Report of the SNC Mission Team in Cameroon August 28-July 07, 2007

Introduction

The present report outlines activities, outcomes and lessons learned during the consultative mission in Cameroon, carried out by a WBISD “Sustaining Natural Capital for Growth and Poverty Reduction (SNC) Program. The members of the team (Marian Delos Angeles, TTL, Jonas Mbwangue and Mirella Hernani) received support of Ousmane Seck, TTL of the World Bank CDD and GEF SLM projects in Cameroon, Germaine Mafougong, Assistant Program at the WBCO and the CDD Project Coordination Unit - “Programme National de Développement Participatif” (PNDP) to prepare in-country consultations with the government and the civil society, as well as the workshop with promising stakeholders. The main objectives of the mission was to layout the foundation for the establishment of the SNC Core Team in Cameroon and to define the preliminary vision and related action plan for the integration of the SNC approaches and principles into the national policies, strategies, programs and projects.

1. Activities

a) Preparation of in-country consultations and stakeholders’ workshop

The first meeting was organized on August 29, 2007 with both the WBCO and the CDD Project Coordination Unit (PNDP). During formal briefing sessions with the WBCO Manager and the PNDP Program Coordinator, the PNDP team indicated three areas of interest: medicinal plants, dispute between agriculture and pasture land, and protected areas. The PNDP and SNC Teams thereafter jointly identified the list of target institutions to be consulted and the target audiences to be invited to the July 05, 2007 workshop on “Sustaining Natural Capital for Local Development”.

The so called “Preparatory Group” also prepared the agenda of the July 05 Workshop and letters of invitation for participants to be signed by the WBCO Manager. Before this, a letter announcing WBISD mission was sent to the Ministry of Finance, Planning, Agriculture, Livestock, Forest, Environment and Land Affairs by the WBCO Manager.

On July 2, all letters of invitation to the workshop were signed by the WBCO Manager and sent to the target institutions, together with the related agenda. With the support of the PNDP team, discussions with top government officials and representatives of civil society organizations were arranged. Part of July3 and 4 was devoted to preparing the logistic organization and supportive communications of the July 5 workshop by both WBISD and PNDP teams.

Stakeholders Consultations

The Joint Team WBISD/PNDP met top level government officials and representatives of key NGOs from July 3-6. The government institutions consulted included the following Ministries: Livestock, Fishery and Animal Husbandry, Forest and Nature Protection, Environment and Wildlife, Agriculture and Rural Development, and Planning and Land Management. In each ministerial department, individual consultation meetings were chaired by the Secretary General of the host ministry, assisted by their directors and technical advisors.

The SNC team with support from the PNDP Office consulted representatives of key civil society organizations including one International Organization (WWF-Central Africa Regional Office), one local NGO (Organisation pour l’Environnement et le Développement Durable - OPED), one local research institute (Institut de Recherche Agricole pour le Développement - IRAD) and one academic institution (Dschang Agricultural University - Faculté d’Agronomie et des Sciences Agricoles FASA).

These consultation meetings were an opportunity for WBISD SNC Team to introduce to both government and civil society officials on the principles of the SNC published in the book entitled “Where is the Wealth of Nations” and to share with them the objectives of the regional capacity building program. Strong interest in the SNC motivated the top officials of the government departments and NGOs visited to appoint their senior and key officials participate in the stakeholders’ workshop. Points raised during these consultations include: conflicting areas of concern among the agencies in charge of animal husbandry, agriculture and forests; weakness of government institutions; lack of a coordination mechanism among all stakeholders and few human resources skilled in natural resource management. b) Stakeholders’ Workshop

On July 5, 2007, WBISD and PNDP jointly organized the stakeholders’ workshop under the overreaching theme of “Sustaining Natural Capital for Local Development”. 42 senior officials from government ministries, academia and research institutions, domestic and internationals NGOS, as well as World Bank funded project staff attended the workshop. They represented a mix of expertise including economists, demographers, sociologists, agronomists, livestock specialists, land and natural resource specialists. After the opening session led by Mr. Ousmane Seck, TTL of the WB-CDD and GEF SLM projects and Mrs. Marie Madeleine Nga, the CDD Program Manager, the workshop proceeded in four main sessions.

In the first session, the CDD Deputy Program Manager (Vincent Gweth) and the SLM Project Coordinator (Georges Nkami) respectively presented to the target audience the results and lessons learned from the first two (02) years of operation of the CDD Project and the implementation framework of the SLM project. This phase was followed by questions from participants and answers from speakers which included: which criteria were used to select areas of intervention; how to ensure the sustainability of the infrastructure (schools, health care centers, roads, etc); which strategy is being developed to mobilize additional funding to expand the coverage of the project at the national level.

In the second session, the three WBISD SNC speakers (Marian Delos Angeles, Mirella Hernani and Jonas Mbwangue) presented the three main pillars of the SNC principles and approaches, which include (a) Valuing Natural Capital, (b) Socio-economic and population dynamics and (c) ecosystem approach in the perspective of sustainable land management. Additionally, the SNC team (Marian Delos Angeles) added some examples from Asian, Latin American, and African countries of applications of natural resources valuation for sustainable land management and forest examples. After usual Q/A period, participants were gathered into two working groups in the third session. The first group was asked to enrich the draft of the implementation methodology of the GEF-SLM project prepared by the CDD Project Coordination Unit and to outline a vision and action plan on “how to mainstream the SNC tools presented by WBISD into the project implementation framework”. While the second group was asked to outline preliminary vision on “how to mainstream the SNC tools into national policy, strategy and programs such as PRSP, Sector Strategies and CAS.

In the last session, both groups presented their reports in PowerPoint format and Marian Delos Angeles, TTL of the SNC Project announced the next steps which include (a) establishing the Cameroon Advisory Group (In-country SNC Steering Committee) and the Technical Group (in- country Analyst Group), (b) refining and finalizing the vision and action plan document as contribution of the Cameroon to the regional workshop and (c) carrying out capacity needs assessment which will be used to develop the training curriculum on SNC.

c) Initial Baseline Survey on SNC Knowledge

A questionnaire to assess the initial knowledge of the participants on SNC was prepared and provided to the participants. 36 participants out of 42 in total responded to the questionnaire. In absolute term 100% of participants responded to the questionnaire, because the six non-respondents were the Staff of the World Bank (04), the CDD Program Manager (01) and the Principal Moderator (01). The questionnaire was filled out by participants after the coffee break during the workshop.

d) Post Workshop Evaluations Sessions

Post-workshop sessions were carried out in two phases. First at the WBCO with Ousmane Seck, WBISD SNC Team drawn lessons learned for this first in-country clinic and the ways to move forward. Mr. Seck also suggested that the team interact with Mr. Erick Fernandez, Senior Advisor to ARD, on his initiative in Burundi where specific tools are being used for assessing natural resources. During a post-workshop session held at the CDD Project Coordination Unit, the team drafted the terms of references (TORs) for the Advisory Group and agreed that WBISD will send to the Advisory Group the TORs for the technical group (Analysts) which would allow them to select CV for potential analysts. The CV for potentials analysts will be submitted to WBISD as guide for selecting the local analyst(s). A timeframe was setup to establishing the in-country groups and finalizing the vision and action plan document.

