater climatic variability represents a recurring threat to future livelihoods. Similar issues of variance versus the mean apply to extreme climatic conditions, and heat, drought and flood tolerance.

Climate Change is also certain to affect the abundance and distribution of crop pests. Pest numbers are subject to complex ecological interactions, both biotic and abiotic, that are hard to model, but new pests are certain to emerge and impacts of existing crop pests will certainly be affected. The IPCC (2014) suggests that the coffee berry borer (Hypothenemus hampei) and a burrowing nematode, Radopholus similis, a pest of bananas may both expand their ranges and increase in abundance in East Africa as temperatures increase. Warmer temperatures and greater humidity are likely to favour an increased incidence of fungal diseases in grain and other crops (such as Pythium infections in beans, late blight in potatoes, and xanthomanos and fusarium wilt in bananas). Cassava brown streak disease, caused by a virus transmitted by whiteflies, is currently one of the most serious emerging threats to food security in Africa70, all the more so since cassava cultivation is a major coping strategy for smallholder farmers in the face of climate change.

Crop failures resulting from changes in water availability from remote sources as a result of Climate Change are also inevitable within the CRAG given the key role of altitudinal gradients in determining local rainfall patterns and hydrology. Rainfall, or the lack of it, on the higher reaches of the catchment greatly influences water availability in the lower reaches. 7.4.6 Habitat Destruction and Altitudinal Shifts

Disasters such as landslides (7.3.3), volcanic eruptions, floods, droughts and fires directly destroy habitats. The degree of damage and the time it takes for habitats to recover vary with the size and extent of the disaster. Similarly the degree to which these events affect people’s livelihoods depends on the number of people impacted and how important the habitats concerned are for their economic well-being and health.

Geological events ranked top for DRC in the threat assessments carried out at the Gisenyi workshop in 2014, but bottom in Burundi. They are a particular hazard for people living in the vicinity of Goma and around Rubavu in Rwanda. Although they occur independently of climate change, they cause the internal displacement of people and reduce the land available for delivering ecosystem services and conserving biodiversity in landscapes that are already under climate stress. An estimated 300,000 people were forced to move by eruptions in Rwanda, mainly from the highly populated area near the Volcanoes National Park.

A more serious threat with potential repercussions on a massive scale is that lava flows into Lake Kivu could cause the expulsion of methane and carbon dioxide from the lakes (Section 7.3.2).

70 http://www.aatf-africa.org/files/files/publications/Global-alliance-war-on-cassava-viruses_0.pdf

101

In Rwanda floods and droughts are estimated to have affected well over 2 million people over the last two decades, with economic costs expected to amount to almost 1% of GDP each year by 2030 (REMA, 2016). These numbers are probably greater in Burundi but less in DRC where population densities are much lower. Since 1970 there have been over 30 major flood events in Rwanda, destroying over 9000 houses, well over 4500 ha of land affected and major infrastructural damage to roads, power facilities and factories. These events include one in 1974 which was national in scale and affected 1.9 million people (REMA 2016). Droughts were ranked as the third most serious cause of poverty (after land shortages and poor soils) in Rwanda by respondents to a REMA survey, and are minimally estimated to have affected over 1.97 million people between 1994 and 2013, mainly in the east of the country where the risk of drought is high. In addition to their direct impacts on natural and agrarian habitats they are responsible for fires. The Virunga and Nyungwe National Parks were affected by fires in 2005 and 2009, leading to the loss of 150 ha on Mount Muhabura in the Volcanoes National Park (REMA 2016).

Habitat shifts are already occurring within the altitudinal gradients of the CRAG and are an inevitable consequence of climate change as temperatures rise. Just as mercury rises in an old fashioned thermometer, so do different species and habitats move up the slopes of mountains. Ayebare et al. (2013) have modelled the anticipated shifts on vegetation types within the Albertine Rift since 1980. The results suggest a low probability for shifts in alpine habitats, high probabilities for bamboo and montane and medium altitude forests, and low to medium probabilities for lowland forests. Changes in the ranges of particular species will inevitably follow the shifts in vegetation habitats. BirdLife models suggest that 14 threatened endemic bird species in the Albertine Rift are expected to move around 350 m upslope by 208571. One species, the Red Collared Mountain babbler, Kupeornis rufocinctus, is expected to lose all the available habitat within its own climate envelope. It is striking how strongly habitat shifts are associated with sharp altitudinal gradients, confirming their role as biotic thermometers for climate change. 7.4.7. Extreme Climatic Events

The increased frequency of extreme climatic events was one of the earliest predictions of Climate Change science. Its consequences are already painfully apparent across the planet. The CESM models used in Chapter 6 only present the general capabilities of CESM in studying regional and local impacts of current and future changes in climate and did not generate specific outputs on this issue. Sections 7.3.1-7.3.6 all underline the importance of such extreme events in exacerbating the threats from erosion, sedimentation, pollution, landslides, crop failures and habitat destruction. The CESM simulations offer excellent opportunities to explore the changes in the frequency of the extreme events, especially now that multiple simulations are currently being performed for this and other project – in particular, a “Large Ensemble” of 40 iterations of the global CESM model now allow for probability statistics and recurrence intervals to be examined for a host of climatic phenomena. The RCP8.5 results presented in chapter 6 show an overall significant increase in temperature, rainfall as well as runoff across the CRAG region: from this it can be strongly inferred, even without a statistical breakdown, that present day extremes in heat and rainfall intensity will recur more frequently and be of ever greater magnitude in coming decades.

71 http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/sowb/casestudy/548

102

7.4.8 Shifting patterns in Human and Livestock Diseases

Climate Change will increase the incidence of water-borne and water-related diseases of humans and livestock, as a result of higher rainfall and floods. Flooding, particularly in urban high density areas, frequently leads to contamination of drinking water, resulting in the transmission of diseases such as diarrhea, dysentery, Salmonella infections, typhoid and cholera. Globally water-borne diseases kill 1.8 million people every year72. Fresh waters also harbor disease vectors such as snails which are intermediate hosts for schistosomiasis, and breeding mosquitoes. Warming is already leading to the spread of malaria to populations living at higher altitudes where it was previously absent. For example, Githeko (2009) has documented the shift of malaria into the Central Highlands of Kenya. Before the 1990s there was no malaria transmission in Nyeri District (1,700 meters above sea level) but after 1994 the number of cases has risen steadily. This is almost entirely due to higher temperatures: 18oC is the average threshold value for malaria transmission because at lower temperatures the malarial parasite does not have enough time to develop into its infective sporozoite stage before the mosquito’s last meal. Since 1994, mean annual temperatures in the Nyeri District have been permanently above this value. The spread of malaria into areas where it has been previously absent is especially devastating because resident populations have little immunity and local health services have limited experience in dealing with the disease.

Given the opportunistic nature of generalist animal pathogens and parasites, and the role of climate change in creating openings for the invasion of alien species, the spectrum of livestock diseases in the CRAG is certain to change73. Tick-borne diseases such as African Swine Flu (ASF) and mosquito-borne viruses such as Rift Valley Fever may be affected. Genetic diversity, in the pathogens responsible for such diseases, presents a pool of different strains that can potentially spread and become more lethal under changed environmental conditions. For example, at least 22 different strains of ASF are known from the region. 7.4.9 Invasive Species

An increased spread of invasive species is one of the major consequences predicted by the IPCCC74. This is because climate change will destabilize ecosystems and make them more vulnerable to invasion. In addition, many invasive species share life history traits and adaptations, such as rapid growth and fast reproduction, which enable them to capitalize on changes in environmental conditions. A further problem is that success breeds success when it comes to invasives. A spectacular example within the Great Lakes Region is provided by Water Hyacinth, which rapidly forms dense mats on the lakes in response to eutrophication as a result of organic pollution and fertilizer runoff. The LTA SAP reports its spread in Lake Tanganyika as being a major problem for DRC and Burundi, noting its ability to “completely dominate the invaded ecosystem excluding all other competing species and having deleterious effects such as reduced light beneath and dissolved oxygen in water, increased evapo-transpiration and accumulation of sediment”. These deleterious effects help to eliminate herbivorous fauna that might otherwise graze on the hyacinth, and increase the eutrophication that fuels its growth.

72http://pulitzercenter.org/downstream?gclid=Cj0KEQjwv467BRCbkMvs5O3kioUBEiQAGDZHL7DeKsH68003tzd rJGDry4wuKag7yeHkmbV_cJmRsIgaAsJh8P8HAQ 73 http://www.fao.org/docrep/017/i3084e/i3084e05.pdf 74 http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg2/index.php?idp=206

103

Other aquatic invasive plants include the Nile Cabbage, Pistia statiotes, and the Red Waterfern Azolla filiculoides, Potomogeton spp. and Hydrilla verticillata. (IUCN,2010). Terrestrial invasive plants include, Sericostachys scandens, an indigenous liana, is currently killing trees and bamboo stands in Nyungwe Forest (REMA, 2016), Lantana camara, Opuntia monocantha, and Mimosa pigra. Two species of alien freshwater crayfish, Procambarus clarkia and Cherax quadricarinatus, are already present in neighbouring waters and have the potential to spread into Lake Tanganyika75. As natural habitats become increasingly disturbed by climate change and other anthropogenic forces, they will open up to invasion by additional species, and the list of invasives is certain to grow. 7.5 Human Footprint (Contributed by James Allan, James Watson, Sean Maxwell, Oscar Venter)

Given that most threats to biodiversity and ecosystem services are anthropogenic their severity can be measured using the Human Footprint (HFP). This is a globally-standardised and data-driven measure of cumulative human influence on the terrestrial environment (Sanderson et al. 2002). The map builds on “top down” remote sensing data by including “bottom up” systematic survey data, quantifying a range of human pressures on the environment. These pressures include land-cover changes such as urban, agricultural and pastoral land uses, infrastructure and industry such as roads, railways, electricity lines, as well as resource extraction such as mining, oil drilling and logging. The Human Footprint also includes human population density, night lights and navigable waterways, which to an extent act as proxies for pressures such as pollution, invasive species, hunting and fishing.

Recently, a group of collaborators lead by Dr. Oscar Venter has attempted to develop a temporal Human Footprint. To do this, they adopted the methods developed by Sanderson et al. (2002). To facilitate comparison across pressures they placed each human pressure variable within a 0 – 10 scale and acquired data for the early 1990s and 2009. Datasets were weighted according to relative levels of human pressure and summed together to create the standardized Human Footprint. For any grid cell, this can range between 0 – 50. Venter et al. (under review) provide estimates of the HFP for 1993 and 2009 that allow for a measure of the change in Human Footprint over this period at a global scale. These data will be made available in raster form at a resolution of 1km2 once the paper is accepted. Using the Zonal Statistics tool in the GIS software ArcMap version 10.2.1, for the purposes of this project they calculated the mean Human Footprint for the Rusizi-Kivu CRAG, and the change in Human Footprint between 1993 and 2009. Interestingly, the analysis suggests that the overall HFT in the CRAG has decreased, with a mean change of -0.14, from 13.82 in 1993 to 13.69 in 2009 (figure 7.9). This overall average estimate of change conceals a complex pattern through time. The landscape is highly dynamic with 85% undergoing some form of land-use change between 1993 and 2009. Decreases in the Human Footprint have taken place over 17% of the Rusizi-Kivu CRAG, predominantly found in fragments along the Eastern Border. Conversely, increases in the Human Footprint have taken place over 68% of the landscape (Figure 2.). In general, it would appear that decreases are localised but intense, whereas increases are widespread but less intense, although hotspots of Human Footprint increase did occur in small fragments of the landscape (Figure 1C.). Notably, for the purposes of the CIP, some of these hotspots were found within the Rusizi Valley, while the marked increases in the HFT in and around Kigali vividly demonstrate the impacts of urban growth. Similar changes are to be anticipated in the other urban centres within the CRAG noted in Chapter 2.

