Biological Conservation 112 (2003) 15–28 www.elsevier.com/locate/biocon

The Cape Action Plan for the Environment: overview of an ecoregional planning process

Amanda Youngea,*, Sandra Fowkesb a53 Hofmeyr Street, Gardens, 8001, South Africa bMetaplan, PO Box30306, Tokai, 7966, South Africa

Received 15 October 2001; received in revised form 22 January 2002; accepted 26 January 2002

Abstract A recent trend in biodiversity conservation has been to undertake conservation planning exercises at regional scale, which attempt to protect a representative sample of all habitat types in an entire ecological region. The Cape Action Plan for the Envir- onment (CAPE), which focussed on the Cape Floristic Region (CFR), is one of the more advanced of current initiatives. This 2-year project, funded by the Global Environment Facility, was designed to develop a strategy and action plan for the CFR. What was special about CAPE was the combination of stakeholder involvement with an explicit, quantitative planning procedure. This paper gives an account of the process by which this was achieved, and describes the project activities, the public involvement pro- cess and a brief overview of project findings. CAPE was a multidisciplinary conservation planning process at relatively large scale, with a key focus on building partnerships between executing agencies, non-governmental organizations, research institutes and the private sector from the outset. This was done to create commitment to implementation and ensure long-term ‘‘social’’ sustainability to match the efforts towards ecological sustainability. The paper concludes by offering some guidelines on the management of ecoregional conservation planning. # 2003 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. Keywords: Biodiversity conservation; Ecoregional conservation planning; Public participation; Strategy development

1. Conserving the Cape Floristic Region: a global and Griffiths, 2000; Van Nieuwenhuizen and Day, 2000; initiative Awad et al., 2002). At least 70% of its 9000 plant spe- cies are found nowhere else on Earth (Goldblatt and The Cape Floristic Region (CFR) is a unique biolo- Manning, 2000). Major threats include loss of habitat to gical region of global significance (Cowling and agriculture, rapid and insensitive development of hous- Richardson, 1995). It is the smallest of the world’s six ing and infrastructure, overexploitation of marine floral kingdoms and the only one to be found entirely resources and wild flowers, spread of alien species, and within one country, South Africa. Together with its inappropriate fire regimes (Gelderblom et al., 2003; adjoining marine areas, it has spectacularly high levels Rouget et al., 2003a). Some lowland habitats have been of plant and animal biodiversity, including more than reduced by over 90% and less than 5% of land in the 1400 Red Data Book plant species, three marine pro- lowlands enjoys any conservation status (Rouget et al., vinces, important RAMSAR sites and many sites of 2003b). The region has, therefore, been identified as one scenic beauty (e.g. Stuckenberg, 1962; Branch, 1988; of the world’s biodiversity hotspots requiring conserva- Cowling and Hilton Taylor, 1994; Skelton et al., 1995; tion action (Mittermeier et al., 1998; Myers et al., 2000). Picker and Samways, 1996; Impson et al., 1999; Grif- Underlying causes for ongoing biodiversity loss include fiths and Prochazka, 2000; Jones et al., 2000; Proshazka lack of capacity and poor co-ordination between bodies responsible for management of natural resources, lack of awareness of the importance of biodiversity, and a * Corresponding author. Tel.: +27-21-424-1838; fax: +27-21-426- short-term focus on meeting needs of a large, previously 5824. disadvantaged populace (Gelderblom et al., 2003; E-mail address: [email protected] (A. Younge). Lochner et al., 2003).

0006-3207/03/$ - see front matter # 2003 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. doi:10.1016/S0006-3207(02)00393-2 16 A. Younge, S. Fowkes / Biological Conservation 112 (2003) 15–28