2. Outcomes

a) Terms of References of the Advisory and Technical Groups were defined

The following TORs were prepared and assigned to the Cameroon SNC Core Team:

Establishment of the Cameroon Consultative Team for Sustaining Natural Capital

Following the conclusions of the workshop on “Sustaining Natural Capital for Local Development” jointly organized by the World Bank and the PNDP on July 05, 2007, a Cameroon Consultative Group for “Sustaining Natural Capital was established.

Composition:

The team is composed of two main sub-groups: The Advisory Committee and the Technical Team (Analysts).

The Advisory Committee will be composed of 10 members including: Economists, Environmentalists, Demographers, Agronomists, Sociologists, Statisticians, Land, Forest and Livestock Specialists. They include top level senior government officials appointed by their Ministries and a mix of representatives of respectful international NGO.

Members of the Technical Team are also a mix of the above multidiscipline. An initial number of 5 key resource specialists would be recommended.

Meetings

The Advisory Group will convene the meeting with a calendar that matches with availability of their members. The participation of the Technical Group to the meetings is mandatory.

Attributions:

The Advisory Group will: • Facilitate the mainstreaming of the principles and approaches of SNC into national policies, strategies and programs in general, and in the implementation of the natural resource projects in particular, especially the GEF-Sustainable Land Management (SLM) project and the “Programme Sectoriel Foret et Environnement “ (PSFE) project. • Provide advisory support for the implementation of the GEF-SLM project, notably on legal, policy and institutional aspects. • Develop advocacy actions toward policy decision-makers and other various actors in order to impulse and accelerate the land reform process.

To perform their work, the Advisory Group will identify and recruit promising analysts who will be members of the Technical Team.

The Technical Team will: • Carry out analytical works, based on the SNC principles, and propose related policy recommendations and options for their implementation • Draft policy memos to be addressed to policy-makers for actions change on SNC issues • Prepare pedagogical materials with pertaining data to be communicated to policy-makers during consultative meetings, workshops or forum planned and organized by the Advisory Group. • Serve as resource speakers in the consultative meetings, workshops and forum with policy and decision-makers. • Prepare training materials and train local service providers involved in the implementation of natural resource programs/projects, notably the GEF-SLM Project.

b) The Baseline data on preliminary knowledge of participants on SNC issues was collected. These data will be processed and integrated in the needs assessment document which will be used to prepare the training curriculum on key SNC issues. In total, 36 questionnaires were filled out by the participants. c) The CDD (PNDP) Coordination Unit under the administration of the GEF-SLM Project Coordinator will follow up the progress of the SNC Core Team in Cameroon.

d) Next Steps and Timeframe

• Before July 30, 2007 TORs for Technical Group will be approved by WBISD and sent to the Advisory Group. • By August 20, 2007, List of members of the Advisory Group will be sent to WBISD • By August 20, 2007, beginning of the work of the Technical Group • By September 15, the vision and action plan document will be finalized and submitted to WBISD.

3. Preliminary topics of interest

Below are the main preliminary key points discussed by government officials, NGO representatives, the TTL of the WB-CDD (PNDP) and GEF-SLM Projects, the WB-CDD Project Coordination Unit, and the stakeholders’ workshop held on July 05, 2007.

a) Land Governance

Land use conflicts are the main issues identified by the stakeholders: (1) traditional conflicts between grazers and farmers are becoming more intense because of poor land tenure system and lack of land use planning. This problem is predominant in the northern region of Cameroon (Far North, North and Adamaoua Provinces). The expansion of the cotton production and the internal migration - mainly young males coming from the populated land scarce Far North Province who are looking for farming activities - increase the pressure to the demand of crop lands; and (2) national and international pressure to increase protected areas is also generating conflicts between the Ministries of Agriculture and Livestock and the Ministries of Forest and Environment. Participants expressed the need for capacity building in organizational development and institutional building to address this critical issue of land governance.

In order to address these problems, participants recognized the need of valuing the stock of natural resources and creating coordination & conflict resolution mechanisms among different government agencies for better land use planning. Participants mentioned that capacity building programs should address land-use conflicts and target a core team of economists and environmental specialists in various tools of “Valuing Natural Capital”, Cost/Benefit Analysis Approach of Sustainable Land Management, Socio-Demographic and, Ecosystem Perspective of Natural Resource Management.

b) SNC approach for Local Development

Government officials and NGOs representatives identified ecotourism, crop (including medicinal plants), and livestock production as main sources of income of the rural poor. Participants emphasized the need of user-friendly toolkits and manuals for practitioners managing local projects to incorporate the “Sustaining Natural Capital” principles and approach to crop /pasture lands and protected areas. This should take into consideration synergies between formal and customary land laws.

c) Climate change adaptation and innovation

Participants also expressed their interest in understanding aspects of land policy and rural land reform in other to shift from subsistence agriculture to high-value commercial agriculture, and exploring agricultural techniques that adapt well to climate change.

Participants also mentioned that at the community level, farmers are skeptical to adopt innovations in sustainable land management. This is because farmers do not have information regarding the costs and benefits of new innovations and technologies. Therefore, capacity building programs for extension workers should include Cost/Benefit Analysis of Sustainable Land Management projects. 4. Lessons Learned

a) The engagement of the WB TTL is very crucial for working with the country counterparts. At this point, the active involvement of Ousmane Seck, TTL of the WB’s CDD and GEF Projects was paramount to facilitate the collaboration with the Project Coordination Unit and consultation with the government officials and the civil society. The team also received secretariat, administrative and logistic support from the WBCO and WB-CDD (PNDP) Project Coordination Unit, via the assistance of the TTL. b) Individual Consultation meetings with senior government officials (General Secretary, Technical Advisors and Directors) and Managers of International Organizations were very successful in mobilizing high level quality of participants, and therefore, showing political support. c) The strategy to link the SNC Program to existing World Bank support Project is a good entry point for the implementation of in-country activities. This strategy also promoted the ownership of the project by the country team. d) More African cases/examples were demanded by our counter parts. There is a need to show progress of the SNC analysis in this part of African countries in the next activities through locally generated case studies.