75 http://lta.iwlearn.org/management-program

104

Figure 7.9 Maps of the Human Footprint in the Rusizi-Kivu CRAG

A B C

Map 1: Human Footprint for 1993. Map 2: Human Footprint for 2009. Red shows areas with a high human footprint and blue shows low Human Footprint. Map 3: Change in the Human Footprint between 1993 and 2009, red shows an increase in Human Footprint and blue a decrease in Human Footprint. It is important to realise that the HFT measures the pressures on the landscape, not its state or response. Equally the dynamic nature of changes in land use throughout the CRAG (often under pressure of human conflicts) suggests that the footprint needs to be tracked through time, and that the picture that emerges for any particular period may not be representative of longer term trends. Further use of the HFT model will provide a useful holistic and objective monitoring tool for measuring changes in human pressure on the CRAG. Its value will depend crucially on the availability of accurate and up-to-date “bottom-up” data on the key variables that feed into the model. The quality of such statistics varies greatly between countries. Political volatility also means that situations on the ground can change rapidly, particularly in response to the displacement of large numbers of people. 7.6 Summary and Conclusion Chapter 7 identifies the threats to ecosystem services and biodiversity in the CRAG. It first uses the globally accepted IUCN-CMP framework to assess and prioritise threats to biodiversity, reporting results from a regional workshop on the CRAG, and then compares this with a detailed threat analysis presented in the Lake Tanganyika Authority Strategic Action Plan. In both assessments Pollution emerged as the most serious problem. Sediments, mining and erosion come second, third and fourth respectively in the LTA SAP, roughly matching the second and third-equal places given to Natural System Modification, Agriculture and Energy and Mining under the IUCN-CMP framework. Because the CIP has a special focus on building resilience to Climate Change in the CRAG, the rest of the chapter adopts a modified framework for threat analysis. This focusses on threats to ecosystem services and biodiversity that arise directly from Climate Change. Nine categories of threat are identified: 1) Erosion; 2) Sedimentation; 3) Landslides; 4) Pollution; 5) Crop Failure; 6) Habitat Destruction and Altitudinal Shifts; 7) Extreme Climatic Events; 8) Human and Livestock Diseases; and 9) Invasive Species. While all nine categories of threats are considered, the greatest emphasis is on the first three because of their strong connection with Climate Change and the severity of their impacts on national economies and local livelihoods

105

Erosion in the Kivu-Rusizi catchments is already severe and will be greatly exacerbated by the high rainfall that is predicted under the Climate Change scenario presented in Chapter 6. Erosion rates increase dramatically when hard rain falls on slopes that are denuded of their vegetation. They are also increased by water turbulence in the rivers of the catchments, particularly when, as is currently the case, there is poor protection of riparian vegetation. Hotspots for erosion are identified through WaterWorld models and through Google Earth, as a result of climate change, deforestation and mining activities. The direct effects of erosion on agricultural productivity and the economic losses that result are described. Sedimentation and landslides are an inevitable effect of widespread erosion and Climate Change. Sedimentation threatens aquatic biodiversity (including a Critically Endangered fish), commercial fisheries, and hydropower. Sedimentation has already impacted severely on hydropower generated by the Rusizi I and II dams and is a problem for Rusizi III. Google Earth images reveal sedimentation to be most severe in the Muhira River in Burundi as a result of artisanal mining on its banks. An empirical approach is urged for evaluating sedimentation threats, using satellite imagery and an innovative technique known as sediment fingerprinting. The history of landslides in the region is presented and its toll on lives, properties, crops and infrastructure is described, using data and anecdotes from Rwanda and Burundi, and Google Earth images from DRC. Pollution is linked to industrial and urban development and to increasing use of agrochemicals. Floods resulting from climate change will flush pollutants into the waters of the catchments and winds will drive them across the lake. Threats to food security, human and livestock health and invasive species are likely to be worsened by ongoing degradation of the catchments and the multiple consequences of climate change and extreme climatic events. Finally the overall anthropogenic impact on the CRAG is analyzed, using a Human Footprint (HFP) model that estimates the cumulative human influence on the terrestrial environment, building on n “top down” remote sensing data and including “bottom up” systematic survey data. This suggests that the greatest pressures will be felt in the Rusizi valley and in and near expanding human settlements. While the aggregate challenges to the resilience of ecosystems, biodiversity and human livelihoods in the CRAG will be made more severe by ongoing climate change, they are not insurmountable, given sufficient political will, donor support and informed local action. Chapter 8 describes some of the interventions that are needed to meet these challenges.

References AfDB 2015: Environmental And Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) Summary - Ruzizi III Hydropower Plant. http://www.afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/Environmental-and-Social- Assessments/Multinational_-_Burundi-Rwanda-RDC-projet_hydro%C3%A9lectrique_de_Ruzizi_III- Resume_EIES_-_EN-_08_2015.pdf

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264676660_Identifying_climate- resilient_corridors_for_conservation_in_the_Albertine_Rift_Acknowledgements

Battisti, D.S. and R.L. Naylor R.L., 2009: Historical warnings of future food insecurity with unprecedented seasonal heat. Science 323:240–244.

106

CEPF 2012: Ecosystem Profile: Eastern Afromontane Biodiversity Hotspot. Washington D.C. Pp 268. http://www.cepf.net/Documents/Eastern_Afromontane_Ecosystem_Profile_FINAL.pdf.

Descy, J.P., Darchambeau, F.,and Schmid, M., 2012: Lake Kivu: Past and Present. In J.-P. Descy et al. (eds.), Lake Kivu: Limnology and biogeochemistry of a tropical great lake, Aquatic Ecology Series 5, Springer Science+Business Media B.V. https://orbi.ulg.ac.be/bitstream/2268/170178/1/Chap_1.pdf

Galey, V., Peucker-Ehrenbrink, B., and Eglinton, T., 2015: Global carbon export from the terrestrial biosphere controlled by erosion. Nature, 521: 204–207, May 2015

Githeko, A.K, 2009: Malaria and climate change. https://idl-bnc.idrc.ca/dspace/bitstream/10625/44031/1/130440

Gornall, J., Betts, R., Burke, E., Clark, R., Camp, J., Willett K. and Wiltshire, A. 2010: Implications of climate change for agricultural productivity in the early twenty-first century. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: 365, 2973–2989

Hunink, J.E., Terink, W., Contreras, S. and Droogers, P., 2015: Scoping Assessment of Erosion Levels for the Mahale region, Lake Tanganyika, Tanzania. FutureWater, Wageningen The Netherlands.

http://www.futurewater.nl/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/LakeTanganyikaErosion_FW148.pdf

IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment- report/ar5/syr/AR5_SYR_FINAL_All_Topics.pdf

IUCN, 2010: Integration of freshwater biodiversity in the development process throughout Africa; mobilizing information and site demonstrations: Rusizi Demonstration Site Component. https://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/final_rusizi_full_report_with_publications.pdf

Joppa et al., 2016: Filling in Biodiversity Gaps. Science. 352: 416-418.

Karamage, F., Zhang, C., Ndayisaba, F., Shao, H., Kayiranga, A., Fang, X., Nahayo, L., Nyesheja, E.M., and Tian, G., 2016: Extent of Cropland and Related Soil Erosion Risk in Rwanda. Sustainability 2016, 8, 609-638. doi:10.3390/su8070609

MacArthur Foundation, 2013: Conservation Strategy for the Great Lakes Region of East and Central Africa. pp265. http://www.birdlife.org/sites/default/files/attachments/AUTHORISED-GLR-STRATEGY_0.pdf

Maeck A., DelSontro, T., McGinnis, D.F., Fischer, H., Flury, S., Schmidt, M., Fietzek, P., and Lorke, A., 2013: Sediment Trapping by Dams Creates Methane Emission Hot Spots. Environmental Science & Technology. 2013, 47, 8130−8137.

Manyifica.M., 2016. Report to an ACNR sediment fingerprinting workshop in May, 2016.

Muvundja, F.A., Pasche, N., Bugenyi, F.W.B., Isumbisho, M., Müller, B., Namugize, J.N.,

107

Rinta, P., Schmid, M., Stierli, R., and Wüest, A., 2009. Balancing nutrient inputs to Lake

Kivu. Journal of Great Lakes Research. 35:406-418 doi:10.1016/j

Muvundja, F.A., Wüest, A., Isumbisho, M., Kaningini, M.B., Pasche, N., Rinta, P., and Schmid, M., 2014: Modelling Lake Kivu water level variations over the last seven decades. Liminlogica 47, 21-33.

Nayar, A. 2009: A Lake full of trouble. Nature, 460: 321-323.

REMA, 2009: Rwanda State of Environment and Outlook Report. Rwanda Environment Management Authority P.O. Box 7436 Kigali, Rwanda

http://www.rema.gov.rw/soe/summary.pdf.

REMA, 2015: State of the Environment and Outlook Report 2015. Pp 219, Rwanda Environment Management Authority, P.O. Box 7436 Kigali, Rwanda.

SAFEGE. (2012). Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Agriculture Sector in Rwanda. European External Action Service.

Sanderson, E.W., Redford, K.H., Vedder, A., Coppolillo, P.B., and Ward, S.E., 2002: A conceptual model for landscape planning based on landscape species requirements. Landscape and Urban Planning 58: 41-56.

Schmid, M., Halbwachs, M., Wehrli, B. & Wüest, A. In Nayar, A. 2009: A Lake full of trouble.