During the last decade the political reform process in addressed the conservation of biodiversity in the terres- South Africa has created opportunities for improved trial, marine and freshwater ecosystems of the Cape environmental protection in two important ways. Floral Region. In particular, the CAPE Project aimed to: Firstly, clauses protecting the environment in South Africa’s constitution are now amongst the strongest in  identify conservation priorities in a rigorous, the world. Amongst others, the country is a party to the scientifically defensible manner and based on International Convention on Biodiversity, the RAM- assessments of biodiversity and threats; SAR Convention on Wetlands of International Impor-  develop a long term strategy for biodiversity tance, the Convention to Combat Desertification, and conservation in the CFR; the World Heritage Convention. The government has  draft a 5-year action plan and investment pro- also produced a White Paper on Biodiversity (1997) and gramme to address conservation priorities; the National Environmental Management Act (1998).  identify potential sources of funding for these Preparation of a National Biodiversity Strategy and activities; and Action Plan is underway. Secondly, the democratization  involve key stakeholders meaningfully in the process has enabled, encouraged and required greater process. levels of public participation in government decision- making at all levels. The CAPE project thus constitutes the first phase of a Conservation in South Africa is faced with significant long-term programme to conserve biodiversity in the challenges. The country suffers from highly skewed CFR. income and resource distribution. The advent of democracy has, of necessity, focussed government funding on economic development and socio-economic 2. Sustainable ecoregional biodiversity conservation: priorities. This has led to a shift of funding away from CAPE in international context sectors such as conservation, with consequent negative impacts on biodiversity. It has become evident that for CAPE is one of a number of ecoregion-based con- conservation to receive significant government and servation (ERC) initiatives world-wide (e.g. Olivieri et popular support in the future, it will need to make a al., 1995; Hannah et al., 1998; Dinerstein et al., 2000). positive contribution to some of the development issues Many of these initiatives are being co-ordinated by the facing the rural poor. However, in spite of the decreas- World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) in partnership ing trend in conservation funding, the South African with other conservation agencies. According to WWF, government has given a clear indication that, owing to ecoregion-based conservation arose in part from the the global significance and vulnerability of the CFR, its need to find ways to operate at a scale large enough to protection will be a high priority. achieve conservation results that are ecologically viable, The first steps taken after 1994 to support the con- conserving networks of key sites, migration corridors, servation of this unique region resulted in South Africa and the ecological processes that maintain healthy eco- being granted US$12.3 million by the Global Environ- systems. By addressing ecoregion-wide processes, the ment Facility (GEF) in support of the Cape Peninsula approach also recognizes the broader social, economic, Biodiversity Conservation Project (World Bank, 1998). and political factors that determine long-term success While the bulk of this funding was directed at con- (WWF-International, 2000; Dinerstein et al., 2000). servation of the highly threatened Cape Peninsula, The development of conservation strategies at this US$1 million was targeted at developing a strategy and scale poses a number of challenges for conservation action plan to conserve the whole Cape Floristic planning. While it enables a more comprehensive and Region. This broader strategic project, termed the Cape integrated approach to be undertaken, it also increases Action Plan for the Environment (CAPE), extended the complexity of the process. It requires rigorous over 2 years from 1998 to 2000. Its objectives were to approaches to identifying ecoregional conservation tar- develop a long-term strategy to conserve biodiversity in gets and identifying ways of achieving these. Further, the CFR, and to prepare a 5-year investment pro- because ecoregional and administrative boundaries sel- gramme focussed on priorities within the strategy. The dom coincide, ERC practitioners are obliged to work in strategy and investment programme were to be pre- a complex political, legal and socio-economic environ- sented to financial agencies, public and private, national ment, and need to enhance their political knowledge, and international, including the GEF, at the end of the networking and lobbying skills, as well as their under- 2-year period. standing of economic issues and dynamics. Stakeholder The CAPE project was co-ordinated by the World participation is also significantly more complex at this Wide Fund for Nature South Africa (WWF-SA) at the scale. request of government, and in partnership with govern- CAPE’s approach to the challenges of terrestrial con- ment, communities and the private sector. The project servation planning at the ecoregional scale differs A. Younge, S. Fowkes / Biological Conservation 112 (2003) 15–28 17 significantly from other approaches, which tend to rely the planning process can lead to stakeholders feeling heavily on the ‘‘expert workshop’’ to define ecological that their presence is merely a token gesture, resulting in priorities (Dinerstein et al., 2000). In summary, CAPE their dissatisfaction and reduced support for the project. approached the question in the following manner The need to ensure a high level of support by key sta- (Cowling et al., 1999, 2003): keholders was of particular importance in the CAPE Project, since subsequent implementation of the pro-  refining an explicit, stepwise protocol for eco- gramme would not be the responsibility of the organiza- regional planning; tion responsible for developing the strategy and action  identifying targets for conservation of biodi- plan (WWF-SA), but instead would be undertaken by versity patterns and ecological processes; and key stakeholders.  combining expert judgement with new technol- The goal of the public involvement programme was, ogies for data analysis to lay out and resolve the therefore, to support effective implementation of CAPE options for achieving explicit conservation targets. outcomes by creating legitimacy for the project process and buy-in to its outcomes by all relevant stakeholders, The CAPE project was undertaken in three major including government at all levels, civil society, non- phases: stocktaking and analysis, strategy development, governmental organizations (NGOs) and the private and implementation programming (action planning). sector. Public involvement, in one form or another, was an inte- The objectives of the public involvement programme gral part of each phase. The major challenges facing CAPE were to run a process that: in terms of project management, project governance and stakeholder participation were the need to:  included all relevant stakeholders;  integrated the views of stakeholders effectively in  integrate the work of biological and social sci- the development of strategies; and entists in an effective strategy and action plan for  built partnerships for and commitment to conservation; implementation.  conduct a regional-scale public involvement process which included stakeholders mean- 3.1. Identifying stakeholders ingfully and created buy-in and commitment to implementation; and The CFR spans nearly 90,000 km2 and three admin-  produce the strategy and action plan within a istrative provinces, has nearly five million inhabitants, limited time (the entire process of stocktaking, and contains a wide variety of organizations and gov- issue identification, strategic planning and ernment bodies with an interest in biodiversity, either development of the action plan took 2 years); directly or indirectly. As in all ecoregions, the vastness of the study area posed significant challenges in terms of The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of identifying all the relevant stakeholders and ensuring the planning process as a whole, together with an their effective representation. account of public involvement. The paper deals first To identify all stakeholders who could influence bio- with issues of public involvement (Section 3), and then diversity conservation in the CFR, or who could be gives an account of the planning process (Sections 4–6). affected by it, a systematic analysis was undertaken. It concludes by deriving some principles to inform This analysis addressed the following questions, draw- similar processes in the future. A discussion of the sci- ing on the work of WWF-US (2000): entific methodologies used to identify conservation priorities is not included here. who knows what? (identifying those who can provide information on the most important social, economic and political factors and trends affecting biodiversity 3. Public involvement in the CAPE project conservation); who controls what? (identifying who owns, manages or Byers (2000) argued that, to undertake conservation harvests resources; who influences allocation, man- effectively, one needs an understanding of human beha- agement and use of natural resources; who has legis- viours with regard to the environment. He stressed the lated responsibility for natural resource management; importance of identifying stakeholders and initiating a who is marginalized); dialogue with them in the very early stages of the pro- who can support the process? (who is sympathetic and ject. This principle applies as much in a regional-scale has resources, skills and networks which can be used project as it does at local project level. to assist the project in achieving its objectives; who It is generally accepted that viewing public involve- has political, financial or economic influence and can ment as an ‘‘add-on’’ rather than an integral aspect of ‘‘leverage’’ support for the project, i.e. who is able, 18 A. Younge, S. Fowkes / Biological Conservation 112 (2003) 15–28