4. Annexes

Annex 1: List of Participants Annex 2: Agenda of the Workshop Annex 3: SNC Program Summary Note-French version Annex 4: PNDP presentation Annex 5: SNC Presentations-WBISD Part I Annex 6: SNC Presentations-WBISD Part II Annex 7: Guidelines for group works Annex 8: Presentation of Group A Annex 9: Presentation of Group B Annex 10: Summary report of the field visits Annex 11: Matrix- overview of products and outcomes of SNC team visits to target countries Annex 1: List of Participants Liste de presences

Atelier d'Echange sur la Valorisation des Ressources Naturelles por le Developpement Local Yaounde, le 5 july 2007

Nom Organisme Function Email Telephone

1 AMBASSA-KIKI Raphael IRAD Chercheur Agro-pedologue [email protected] 99831437

2 BALOMOG Pierre PNDP/RPSE/CE DPSE [email protected] 75281951 Chef cellule des projets 3 BELLE Sossoh MINADER [email protected] 99944216 participatifs 4 BENGONO BELINGA Hyrceinte MINEFI 75835779

[email protected] / 77934907 / 5 BOYOGUENO Alphonse PNDP RSE [email protected] 99896480 7746074 / MINADER/DEPC/CPP/Unite des Consultant en politique et [email protected] / 6 DEBAZOU Yantio Yantio 6849430 / programes de RN evaluation de developpement [email protected] 2000841 +1 202 7 DELOS ANGELES Marian S. World Bank Sr. Environmental Economist [email protected] 4739527 8 DJILO Gabriel MINIPLAPDAT Charge d'Etude [email protected] 9585168

9 DZOKOU Joseph Celestin PNDP

Chef Service Promotion 10 ELOUNDOU Eloundou MINEPIA [email protected] 9880189 Innovations 11 FONGNZOSSIE Evariste OPED Chercheur [email protected] 77207532

12 GWETH Jean Vincent PNDP Coordinateur National Adjoint [email protected] +1 202 13 HERNANI Mirella World Bank Consultant [email protected] 4581490 OPED - organisation pour 77602383 / 14 KEMAJOU SYAPZE Jonas l'Environnement et le Developpement Directeur [email protected] 22003506 Durable MINFOF - Ministere des Forets et de la 99460315 / 15 KIBONGO AGNES EBANGA Nee Cadre/DCP [email protected] Faune 22034877 16 KNETCHE Inst National de la Statistique Sous-Direction [email protected] 22220788

17 KOLOKO Marie-Yvette MINREX Cadre a l'Inspection Generale [email protected] 99838770

18 KOUATCHOU Medard MINIPLAPDAT Charge d'etudes DPD [email protected] 77743976

MINFOF - Ministere des Forets et de la Rep.coordinateur PSFE (Chef 19 LONO Daniel [email protected] 77223604 Faune - PSFE Cellule de Suivi / SG) 20 MANDA Raphael MINEFI CEA CS/SG [email protected] 77765606 MINFOF - Ministere des Forets et de la Chef Cellule Programmation 21 MARFOR TANGALA Alphonse [email protected] 77625228 Faune et Projets 22 MASSO Diendonne MINIPLAPDAT CEA/CAPR/DADR [email protected] 75527077

23 MATIP NOUGA Francis D. MINIPLAPDAT/DAT CEA/CESA [email protected] 77727951

MINIPLAPDAT - Division d'Appui au 24 MBAMBAND Jael Christine CEA [email protected] 99953691 Developpement regional et Local 25 MBWANGUE Jonas World Bank Consultant [email protected] [email protected] / 77400646 / 26 MIMCHE Honore IFORD - Univ. Yde II-SOA Enseignant Chercheur [email protected] 99873688 Coordinateur technique du 27 MOTTO MALLO Jean Guy Programme Desertification MINEP [email protected] 99703511 programme LCD MINFOF - Ministere des Forets et de la 28 MUNAKWA Emmanuel Directeur PFNL [email protected] 99953348 Faune Chercheur et responsable 29 NANA Richard OPED [email protected] 99525508 Etudes socio-economiques 30 NDOMBOL Piere MINDAF Sous-Directeur du budget 96505360

31 NGWEN Ngangue MINIPLAPDAT Chercheur C/CDNT [email protected] 77379101 Socio-environnementaliste - 32 NKAMI George PNDP [email protected] 75281946 PNDP

33 NKWINKWA Robert MINFOF Cadre a la DCP / MINFOF [email protected] 77719757 [email protected] / 34 NONO Yomi Nee MINDUH CEA/DEPCCEP 77530230 [email protected] MINEP - Ministere d'Environnement et de 35 POUKA M. Margaret Isabelle Chargee d'Etudes A [email protected] 77601715 la Protection de la Nature 36 TAMZE Victorine IMPM / Focal / MINRESE Chercheur [email protected] 99526333 775000440 / 37 TANJONG Tabe EBANGA_OROCK WWF-CARPO Senior Policy Officer [email protected] 77500035

38 TCHATCOUANG Roger MINIPLAPDAT Cadre [email protected] 75798526 [email protected] / 39 TCHOUALAK PECHEN Yves Narcisse MINIPLAPDAT/DABR CEA/CAPR 99743581 [email protected] Enseignant, chercheur 40 TCHOUAMO Isaac Roger OPED / Universite de Dschang CRESA [email protected] 99572491 Developpement 41 TEKEUBENG Apol. MINADER Cadre d'Appui 99735423

42 TENTCHOU Jean CARFAD Agro Socio-Economiste [email protected] 77780028 Annex 2: Agenda of the Workshop

ATELIER D’ECHANGES SUR LA VALORISATION DES RESSOURCES NATURELLES POUR LE DEVELOPPEMENT LOCAL Jeudi 05 juillet 2007 Hôtel Djeuga – Yaoundé

Organisé conjointement par la Banque Mondiale et le Programme National de Développement Participatif

PROGRAMME DE L’ATELIER

08h30 – 08h45 Arrivée et inscription des participants dans la salle

08h45 – 09h15 Présentation des participants et attentes et Introduction à l’atelier (Informations pratiques, Objectifs, Déroulement)

09h15 – 09h30 Mots de bienvenue du TTL / Coordonnateur du Projet de Gestion Durable des Terres et des Systèmes Agro-Sylvopastoraux (PNDP)

09h30 – 10h00 Présentation du PNDP/Lien avec les Projets de Gestion des Ressources Naturelles

10h00 – 10h30 Présentation de la méthodologie de mise en œuvre du PNDP

10h30 – 11h00 Echanges sur le PNDP

11h00 - 11h15 Pause rafraîchissants

11h15 – 11h30 Questionnaire

11h30 – 12h00 Présentation du Programme de Gestion du Capital Naturel pour le Développement Durable (SNC)