SEI (Stockholm Environment Institute), 2009: Economics of Climate Change in Rwanda. https://www.sei- international.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/Climate/cc_economics_rwanda.pdf

World Bank, 2014: Landscape Approach To Forest Restoration And Conservation Project (LAFREC). https://www.thegef.org/sites/default/files/documents/06-30-14_Project_Document_PAD.pdf

108

CHAPTER 8: INTERVENTIONS Principal Author: Ian Gordon

‘The objective may be global but implementation is always local’

(The Serengeti Rules, S.B. Carrol, 2016) 8.1 Introduction

The Kivu and Rusizi watersheds cover an area of over 9000 km2 and are drained by over 120 rivers. They are fringed by rugged mountains rising to over 3000 metres a.s.l. and by steep slopes with degraded vegetation and eroding soils. Rainfall is projected to increase by over 200 mm/yr and dry season temperatures by more than 2oC by 2060. The human populations within the CRAG number over 2 million and are expected to double within the next 25 years. Effective governance and policy implementation has been periodically sabotaged by the civil conflicts that have plagued the three countries over the last three decades, although Rwanda has made a spectacular recovery from the genocide of the early nineties. The challenge of enhancing climate change resilience in such landscapes is severe and demands a level of investment and effective action that far exceeds any effort seen in the region to date. The good news is that most of the solutions to the climate-change related threats described in Chapter 7 are already tried and tested practices in landscape management, and are embedded in national policies and numerous current projects within the Kivu-Rusizi catchments. This chapter outlines these established solutions in the context of specific sites and the 9 categories of threats in Table 7.1, together with some relevant ongoing projects. It also identifies gaps in our knowledge that need to be filled and proposes some innovative approaches that take advantage of recent scientific and technological progress. It concludes with a discussion of how the LTA and ABAKIR can help to bring all the interventions together within their strategic plans to enhance climate change resilience in their respective landscapes. 8.2 Erosion 8.2.1 Vulnerable sites

All steep slopes in the CRAG that have little vegetation are vulnerable to erosion (Figure 7.4, Chapter 7). While some soil losses are geological and due to natural events (disasters and related phenomena), most is accelerated erosion due to human actions. Key factors affecting the erosion rate (Rishirumuhirwa, 2016) include rainfall intensity, soil erodibility, length and steepness of slopes, vegetation cover and the extent of anti-erosion practices. Wherever the first three factors in this list are high and the last two are low, sites are highly vulnerable, and all forms of erosion (sheet, rill, gully and landslides) are likely. National maps of erosion risk are available in the REMA State of the Environment Report for 2009 for Rwanda, and from GIZ (2014), for Burundi. Both maps show that the highest risks are found along almost the entire eastern edge of the Kivu-Rusizi catchments as well as along stretches of the Ruhwa River on the border between the two countries. Erosion risks on the western DRC slopes may be lower because of much smaller population densities, but security and governance issues may impair effective erosion control measures. The great damage caused by soil erosion has stimulated a number of studies. In Burundi, national erosion rates have been estimated at 100t/ha/year by Roose in 1991, 150-200t/year/ha by GIZ in 2015. Other local estimates include 100t/ha/year in the Murima agricultural zone, 21.5 t/ha/year in Congo Nile watershed, 18t/ha/year on Central Highlands, 4t/ha/year in the East depressions, 2.6t/ha/year in Bugesera and 2.5 t/ha/year in plain of Imbo (Bucankura, pers. com.).

109

Estimates in Rwanda vary widely (Chapter 7), from O.6 tonnes /ha/yr (REMA 2009) to 250 tons/ha/yr (Karamage et al., 2016). Despite these inconsistencies, there is universal agreement that erosion is a serious problem that must be tackled. There is equal agreement on where it has serious impacts beyond those affecting soil fertility (in catchments for irrigation and hydropower dams), and on the likelihood that erosion threats will increase with climate change. The total area at risk is dauntingly large. In Rwanda alone, 40% of the land has been categorised as very high to high risk from erosion and 75% as highly degraded. This makes it hard to choose a manageable set of priority action sites, and may necessitate judgements on where logistical and political/socio-economic conditions are most conducive for effective action.

According to Karamage et al. (2016), croplands, which occupy 56% of the total land area in Rwanda, are responsible for 95% of total national soil loss. Ninety percent of the losses came from the 24% of croplands in Rwanda that are judged to be unsuitable for agriculture. In these unsuitable areas, mean soil erosion rates are catastrophically high (1,642 t/ha/year). REMA (2009) noted that although ‘it is generally agreed that slopes of more than 5 per cent need erosion control measures, the reality is that most cultivation is carried out on steep slopes without any recommended soil control measures. Indeed it is not unusual to find crops grown on steep slopes of up to and above 55 per cent.’ High population densities and land shortages make such practices difficult to control. Diminishing returns from crop harvests will inevitably stop them in the short to medium term, but the environmental damage they will have caused by then will be reversible only at great and unrealistic cost. This is an issue that has to be faced throughout the CRAG (together with erosion risks from artisanal mining), particularly given the effects of sedimentation in hydro-electric and irrigation dams (Chapter 7). The effectiveness of anti-erosion measures currently in place in Burundi and Rwanda needs to be urgently investigated and the different practices evaluated, so that optimal solutions can be replicated at scale. At the Kigali Expert workshop in July 2016, four erosion sites were identified for targeting with interventions: Ruvyimvya (3°06'S, 29°32'E) in Burundi, Kalehe (2°7'S, 28°52'E) and Ngomo Escarpment in DRC, and Rubyiro in Rwanda (2°40'S, 29°1'E). These sites should be taken as an immediate priority pending further investigations. They are being eroded because of: 1) over-exploitation and use of land not suitable for agriculture; 2) poor agricultural practices including slash and burn and overgrazing; 3) very high slopes; 4) local climates that feature intense short-periods of rainfall; and 5) lack of control measures by the state. A large number of other sites will need attention, some of which (e.g. Gishwati- Mukura in Rwanda) are already targeted under ongoing interventions (Box 1 for Rwanda76, Box 2 for DRC77, Box 3 for Burundi78).

76www.rnra.rw/.../Rwanda-Waterstrategy-04062011-final-1006-corrected1406.docx http://www.lwh-rssp.minagri.gov.rw/lwh/ http://www.fonerwa.org/search/node/erosion http://www.worldbank.org/projects/P131464/landscape-approach-forest-restoration-conservation- lafrec?lang=en 77https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1866/2016%20Final%20DRC%20CSI.pdf https://www.cordaid.org/en/projects/risk-reduction-rel http://www.etifor.com/upload/lavori/editor/PDD%20Kitshanga_v1.4.pdf 78 http://www.btcctb.org/en/news/digital-soil-maps-burundi-available%20 http://www.afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/Procurement/Project-related- Procurement/Burundi_%E2%80%93_Watershed_Management_Project_PABV__- _Project_Completion_Report__PCR__.pdf

110

8.2.2 Recommended Interventions

The two most important factors driving erosion in the CRAG are deforestation and unsustainable agricultural practices.

Ryan et al. (undated), using satellite-derived data, estimate annual mean forest cover losses across six countries in the Albertine Rift over the first decade of the 21st century at 1.98% and predict up to 10% further losses within the next two decades, largely as a result of population growth. Policies to address both drivers of erosion are already in place (Chapter 3); the problem lies in their effective and consistent implementation. As noted in the quote at the beginning of this Chapter, ‘The objective may be global but implementation is always local’. If local implementation is to be effective it must be focussed on those sites where the risk of soil erosion is most severe. Ideally, the prioritisation of sites should be data driven, but this is an unaffordable luxury given the current state of the Kivu/Rusizi landscapes. We already know which broad zones are most at risk (the escarpments and steep slopes that define the watershed boundaries). For precise site targeting, we need to rely on national and regional expert as well as local indigenous knowledge. This was the justification for seeking the views of participants at the July 2016 Kigali workshop, leading to the identification of the five sites listed above. Such a consultation process needs to be expanded and to involve local communities throughout the CRAG, whose knowledge of their own landscapes is unsurpassed, and whose livelihoods are most at stake. This conclusion leads to the first recommended intervention.

Recommendation 8.2.1. Design and apply a protocol for identifying and prioritising sites throughout the CRAG that are most at risk from erosion, based on scientific and indigenous knowledge.

A wide range of interventions are known to be effective for erosion control, and have already been applied within the Kivu Rusizi catchments (Box 1). GIZ (2012) lists the following as good practices in soil and water conservation: semi-circular bunds or embankments for crops and forest/rangeland; Nardi/Vallerani trenches or micro-catchments; contour bunds or terracing for crops and forest/rangeland; firebreaks; hand-dug trenches; permeable rock dams; contour stone bunds; permeable rock dikes; Zai or tassa planting pits; grass strips; use of organic matter (manure and compost); mulching; assisted natural regeneration; water-spreading weirs; small-scale dams; and village irrigation schemes. Several of these interventions serve multiple land management purposes, such as water conservation, avoiding water-driven erosion, and conserving natural vegetation cover; they will be referred to again in subsequent recommendations. They vary in their appropriateness for different landscapes, their effectiveness, sustainability and their cost. The GIZ (2012) reference is useful as it provides a valuable and concise summary of the factors that need to be considered in choosing optimal solutions in different ecological and economic contexts. Within the CRAG, reforestation, forest protection and forest rehabilitation (≡ Assisted natural regeneration) is particularly important and is the primary strategy in World Bank plans for addressing erosion in the Gishwati-Mukura landscapes. Delegates at the Kigali workshop recommended re-afforestation programmes, implementation of sound policies on farming and grazing areas, agroforestry and crops rotation practices.

As with the identification of sensitive sites, the difficulty lies in where the focus should be. Each erosion control measure presents different challenges, costs and opportunities, which are in turn dependent on local context. An IUCN/ WRI study (reported in World Bank 2014) ranked the soil erosion reduction potential of various interventions. Natural forest regeneration on deforested and degraded forests came top, reducing erosion by 36 t/ha, followed by protective forests on ridge tops and steep slopes (9 – 31 t/ha). Agroforestry ranked as third (5.5 t/ha) and improved woodlot management as fourth (0.5 t/ha).

111

The study also looked at the economics of the four interventions, calculating the return on investment (ROI) of the four interventions. It found the ROI to be negative (-82%) for protective forests on ridge tops and steep slopes, 0% for naturally restored forests,12% to 38% for the establishment of agroforestry systems, and 17% to 24% for woodlots.

These estimates depended on the initial costs, whether or not carbon revenues were included (as they were in the case of protective and natural forest) and on the effectiveness of anti- fire measures. It is clear that much can be learnt from careful monitoring of interventions in the Gishwati-Mukura project in Rwanda, the GIZ interventions in Burundi, and from experiences during the completed GEF Project on the Lake Tanganyika catchment project around Uvira in DRC (Marijnissen, 2013).

BOX 1 RECENT, ONGOING, AND PLANNED PROJECTS ON EROSION IN BURUNDI

1. GIZ. Adaptation au Changement Climatique pour la Protection des Resources en Eau et Sol (ACCES). The project supports government efforts and actions to reduce the vulnerability of the rural population of Burundi to address the adverse effects of climate change. It focusses on Erosion control in Marangara, Isare, and Mutambu, populates a database on erosion risks and provides national erosion vulnerability maps for Burundi. 2. Belgian Development Agency. Digital soil maps. Available from Institute of Agricultural Sciences of Burundi (ISABU). 3. AfDB. Burundi Watershed Management Project. Completed 2014. The erosion control structures of the watersheds helped to significantly reduce erosion. The grazing ban on the area covered by forest plantations resulted in the regeneration of vegetation cover and the reintegration of a fair amount of wildlife. Established erosion control ditches replaced by mixed hedges of grass, shrubs and agro-forestry trees for afforestation; selection of fire- resistant species.

