Payment for Watershed Services in the Uluguru Mountains‐

Prof. Shadrack Mwakalila, University of Dar es Salaam‐ TANZANIA Email: [email protected]

Conference organised by SAIIA –Johannesburg, 22‐23 October 2013 (EAM)

• EAM stretch from Taita Hills in Kenya to Southern Tanzania. • Has been categorized among the 34 World Biodiversity Hotspots. • The value of EAM water to power generation, water supply to people, and for agriculture is a major incentive for forest conservation in the country. Uluguru Watershed Services

• Water supply for drinking, irrigation and industrial development. • Important for storing carbon storage, • Providing a basis for ecotourism, and • Providing important forest and non‐forest products. Uluguru Watershed Degradation

• Deforestation and watershed degradation at rate of 9%; • Declining in water flow volumes and increasing water turbidity in the Rivers, • Dramatic increase in sediment loading into the river that affect various uses downstream especially Dar es Salaam including high treatment and tariffs’ costs. Causes of Uluguru Watershed degradation

Unsustainable farming and irrigation practices. Encroachment to the Forests and water sources Illegal gold mining. activities in river systems and within forest reserves. Accelerated poverty in local communities. Payments for Watershed Services

• Implemented in the Uluguru Mountains in Tanzania by CARE International in Tanzania and WWF Tanzania Country Office. PWS Programme Objectives: • To establish long term financial investment for watershed conservation.

• To establish payment mechanism Win‐win situation when that improve the quality of life of conserving watershed and vice versa (adopted from upstream communities. Curtis, 2006 Location of pilot project sites

• The PWS program is being piloted in four villages in Kibungo sub‐catchment of the . • Ruvu River is the principal source of water to the City of Dar es Salaam and other towns such as , Kibaha, Mlandizi and Bagamoyo. Implementation of PWS‐Phase I • Identification of Hotspots; Baseline Studies • Identification of sellers and buyers; • The identified buyers were Dar es Salaam Water Supply Cooperate HydrologyInstitutional LivelihoodCost‐benefit (DAWASCO) and Coca Cola Kwanza Limited; • Development Business case and Signing of MoUs btn sellers and buyers. Technical Reports Implementation of PWS ‐ cont.

Phase‐2: • Implementation of land use change interventions: • Agro‐forestry, reforestation, grass strip farming, contour farming, and terracing and riparian zone restoration. • Establishment of a payment mechanism for watershed services. Implementation of PWS ‐ cont.

• Payment mechanisms: • The mechanism aimed at transferring of rewards from those who benefit from the watershed service to those who manage it. • Farmers were paid in cash depending on type of improved land use change (Sustainable Land Management) practices adopted per land size. Flow of payments to farmers

54 Individual DAWASCO Farmers

49 Individual Farmers VILLAGE CARE/WWF

23 Individual COCA COLA Farmers

18 Individual Farmers Benefits of PWS Implementation

Improved soil moisture and land productivity. • The adoption of improved land use change practices enabled local farmers to improve their land productivity. • Terraces reduced run‐off and improved infiltration within the terraces hence increasing soil moisture and nutrients in the area. Improved crop yields Main Indicators Baseline Current Objectives 2009 2012 Crop Increased crop Maize production production 400kg/acre 1600kg /acre Food security Number of meals per 1.5 3.0 day Poverty Increased incomes US$ 50 US$ 500 per reduction season

Health Ability to pay health No Yes services Education Ability to pay school Low Moderate contributions Improved livelihoods

• Farmers through crop production earned a significant amount of cash incomes over $13,000 through selling their crops especially beans, cabbage, tomato and onions at farm gate and markets in Morogoro town. • Communities used the money generated from crop sales to cover basic needs. Benefits to the Environment

• Reduction of soil erosion, sediment load. • Improving soil nutrients to produce more crops per unit area. • Increased land cover by planting timber tree species, agroforestry and fruit tree species. • Incidences of fires have been reduced significantly. Replication of this programme to other areas in Tanzania • The Wildlife Conservation Society of Tanzania is implementing PES in Uluguru Mountains. • WWF‐TCO completed phase I of PWS in . • FAO is assessing the potential of PES in Kagera River. • ICRAF has implemented PES in one part of Ulugurus. • Water act include PES as a conservation instrument. • PES is included in the revised National Forestry Policy. Challenges of PWS implementation • Initial costs are high and thus needs external support to facilitate implementation. • Getting sellers is simple while engaging buyers is not easy. They feel conservation as task of someone else • Tangible impacts of PWS such as increased of water quantity can not be realized over short period of time. Conclusion Successful implementation of PWS requires: • To map services and place economic values on each one • To develop business cases for each ecological service. • To make these business cases acceptable within the Tanzanian political and government circles. • To instigate operational models whereby benefits from ecosystem services are transferred to the managers of the habitats providing the service. • Effective awareness creation all stakeholders about PWS concept. Framework for implementing PES 1. Inventory services, people & landscapes

2. Model & map service production & flows

7. Explore plausible 3. Model & map beneficiaries of scenarios services

4. Map benefits of 5. Map costs of conserving services conserving services

6. Map winners & losers

8. Design mechanisms to capture service values Acknowledgement

• Dosteus Lopa the Programme Manager for CARE International in Tanzania, Morogoro; • Iddi Mwanyoka the Project Executants for WWF Tanzania Country Office, Dar es Salaam.