12h00 – 12h40 Valorisation du Capital Naturel : Exemple des études de cas Internationales

12h40 – 13h00 Echanges sur le SNC et études de cas

13h00 – 14h00 Pause Déjeuner

14h00 – 16h00 Travaux en groupe

16h00 – 17h00 Présentation des travaux de groupe

17h00 – 17h30 Conclusions de l’atelier / Etape suivante Annex 3: SNC Program Summary Note-French version

Programme de Gestion du Capital Naturel Plan de Développement sur le Renforcement des Capacités pour un Plan d’Action et de Réformes des Politiques

La plupart des pays en Afrique Sub-saharienne ƒ Empêcher, prévenir et stopper la dégradation des dépendent de manière considérable de leurs terres; ressources naturelles pour leur subsistance de base ƒ Maximiser les avantages et profits obtenus de mais aussi pour leur développement économique. Il l’exploitation des terres et des ressources existe deux facteurs principaux-les changements naturelles à l’endroit des pauvres ou climatiques à l’échelle globale et les tendances communautés marginalisées, spécialement les démographiques avec une croissance et un taux femmes, permettant ainsi d’améliorer leur d'urbanisation élevé-pouvant mettre en péril la sécurité alimentaire et également leurs revenus durabilité des ressources naturelles. en milieu rural. ƒ Améliorer la productivité agricole, des ressources Ces facteurs doivent être adaptés afin de soutenir la naturelles mais aussi de leur gestion durable en croissance économique et la réduction de la Afrique Sub-saharienne (ASS). pauvreté. Les pays d’Afrique Sub-saharienne devront investir non seulement dans la conservation Le programme vise dix pays en ASS qui sont le de leur capital naturel, mais aussi dans une Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroun, Ghana, Kenya, utilisation efficace et durable de leurs ressources en Liberia, Nigeria, Sénégal, Tchad, et la Guinée investissant sous d'autres formes de capitaux tels le Bissau. capital social, culturel, institutionnel, produit, financier et humain. Ces interdépendances Les Principaux Composants du Programme de constituent les points essentiels du « Programme Gestion du Capital Naturel sont: de Gestion du Capital Naturel pour un Développement Durable en Afrique Sub- Le développement d’outils de connaissance conçu a saharienne». partir du travail analytique en matière de valorisation économique des ressources naturelles et environnementales, tels des articles analytiques L'objectif global de cette initiative de sur le capital naturel, des études de cas et développement d’une durée de vingt-deux-mois est également un programme d’études préliminaires. d'établir une masse critique de ressources humaines, d’outils, d’approches, et de voies de L’établissement d’un forum sur le Capital Naturel transmission afin de renforcer les capacités et de avec un niveau élevé d’interaction entre les mettre en application les principes de gestion différents pays choisis soit pour une analyse de environnementale présentées dans cet ouvrage scenario, de bonnes pratiques, de développement récemment publie et intitulé «où se trouve la de vision commune ou de planification richesse des nations?». environnementale.

Le programme est aligné en partenariat avec Mise en place d’un Programme de Développement TerrAfrica, le plan d'action pour l’Afrique de la National et Régional en établissant les capacités banque mondiale, le département de la région institutionnelles et humaines nécessaires à la Afrique en matière de stratégie rurale, aussi bien formation dans les domaines des sciences que le plan d'action environnemental du NEPAD, qui économiques, environnementales, de gouvernance, ont tous comme but commun d’élargir l’étendue des démographiques, de gestion des ressources terres en Afrique sous un régime de gestion durable naturelles à l’échelle de l’écosystème, de gestion de à l’échelle de l’écosystème. projets, d’interventions d’ONG, et de différents types de travaux communautaires. La contribution de ce programme serait d'établir une capacité analytique en matière de gestion des Equipe Gestion du Capital Naturel ressources naturelles et environnementales au sein For more information about the SNC program, visit: d’institutions locales et d’unités d’exécution des http://www.worldbank.org/wbi/environment/snc [email protected] projets de la Banque avec pour mission à long [email protected] [email protected] terme de contribuer à: Annex 4: PNDP presentation

AtelierAtelier dd’échanges’échanges sursur lala valorisavalorisationtion desdes ressourcesressources naturellesnaturelles pourpour lele DDéveloppementéveloppement locallocal

Yaoundé, 05 juillet 2007 Yaoundé, 05 juillet 2007

Présentation de la méthodologie de mise en œuvre du Projet de Gestion Durable des Terres et des Systèmes agrosylvopastoraux dans cadre du PNDP

Georges K. NKAMI, Spécialiste socio- environnementaliste/PNDP

Plan de la présentation

1. Présentation du Projet de Gestion Durable des Terres et des Systèmes agrosylvopastoraux; - Objectif du PGDT; - Zones d’intervention; - Durée et bénéficiaires - Composantes, activités et indicateurs; 2. Approche spécifique de mise en œuvre du PGDT - Données à collecter; - Processus d’élaboration du plan de développement local/communal; - Apport de quelques outils à utiliser

10

1.1. PrPrésentationésentation dudu ProjetProjet dede GestionGestion DurableDurable desdes TerresTerres etet desdes SystSystèmesèmes agrosylvopastorauxagrosylvopastoraux

a) Objectifs du PGDT

- Permettre aux communautés de contribuer à la lutte contre la dégradation des terres dans les zones critiques à travers l’adoption de bonnes pratiques de gestion durable des terres et le développement des capacités, des outils et des mécanismes adéquats;

- Améliorer le fonctionnement des écosystèmes par l’intégration de la gestion durable des terres dans le développement local et la réduction de la perte de la biodiversité dans les écosystèmes agrosylvopastoraux fragiles

b)b) ZonesZones d’interventiond’intervention

Provinces Communes Caractéristiques/ Problématique Ngaoundéré, -Embuissonnement des Adamaoua pâturages et surpâturage; Meiganga, Tignère, -Destruction des forêts galeries Ngaoundal, Mayo-Darlé - Infestions par les glossines Nord Mayo-Oulo, Guider, -Désertification ; Pitoa, Lagdo, Tcholliré -Forte migration -Ensablement -Conflits entre el/agr./faune Centre Yoko, Batschenga, -agriculture itinérante sur brûlis, Okola - Déforestation; -Conflits Ouest Bangangté, magba, - Erosion hydrique; Kouoptamo, Santchou - perte de la biodiversité; - surpâturage, conflits 04 provinces 17 communes

11

c) Durée et bénéficiaires

{ Durée: 04 ans (àcompter 01 décembre 2006)

{ Bénéficiaires:

Bénéficiaires directs: - les communautés à la base, ou les Organisations de

producteurs (ayant un statut légal); - les communes

Bénéficiaires indirects: - Les administrations publiques;

- les ONG ; - les structures privées ;

- les institutions de recherche

d) Composantes, et sous composantes

Composantes Sous composante

Amélioration de l’intégration de la GDT dans le développement local

Appui institutionnel à la 1. Appui institutionnel au processus de

GDT réforme du régime foncier ( 3 principales activités)

2. Renforcement des capacités au niveau

local (2 principales activités)

Gestion, Coordination, SE et Communication

12 d) Composantes, activités et indicateurs (suite)

Composantes Activités principales Indicateurs et résultats

Amélioration de - identifier les MP sur la base des PDL/PDC; - 60 MP communaux et 150 MP communautaires sont financés; l’intégration de la - cofinancer les MP communautaires et - Amélioration de la fertilité des terres; GDT dans le communaux développement local - augmentation du couvert végétal d’au moins 25 000 ha; - les limites/contours d’au moins 5000 ha d’aires protégées sont réhabilités par les pratiques GDT

Appui institutionnel à - Renforcer les capacités institutionnelles de - Les CNCEDD, CIE, etc. sont fonctionnels; la GDT coordination intersectorielle (CNCEDD, - au moins 05 PUGDT sont élaborés et mis CIE, etc.); en œuvre; -élaborer et mettre en œuvre les plans - Une étude a été réalisée sur la d’utilisation et de gestion durable des pérennisation et le statut des PUGDT; terres (PUGDT) au niveau communal; -Au 100 organisations communautaires - Examiner et soumettre pour adoption des sont capables de mettre en œuvre les textes sur le régime foncier pratiques GDT; - Au moins 6000 ménages ont adopté les - Renforcer les capacités des acteurs pratiques GDT (Communautés, OAL, Communes, -Au moins 10 cadres de résolution de Administrations, CPAC/CPAP); conflits sont opérationnels au niveau - Opérationnaliser les mécanismes de règlement communal des conflits Gestion, -Intégrer les paramètres de dégradation des -le système de Suivi-Evaluation (SE) soit Coordination, SE et terres dans le système de SE du PNDP; adapté Communication -Le SIG est en place et fonctionnel; -Mettre en place un SIG; -au moins 10 meilleures pratiques de GDT -Coordonner, gérer et communiquer sont identifiées et diffusées

2. Approche spécifique de mise en œuvre du PGDT

a) Données à collecter

{ - Mode d’organisation et nombre d’organisations communautaires impliqués dans la GDT; { - population cibles et nombre de ménages; { - état/manifestation de la dégradation des terres (pâturages, lacs, bassins versants, sources de conflits, etc.); { Potentiel, atout de la région { - inventaire des bonnes pratiques dans la commune et niveau d’adoption; { - inventaire/analyse des initiatives et acteurs potentiels de mise en oeuvre (communautés, CPAC/CPAP, partenaires); { Besoins en formation et en développement participatif de technologie { - existence et fonctionnement des cadres/commissions de règlement des litiges agropastoraux { - estimation et composition du couvert végétal; { -présence et état des aires protégées/forêts communautaires ou communales

13

b) Processus d’élaboration du plan de développement local/communal

Que cela soit au niveau communautaire ou communal, le mode opératoire s’articulera autour de 03 phases successives:

{ -Préparation;

{ -Diagnostic;

{ -Planification

Au niveau communautaire (phase du PDL)

{ Préparation

- information et sensibilisation des bénéficiaires;; - Prise de contact avec les bénéficiaires;/Visite exploratoire - Collecte des données de base; - Examen des PDL/PDC existants - Préparation pédagogique de l’intervention au sein de l’équipe de facilitation;

14

{ Diagnostic thématique

- Installation des participants et présentation de l’objet de la mission;

- ISS;

- Carte de synthèse du terroir - Schéma d’aménagement - Transect;

- Inventaire des Atouts/potentialités et contraintes

- Liste des problèmes importants; - Application de l’outil 4R (Droits (rights), Responsabilités, Revenus/Bénéfices, Relations)

{ Planification

- Analyse des problèmes (arbre à problèmes, etc.); - Élaboration du plan d’aménagement de la région; - Identification des besoins en formation et de développement participatif de technologies; - Mise en place/élargissement du comité de concertation - Identification du MP prioritaire

Esquisse du plan d’aménagement

Unité de paysage Caractéristiques Utilisations Potentialités Contraintes Actions à actuelles entreprendre

15

Au niveau communal

{ Préparation

- information et sensibilisation des bénéficiaires;;

- Prise de contact avec les bénéficiaires;/Visite exploratoire - Collecte des données de base, y compris des différentes cartes de la région

- Examen et exploitation des PDL/PDC existants - Préparation pédagogique de l’intervention au sein de l’équipe de facilitation;

- Diagnostic institutionnel de la commune; - Mise en place/élargissement du comité de suivi

{ Diagnostic et planification - Installation des participants et présentation de l’objet de la mission; - ISS - Matrice de Diagnostic des ressources naturelles - Identification du MP prioritaire

- Structure de la matrice diagnostic Ressource Statut Potentiel Acteurs Contrôleurs Mode de Tendances Actions à d’exploitation -stock dans de gestion entreprendre s l’exploitation l’exploitatio par la /Localisation naturelles n commune

- Sols

-Forêts, etc.

16

c) Apport de quelques outils à utiliser

Outils Livrables ISS, Enquêtes - Mode d’organisation, et nombre d’organisations communautaires, Populations cibles, nombre de ménages, ISS, Carte du terroir, Schéma Etat/manifestation de la dégradation d’aménagement, Transect Carte synthèse du terroir, Atout, potentialités SEPO, ISS, Enquêtes Transect, ISS Inventaire des bonnes pratiques, niveau d’adoption, et superficies concernées, estimation couvert végétal Transect, ISS, carte du terroir Présence et état des aires protégées ISS, transect Identification des besoins en formation, sensibilisation en pratiques GDT, et Plan d’aménagement Identification des besoins en formation-sensiblisation, en développement participatif de technologies Identification des MP Matrice de Diagnostic des Identification des besoins en formation-sensiblisation, ressources naturelles Identification des MP

ISS, Enquêtes, travail en Collecte des données diverses (canevas type, cahier de groupe charge, etc.)