BOX 2 RECENT, ONGOING, AND PLANNED PROJECTS ON EROSION IN DRC

1. USAID Office of Food for Peace (FFP). The goal of USAID/DRC’s development food assistance projects is to improve the food and nutrition security and economic well-being of vulnerable households. This project will operate in South Kivu and other locations outside the CRAG. Applicants should propose proven and sustainable approaches to improving soil quality and forest/agroforest products while reducing erosion and flooding hazards which are strategically tied into the other components of the overall project. 2. Cordaid. Erosion related Disaster Risk Reduction in Walungu region. Through risk mapping, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has been identified as one of the 14 most disaster prone focus countries. Local partner Caritas Bukavu has started a Community Managed Disaster Risk Reduction project in Eastern Congo to address causes and consequences of serious erosion problems in 4 villages (of 39) located around a massive wetland. 3. WWF/GEF. Sustainable Catchment Management Interventions in the Uvira Territory, South Kivu Province, DRC (completed in 2013). The project targeted Kigongo River, Kalimabenge River and Mulongwe River sub-catchment. Sustainable catchment management approaches require greater emphasis on improved agriculture, maintaining and increasing woody vegetation cover, and improving livelihoods through diversified incomes. Activities were designed to take into account the intricate linkages between environmental challenges and the associated sustainable socioeconomic development parameters. 4. Caritas Goma, University of Padova, and ONG Associazione Cooperazione e Solidarietà. Kitshanga Reforestation Project. The reforestation project will contribute to enhance soil fertility and reduce soil erosion in the Kitshanga. Two thirds of reforestation is taking place on steep slopes to minimise soil losses and nutrient leakage. 112

BOX 3. ONGOING PROJECTS TACKLING EROSION IN THE RWANDA CRAG

1. Government of Rwanda. Rehabilitation of Critically Degraded Watersheds (GoR). Sebeya River. Planting trees along the Sebeya riverbanks covering about 90% of the targeted 511 Ha. Some 115 households successfully relocated from proximity to River Sebeya. On course to relocate another 153 households in Rubavu District. 2. World Bank. Landscape Approach to Forest Restoration and Conservation (LAFREC Project). Establishment of the Gishwati-Mukura National Park, restoring and rehabilitating 2,500 ha and improving land management practices for 2500 households within the Sebeya River catchment. 3. Water for Growth Rwanda. Detailed mapping project for the Sebeya catchment that will focus mainly on terracing with an aim of controlling soil erosion in key areas of the catchment.

4. FONERWA. Soil erosion resulting from deforestation with subsequent biodiversity loss is the major environmental challenge affecting communities in Nyabitekeri Sector of Nyamasheke District. This situation is exacerbated by climate related pressures such as unpredictable rainfall that has in turn led to loss of lives and property. This project thus intends to build community’s resilience through provision of environmentally friendly practices that minimize soil erosion while improving livelihoods. 5. FONERWA. The Karongi Integrated Green Village Project aims to reduce vulnerability to environmental challenges, build resilience to environment and climate related pressures to improve livelihoods of 854 vulnerable households in Gahabwa and Nyamuhebe villages. These households are exposed to climate related pressures such as unsustainable land, water and soil management practices, flooding and landslides. Intense rainfall has led to loss of lives and property. In addition, it led to soil erosion since the land is bare due to

deforestation. 6. FONERWA. Vulnerable Ecosystem Recovery Programme towards Climate Change Resilience. This focuses on long term capacity development to achieve improved sustainable management of natural resources, clean renewable energy resources and use, environment and climate change resilience. It targets 10 islands and one wetland in 4 districts among

them 3 districts which are affected by soil erosion, loss of biodiversity and flooding including the Rusizi and Bugesera Districts which are affected by deforestation and drought. 7. Adaptation Fund, Germanwatch. Reducing Vulnerability to Climate Change through Community Based Adaptation in Nyabihu and Musanze Districts; project started in June 2014 and will end in October 2016. National Implementing Entity: Ministry of Natural resources

(MINIRENA), National Executing Entity (Rwanda Natural Resources Authority (RNRA). North West Rwanda The project aims to address factors that exacerbate the effects of intense rainfall and lead to flooding and landslides. These include erosion and unsustainable farming practices linked to demographic pressure on natural resources. By introducing erosion and flood control measures, building the capacity of farmers to adapt to climate variability.

8. MINAGRI. Land Husbandry, Water Harvesting and Hillside irrigation Project. The project started piloting different techniques on three ecological zones in the sites of Karongi-12, Karongi-13 in Western Province. To reduce soil loss in the hillsides, the project introduced a modified watershed approach to introduce sustainable land husbandry measures for hillside agriculture on selected sites, as well as develop hillside irrigation for sub-sections of each

site. It was found to be necessary to use several land management techniques (soil bunds, terraces, cut-off drains, water ways, afforestation and reforestation) as well as strengthening terraces with risers to develop appropriate land husbandry practices for both rain-fed and irrigation agriculture.

113

Recommendation 8.2.2. The choice of anti-erosion interventions at each site should be guided by the local context at that site, available scientific knowledge, community/government capacity and consultations, anticipated effectiveness/benefits, funding and costs.

Recommendation 8.2.3. Because of additional benefits, particularly for biodiversity, the protection of and expansion of existing forest cover is a first priority, together with the restoration of degraded forest habitats: in each case the potential for carbon revenues must be explored through national level schemes.

Recommendation 8.2.4. Because of the high costs and negative ROI for protective forests on ridge tops and steep slopes, this option should only be pursued where significant soil losses are still anticipated and the consequences are likely to be severe (e.g.in catchments for irrigation and hydropower reservoirs).

Recommendation 8.2.5. All anti-erosion measures that can be practised by individual smallholders should be promoted and encouraged, however small their projected impacts.

Recommendation 8.2.6. Baseline and monitoring data are essential to ensure that objectives and activities are implemented and lessons are learned. While quantitative data are best, the costs can be prohibitive and data-based monitoring can only be implemented in selected sites; anecdotal feedback from farmers is therefore likely to be more practical and generally useful and should be sought at all sites where interventions are practiced. 8.3 Sedimentation 8.3.1 Vulnerable sites

The problem of sedimentation is directly and obviously liked to erosion since eroded soils are washed into the rivers and lakes. Additional sediments arise from solid wastes that are simply dumped into the rivers and lakes. The serious economic problems that result are detailed in Chapter 7 and particularly affect fisheries, hydropower generation, irrigation, and water transport services. Although soils that are closest to water are likely to be sources of sedimentation, much depends on their condition (vegetation, slope, erodibility) and remote sources can also make major contributions. This is especially true in the volatile landscapes of the CRAG that are subject to geological events, landslides, unregulated mining activities and the accelerating impacts of climate change (Chapters 6 and 7). The sediments entering Lake Tanganyika that are visible in Figure 7.6 (Chapter 7) could have come from anywhere within the catchments of Lake Kivu and the Rusizi River. This complicates the identification of the vulnerable sites that are responsible for the problem. Complications also arise from political and economic issues, as for example where profitable mining industries generate large volumes of sediment and powerful vested interests are involved or local livelihoods are at stake. All this means that science has a key role to play. A recently developed technique (sediment fingerprinting) has potential to provide an objective tool to identify sediment sources and to justify what may be hard decisions in watershed management. Its principle is simple. Sediment samples are taken at suitable points in the water courses and their chemical composition is compared with that of soils in the watershed. Given sufficient local differences in the chemical characteristics of the latter (soils), it is then possible to determine the sources of the former (sediments). Sediment finger printing has been piloted in the Ruvu River catchment where results suggest that 36% of the sediments came for only 3% of the total area of the watershed (USAID 2013). As noted in Chapter 7, this technique is currently being applied by the Ministry of Natural Resources of Rwanda (MINIRENA in the catchment of the Nyabarongo dam in Western Rwanda under the USAID GLOWS Programme.

114

It is hoped to identify the sources of sediments may be responsible for the failure of this dam to reach its projected output of 28MW. The Rwandan Standards Board now has the capacity to do the requisite chemical analysis. In May 2016, representatives of the three CIP project partners (ABN, ACNR and HN) were trained in sediment fingerprinting under a grant to ACNR from the CEPF Afromontane Hotspot programme. They are currently (August 2016) applying the technique to various locations within the water courses of the CRAG in an attempt to pinpoint sediments sources. The success of their efforts will depend crucially on the comprehensiveness of soil sample analysis in the catchment area. Pending the results of current and future fingerprint sampling, the partners identified 5 sites as an immediate priority for investigation and subsequent action: the Rusizi outlet to Lake Tanganyika (3°22'S, 29°16'E), the Ruhwa (2°44'S, 29°02'E) and the Muhira (2°56'S, 29°09'E) River outlets to the Rusizi in Burundi; the Nyamuhinga outlet (2°27'S, 28°50'E) to Lake Kivu near Kabare, Kavimvira outlet (3°21'S, 29°09'E) at Uvira and the inflow to the Rusizi II dam (2°63'S, 28°90'E) in DRC; the Rubyiro rice farms (2°40'S, 29°09'E), the Sebeya outflow (1°42'S, 29°115'E), into Lake Kivu, and in the Rusizi just above the Ruhwa confluent at the Burundi/Rwanda border in Rwanda. For comparative purposes it may be useful to include upstream samples from rivers leaving the Gishwati-Mukura and the Nyungwe National Parks. As noted in Chapter 2, the Nyungwe NP occupies half of the Rwanda catchment for the Rusizi River.

The great majority of the sediments entering Lake Tanganyika from the CRAG pass through the Rusizi outlet in Burundi (Figure 7.6). Results from fingerprinting at this outlet will be complex and difficult to interpret. Most of the sediments, particularly the heavier ones, from the upper parts of the catchments will have settled in the dam reservoirs and calmer waters upstream, and in the Rusizi plains. Sediment sampling from this site is therefore likely to be drawn largely from the lower reaches of the Rusizi catchment and will be made up of lighter particles. Although it may not yield clear evidence on where action is most needed, it will provide valuable data on sediment loads into the lake that can be used to investigate potential impacts on fisheries. It will also provide valuable information on seasonality and on aggregate baselines against which the effects of extreme climatic events can be measured. Fingerprinting analysis in the other sites will be equally subject to their watershed contexts, and will need careful interpretation. Fingerprinting at the Rusizi II dam will be important for understanding where action is needed to maintain hydropower generation. The same applies to the Sebeya River where the output from a private (<5 MW) hydropower unit is regularly interrupted for cleaning of the turbines.

No effective action to counter sedimentation is possible unless its sources are understood. Initial analysis will necessarily be coarse grained, but as knowledge accumulates, sampling locations can be more strategically targeted in a step by step process as follows. This process needs to be integrated with ongoing and previous efforts to control sedimentation within the CRAG (Box 4 for Burundi, Box 5 for DRC, Box 6 for Rwanda).

Recommendation 8.3.1. Compile existing data, and analyse time series of satellite images of the catchments in order to determine where and when sedimentation is most severe, based on visual and any other available and relevant remote sensing data.

Recommendation 8.3.2. Based on the results from 8.3.1 and suggestions from the July Kigali workshop, identify first priority action sites on the basis of their biodiversity values and economic importance for both large and small hydropower and irrigation services.

Recommendation 8.3.3. In order to provide information for sediment fingerprinting, compile national data bases and maps for chemical footprints of the soils and water samples in the CRAG, starting

115 with the sub- and micro-catchments for the locations identified under 8.3.2, and expanding as resources and opportunities allow.