with the application of limited effort, to create sig- 3.2. Forms of stakeholder involvement nificant effect.); who can block the process or undermine it? (either Stakeholders were grouped into three major categories: through destructive participation or, in the case of government agencies, by failing to participate and to 1. General public. buy in, thereby reducing the potential for successful 2. Those who would have a direct responsibility for implementation); implementing the action plan drawn up in the who gains and who loses? (both from conservation CAPE process. activities, and from exploitation of natural resources 3. Interested and affected parties; those who either in the biome). take an interest in biodiversity conservation, or who would be affected by project outcomes. The analysis identified government bodies (national, provincial and local), scientific research institutes and Participation in the CAPE process was structured to technical experts, and non-governmental, private and allow different degrees and forms of involvement by community-based organizations across a range of sec- different groups, depending on their preference and on tors (including conservation, agriculture and tourism) the roles that they would play in implementation. To and disciplines. Over 1500 individual stakeholders were ensure that the public involvement programme was tai- involved in the project. lored to the needs of each category, there were An interesting outcome of the analysis was the finding effectively three ‘‘streams’’ of activity required. that most land in the CFR is in private ownership, par- The first stream addressed the first category of stake- ticularly in the agricultural sector, and that agriculture holders, the general public. There was a need to raise is the major land use, occupying over 75% of the land awareness in order to heighten CFR residents’ under- area of the Western Cape Province which includes most standing and appreciation of the uniqueness of the area of the CFR. This highlighted the need to involve orga- that is on their doorstep. This required a broadly based nized agriculture. Attempts were made to draw programme of communication. A publicity campaign AgriCape, the organization which represents farmers, (radio, press and television) was undertaken to inform farm workers and agricultural suppliers in the Western the public of the CAPE process, strategy and action Cape into the process, and similar attempts were made plan. Information was also made available through the with farmer’s organizations in the Eastern Cape (see Website, brochures and public presentations. Section 3.2). At the other end of the spectrum, the second stream Another interesting outcome of the analysis was the of activity addressed the need for the project co-ordi- identification of organizations whose activities create nator and consulting team to work as seamlessly as additional impact, either positive or negative, through possible with the ultimate executing agencies (the ‘‘key ‘‘leveraging’’, that could support the objective of CAPE. stakeholders’’), in particular the Western Cape Nature A powerful example of a ‘‘leverager’’ is the Working for Conservation Board, South African National Parks, Water campaign that achieves multiple environmental Eastern Cape Directorate of Environment Affairs and and social goals by working with unemployed people to the national Department of Environment Affairs and clear invading alien plants that diminish the yield of Tourism, to ensure that these agencies took ownership water catchments (Van Wilgen et al., 1998). Generally, of the project and its implementation. A concerted the two groups that form the ‘‘leveragers’’ are those attempt was made to involve them closely in planning spending money on the CFR, and major income gen- and management of the project, through the establish- erators. Projects which entailed significant amounts of ment of a project Steering Committee comprising key money being spent in the region and impacting on bio- stakeholders. The Steering Committee was supported by diversity, such as Working for Water, projects funded a Technical Committee co-ordinated by WWF-SA and by the Global Environment Facility and WWF-SA with comprised the consultants (terrestrial, aquatic and its associated Trust Funds, and projects being funded by socio-economic). Technical experts representing the various government agencies, were identified in terms major executing agencies were co-opted on to this com- of this criterion. In addition, those organizations mittee, to ensure effective integration of these agencies exporting the CFR’s natural capital and generating in the project management process. This also allowed economic benefits outside of the region were identified for a sense of collective responsibility to develop and for and the nature and extent of their activities explored. working partnerships to evolve. In addition, in-depth The South African Protea Producers and Exporters consultation with representatives of key stakeholders (which exports CFR-derived cut flowers), South Afri- was held in each phase of the project, to ensure that the can Forestry Company Limited and the various agri- views, interests and concerns of these agencies were cultural export organizations are examples of this taken into account in the process and its products. This group. consultation brought together institutions with different A. Younge, S. Fowkes / Biological Conservation 112 (2003) 15–28 19 but related interests, characteristics, resources and roles informed, give input, interact, and participate in joint to play, to improve communication, increase mutual decision-making), each of which was made possible understanding and common ground, and create collec- through the means indicated in Table 1. Approaches to tive commitment to an implementation partnership. The involvement were cumulative from level 1 to level 4. For process provided a forum for their different interests to example, those who wanted to participate in joint deci- be articulated, common interests to be identified and sion-making also received mailings of brochures and partnerships to develop. invitations to participate in workshops. The third stream was more akin to conventional Newsletters informed people of opportunities to par- public involvement. At the outset, as outlined earlier, a ticipate and invited comments on developments and wide range of potential stakeholders was identified and draft findings at each stage of the project, and the com- categorized in terms of the potential role they could play ments and responses were incorporated into reports in the project. A database of over 1500 concerned where appropriate. In the stocktaking and review phase organizations and individuals was developed, and con- of the project (see Section 4), project initiation sultation with those listed on the database was under- workshops were held with stakeholders to introduce the taken in a number of ways. project and identify both important issues that needed CAPE’s consultation process was of necessity regio- to be addressed and stakeholders who needed to become nal. The focus therefore was on involving organizations involved. After this, smaller focus group meetings were with a regional character (also termed ‘‘umbrella’’ held with representatives of specific constituencies to organizations). While there was no scope for local con- explore specific issues more deeply. Throughout the sultation to take place during the course of the CAPE process, meetings were held with stakeholders to report project, the regional consultation process was open to back on progress and receive comment and input. anyone, including local organizations and individuals. It Inviting stakeholders to specify their preferred form was felt that the most appropriate point for local involve- of involvement has one significant weakness: it relies on ment in CAPE would be in the design and implementation the current perceptions of individuals and organizations of specific projects. as to what constitutes their interests, and fails to iden- A sense of ownership of the products of any project is tify potential interests or interests that are not perceived significantly enhanced where role players can exercise by stakeholders. To counter this, the stakeholder ana- their choice about the extent and nature of involvement lysis undertaken identified stakeholders whose support that is appropriate for them. For this reason, all stake- would be important to the successful implementation of holders identified in the CAPE process were canvassed the project, including groups within the agriculture and as to which level and form of involvement was appro- tourism sectors, and community-based organizations, priate to their needs and resources. Stakeholders were and particular effort was made to create an awareness of asked: the importance of CAPE for these groups, to involve them in the process and to gain their support for the What would it take for the CAPE project (or this outcomes. This was done through targeted media relea- phase of the project) to count for you/your organi- ses, presentations to interest groups and political bodies sation? at local, provincial and national levels where a greater degree of involvement was sought or to allay concerns The range of possible answers to this question exten- arising from inadequate information. Where media ded from a low level of involvement with minimal rights releases and presentations did not adequately elicit par- to influence the nature of the project, to a very high level ticipation, networking—the use of personal contacts of influence. All stakeholders were offered the option of and relationships to engage key stakeholders—was engaging in any or all of four incremental levels (be used.

Table 1 Continuum of opportunities for involvement in CAPE

Level of involvement Be informed Give input Interact Participate in joint decision-making

Approaches to Mailings of brochures, Opportunity to comment Opportunity to participate Sit on Technical and deliver this level newsletters and response sheets through response sheets, in project-initiation workshops, Steering Committees comment sheets and focus groups, interviews and questionnaires strategy-development workshop Opportunity to attend presentations and report-back meetings Website Articles in publications and media 20 A. Younge, S. Fowkes / Biological Conservation 112 (2003) 15–28