Je vous remercie pour votre aimable attention

17 Annex 5: SNC Presentations-WBISD – Part I

Valorisation du Capital Natural pour le Développement Local au Cameroun

Atelier d’Echange

Yaoundé, 5 Juliet 2007

ObjectifsObjectifs

Etablir une Masse Critique de: „ Ressources Humaines „ Outils et Approches Pour une gestion environmentale efficace basée sur les principes de l’ouvrage intitulé Ou se trouve la Richesse des Pays? afin de contribuer:

„ Freiner la dégradation des terres „ Maximiser les bénéfices issus de l’exploitation des terres et des ressources naturelles „ Améliorer la productivité agricole ainsi que celle des ressources naturelles pour un développement durable en Afrique Sub-Saharienne. 18

1010 PaysPays ParticipantsParticipants

GroupesGroupes Identifiééss

„ Economistes en Ressources Naturelles „ Chercheurs „ Directeurs de Projets „ ONGs et autres organisations de la Société Civile „ Parlementaires

19

ZonesZones d’IntIntéérêtsrêts

„ Valorisation du Capital Naturel

„ Perspectives de l’Ecosystème et

Gestion Durable des Terres

„ Dynamique démographique

ExpectedExpected OutcomesOutcomes

„ A strategy to Convince Policy and Decision Makers of the critical role of the Natural Resource Base in Fighting Poverty and Secure Environmental Sustainability (Reaching MDGs 1 and 7) „ A National Capacity to Train and Educate Different target groups in Efficient Management of Natural Resources Based on the Principles in Where is the Wealth of Nations?

20

WorkshopWorkshop ResultsResults

„ A Common Understanding of the

Outcomes of the SNC Program

„ A Preliminary Outline of a Burkinabe

Vision Paper related to the three

Focus Areas (Valuing Natural Capital, Ecosystem Approach to SLM, and demographic dynamics)

„ Agreement on Primary Authors and

Reviewers of Draft Contributions

Les Bases Théoriques du Programme de Gestion du Capital Naturel pour un Développement Durable

Ou se trouve la Richesse des Pays: Une Mesure du Capital au 21éme Siécle

La Banque Mondiale, 2006

21

PourquoiPourquoi lesles ComptesComptes ““vertsverts””??

„ La prise en compte standard des ressources à

l’échelle nationale considére uniquement les produits finis– les ressources naturelles étant

considérées de maniére incompléte.

„ Exploitation des ressources naturelles considérée Exploitation des ressources naturelles considérée comme source de revenues

„ Dégats engendrés par la pollution et l’exploitation des ressources naturelles ne sont

pas pris en considération

Example – Mauritania

„ During the first half of the 1980s fish catch in Mauritania grew strongly from around 20,000 tons in 1980 to nearly 90,000 tons in 1987. „ Current indicators – employment, foreign exchange earnings, and budget revenues – all grew strongly. „ But the fishery collapsed from over-exploitation: exports grew at a real 7.5% per year over 1980- 87, but shrank -2.3% per year from 1987-2000. „ The wellbeing of Mauritanians benefiting from the export fishery could not be sustained. „ Measuring assets – fish stocks – could have signaled the impending collapse.

22

Eléments du Portefeuille de Capitaux

„ Capital Produit

„ mineraux, forêts, terre) Ressources Naturelles (mineraux, forêts, terre)

„ Capital Intangible

• Capital humain

• Institutions / gouvernance

OuOu estest lala richesserichesse dede Cameroun? (US$/capita) - 2000

23

Distribution du Capital

par Categorie de Pays (2000)

Valorisation des Ressources Naturelles par Capita (2000)

24

Facteurs expliquant le Capital Intangible Factors explaining intangible capital

Foreign remittances

7%

Schooling 36% 57% Rule of law

Taux net (réel) de Sauvegarde Ajusté AdjustedAdjusted net (genuine) savingsaving Bolivia, 2003 % GNI 15

10 Depreciation of fixed capital Education Depletion of 5 exp. natural resources

0

Pollution damages -5 Gross saving Net saving Net saving plus Genuine saving Genuine saving educ. exp. exc. pollution damages

25

Taux Réel de Sauvegarde en Afrique Genuine saving in Sub-Saharan Africa Genuine savingSub- Sahariennein Sub-Saharan Africa

30

25 20

15

10

% of GNI 5

0

1972 1974 1982 1992 1999 -51970 1971 1973 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

-10

Gross saving Net saving Genuine saving

Lorsque l’épuisement des ressources et la croissance de la population sont pris en compte, la majorité des pays à faible revenus font face à une diminution des richesses par capita Genuine Saving / capita vs.vs. Population growth rate 0.4

0.2

0 -3.0% -2.0% -1.0% 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0%

-0.2

-0.4 Change in wealth / GNI

-0.6

-0.8 Population growth rate, %

26

Population variables

Three population variables will significantly change the balance between people and natural resources in Burkina Faso in the coming decades

1-Population growth and size

2-Population structure

3-Population movement and distribution

The dependency ratio (ratio of young and old people to people in the productive ages) is large. Implication: relatively few people have to provide for dependents

Total population: 17 300 000

27

Cameroon ’s population is young. Implication: A very large population group will soon enter the productive ages. This can either be a blessing or a constraint,

depending on policies and governance.

Total Estimated population: 24 300 000

Population movement and distribution

„ In 1990, the 40.70% of the Cameroonian population was urban. In 2005, 54.6%. The trend towards increasing ururbanizationbanization will almost certainly continue. Implication: Different use of natural resources

„ Rural-urban migration tends to be age- and sex- selective, with the overwhelming majority being young and male. Implication: Gender issues, legal and institutional questions

28

Conclusions I

„ Le capital naturel est significativement plus large que le

capital produit

„ Environ 70% du capital naturel dans

les pays à faible revenus proviennent d’ activités agricoles

„ La valeur de la richesse naturelle totale par personne augmente en

fonction du revenu

Conclusions II

„ Le Processus de Développement débute par le Capital Naturel

„ Les profits (revenus) issus de l’utilisation/ exploitation sont investis dans les capitaux Produits et Intangible (Ressources Humaines, Institutions)

29

Dans les pays fortementfortement

dependant des ressources naturelles renouvables, le PIB varie en fonction de la

pluviométrie

Exemple Ethiopia: pluviométrie, PIB & PIB Ag

25 20 15

10 5 0

% 0 -5 -20 1987 1991 1992 1984 1986 1988 1989 1990 1993 1994 1982 1983 1985 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 -10 year -15 -40 rainfall variability -20 -60 GDP growth -25 Ag GDP growth -80 -30

Source: A Country Water Resources Assistance Strategy for Ethiopia (Sadoff)

30

Les Sources de revenus issuesissues de

l’ expansion des activités agricoles sont plus

bénéfiques aux population pauvres

Une croissance de la production céréaliére génére une réduction du taux de pauvreté en Asie du Sud – Alors qu’ avec une stagnation de la production céréaliére en ASS, l’on observe une stagnation du taux de pauvreté de 1987-2001