Recommendation 8.3.4. Based on the results from 8.3.1-8.3.3, and in consultation with appropriate Ministries in the three countries, map and compile a hierarchical list of the priority sites for sediment control actions within the CRAG.

Interventions

There are two basic approaches to sedimentation control: 1) prevention of erosion in the catchments; 2) sediment trapping at critical sites. The first involves the various erosion control measures outlined in 8.2.1, and is most effective when these are targeted at landscapes and sites that are the most important sources of erosion for the water courses of interest (recommendations 8.2-1-8.2.6). Riverine and lakeshore habitats are obviously critical, and the need to enforce existing policies and legislation to control erosion in riparian zones is a clear priority. Equally the prevention of further deforestation in the catchment is essential.

Recommendation 8.3.5. Implement soil erosion control measures (8.2.1-8.2.5) at the primary sites of sedimentation identified through recommendations 8.3.1 – 8.3.5.

Recommendation 8.3.6. Use all possible outreach, education, community and government channels to ensure that national legislation to protect riparian zones is observed, and to promote sediment consciousness across the CRAG.

The second approach involves the use of practices or devices that prevent sediment from spreading from a source to a place or a structure where it will cause damage. Depending on the situation and the need it can involve check dams, diversion dikes, fibre rolls, siltbusters, sand bags, sediment basins and traps, gabions, temporary surfaces such as geotextiles, silt fences, straw bales, and turbidity curtains. Silt fences are commonly used in construction sites where soil erosion rates can be as much as 40,000 times greater than in pre-construction activities79. Gabions, composed of rocks and wire mesh, are routinely employed along the new road networks that are being built along the hills that border the CRAG. There have been recent and exciting developments in the use of geotextiles, and the potential for using local by-products (such as coconut fibre) from agricultural industries cries out for new investment. There is increasing awareness that upstream and effective sediment trap reservoirs are essential to ensure sustainable hydropower generation (Munyaneza et al. 2015). Wherever significant new road works, construction activities, or water-driven facilities (such as urban water supplies, irrigation and hydropower) are underway, the advice of geo-morphologists working together with engineers to control erosion and sedimentation is essential.

Munyaneza et al. (2015), in the context of the Keya Dam on the Sebeya River, note that “common knowledge or general awareness of sediment problems is not enough to tackle this issue” and recommend that “Hydro power engineers must be ‘sediment conscious’ during investigations, design, operation and maintenance, and even upgrading and refurbishment.” Widespread sediment consciousness is needed throughout the CRAG. Sedimentation is seriously harming energy production, irrigation and fisheries. It fills reservoirs (reducing the level of that for the Rusizi II by 60% since construction) and damages hydropower turbines.

79 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169555X99001075

116

At Keya the original turbine had to be replaced after only 6 months, and the new turbine was damaged 15 months later, resulting in a reduction in power output from 2.2 MW to 900 KW and working hours from 24 to 5 per day (Munyaneza et al. 2015). Similar reported reductions in power output from the Nyabarongo and Rusizi II dams exceed 80 per cent. These costs are simply unaffordable.

Recommendation 8.3.7. Ensure regular maintenance and rehabilitation of erosion control infrastructure especially after heavy rains.

Recommendation 8.3.8. Promote technically rigorous research at major hydropower and irrigation schemes throughout the CRAG to assess the costs of sedimentation to national economies and to recommend site-specific maintenance, rehabilitation and remedial measures.

Recommendation 8.3.9. Introduce and facilitate the processes by which policies and recommendations that control sedimentation from artisanal and industrial sources such as mining can be implemented.

117

BOX 4. RECENT, ONGOING, AND PLANNED PROJECTS ON SEDIMENTATION IN RWANDA

(See also Rwanda Projects on Erosion)

1. Rwanda Integrated Water Security Program (RIWSP) in collaboration with Rwanda Natural Resources Authority (RNRA); under the Global Water for Sustainability Program. Project partners include the Florida International University, Care, World Vision and Water Aid. This project was funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). A sediment fingerprinting project is going on; data collection and analysis completed, final report to be made available before the end of this year. Rutsiro and Karongi districts (part of the CRAG) and housing the affluents of Nyabarongo River were covered. http://www.globalwaters.net/projects/current-projects/rwanda-integrated-water-security- program/ 2. CEPF-funded project: The Association pour la Conservation de la Nature au Rwanda (ACNR) received a fund from the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (CEPF) to implement a project on sediment fingerprinting in the Kivu and Rusizi catchments of Rwanda, DRC and Burundi. The project will last for 17 months starting from April 2016. ACNR signed sub-contracts with other two local NGOs in DRC and Burundi: Horizon Nature (HN) and Association Burundaise pour la Protection de la Nature (ABN). First, together with ACNR and its supervision, three NGOs were trained on soil and sediment sites selection and sampling techniques and will also train a sample of local communities in the study area. Second, they will collect soil and sediment data and send them to Rwanda Standards Board (RSB) for analysis. Third, results will form input to a model that, after parameterisation, yields sources of sediments in the targeted region. 3. Water for Growth for Rwanda. Led by Rwanda Natural Resources Authority (RNRA), a joint Rwanda-Netherlands initiative to pilot governance frameworks and develop land and water management solutions in various water catchments, including CRAG regions (Sebeya Catchment, Adaptation Fund project: ‘’Reducing vulnerability to climate change in North West Rwanda through community based adaptation project’’. This project started January 2014 and will be completed in October 2016. The Adaptation Fund/Germanwatch is the donor of this project. The implementing entity is MINIRENA while the executing entity is RNRA. The project covers two districts in North Western Rwanda: Musanze and Nyabihu including some CRAG regions. Activities done so far include land and water management practices: bench and progressive terraces, drainage of a lowland through the construction of a water channel, creating caves, gabions and check dams. In addition, there is a village built with cow sheds and biogas production facilities; where 200 households living in high risk zones will be resettled https://www.adaptation-fund.org/adaptation-fund-in-rwanda/. 4. Adaptation Fund project in Rwanda (future project): ‘’Adapting to Climate Change in Lake Victoria Basin’’; Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda Transboundary water management. This is a proposal submitted by the UNEP (Implementing Entity). The executing entities are Lake Victoria Basin Commission (LVBC). Proposal under review https://www.adaptation-fund.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/08/Regional_UNEP_full_proposal.pdf

118

8.4 Landslides

8.4.1 Vulnerable sites Landslides are directly linked to erosion, sedimentation and climate change. They generate mass erosion events that lead in turn to large quantities of sediments being flushed into water courses. They are triggered by seismic events and heavy rains. Extreme rainfall for a short period (anything approaching or exceeding 75mm in 2-3 hours) is most damaging when following severe drought, as soil cracking under drought conditions increases water infiltration, leading to soil saturation and the formation of discontinuity layers. High risk zones include steeply sloping hills surrounding the Ruzizi plain and Kivu, volcanic soils on granite in Kivu and North of Rwanda, the gneiss rocks near Bujumbura, the high altitudes with heavy rainfall, and along roadsides, gullies and rivers. A landslide risk assessment document (Nsengiyumva, 2012) ranked Burera, Musanze, Nyabihu, Gakenke, Ngororero and Rubavu in the North West as the most vulnerable areas in Rwanda, based largely on previous occurrences. Within the CRAG, delegates to the July 2016 Kigali workshop, using Google Earth images, identified: Gatunguru (3°20’S, 29°25'E) in Burundi; Ramira/Kalehe (2°7'S, 28°52'E) in DRC; and Rubyiro (2°39'S, 29° 1'E) in Rwanda as further danger spots, due to a combination of deforestation, slopes, mining, and the removal of vegetation. Prediction of where landslides are likely to occur is a challenging task and demands detailed knowledge of slope gradient, aspect, physical characteristics of rocks (lithology), underlying geology, soil drainage, and the likelihood of extreme climatic events. In the absence of such detailed information, a helpful simplifying assumption (used by Nsengiyumva) is that future landslides will have the same causal factors as the landslides initiated in the past, and are therefore likely to happen again in the same places. Increased public awareness of risks in such areas could reduce the loss of life that so frequently accompanies landslides especially where populations are dense. Recommendation 8.4.1. Compile and map all available data on past occurrences of landslides within the CRAG.

Recommendation 8.4.2. Consult engineers and geo-morphologists to fine-tune the risk estimates in landslide prone areas on the basis of their slopes, debris flows, cut and fill failures, poorly drained soils and geological features that are prone to saturation.

Interventions

Interventions should target the prevention of landslides, based on knowledge gained from the implementation of recommendations 8.4.1-2.

Recommendation 8.4.3. Promote public awareness and continuous monitoring of risks in landscape prone areas by local communities, and use civic authorities to issue alerts to residents during heavy rainfall.

Recommendation 8.4.4. Ensure that landuse and construction plans for dams, mines, buildings and transport systems give adequate and early consideration to landscape risks and put in place remedial measures (e.g. gabions).

Recommendation 8.4.5. Use traditional agro-forestry techniques, planting trees in the risk areas, choosing species that are known to have soil stabilising (bamboo) and high evapotranspiration rates (Eucalyptus).

119

Recommendation 8.4.6. Establish rills and gully management practices (planting forage, fruits and legumes in the dry season) to reduce river velocity and disperse sediments.

Recommendation 8.4.7. Build the capacity (stockpiling equipment and supplies, rapid response training and co-ordination, communication networks) of civic authorities and local communities for disaster management and the rescue of humans and animals trapped by and buried in landslides. 8.5 Pollution 8.5.1 Vulnerable sites

Pollution comes from point and non-point sources. It involves multiple sectors including agriculture, energy, mining, natural resources, urban and industrial development, health, and private business and investment. The most obvious point sources of pollution are urban centres, oil and gas providers and processors, mines, and heavy industries. All the urban centres in the catchments pollute the rivers and lakes to varying degrees depending on their population densities, closeness to water sources, industrial activity and the effectiveness of pollution control measures and sanitation networks. Treatment of waste and effluents is inadequate, leading to hazards for human health and necessitating the off-take of water for domestic and industrial use at ever greater distances from urban centres. In the case of Bujumbura, water was formerly drawn from 3.5 km into Lake Tanganyika but this distance has now been increased by 0.8 k (Masumbuko, 2016). Masumbuko reports that the “port, brewery, textile, battery, paint factories, soap making companies, dairy processing, cottonseed oil, pharmaceutical factories and petrol depots” in Bujumbura discharge pollutants “into Lake Tanganyika through infiltration” together with domestic waste which are thrown directly into the lake along its edges. Similar problems affect the other lakeside settlements in the CRAG, such as Uvira, Bukavu, Gisenyi and Goma. Other point sources such as mines are diffused in predominantly rural areas throughout the catchments, and some of their pollutants (e.g. mercury from artisanal gold mining – see Chapter 7) pose serious threats to human health through bio-accumulation. The LTA SAP (2012) notes that mercury levels in two fish species (Lates microlepis and Clarias theodorae) in the lake had levels of mercury that exceeded recommended mercury levels as long ago as 2008. REMA (2016) also notes high arsenic levels from mine wastes in the Sebeya River (Rutsiro District) which drains into Lake Kivu.