Certain sectors and interest groups pose a threat to being the larger and better organized group, for whom biodiversity because it is in their short-term economic biodiversity conservation issues are relatively remote; interest to do so, and any attempts to create significant the rural being poorly organized, and severely lacking in support for conservation in such a sector, within a resources and mobility. 2-year process such as CAPE, are likely to be severely Unlike many other rural areas in South Africa and limited. elsewhere in Africa, the CFR does not encompass sig- By far the most significant threat to biodiversity in nificant communal farming areas. Disadvantaged rural the CFR is commercial agriculture (Rouget et al., 2003), constituencies generally comprise farm workers in com- and few representatives of this sector appear to view mercial farming districts. For these constituencies, conservation as being in their interests. In the past, CAPE found that a shift towards biodiversity con- perverse incentives encouraged the ploughing of new servation could potentially improve rural livelihoods lands, even in agriculturally marginal landscapes, while through improving the profitability of farming, and the benefits of conservation-friendly farming are gen- through increased job-creation in the nature-based erally not well understood, and no incentives exist to tourism sector (Gelderblom et al., 2003). In spite of this, restore transformed land or to compensate farmers for it proved extremely difficult to involve representatives forgone income from not clearing virgin land. Thus, from disadvantaged rural communities in the strategic while a measure of support for the project was forth- planning process. This was due to a number of factors, coming from government departments of agriculture at the most important of which were that such commu- national and provincial level, from AgriCape, the orga- nities were not highly organized at a local level and nized body representing the farming sector, and from therefore difficult to involve and did not see the rele- certain individual farmers, this was not sufficient to vance of a regional biodiversity strategy process to their raise awareness or lead to any significant changes in daily lives and priorities. behaviour during the planning phase. It was therefore Where regional organizations existed, such as considered a priority to include in the implementation umbrella community associations representing impo- programme actions to deepen awareness of the need to verished communities, they tended to focus on immedi- farm in a more sustainable manner, to remove perverse ate basic needs and were severely under-resourced, often incentives, and to create a programme of positive incen- lacking even the most basic office facilities and staff tives to conserve biodiversity in the implementation resources. CAPE was only able to engage regional programme. umbrella civic organizations in the most superficial A similar difficulty arose in regard to marine con- manner, although the project’s objectives and outputs servation, where poaching of abalone is at crisis level were supported. However, there is significant potential (Griffiths and Prochazka, 2000). The issue is highly for more meaningful involvement when the CAPE contested and government efforts to achieve sustainable strategy is implemented locally, since as mentioned ear- levels of harvesting in the past have met with only lier each of the implementation projects will provide for limited success (Gelderblom et al., 2003). It did not public participation by affected parties. Given the prove possible to involve all players in this industry in immediacy of a local project, its accessibility to local the CAPE strategic planning process, or would such communities, and its more tangible nature (as against a involvement have been able to address the specific pro- strategic planning process which is highly abstract) it is blems faced. It was agreed that the implementation likely that poor communities will find it easier to engage programme should address the resolution of this issue with the process at this level. as a matter of priority. Actions proposed included At the level of individual projects, local stakeholder enhancing the system of marine protected areas to identification will be revisited to ensure that appropriate secure the resource base, enforcing legislation more stakeholders are involved. Stakeholder communication effectively, and establishing fisheries co-management will continue to be an important component of overall arrangements (Gelderblom et al., 2003). co-ordination, together with publicity. Further, to con- The ability to engage a constituency or stakeholder tribute to raising awareness locally of the value of the grouping in a strategic planning process depends not CFR, a project to promote environmental awareness only on its ability to see the relevance of the process to forms part of the implementation programme. its needs, but also on the constituency’s level of organi- A brief account of the phases of the planning process zation and the resources that it has available. It proved and summary of outcomes follows. extremely difficult to involve relatively unorganized constituencies in the CAPE process, particularly those that lacked significant social and economic power and 4. Phase 1: stocktaking and analysis influence. Disadvantaged communities in the CFR can be cate- In the first phase of the project, between late 1998 and gorized into urban and rural constituencies; the urban January 2000, a team of scientists led by the Institute for A. Younge, S. Fowkes / Biological Conservation 112 (2003) 15–28 21

Plant Conservation (IPC) and Zoology Department of  environmentally damaging siting of bulk infra- the University of Cape Town (UCT), and the Council structure e.g. dams, roads, power lines; and for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) undertook  increasing housing and commercial development a three-part analysis to assess: in coastal areas.

1. The conservation status of terrestrial components It was felt that these biophysical issues were caused or (Cowling et al., 1999). exacerbated by inadequate provision for protection of 2. The conservation status of aquatic components biodiversity through (again not in order of priority): (Impson et al., 1999; Griffiths and Prochazka, 2000; Prochazka and Griffiths, 2000; Van Nieu-  a failure to correctly value the benefits or wenhuizen and Day, 2000). opportunities presented by the CFR (e.g. 3. The legal, policy, institutional, financial, social sustainable water production from managed and economic aspects affecting the conservation catchments, the potential for jobcreation, of biodiversity in the CFR (CSIR, 2000). generation of economic activity, the contribution to South Africa’s international obligations on Initial stakeholder consultation had taken place dur- biodiversity); ing the project development phase, and once the project  lack of public awareness and support for the was initiated, a database of stakeholders was developed conservation of the CFR because of a failure to and a series of meetings and workshops held to inform appreciate its value in terms of human health and stakeholders about the project objectives, process and economic opportunity; methodology; to identify additional stakeholders; and  poverty and inequity of access to resources and to nominate appropriate members for the Steering a lack of an awareness by the needy members of Committee which was established in this phase. Con- society of the options for utilization of the sultation with key stakeholders (defined as those agen- natural resources of the CFR in the short and cies that would play an important role in long-term and thus of its potential value to implementation of the CAPE strategy and action plan) them; and other experts was undertaken to help identify,  conflicting political agendas preventing appro- understand and prioritise the main issues to be addres- priate intervention; sed in the strategy. Methodological debates also took  lack of political will to protect the CFR; place during this phase. The major issues identified in  fragmented or inappropriate laws which impact the analysis fell into two categories: firstly, the biophy- upon land or resource utilization in the CFR; sical manifestations of the deterioration of the environ-  lack of a comprehensive land-use plan for the ment, and secondly, the underlying socio-economic CFR and subsequent enforcement of that plan structural causes or exacerbating factors, including on a long-term basis; legal, financial, policy and institutional issues.  failure to identify and provide appropriate pro- tection to key areas of biodiversity; 4.1. Key biophysical aspects of deterioration and  inadequate funds and resources being made underlying socio-economic causes available to agencies responsible for biodiversity conservation and natural resource utilization; The key biophysical factors identified were (not in and order of priority) (Fowkes, 1999):  confusion or conflict over institutional roles and responsibilities from national, through provincial  the increasing spread of invasive aliens species to local government level and between the public both on land and in the water; and private sector.  inappropriate burning or uncontrolled fires;  problems in catchment management, with loss of water production, erosion and siltation occur- 4.2. Key findings ring;  farming methods, inter alia, over-fertilization, The findings of the research and analysis undertaken planting of inappropriate crops, uncontrolled use in the first phase were expressed as recommendations of herbicides/pesticides, etc.; informing the strategy-development process.  expansion of agriculture into native vegetation;  environmentally inappropriate changes in land- 4.2.1. Terrestrial recommendations use e.g. for housing, extension of farm land, With regard to terrestrial biodiversity, it was recom- unplanned settlements and changing approaches mended (Cowling et al., 1999; CSIR, 2000) that the to commercial forestry areas; strategy should seek to: 22 A. Younge, S. Fowkes / Biological Conservation 112 (2003) 15–28