31

L’expansion de la production céréaliére sous différentes directions en Afrique

Sub-Saharienne & en Asie (1961-65=100)

Les Systémes Agricoles en Afrique n’étant pas sur une voie de Développement Durable

Précipitations Précipitations D. Commerciale limitant favorisant Intensive et l’intensification l'intensification Specialisée E.Spécialisé dans des activités C. Semi- Commerciales commerciale Extensive Intensive

s Integrée

é

h

s

c

n

r

o

a

i

t

M

u

t B. Semi

x

i t

u -subsistance

s

a

n

I

s

Intégrée

t

é

e

c

c A

A. Subsistance Creation de Zones Pastorale d’Expansion et Agropastorale Tendance Actuelle en et Degradation Afrique Sub-Saharienne des Terres

Pression de la Population

32

Pr écipitations and Performance Economique

à Andhra Pradesh, Inde

40% %Growth of AGDP 35% %Growth of GSDP %Dev of rainfall from Normal 30%

25% 20% 15% 10%

5% 0% -5% 95 96 98 99 00 02 9 -10% 1993 1994 19 19 1997 1 19 20 2001 20

Percentage Deviation\Growth -15%

-20% -25% -30% -35%

-40% Source: Banque Mondiale, 2006

QuestionQuestion Essentielle

Quelles sont les conditions, dynamiques et conducteurs fondamentaux nécessaires a l’augmentation de la productivité dans un but de réduire la pauvreté et de générer des revenus pour investir dans le capital produit et intangible, mais aussi pour une Gestion du Capital Naturel pour un Développement Durable ?

33

Perspective d’Ecosystéme pour une Gestion

Durable des Terres

GDT comprend:

1. Recherche et Gestion des Ressources Naturelles dans un systéme social dirigé par les différents dépositaires 2. Gestion et innovation pour améliorer :

• La subsistance • résilience d'agroécosystème • productivité agricole • services environnementaux

Au niveau communautaire et eco-régional

Six Composantes

1. Gestion des Terres au sein de l’Entreprise Agricole

• Contrôle de l’érosion

• Gestion de la fertilité des Sols

• Gestion de l’Eau

• Gestion des pâturage

2. Gestion et/ou restoration des fonctions de l’écosystéme

• Focaliser sur les bassins de captation/rétention

• Retenir/restorer la couverture végétale naturelle

• Etre préparé aux conséquences d’événements extrêmes

• Utiliser les ressources naturelles de facon durable

• Préparer pour les changements climatiques et les désastres naturels

34

Six Composantes (cont…) Six Composantes (cont…)

3. Facteurs Politiques et Institutionels ƒ Improve understanding of policy and institutional factors affecting land management

ƒ Identify promising policy and institutional options ƒ Develop implementation guidelines for policy and institutional interventions

ƒ Monitor and increase awareness of promising interventions in larger areas

ƒ Create opportunities in agro-food trade

4. Harness genetic resources

• Use improved varieties to increase productivity

Six Composantes (cont…)

5. Partage du Savoir-faire et de la Technologie

• Action Research

• Community to Community knowledge sharing 6. Diversify systems and livelihoods

• Introduce new crops (cash and food)

• Start up non-agricultural activities

• “Domesticate” Medicinal Plants

• Agro-food trade

35

Barriers and Bottlenecks to SLM - Root Causes to SLM - Root Causes

Institutional Barriers: „ INRM is not a single institutional issue but requires cooperation across institutions such as agriculture, environment, local government, rural development, finance and between local stakeholders groups such as men. women, herders, cultivators

Policy Barriers: „ INRM requires tenure arrangements conducive to investments in improved land management

„ INRM requires access to credit to invest in improved resource management

„ INRM requires access to markets for farm and other produce/products and inputs

Barriers and Bottlenecks to SLM - Root Causes (cont(cont…)

Insufficient allocation and harmonization of both domestic and international financing: „ Funds are often not targeted at the full range of factors that underpin successful INRM „ Investments are often not sustasustainedined long enough to achieve results Lack of knowledge and disconnects between the research community and the extension services and farmers: „ Build on traditional knowleknowledgedge and merge it with new knowledge

36

Barriers and Bottlenecks to SLM - Root Causes (cont…) to SLM - Root Causes (cont…)

Lack of capacity to disseminate knowledge, replicate good practices and to address shortcomings in the enabling environment:

„ Linked to the above issue are Insufficient analysis of economic and socio-cultural

factors underlying land management practices: „ Availability and division of labour between men and women, young and old, different social groups to support those without sufficient family labour

„ Access to knowledge

„ Level of education

Pathways to Impact

„ Integrated ecosystems are complex, so outputs are achieved through Development Process Models (DPMs) rather than technological fixes (there is no silver bullet)

„ DPMs can be flexibly adapted elsewhere, triggering a ripple of impact

„ The participatory implementation of DPMs fosters buy-in, builds local capacities and self-reliance to evolve over time, and promotes diversity across locations

37

PathwaysPathways to Impact

„ Solutions will spread IF they improve livelihoods for the poor

„ Participation of stakeholders is necessary

to ensure relevance and uptake

„ Linkages to state, national and regional

institutions, projects and networks, NGOs and private sector will ensure wide

dissemination of the results

Cornerstones for Operationalising an Ecosystem Perspective on SustainableSustainable Land Management

Short-term Explicit scaling- gains through the up strategy-based process itself- Effective facilitation on best bets and coordination no handouts Partnerships but at different levels on mutual trust, respect and ownership by all

Shared Cross-disciplinary problem focus research and Managing an effective development process of implementation teams

Effective communication Organizational strategy capacity for INRM process

Access to pragmatic Clear roles and knowledge (technologies, PAR & learning commitments of policies, process approaches implementing partners institutions) by all partners at each level

38

Integrated Ecosystem Perspective Equilibrium being changed as result of climate change

Natural goods & services sustain agro- ecosystems

•Technology •Climate •Social & •Soil/Water Natural economic Agro- ecosystems •Flora drivers ecosystems

•Fauna •Management/ Governance

Sustainable livelihoods motivate

protection Source: DDPA

BecomeBecome System ThinkersThinkers

http://www.worldbank.org/wbi/environment/snc

39

Annex 6: SNC Presentations-WBISD – Part II

Valuing Natural Capital: Insights from International Examples

M.S. delos Angeles, WBI Yaoundé, 5 Julliet 2007

A. Perspectives from the Millenium Ecosystem Assessment: Ecosystem services typology

„ „Provisioning „Cultural „Goods produced „ Regulating „Non-material or provided by „Benefits obtained benefits from ecosystems from regulation of ecosystems ecosystem processes

40

Photo credits (left to right, top to bottom): Purdue University, WomenAid.org, LSUP, NASA, unknown, CEH Wallingford, unknown, W. Reid, Staffan Widstrand