120

BOX 5. RECENT, ONGOING, AND PLANNED PROJECTS ON LANDSLIDES IN RWANDA

(See also Rwanda Projects on Erosion)

1. Adaptation Fund project in Rwanda (current): ‘’Reducing vulnerability to climate change in North West Rwanda through community based adaptation project’’. This project started January 2014 and will be completed in October 2016. The Adaptation Fund/Germanwatch is the donor of this project. The implementing entity is MINIRENA while the executing entity is RNRA. The project covers two districts in North Western Rwanda: Musanze and Nyabihu including some CRAG regions. Activities done so far include land and water management practices: bench and progressive terraces, drainage of a lowland through the construction of a water channel, creating caves, gabions and check dams. In addition, there is a village built with cow sheds and biogas production facilities; where 200 households living in high risk zones will be resettled. Website: https://www.adaptation-fund.org/adaptation-fund-in-rwanda/

2. Building National and Local Capacities for Disaster Risk Management in Rwanda. Being implemented by the Rwanda Ministry of Disaster Management and Refugee Affairs (MIDIMAR); this project is funded by UNDP and EU. The project started in July 2013, and

will be completed in 2018. Some expected outputs include: (1) enhanced capacities of national and local institutions to manage disaster risks and recover from disaster events, (2) disaster risk reduction mainstreamed into national policies, strategies and plans, (3) a functioning national disaster risk assessment and monitoring system, (4) end-to-end early warning systems established and operational, (5) reduced vulnerabilities and increased household resilience in selected high risks districts and increased awareness on disaster risk reduction. Website: www.midimar.gov.rw

Non-point sources also produce pollutants that have the potential to undergo bio-accumulation. (Manirakiza et al. 2002) showed that persistent organochlorine pesticide, including DDT, had already built up in several species of commercially important fish. As agriculture shifts from smallholder scale to intensive production systems, pesticide and chemical fertilizer use are increasing, raising the risk of eutrophication in the lake . Palm-oil production causes pollution near rivers throughout many parts of the lake basin. It is clear that both point and non-point pollution need to be closely monitored in order that action is taken before damage is done. Sites identified for special attention during the July Kigali workshop include: in Burundi, Bujumbura Bay and Beach (for industrial and domestic wastes and emissions from the industries in Bujumbura), and the Mulongwe outlet (for solid and liquid domestic wastes from Mulongwe-Uvira); Wesha Bay and Bralirwa Bay in DRC (for smoke and liquid and solid waste from the industry close to Lake Kivu); and the Ruhwa outlet to the Rusizi at the Burundi/Rwanda border (for agro-chemicals – pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers). Harbour and lake transport systems are further sources of pollution, particularly from accidental contamination from spillage during transfer of cargo, waste dumped from boats. Additional concerns arise from the increasingly rapid expansion of oil and gas exploration within ther watersheds and thelakes Recommendation 8.5.1. Set up routine pollution monitoring systems for dissolved oxygen, oxygen demand, alkalinity, nutrients, toxins and heavy metals downstream from harbours, transport systems, energy exploration initiatives and locations where agricultural and mining activities are discharging wastes. Recommendation 8.5.2. Track potential bio-accumulation in the edible fish of the CRAG, with special attention to organochlorine pesticides, mercury and other heavy metals. Recommendation 8.5.3. Closely track origin of pollutants from with the lakes and catchments and recommend remedial actions to policy makers.

121

Interventions

Population growth and the increasing pace of development within the CRAG means that pollution is certain to be an ever-growing problem. While existing policies and legislation on pollution, subject to the limitations of enforcement, may have been adequate in the past, the rate of change will demand their regular review.

Recommendation 8.5.5. Increase investment into research on pollution and into national programs for the management of chemical products.

Recommendation 8.5.6. Ensure that all relevant policies and legislation (by-laws and regulations) are regularly reviewed so that new developments in the region do not lead to new and unexpected sources of pollution.

Recommendation 8.5.7. Ensure adequate planning of urban areas and settlement programs to minimise discharges of organic and inorganic pollutants .

Recommendation 8.5.8. In consultation with stakeholders, review the current status and operations of water treatment/sanitation, and effluent/waste treatment plants and facilities throughout the CRAG and recommend remedial actions where needed.

Recommendation 8.5.9. Ensure that the “polluter pays” principle is consistently applied in all cases where the origin of a pollutant can be clearly traced and responsibility assigned.

8.6 Food security 8.6.1 Vulnerable Sites

Vulnerable sites, with previous histories of food insecurity that were identified in the July Kigali workshops include Bubanza in Burundi, Nyamasheke in Rwanda, and Kalehe in DRC. More generally, threats to food security will be greatest in areas that are likely to be hit by natural disasters (Sections 8.4 and 8.7), wherever erosion is reducing soil fertility (Section 8.2), and in the case of rice, wherever rice fields are at risk of flooding and heavy sedimentation (Section 8.3). Climate change will increase the risks of all of these events and will also have direct effects on the crops themselves over wide areas, with beans being the most vulnerable to increasing temperatures, and drought being the biggest threats for all crops. Seasonality changes are also likely to occur over large areas of the CRAG and can lead to crop failures when optimal planting and harvesting times are disrupted. New applications of the CESM models (Chapter 6) are planned to explore changes in yield of crops and the frequency of droughts and floods for a range of possible climate scenarios, and will help to pinpoint vulnerable sites within the CRAG. As its resolution improves it will also help to prevent investments in irrigation schemes where shifts in rainfall may make them unsustainable.

Recommendation 8.6.1. Invest in higher resolution tracking and modelling of climate change impacts on food security to identify areas where extreme climatic events and natural disasters are most likely to occur.

122

Interventions

The interventions described in Sections 8.2-8.4 will all help to restrict the extent of crop losses in the CRAG particularly if agricultural activity can be avoided in the most high risk sites for erosion, floods (8.7) and landslides, but population pressures and the demand for land mean that unsuitable lands will continue to be used for cropping.

Improved agricultural practices are needed throughout the Kivu and Rusizi catchments. Most obviously these include the erosion control measures described in Section 8.2, but a variety of additional changes in crop and land management methods will be required. Intensified use of agrochemicals and the introduction of improved varieties of crops and livestock will be essential for improving food security, but pose risks in terms of sustainability and adverse impacts on ecosystem services, biodiversity and genetic diversity.

An alternative and emerging portfolio of best practice, currently being promoted by the FAO, which avoids such risks, is known as ecological intensification. Ecological intensification can be broadly defined as a “knowledge-intensive process that requires optimal management of nature’s ecological functions and biodiversity to improve agricultural system performance, efficiency and farmers’ livelihood”80. A good example is provided by pollination services. Using a coordinated protocol across regions and crops, Garibaldi et al. (2016) showed that ecological intensification improved yields by 24% on 344 fields from 33 pollinator-dependent crop systems in small and large farms from Africa, Asia, and Latin America. The improvements were due to higher pollinator richness and diversity, measured by documenting flower visitation rates, as a result of the presence of natural vegetation adjacent or close to the crops.

Other more traditional practices, many of which fall under the general heading of conservation agriculture, are also required. A review of Climate Smart agriculture in Rwanda (World Bank; CIAT. 2015) advocates agroforestry and mixed cropping (for maize/bean, legumes/cereals, and coffee/bananas, and including hedgerows, mulching and rotation) as a general practice. It also provides further crop-specific recommendations for beans, rice, maize, cassava, Irish potatoes, sweet potatoes, and coffee. Ridges, furrows, mulching, green manure, and the “efficient use” of fertilizers and crop residues feature prominently in the context of soil management. Shade grown coffee is advised together with the breeding of pest and disease resistant varieties to increase the resilience of this important cash crop. For livestock, zero grazing, improved pasture (using Brachiaria grass) is recommended. In the longer term, an accelerated program to develop improved (heat, drought and pest-resistant) crop varieties is essential for food security in the CRAG; as it can take up to 30 years for these to be widely adopted (Section 7. 4.5), the need to invest in these efforts now is urgent.

The World Bank/CIAT review also mentions a weather-based index insurance program (Hinga Urushngiwe, in Kinyarwanda) initiated by MINAGRI in 2010. Designed to help farmers repay loans taken out when crop losses result from adverse weather conditions, it has considerable potential to support livelihoods in the face of climate change. A major problem in the past, the difficulty of cost- effective means of verifying losses and providing timely payments, is on the verge of solution through the use of remote sensing and mobile banking.

80 http://www.fao.org/agriculture/crops/thematic-sitemap/theme/biodiversity/ecological-intensification/en/

123

Satellite readings (Normalized Difference Vegetation Index) can estimate the levels of greenness over large areas and are already being employed to anticipate cattle mortality in the Marsabit County in Kenya81 and to trigger insurance payments to pastoralist subscribers during droughts. Such systems will need substantial international finance if they are to remain sustainable as weather-induced crop losses become ever more frequent, but their practical feasibility is no longer a barrier.

Food security issues are of such importance for human wellbeing that they attract major donor support and the strong commitment of global expertise. In the context of the CIP, the main focus is therefore to play a supporting role and to help to ensure that increased agricultural productivity is as compatible as possible with ecosystem resilience and biodiversity conservation in the face of climate change.

Recommendation 8.6.2. Evaluate annual statistical reports on agricultural production to improve the provision of up-to-date information on changes in food security

Recommendation 8.6.3. Promote awareness, at all levels, of the environmental risks that accompany the use of agrochemicals, and of the benefits of alternative best practices that improve smallholder yields with less cost and better environmental health.

Recommendation 8.6.4. Support efforts to diversify culturally acceptable crop systems for adaptation to changing climates, and to ensure against the loss of genetic diversity in indigenous crops and livestock by collaborating with local and international agricultural research institutions.

Recommendation 8.6.5 Build capacity of stakeholders to report problems and successes and to respond to new opportunities.

Recommendation 8.6.6. Seek synergies with food security initiatives that adopt conservation agriculture and ecological intensification technologies with less adversarial environmental impacts in sites that are vulnerable to climate change.

Recommendation 8.6.7. Expand the number formal climate monitoring/weather station installations and build capacity of school teachers, extension workers and farmers to measure and report weather data through mobile phones.

Recommendation 8.6.8. Building on 8.7.7, support highly-networked early-warning systems that assist farmers in the timing of planting and harvesting crops in the face of short and long term changes in the onset of wet and dry seasons. 8.7 Habitat Destruction and Altitudinal Shifts 8.7.1 Vulnerable sites

Habitat destruction and altitudinal shifts fragment habitats and threaten biodiversity and the delivery of ecosystem services. Delegates at the July Kigali workshop identified the following sites as vulnerable: Kibira and the Rusizi Plains in Burundi, Gishwati, Mukura and Nyungwe forest in Rwanda, and Kalehe in DRC. All sites which are vulnerable to volcanic eruptions, geological events, landslides, droughts, fires and floods (Sections 8.3, 8.8; Chapter 7) face potential habitat destruction at scales and intensities that will vary with the cause.