 give priority to conserving those habitats that necessary to conserve freshwater biodiversity in the have highest conservation value (i.e. those for region: which all remaining habitat is required to achieve the conservation target) and are extremely vul-  support continued research on the diversity and nerable to threatening processes; ideally all conservation needs of freshwater ecosystems in untransformed land in these habitats (e.g. on the the region, especially wetlands; and southwestern lowlands), irrespective of size of the  integrate freshwater and terrestrial components in remnant, should enjoy some form of conservation conservation planning to ensure representation of action in order to achieve the conservation targets; freshwater species and habitats in protected areas.  exploit opportunities in less transformed but highly threatened landscapes, such as the Agulhas Plain, in order to establish protected area systems 4.2.4. Estuarine recommendations that will achieve conservation targets before these Major recommendations relating to estuaries (Pro- are compromised by ongoing transformation; chazka and Griffiths, 2000) included:  plan and implement large protected areas that extend across climatic and habitat gradients;  effective management and conservation of entire where possible, include a wide altitudinal range catchments; in order to accommodate the effects of global  establishment of protected estuaries in good climate change; the report recommends the physical condition in which no exploitation may establishment of three mega-conservation areas occur, and which will act as refuges and serve to (400,000–600,000 ha) in the Cedarberg, Little enhance populations of exploited species; Karoo and Baviaanskloof areas;  development of management plans for all estu-  link protected areas by means of natural ‘‘corri- aries which include measures to improve or at dors’’, for example, river courses, to allow plants least maintain the current state of each estuary and animals to move or migrate, either season- (including improved pollution control, periodic ally or in response to climate change; flood releases to flush siltation, etc.);  develop a land acquisition strategy; and  ensuring appropriate future development around  develop capacity in executing agencies to estuaries and, in some cases rehabilitation of strengthen conservation planning. estuaries, particularly with regard to alteration of the estuary mouth; 4.2.2. Marine recommendations  improvement of the current knowledge base, The major recommendations of the marine analysis particularly with regard to the distribution and (Griffiths and Prochazka, 2000) were: occurrence of species within estuaries, and bio- logical processes such as fish reproduction and  revise management plans for existing Marine migration. Protected Areas (MPAs) in order to upgrade their capacity to conserve resources, provide monitoring stations and develop tourism-based 4.2.5. Socio-economic alternatives to exploitation; A review of policies and legislation (CSIR, 2000)  create additional MPAs to rebuild over-exploited noted that the Constitution of South Africa guarantees stocks; the right to a healthy environment and environmental  make significant improvements to enforcement protection through conservation, pollution control and capability; sustainable development, and that the Western Cape  develop an intensive observer programme to Province has adopted a bioregional approach to land- collect important fisheries data and monitor the use planning and established a ‘‘Man and Biosphere’’ coastal zone; programme. However, the analysis concluded that, at  establish co-management arrangements to allow provincial and local levels, more cohesive legal frame- joint-decision making by authorities and local works are needed to guarantee on- and off-reserve con- communities, where appropriate; servation of biodiversity.  promote increased awareness of the importance Although the principle of sustainable development of sustainable resource-use. was contained in government policies such as the gov- ernment’s Growth, Employment and Redistribution (GEAR) Policy, research indicated that in practice a 4.2.3. Freshwater recommendations number of socio-economic issues tended to override The freshwater research concluded (Van Nieuwen- concerns for biodiversity conservation (CSIR, 2000). huizen and Day, 2000) that the following actions were These included: A. Younge, S. Fowkes / Biological Conservation 112 (2003) 15–28 23

 lack of awareness of the importance of bio- first phase were used to inform the process of strategy diversity to the economy and to long-term development. A crucial input to the strategy develop- sustainability; ment process was the development of a spatial plan out-  agricultural incentives and inappropriate taxa- lining a notional system of conservation areas that would tion encouraging unsustainable land use prac- achieve explicit targets for the conservation of biodi- tices; and versity patterns and processes (Cowling et al., 1999, and  lack of incentives to conserve resources, for see Cowling et al., 2003 for an updated version). Aspects example, marine organisms and wild flowers. of the conceptual basis for the plan stimulated spirited debate within sectors of the scientific community, and Researchers argued that awareness programmes were adjustments were made to accommodate these. Although crucial for effective conservation, and that conservation it was only feasible to engage in limited public consulta- programmes should be based on a model that integrates tion regarding the various options identified by the plan, biodiversity benefits with economic benefits, particularly the outcomes met with broad support at the workshop in rural areas. and from stakeholders afterwards. Once the strategy had From an institutional and financial point of view, the been drafted, it was circulated to all stakeholders whose most serious problems facing biodiversity conservation comments were sought by means of a questionnaire. in the CFR were the limited capacity of the conserva- There was a 5.9% response to the questionnaire. An tion agencies in the region, in particular in the Eastern analysis of responses revealed that 98% of respondents Cape Province, to manage and enforce effectively, and supported the draft vision, 95% supported the suggested the lack of coordination between conservation agencies goal and 100% of respondents supported the overall with regard to approaches, activities and priorities approach of the strategy, including the themes and com- (CSIR, 2000). ponents. Comments on specific aspects were integrated The review highlighted the need to refocus and into the strategy where appropriate. streamline functions in all conservation agencies in the The strategy-development workshop developed a region. More effective coordination of conservation draft vision and goal for the conservation of biodi- projects and priorities was found to be essential, as was versity in the CFR. The CAPE Vision stated: the establishment of a single, shared information man- agement system to assist conservation planning across We, the people of South Africa, as proud custo- the whole CFR. dians of the Cape Floral Kingdom(sic), will protect Involving stakeholders in providing and sharing and share its full ecological, social and economic information catalysed their deeper involvement in the benefits now and in the future. project. The draft research and analysis undertaken with stakeholder input was circulated to stakeholders The Goal of CAPE was defined as follows: for information and comment. In addition to the bene- fits that this gave to the project in terms of checking and By the year 2020, the natural environment and refining the analysis, it served as a resource to stake- biodiversity of the Cape Floral Kingdom will be holders, showing relationships, linkages, conflicts, con- effectively conserved, restored wherever appro- tradictions, threats and opportunities that were priate, and will deliver significant benefits to the sometimes not evident to individual stakeholders oper- people of the region in a way that is embraced by ating independently. The process of sharing information local communities, endorsed by government and and identifying issues also facilitated the development of recognized internationally. networks and partnerships between stakeholders for implementation (Fowkes, 1999). Obstacles to attaining this goal were identified, fol- lowed by formulation of strategic objectives to achieve the goal. The key issues identified in the stocktaking and 5. Phase 2: strategy development analysis were used to assist in developing draft themes and components of each theme for the strategy Owing to the need to involve key stakeholders mean- (Gelderblom et al., 2003): ingfully in the process of developing the strategy and the limited time available, it was felt that strategy-develop-  conserving biodiversity in priority areas (com- ment should be undertaken in a participative workshop ponents: strengthening on- and off-reserve con- with representatives of key stakeholders. A 3-day work- servation; supporting bioregional planning); shop was therefore held in February 2000, attended by  promoting sustainable use (components: conser- over 50 participants made up of both CAPE consultants ving biodiversity and natural resources in catch- and stakeholders (Lochner et al., 2003). The recom- ments; improving the sustainability of harvesting; mendations arising from the analysis undertaken in the promoting sustainable nature-based tourism); 24 A. Younge, S. Fowkes / Biological Conservation 112 (2003) 15–28

 strengthening institutions to achieve the earlier protection, a project targeting the identification and (components: strengthening institutions, enhan- protection of Red Data Book plant species was cing cooperative governance (primarily inter- identified as a priority. agency collaboration and fair process); promot- Enhancing off-reserve conservation: off-reserve con- ing community involvement in decision-making). servation measures can make a significant contribu- tion to conserving the biodiversity of the region The workshop then developed a strategic goal for (Pence et al., 2003). Proposals include the devel- each component, together with objectives to achieve opment of co-operative management models and these goals (Lochner et al., 2003). A set of actions incentive mechanisms to enhance community invol- needed to meet the objectives was identified, together vement and increase the land under conservation with criteria for project prioritization. These are out- management. Biosphere reserves, an important lined later, and discussed more fully in Gelderblom et means for achieving this, are supported in the al. (2003). strategy.

5.1. Conserving biodiversity in priority areas 5.1.2. Supporting bioregional planning In conserving biodiversity in priority areas, the focus Bioregional planning is land-use planning that places was placed on strengthening on- and off-reserve con- biological patterns and processes at the forefront (Miller servation, and on supporting bioregional planning in and Hamilton, 1999). The strategic goal identified for the region. this component was:

5.1.1. Strengthening on- and off-reserve conservation By December 2002, planning and environmental The strategic goal identified for this component was: policy and legislation are used to ensure integrated and informed decision-making which supports the By 2020, an effectively managed system of con- conservation of biodiversity in the region. servation areas, land-uses and ownership that is representative of the Cape Floral Kingdom and It was felt strongly that the data, analysis and deci- marine biodiversity, is implemented by landowners sion-support system for terrestrial conservation plan- and responsible agencies. ning developed during CAPE (Cowling et al., 1999; and see Cowling et al., 2003) should be used on an ongoing An integrated package of project proposals to address basis in the future to inform all conservation and land- the need for more effective biodiversity conservation use planning in the region, including the ‘‘Man and both on- and off-reserves was developed. Key compo- Biosphere’’ programme, long-term conservation plan- nents were: ning and ongoing assessment of the environmental impact of development proposals. Establishing an effective reserve network: this compo- Legal recognition of this information and decision- nent focused on designing and implementing a system making system was seen as necessary to ensure its of representative conservation areas to conserve pro- application. In addition, training would be needed to cesses and secure irreplaceable habitat. It aimed to support implementation at both regional and local level. establish a robust system, representative of the bio- diversity of the Cape Floristic Region. There are three 5.2. Using resources sustainably scales of operation: Three major focus areas were identified for sustain- able use: sustainable catchment management, sustain- protecting the last remnants of highly threatened able harvesting, and sustainable nature-based tourism. vegetation types; developing medium-sized reserves in lowland priority 5.2.1. Sustainable catchment management areas where enough natural habitat remains to create The strategic goal identified for this component was: viable reserves; establishing mega-reserves in the Cedarberg, Little By the year 2020, institutions and communities will Karoo and Baviaanskloof areas, as well as mega-cor- be working together to ensure that appropriate ridor reserves linking these and other protected areas. catchment management is in place to protect both water sources and biodiversity.

Targeting threatened plant species: to complement the CAPE focussed attention on two aspects of sustainable above projects which focus predominantly on habitat catchment management: A. Younge, S. Fowkes / Biological Conservation 112 (2003) 15–28 25

1. South Africa’s new water law helps to protect to encourage good stewardship and efficient use catchments and sets up catchment management of resources; and associations to support its implementation  further research to determine sustainable levels of (Republic of South Africa, 1998). However, use. catchment management is focused only on securing the supply of water and needs to be Priorities for action were therefore identified as being: broadened to consider biodiversity. 2. The Working for Water Programme of the  strengthening the system of Marine Protected Department of Water Affairs and Forestry is Areas and establishing long-term monitoring directed at controlling alien vegetation in order programmes to help stocks of over-exploited to ensure sustainable supplies of fresh water, marine organisms to recover; while at the same time creating jobs and building  developing sustainable management strategies to capacity (Van Wilgen et al., 1998). This pro- conserve and restore lowland areas of the CFR in gramme also delivers major benefits in terms of particular; protecting biodiversity from alien plant infesta-  establishing co-management forums in coastal tion. CAPE needs to support Working for Water and inland areas to facilitate collaboration through developing capacity to manage alien between communities and conservation agencies; plants and by identifying which areas/catchments  developing education programmes to build the are priorities for clearing from a biodiversity understanding and capacity of communities to perspective. use resources in a sustainable manner; and  developing and implementing effective law Priorities for action identified included: enforcement strategies and training programmes.

 broadening the mandate of catchment manage- ment agencies to include biodiversity conservation; 5.2.3. Sustainable nature-based tourism  developing capacity through training in clearing The strategic goal identified for this component was: invasive alien plants and managing fires;  undertaking a 5-year research programme on the By 2020, the tourism industry is contributing sig- biological control of invasive alien plants; and nificantly to the sustainability of the natural  conserving and restoring inland aquatic systems. resources of the Cape Floral Kingdom. Nature- based tourism is attracting visitors to the region, and in turn is providing sustainable benefits to 5.2.2. Sustainable harvesting communities, increased incentives for ongoing The strategic goal identified for this component was: conservation, a contribution to the costs of mana- ging the natural resource base of the industry, a By the year 2020, the natural resources of the Cape stimulus to the regional economy and a world-class Floral Kingdom will be used sustainably providing experience for tourists. maximum benefits to society without harming the environment. The priority for action was identified as being a strat- egy to guide the development and implementation of Sustainable harvesting of natural products will nature-based tourism in the CFR, together with pilot require more effective conservation management. To projects in the Agulhas Plain, the Garden Route and ensure this, if was felt that a number of things were selected agricultural areas in the region. needed: 5.3. Strengthening institutions and governance  a strong legal framework and the institutional capacity to implement policy and manage Three major areas of focus were identified: resources;  sustainable management strategies to guide con- 1. Strengthening institutions. servation and restoration, particularly in more 2. Enhancing co-operative governance. threatened habitat types; 3. Promoting community involvement.  a system of ownership or user rights to encourage communities to manage their local resources The strategic goals identified for this component were: sustainably;  incentives and a clear understanding of the Strengthening institutions: ‘‘The collective capacity intrinsic and economic value of natural resources and will of implementers is sufficient to sustain 26 A. Younge, S. Fowkes / Biological Conservation 112 (2003) 15–28