81http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/09/qa-livestock-insurance-helps-african-herders-survive- droughts?utm_campaign=news_daily_2016-09-05&et_rid=17053857&et_cid=779496

124

The Virungas and the area around Goma have a history of past volcanic eruptions and remain vulnerable. Fires are a danger in Nyungwe and Kibira and other forests in the CRAG, especially where traditional wild honey collection is practiced.

Such events can lead to sudden destruction; others happen at a slower pace and are potentially more easily managed. Erosion can degrade habitats to the point where they disappear altogether while sedimentation can smother the breeding grounds of fish. Ongoing and future expansion of agricultural activities destroys natural habitats. This will be an increasing trend as climate change makes the uplands more favourable for food production than drier lower zones (Chapter 6).

Altitudinal shifts are an inevitable consequence of warming and can lead to the extinction of individual species or entire communities if upward movement is prevented by barriers or by reaching summits. This danger is present in all habitats on steep slopes and needs to be carefully monitored in all the Protected Areas in the CRAG. Modelling by Ayebare et al. (2013) suggests that bamboo and montane and medium altitude forests are most likely to move upslope, while lowland forests will be less affected. Bamboo habitat will be particularly vulnerable to the west of Lake Kivu, in the Virungas to the north, and the eastern edge of the CRAG along the Rusizi basin. The same areas will be affected for montane forests with the addition of the mountain chain down to Itombwe in the south-west. Medium altitude forests have the highest probability of shifting their range in the south west of the Kivu basin. Ayebare et al. also studied changes since 1980 in the distributions of 93 threatened and endemic species of plants, birds and mammals. As expected, these broadly followed the changes in the distribution of vegetation types, with additional hotspots of change in the mountains down to Itombwe in the south-west.

A separate BirdLife study used climate envelope modelling to predict changes in the distributions of 14 endemic and threatened bird species. All are predicted to move around 350 m upslope by 208582. The Red Collared Mountain babbler is expected to disappear as a result of losing all available habitat within its own climate envelope. This Near-Threatened species, endemic to the Albertine Rift, is found in montane forest and bamboo at altitudes of 1,500-3,200 m and is known to occur in the Itombwes and at Nyungwe. More positively, some regions outside the current IBA network are projected to become more suitable for many of these species. It will be important to ensure connectivity to these sites.

The most recently and severely fragmented region within the CRAG is the landscape between Gishwati and Mukura forests which was settled by refugees in the late 90s and almost completely deforested. In the absence of rehabilitation, and given the fragility of soils on cleared forest land, it is likely to suffer further degradation and habitat destruction under climate change. This landscape has recently been declared a National Park and is the subject of a visionary World Bank/GEF project that aims to re-establish connectivity between the two forests83. The project is visionary because it is attempting to establish connectivity across a settled landscape; it has political backing from the top, and it will have valuable lessons for climate change adaptation and mitigation across the globe. It is adopting a stepping stone approach through protecting and rehabilitating remnant native forest patches, especially on slopes, ridges and riparian habitats. As an incentive to sacrifice strips and patches of land for connectivity rather than for crops or grazing, and to maintain/enhance food production, training and agrochemical inputs will be provided to communities on established farmland.

82 http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/sowb/casestudy/548 83 http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/docsearch/projects/P131464

125

This combination of agricultural and ecological intensification should be intensively monitored re its delivery of food security and biodiversity benefits. The Gishwati-Mukura landscape is one to watch.

Recommendation 8.7.1. Revisit and refine the Ayebare et al. and BirdLife analyses to determine specific locations for connectivity interventions for biodiversity within the CRAG.

Recommendation 8.7.2. Map steep slopes and connectivity issues in Kibira, Rusizi Plain, Kalehe, the Virungas and Nyungwe for future monitoring and interventions.

Recommendation 8.7.3. Determine critical sites for altitudinal connectivity within the Gishwati- Mukura forest corridors in the new National Park.

Interventions

The nature of interventions to counter habitat destruction and altitudinal shifts is clearly event and scale dependent. Little can be done about some events such as geological disasters other than to build readiness for rapid response and appropriate action.84 The scale of interventions ranges from planting trees on individual farms and degraded slopes costing a few hundreds of dollars to landscape level initiatives such as the Gishwati-Mukura project that targets an 40,000 ha occupied by 224,000 people at an estimated cost of 61 million dollars. But the overall objective of all these interventions remains clear: to sustain connectivity and prevent the loss of habitats in the face of climate change. Any attempt to achieve this objective must be based on: 1) local community/ government understanding, support and participation; 2) sound science; and 3) mobilization and delivery of all the requisite technical, financial and human resources. Brodie et al. (2016) in a review of the science, policy, and implementation of habitat corridors stress that achieving political buy-in (1, 8.7.3) should take place at the same time as the scientific determination of optimal corridor locations (2, 8.7.4). Other significant considerations include land tenure and habitat intactness. Most importantly there is a need to provide incentives (e.g. through income generation, local government bed taxes, PES, and strategic forest certifications) for sustained community action (3, 8.7.7 and 8). In the context of the Kivu Rusizi CIP, additional lessons from the Gishwati-Mukura project should be learned and applied.

Recommendation 8.7.4. Build local and government support for all interventions by employing the standard tools of stakeholder and problem analyses, awareness-raising, consensus-building, and participatory implementation and management.

Recommendation 8.7.5. At the same time, ensure that interventions are adequately informed by site- specific considerations and baseline data/images on slopes, hydrology, water-run-off, soils and native vegetation.

Recommendation 8.8.6. Focus rehabilitation interventions on marginal land, steep slopes, ridges and riparian corridors, and encourage agroforestry and fruit/useful tree planting using native species wherever possible.

Recommendation 8.8.7. Apply high-resolution remote sensing and modeling technologies building on and supplementing CESM projections and check results and predictions against ground truth in intervention sites.

84 The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (2015-2030) prescribes 4 priorities for action as outlined in Chapter 3, and Rwanda has developed a Strategic Plan in line with these priorities. Detailed accounts of how to deal with disasters are provided in these documents. The interventions required are therefore not dealt with here except in so far as they relate to other issues (Sections 8.4, 8.8).

126

Recommendation 8.8.8. Put monitoring and weather systems in place that are clearly tied to an incentive system that rewards effort and success at individual and group levels.

Recommendation 8.8.9. Provide green energy (woodlots, improved stoves, solar energy, pico- hydropower85 and wind) facilities to deliver further benefits at community levels and to reduce demands for charcoal and wild-harvested fuelwood 8.8. Extreme Climatic Events 8.8.1 Vulnerable Sites

Delegates at the July Kigali workshop reported the following sites as vulnerable: Bujumbura in Burundi where there have been lethal landslides, floods and increased water levels in Lake Tanganyika in recent years; Kalehe/Bushushu in DRC where flash floods and losses of life and property now recur annually and the Lake Kivu levels are increasing, forcing communities to move uphill; and Nyungwe in Rwanda, where fires were reported to have degraded 12% of the forest by 2004 (mostly in the abnormally dry year of 1997). These reported sites and incidents are a small subset of much wider problems of extreme climatic events that are affecting the rest of the Kivu-Rusizi catchments and are certain to become much more frequent in the years ahead.

While droughts do occur within the CRAG, given its steep slopes, large numbers of rivers and the virtual certainty of increased precipitation under climate change (Chapter 6), riverine flooding presents the greater danger for extreme climatic events. In Burundi, the north-western provinces of Cibitoke, Bubanza and Bujumbura are most frequently hit by floods86. A map of hazard risks in Rwanda (REMA, 2015) shows that most of the catchment area for Lake Kivu and the Rusizi River is flood prone. Both the North and South Kivu Provinces in DRC are also severely and routinely affected by floods. Most damage occurs in densely populated areas, and all urban centres within the CRAG are at risk, as human settlements are strongly associated with water availability and river systems. There are additional dangers of destructive spill overs from dams and reservoirs. Flood control during exceptional climatic events is one of several concerns raised by the ESIA for the Rusizi III dam (AfDB, 2015). Much of the flood risk within the CRAG can be attributed directly to deforestation, most notably in the Gishwati-Mukura landscape (World Bank, 2015) where the incoming National Park project plans numerous interventions for flood forecasting, mitigation and control.

Recommendation 8.8.1. Collate all past records of extreme and recurrent climatic events and their impacts and produce a detailed future risk map for droughts and floods within the Kivu-Rusizi watersheds for all three countries.

Interventions

An increased frequency of extreme climatic events is inevitable and needs long term global solutions; no interventions under this CIP can do anything meaningful to prevent it. The focus therefore needs to be on adaptive measures to ameliorate impacts. Several of these have been presented above, dealing with specific threats (erosion, sedimentation, landslides etc.) that are related to extreme events. This section concentrates on interventions that will reduce impacts from exceptional rainfall. These include weather prediction research at all time scales, training for engineers and communities, and infrastructural developments.

85 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877705814010558 86https://www.cordaid.org/en/wp-ontent/uploads/sites/3/2013/06/Burundi_risk_mapping_20120130_ETG.pdf

127

Recommendation 8.8.3. Halt all further deforestation and promote future restoration models within the CRAG, giving immediate priority to forests on critical watersheds.

Recommendation 8.8.4. Designate flood prone areas (e.g. on lake shores) where the building of new residences or other inappropriate infrastructure is not permitted and the rehabilitation of natural vegetation is encouraged.

Recommendation 8.8.4. Install more automated climate stations in strategic locations within the CRAG to improve inputs into expanded CESM models and build capacity and resources for independent monitoring and reporting of weather conditions in local communities.

Recommendation 8.8.5. Develop flood forecasting and preparedness systems for flood-prone areas with the highest risk and potential impact assessments.

Recommendation 8.8.6. Seek dedicated funding to develop and install new flood control and drainage systems for urban centres within the CRAG, and to ensure that any new developments have adequate systems for the same.

Recommendation 8.8.6. Wherever possible, ensure that flood spillway systems lead into water reservoir and storage tanks.

Recommendation 8.8.6. Strengthen technical and university training in hydropower and irrigation engineering for deployment in the water and energy sectors.

Recommendation 8.8.7. Review flood control infrastructure in major dam and irrigation schemes throughout the CRAG and fund and implement upgrades as necessary.

Recommendation 8.8.8. Manage watercourses to allow unimpeded flow during intense rainfall events. 8.9 Shifting Patterns in Human and Livestock Diseases 8.9.1 Vulnerable Sites

Climate change will increase the impacts of human diseases primarily through affecting the chances of transmission. An additional risk is the emergence of new infectious diseases that were hither-too present in birds and mammals with which humans had previously limited contact; livestock can also act as intermediates in disease transmission to humans in such cases. The latter is by its very nature hard to predict. The former is most likely to occur as a result of increased rainfall and flooding (for water-borne diseases), and changes in the distribution of insect and other vectors in response to warming. Diarrhoea, cholera, typhoid, and dysentery regularly flourish when floods hit high density urban areas and safe water supplies are disrupted. Floods can also increase the distribution of the snails responsible for schistosomiasis. Vulnerable sites obviously include all areas subject to flooding (8.8). The clearest case of the former (changes in the distribution of vectors) is malaria where the evidence is unequivocal that warming is leading to its spread into higher altitudes from which it was formerly absent (Section 7.4.8). Even in the lowlands an increase in stagnant water following rains and floods will lead to more malaria and other mosquito borne illnesses.