innovative and adaptive management in the Cape CFR in the long term. This was supported by national Floral Kingdom.’’ government. However, the provincial government in the Enhancing cooperative governance: ‘‘Role players are Western Cape felt that there was potential for such a aligned and mobilised towards a common vision, body to usurp the constitutional powers of provincial policy and purpose for the conservation of the Cape government. As this issue could not be resolved in the Floral Kingdom.’’ short term, a looser arrangement in the form of an Promoting community involvement: ‘‘Well-motivated interim co-ordinating committee of executing agencies and capable local communities and resource users act was established. Agreement on a final institutional fra- to promote and conserve the Cape Floral Kingdom.’’ mework for implementation had not been reached by the conclusion of the project, and negotiations con- The achievement of these goals was supported by the tinued thereafter, resulting finally in agreement that co- development of projects designed to: ordination and management of the implementation programme would fall under the National Botanical  create an effective legal and policy framework for Institute. biodiversity conservation in the CFR; An initial estimate of the total budget required  strengthen protected area management in the to implement the 5-year action plan was R812 million Eastern Cape Province; (ca. US$70 million), of which R325 million would be  undertake a 5-year research programme to sup- provided by local executing agencies in the form of port effective conservation management; and counterpart funding. Significantly, a major executing  develop programmes to raise awareness and agency, the Western Cape Nature Conservation Board promote the sustainable use of natural resources formally adopted the CAPE strategy and used it to and conservation. focus its own activities throughout the region, with consequent realignment of its capital and operating budget. Additional funding being sought amounted to R487 million. A study to assess ways of increasing the 6. Phase 3: implementation programming financial self-sufficiency of the programme was com- missioned subsequent to the findings and proposals During this phase, a project proposal was developed being presented to donor agencies at the end of the for each of the priorities for action identified in the 2-year period. strategy-development process (Gelderblom et al., 2003). Proposals were developed to the level of an outline project proposal suitable for submission to donor 7. Concluding comments agencies. This was done in partnership with those con- servation agencies that would be responsible for project This paper has attempted to give an overview of the implementation. This suite of projects, many of which process of drawing up the Cape Action Plan for the were interdependent, constituted an integrated, com- Environment, focussing on aspects other than the sci- prehensive 5-year action plan or implementation pro- entific methodology for identifying priorities and gramme, the first phase of a 20-year conservation designing a viable protected area network. Hopefully programme (Gelderblom et al., 2003). This programme the paper has provided a sense of the complexity of the was presented at several stakeholder meetings for com- task of ecoregional conservation planning: not only was ment, where it met with broad support. CAPE a multidisciplinary planning process at a regional Monitoring and evaluation mechanisms were built scale, that analysed and made proposals for conserva- into each project proposal and it was proposed that tion, but it engaged with a wide range and large number responsibility for monitoring the progress of the pro- of stakeholder groupings with the ultimate goal of gramme as a whole would be the task of a body to be effecting significant long-term changes in human beha- nominated by government. viour towards the environment in the region. It did this One of the project proposals addressed the needs of in a relatively short time, with limitations on knowledge, co-ordination and management of the implementation resources and experience. of the programme as a whole. In addition, it was felt In a guidance note for ecoregion-based conservation, that measures needed to be taken to strengthen the WWF-US (2000) argues that despite the range and institutional framework for implementation and to give variety of approaches that are emerging in ecoregion- concrete form to the partnerships developed between based conservation, successful outcomes are more likely key stakeholders during the planning process. A review if certain fundamental principles are adhered to. These of institutional ‘‘best practice’’ undertaken earlier in the are, in brief, a primary focus on biodiversity, a multi- process had recommended the establishment of a single disciplinary approach, stakeholder participation and body to co-ordinate biodiversity conservation in the collaboration, partnership development, long-term A. Younge, S. Fowkes / Biological Conservation 112 (2003) 15–28 27 commitment by key participants, and adaptability and References flexibility in approach. In addition to these principles, a few additional points Awad, A.A., Griffiths, C.L., Turpie, J.K., 2002. Distribution and are suggested, arising from the CAPE experience: endemicity patterns of marine benthic invertebrates in South Africa applied to the selection of priority conservation areas. Diversity and strategic and pragmatic approach: the need to prevent Distributions 8, 129–145. the process becoming bogged down at an inap- Branch, W.R., 1988. South African Red Data Book—Reptiles and propriate level of detail, to continually refer to the Amphibians (South African National Programmes Report No. 151). CSIR, Pretoria. broader objectives and context in order to keep issues Byers, B.A., 2000. Understanding and Influencing Behaviours: A in perspective, to be pragmatic instead of perfec- Guide. Biodiversity Support Programme, Washington. tionist, and to focus on the implications of informa- Cowling, R.M., Hilton-Taylor, C., 1994. Plant diversity and endemism tion and analysis for the development of strategies, in southern Africa: an overview. In: Huntley, B.J. (Ed.), Botanical rather than on for its own sake; Diversity in Southern Africa. National Botanical Institute, Kirst- enbosch, pp. 31–52. emphasis on communication: the need for full, frequent Cowling, R.M., Richardson, D.M., 1995. Fynbos: South Africa’s and frank communication with stakeholder groups as Unique Floral Kingdom. Fernwood Press, Cape Town. often as possible to eliminate misunderstandings and Cowling, R.M., Pressey, R.L., Lombard, A.T., Heijnis, C.E., to support consensus and collective decision-making; Richardson, D.M., Cole, N., 1999. Framework for a Conservation differentiating roles of stakeholders: the need to Plan for the Cape Floristic Region (IPC Report 9902). University of Cape Town. determine in consultation with stakeholders a range of Cowling, R.M., Pressey, R.L., Rouget, M., Lombard, A.T., 2003. A levels and forms of involvement appropriate to the conservation plan for a global biodiversity hotspot—the Cape project’s needs and those of stakeholders; Floristic Region, South Africa. Biological Conservation 112, 191– key stakeholder involvement in project governance: the 216. need to ensure commitment to implementation by Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), 1999. Cape Action Plan for the Environment: An Assessment and Review of the executing agencies, through involving them exten- Current Policy, Legal, Institutional, Socio-economic and Financial sively in project committees and decision-making Situation Affecting the Conservation of Biodiversity in the Cape processes, including the strategy-development process Floristic Kingdom. Parts 1 and 2 (CSIR Report No.: ENV-S-C and implementation programming; 99130 A). CSIR, Stellenbosch. balancing the need to give direction and build rela- Dinerstein, E., Powell, G., Olson, D., Wikramanayake, E., Abell, R., Loucks, C., Underwood, E., Allnutt, T., Wttengel, W., Ricketts, T., tionship: reconciling two sometimes conflicting Strand, H., O’Connor, S., Burgess, N., 2000. A Workbook for objectives—the need to ensure that the process has Conducting Biological Assessments and Developing Biodiversity direction and maintains momentum, while at the same Visions for Ecoregion-Based Conservation. Part 1: Terrestrial time ensuring that as far as possible players are Ecoregions. Conservation Science Program. WWF-USA, Washing- focussing on issues of common interest and are in ton. Fowkes, S., 1999. Public Involvement Programme for Phase 1: Sit- agreement. uation Assessment and Review. Metaplan, Cape Town. Gelderblom, C.M., van Wilgen, B.W., Nel, J., Sandwith, T., Botha, In a number of ways, CAPE represents a unique and M., Hauck, M., 2003. Turning strategy into action: the design of a innovative approach to ecoregion-based conservation, conservation programme for the Cape Floristic Region. Biological integrating biodiversity and human concerns in a Conservation 112, 291–297. Goldblatt, P., Manning, J., 2000. Plants of the Cape flora. Strelitzia 9, coherent, comprehensive conservation strategy and 1–744. action plan to conserve the globally significant biodi- Griffiths, C.L., Prochazka, K., 2000. Cape Action Plan for the Envir- versity in the Cape Floristic Region. Faced with the onment: Final Report of the Marine Component. Zoology Depart- challenge of conducting a participative strategic plan- ment & Marine Biology Research Institute, University of Cape ning process in an entire ecoregion, its public involve- Town. Hannah, L., Rakotosamimanana, B., Ganzhorn, J., Mittermeier, ment programme needed to be innovative and flexible, R.A., Olivieri, S., Iyer, L., Rajaobelina, S., Hough, J., Andriamiali- and to focus on building partnerships between executing soa, F., Bowles, I., Tilken, G., 1998. Participatory planning, scien- agencies, non-governmental organizations, research tific priorities, and landscape conservation in Madagascar. institutes and the private sector, creating commitment Environmental Conservation 25, 30–36. to implementation and thereby ensuring long-term sus- Impson, N.D., Bills, I.R., Cambray, J.A., Le Roux, A., 1999. The primary freshwater fishes of the Cape Floristic Region: conservation tainability of the implementation programme. needs for a unique and highly threatened fauna. Western Cape Nature Conservation Board, Stellenbosch. Jones, G., van Nieuwenhuizen, G.D.P., Day, J.A., 2000. Cape Acknowledgements Action Plan for the Environment: Selecting Priority Wetlands for Conservation: The Agulhas Plain as a Case Study. Fresh- water Research Unit, Zoology Department, University of Cape We would like to thank Richard Cowling, Bob Town. Pressey and John Fowkes for their advice and com- Lochner, P., Weaver, A., Gelderblom, C., Paert, R., Sandwith, T., ments on drafts of this paper. Fowkes, S., 2003. Aligning the diverse: the development of a 28 A. Younge, S. Fowkes / Biological Conservation 112 (2003) 15–28

biodiversity conservation strategy for the Cape Floral Kingdom. Lombard, A.T., 2003a. Current patterns of habitat transformation Biological Conservation 112, 29–43. and future threats to biodiversity in terrestrial ecosystems of the Miller, K.R., Hamilton, L.S., 1999. Challenges facing our protected Cape Floristic Region, South Africa. Biological Conservation 112, areas in the 21st Century. Parks 9, 126. 63–85. Mittermeier, R.A., Myers, N., Thorsen, J.B., da Fonseca, G.A.B., Rouget, M., Richardson, D.M., Cowling, R.M., 2003b. The current Olivieri, S., 1998. Biodiversity hotspots and major tropical wild- configuration of protected areas in the Cape Floristic Region, South erness areas: approaches to setting conservation priorities. Con- Africa—reservation bias and representation of biodiversity patterns servation Biology 12, 516–520. and processes. Biological Conservation 112, 129–145. Myers, N., Mittermeier, R.A., Mittermeier, C.G., da Fonseca, G.A.B., Skelton, P.H., Cambray, J.A., Lombard, A.T., Benn, G.A., 1995. Kent, J., 2000. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Patterns of distribution and conservation status of freshwater fishes Nature 403, 853–858. in South Africa. South African Journal of Zoology 30, 71–81. Olivieri, S., Bowles, I., Cavalcanti, R.B., Fonseca, G.A.B., Mitterme- Stuckenberg, B.R., 1962. The distribution of the montane palaeogenic ier, R.A., Rostrom, C., 1995. A Participatory Approach to Biodi- element in the South African invertebrate fauna. Annals of the Cape versity Conservation: the Regional Priority Setting Workshop. Provincial Museum 11, 119–158. Conservation International, Washington DC. Van Wilgen, B.W., Le Maitre, D.C., Cowling, R.M., 1998. Ecosystem Pence, G.Q.K., Botha, M.A, Turpie, J.K., 2003. Finding the optimal; services, efficiency, sustainability and equity: South Africa’s Work- combination of on- and off-reserve conservation strategies for the ing for Water programme. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 13, Agulhas Plain, South Africa: a financial perspective. Biological 378. Conservation 112, 253–273. Van Nieuwenhuizen, G.D.P., Day, J.A. 2000. Cape Action Plan for Picker, M.D., Samways, M.J., 1996. Faunal diversity and endemicity the Environment: The Conservation of Freshwater Ecosystems in of the Cape Peninsula, South Africa—a first assessment. Biodi- the Cape Floral Kingdom. Freshwater Research Unit, Zoology versity and Conservation 5, 591–606. Department, University of Cape Town. Prochazka, K., Griffiths, C.L., 2000. Cape Action Plan for the Envir- WWF-International, 2000. Ecoregion-based Conservation Approach. onment: Final Report of the Estuarine Component. Zoology WWF, Gland. Department & Marine Biology Research Institute, University of WWF-US, 2000. A Guide to Socioeconomic Assessments for Eco- Cape Town. region Conservation. WWF-US Ecoregional Conservation Strate- Republic of South Africa, 1998. National Water Act No. 36 of 1998. gies Unit, Washington. Governmnet Printer, Cape Town. World Bank, 1998. South Africa: Cape Peninsula Biodiversity Con- Rouget, M., Richardson, D.M., Cowling, R.M., Lloyd, J.W., servation Project: Project Document. World Bank, Washington DC.