Recommendation 8.9.1. Track the incidence of mosquito-borne diseases in human populations living at transitional altitudes (>1700m) for malaria transmission.

Recommendation 8.9.2. Map the incidence of water-borne before, during, and after flood events.

128

Interventions

In all cases of alterations in the distribution of diseases as a result of climate change, the key interventions must focus on preparedness. All human populations living altitudes above 1700m within the CRAG are already suffering from increased risks of contracting malaria, and these risks are exacerbated by their lower resistance to the disease (as a result of a lack of exposure in childhood) and the relative inexperience of local clinics and staff in dealing with the disease. Heatwaves in the dry season can also cause mortality, especially among the elderly.

Recommendation 8.9.4. Ensure that medical staff serving patients above 1700m are familiar with the diagnosis and treatment of malaria and other mosquito-borne diseases and have the requisite resources and skills to deal with them.

Recommendation 8.9.5. Increase surveillance capacity for emerging infectious diseases of both humans and livestock.

Recommendation 8.9.6. Fast track and stockpile supplies of appropriate drugs and vaccines for use in climate change driven disasters, especially for typhoid, cholera, diarrhoea and dysentery when floods occur or are anticipated.

Recommendation 8.9.7. Stockpile supplies of safe drinking water for use during floods and heatwaves. 8.10 Invasive Species

8.10.1 Vulnerable Sites

Invasive species are found over much of the CRAG, and no habitat within it can be considered as invulnerable. Delegates at the Kigali workshop drew attention to the Nyungwe, Kibira and Kahuzi- Biega National Parks where Sericostachys scandens (a native but invasive liana) has colonised openings in the forest, Lake Tanganyika with its infestations of water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) and where Mimosa diplotrica is spreading on its shores, Lake Kivu where the Killifish (Lamprichthys tanganicus) has spread in the absence of its normal predators, and Rusizi National Park where Lantana camara is thriving. As elsewhere the disruption of natural ecosystems provides openings for invasives to enter and spread (e.g. in Nyungwe where fires and declines in buffalo and elephant populations have enabled Sericostachys to establish virtual mono cultures, excluding plants on which gorillas feed). Anthropogenic introductions add to the problems (e.g. of Lamprichthys in Lake Kivu). Further invasions are likely under climate change as a result of changed conditions favouring an invasive or community disruption or both.

Recommendation 8.10.1. Establish and maintain surveillance systems for monitoring the spread of existing invasives or the appearance of new ones.

Interventions

Control measures for invasives are generally species-specific and depend on the biology and ecology of the species concerned. The preferred option, whenever possible, is biological control through introducing natural enemies of the invasive. This can be astonishingly successful (as with the control of the alien cassava mealybug in Africa by releasing parasitoids wasps from Mexico) and extraordinarily cost effective after an initial outlay for research. But it only works for a restricted number of species. Mechanical (physical clearing and removal) and chemical methods are also available. Action plans have been developed for most of the species listed above. These are

129 knowledge-intensive based on extensive research and field experience, and are often expensive to implement. The best overall defence against invasives is to maintain the integrity of existing ecosystems.

Intervention 8.10.2. Ensure that all attempts to control invasives are research and knowledge-based build on previous experience and action plans, and are informed by the local context.

Intervention 8.10.3. Perform a cost-benefit analysis before attempting any control measures that involve substantial investment.

Intervention 8.10.4. Ensure that local communities and government officials are sensitized to the importance of controlling the invasive, support the control measures adopted, and participate (including employment) as much as possible in whatever effort is undertaken.

Intervention 8.10.5. Obtain baseline measurements and images and monitor successes, failures, and impacts to inform future initiatives and investments. 8.11 Making it all happen: The Role of the LTA and ABAKIR

8.11.1 General considerations

Enhanced resilience to climate change within the Kivu-Rusizi Basins is essential for the human well- being of all who live within them. The LTA and ABAKIR have the responsibility to deliver the healthy ecosystems on which the resilience of the basins depends. The proposed interventions conform to the strategic plans and objectives of both these basin authorities, but will further require the engagement of relevant government ministries, local communities and civil society in each of the three countries within which the catchments of Lake Kivu and the Rusizi River are found. Because of the geographical focus of the CIP, ABAKIR is best placed to provide overall coordination, working closely with the LTA because the Rusizi River provides the major inflow into Lake Tanganyika. Because the problems and solutions are inter-sectoral, and overlap with many ongoing and planned initiatives, the implementation of the CIP will be impossible without the integration of its components into government plans and programs. Many of these are ongoing, but because of the complementarity of their various objectives (and those of the CIP), little will be required in terms of retrofitting. Formal ratification of the CIP by LTA and ABAKIR is an essential starting point. The Great Lakes Conference in June 2017 provides an opportunity for its launch. The interventions proposed in the CIP are designed to achieve climate change resilience for biodiversity and ecosystem services. There is little in the plan that is original, and there is much in it that is already ongoing. Some of its thinking will inevitably prove to be flawed or simplistic, and will need to be corrected whenever needed. If this document is to be of any value, its recommendations will need to receive the review, backing and support of the LTA and ABAKIR.

Recommendation 8.11.1 LTA and ABAKIR provide a platform for critical ongoing and future reviews of the CIP to ensure that its content is realistic, practical and acceptable to key decision makers throughout the CRAG.

Recommendation 8.11.2 Mainstreaming of the CIP, in whole or in part, into government programs is essential and will require the active support of LTA and ABAKIR.

Recommendation 8.11.3 High level endorsement of an agreed version of the CIP is achieved in time for a formal launch by the GLR Basin Authorities at the Great Lakes Conference in Entebbe in May 2017.

130

Interventions

During implementation, a flexible approach will be needed, incorporating both bottom-up and top- down approaches, and ranging in scale from micro-level community actions to major infrastructural and intergovernmental programs and projects.

Engagement with multiple actors and beneficiaries is required, and interventions will involve a diversity of interests from urban dwellers, farmers, and fisherfolk to government ministers and international agencies. Capacity will have to be built through creating widespread awareness of the formidable challenges involved, through mobilising political backing, and through supporting the research that is needed to understand the processes by which ecosystem and human health is maintained in the basins. It is obvious that all this will not be easy, that there will be no avoiding conflicting interests. A clear understanding of stakeholders is therefore required from the outset.

Endorsement and the launch of the CIP is only the beginning. Thereafter, its realisation through action on the ground will depend on mobilising resources and integrating its efforts with other ongoing initiatives. Multi-, bi- and uni-lateral funding through governments will remain the major source of financial support for achieving climate change resilience in the CRAG, but donor funds for Civil Society also have an important role to play. In the interests of integration, climate change and resilience/adaptation projects within the basins should be designed to include roles for the LTA and ABAKIR in addition to their specific objectives. Any such support should be reciprocated in order to build and sustain alliances.

Recommendation 8.11.4 The LTA and ABAKIR conduct a series of stakeholder analysis workshops involving NGOs, CBOs, government and intergovernmental agencies, and the private sector to identify congruent and conflicting interests, working alliances, strengths and weaknesses, implementation arrangements, and lessons learned in addressing environmental problems in the CRAG. Recommendation 8.11.5 A coalition of diverse partners is needed to implement the CIP and should be built around LTA and ABAKIR through reciprocal fund raising at all levels.

The Great Lakes Conference held in May 2017 was timely and provided an opportunity to initiate the collaborative arrangements required to restore ecosystem health throughout the GLR. The CIP is a contribution to this wider goal in one of the most critically important ecological regions in East and Central Africa. References

AfDB 2015: Environmental And Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) Summary - Ruzizi III Hydropower Plant. http://www.afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/Environmental-and-Social- Assessments/Multinational_-_Burundi-Rwanda-RDC-projet_hydro%C3%A9lectrique_de_Ruzizi_III- Resume_EIES_-_EN-_08_2015.pdf

Brodie J.F., Paxton, M., Nagulendran, K., Balamurugan, G., Clements, G.R., Reynolds, G., Jain, A. and Hon, J., 2016: Connecting science, policy, and implementation for landscape-scale habitat connectivity. Conservation Biology, Volume 30, No. 5, 950–961.

Carrol, S.B., 2016. The Serengeti Rules. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.

131

Garibaldi et al. (2016): Mutually beneficial pollinator diversity and crop yield outcomes in small and large farms. Science 351: 388-391.

GIZ, 2014: Modèle pour établir les taux d’érosion pour les zones d’intervention du projet ACCES World Bank 2014 http://www.climat.bi/index.php/l-archive/Documents/Mesures- dadaptation/activités-au-Burundi/Modèle-pour-établir-les-taux-d’érosion-pour-les-zones- d’intervention-du-projet-ACCES/

Manirakiza,P.,Covaci,A.,Nizigiymana,L.,Ntakimazi,G . & Schepens,P., 2002): Persistent chlorinated pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyls in selected fish species from Lake Tanganyika, Burundi, Africa. Environmental Pollution. 117: 447– 455.

Marijnissen, S.A.E., 2013: Sustainable Catchment Management Interventions In The Uvira Territory, South Kivu Province, DRC. Lessons Learned. http://iwlearn.net/iw-projects/1017/reports/lessons- learnt-on-sustainable-catchment-management-interventions-in-the-uvira-territory-south-kivu- province-drc

Munyaneza, O., Majoro, F., Mutake, S., Nsengiyumva, E.H., 2016: Performance Evaluation of Sediment Basins: Case Study of Keya Hydropower Plant in Rwanda. Journal of Water Resource and Protection, 2015, 7, 1387-1398. http://www.scirp.org/journal/jwarp http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/jwarp.2015.716112

Rishirumuhirwa, 2016: Climate change and landslides threats in Kivu and Ruzizi basin. Presentation to the CRAG Expert Workshop, Kigali, July 2016.

REMA, 2009: Rwanda State of Environment and Outlook Report. Rwanda Environment Management Authority P.O. Box 7436 Kigali, Rwanda http://www.rema.gov.rw/soe/summary.pdf.

REMA, 2015: Rwanda: State of Environment and Outlook Report 2015 Rwanda Environment Management Authority P.O. Box 7436,Kigali, Rwanda

Ryan, S.J., Palace, M., Diem, J.E., Chapman, C.A. and Hartter, J., Population pressure and global markets drove a decade of deforestation in Africa’s Albertine Rift http://users.clas.ufl.edu/prwaylen/Mweru/Deforestation%20in%20Albertine%20Rift.pdf

Downloaded 15 November 2016.

USAID 2013: Sediment Source Determination by Fingerprinting: Ruvu River Basin, Tanzania. http://dpanther.fiu.edu/sobek/FI14103143/00001

World Bank and CIAT. 2015: Climate-Smart Agriculture in Rwanda.

https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/64754/retrieve

Wiesenhuetter, J. 2016. Climate Change Vulnerability and Adaptation in Burundi. Presentation to the CRAG Expert Workshop, Kigali, July 2016.

132

World Bank, 2014: Landscape Approach to Forest Restoration And Conservation Project (LAFREC). https://www.thegef.org/sites/default/files/documents/06-30-14_Project_Document_PAD.pdf

133