Provisioning Services

Goods produced or provided by ecosystems

„ Food

„ Crops

„ Livestock „ Capture Fisheries

„ Aquaculture

„ Wild Foods „ Fiber „ Timber

„ Cotton, hemp, silk „ Wood Fuel „ Genetic resources

„ Biochemicals

„ Freshwater „ Recreation and Ecotourism

Photo credit (top): Tran Thi Hoa (World Bank), Regulating Services

Benefits obtained from regulation of ecosystem processes

„ Air Quality regulation

„ Climate regulation

„ Global (CO2 sequestration) „ Regional and local „ Erosion regulation

„ Water purification

„ Disease regulation

„ Pest regulation

„ Pollination „ Natural Hazard regulation

„ Habitat

41

Cultural Services

Non-material benefits obtained from ecosystems

„ Spiritual and Religious Values

„ Knowledge Systems

„ Educational values

„ Inspiration

„ Aesthetic Values

„ Social Relations

„ Sense of Place

Photo credits ( top to bottom): W. Reid, Mary Frost, Staffan Widstrand, unknown.

1. Total Economic Value Accounting reveals the relative importance of nature’s goods and services: Tanzania’s Conservation Forest Reserves, 2001 (Source: G. Lange, 2006) 000's of US$ % of total Commercial wood 901 3% Non-market wood and wood prods. 5,860 17% Non-market NTFP 1,696 5%

Forest Services 75% Fodder/grazing 12,657 37% Tourism 1,188 3% Water supply protection 5,021 15% Soil protection 1,870 5% Carbon storage 5,087 15% Total$ 34,282 100% 42

2. Distribution of Forest Benefits

Why do we care?

Distribution guides policymakers toward setting priorities for forest investment and management

„ Commercial enterprises vs. community forests

„ Downstream beneficiaries of forest services: how to set charges for water, soil protection services

„ International beneficiaries: setting fees for tourism

Source: G. Lange (2006)

B. PROVISIONING SERVICES: Insights from Economic Analysis

„ Production function approach „ Households as producers „ Crops, livestock, collection of natural products, etc. „ Firms „ Government „ Others: NGOs, civil society

„ Welfare impacts: quality of life

43

1. Careful accounting shows possibilities for improving

capture of Natural Resource Rents

„ Bulk of potential revenue Mongolia

from fossil fuel and Paraguay mineral rents probably Chad already captured Lao PDR „ Large potential in Guyana

forestry (in forest-rich Gabon countries) Guinea-Bissau ƒ $9 billion in revenue Papua New Guinea mostly uncaptured Central African Rep. ƒ Encourage more Solomon Islands sustainable practices ƒ Similar results for tourism 0123456 Potential timber revenues as % GDP in nature parts

From: K Hamilton 2. Full accounting shows who benefits from payments to nature-based activities: Namibia Parks (Source: J. Barnes, 2006)

„ The total income is paid out to different ‘factors of production’ Taxes - subsidies on production & products 17% Skilled labour Rent/royalties 13% to Communal lands 3%

Unskilled labour Gross operating 16% surplus 43% Mixed income, commercial agriculture 5% Mixed income, traditional agriculture 4%

44

3.0 Namibia’s Parks 3.1 Mapping accommodation

expenditures

NWR Resorts :N$ 52 m Adjacent to PAs (red dots): N$ 192 m Rest of Namibia (blue dots): N$ 147-560 m

Source: J. Barnes, 2006

3.2 Who owns / controls these resources in Namibia? Source: Adapted from J. Barnes. 2006

„ 46% freehold „ contains ~80% of large game

„ 36% communal „ contains ~9% of large game

„ 18% state (mostly PAs) Source: Adapted from J. Barnes. 2006

45

3.3 How are Namibia Parks expenditures distributed? Source: Adapted from D. Barnes (2006)

Shopping 14%

Recreation/Cultural 6% Handicrafts Accommodation 3% 35%

Tour Operators/Guides 4% Domestic Travel 3%

Car Rental 7% Meals and drinks 28%

3.4 How important is good park and wildlife resources to Namibia?: the Impact on GDP Source: Adapted from J. Barnes, 2006

How does park tourism contribute to GDP? „ (a) direct GDP (value added) „ The total turnover in park tourism sector (tourist expenditures) less costs of inputs from other sectors (raw materials, food, etc.) „ = Returns to internal factors (labour and capital) „ (b) indirect GDP (value added) „ Further value added due to demand created by tourism sector activities in other sectors of the economy (e.g. roofing thatch) „ Measured through an income multiplier

46

3.5 Estimating total Parks’ contribution to GDP: Namibia Source: J. Barnes (2006)

Lower Upper „ Used a Social bound Bound Accounting Matrix (SAM) Park tourism N$ 1 172 m N$ 2 332 m expenditure „ a tool designed for economic impact analysis Direct N$ 546 m N$ 1 103 m „ Expanded version of contribution to national accounts that (1.7%) (3.4%) GDP* quantifies linkages among all parts of economy Total N$ 1 013 m N$ 2 022 m „ Recently constructed SAM contribution to (3.1%) (6.3%) was modified to include GDP more detail on park tourism „ Impact on economy N$ 1 Multiplier 1.86 1.83 013 - 2 022 m (total : direct impact) * GDP in 2003 = N$32 309 million

4. South Africa 4.1 Soil erosion concerns (Source: A. Bouzaher (2006), based on SA Dept. Agriculture)

Type of erosion and Seriousness of Erosion and Area affected Total (ha) land use Serious Moderate Not significant (ha) (ha) (ha) Wind 415 001 1 325 749 1 427 088 13 370 469 - Cultivated land 569 524 1 700 436 7 932 671 - Pastures Water 930 735 2 258 193 2 886 727 16 978 705 - Cultivated land 801 288 3 128 613 6 973 149 - Pastures Total 30 349 174 Nutrient loss from N: 3 kg N: 1.5 kg Erosion P: 2.4 kg P: 1.2 kg (per hectare) K: 33 kg K: 16 kg

Productivity US$ 50 US$ 81 replacement cost (US$ million)

47

4.2 Forests (green) next to degraded land (red)

Source: A. Bouzaher (2006)

5. Philippines: Reforming Pasture Lease Fees (Source: Philippine Environmental and Natural Resources Accounting Project, 1999)

„ 1939-1982 : 25 to 60 centavos/hectare „ 1982 : one peso/hectare „ 1993 : 15 to 20 pesos/hectare „ 1998 : nationwide study on land rent, site differences, measures to mitigate degradation, and alternative land uses „ 1999 new fees: 200 to 500 pesos/hectare „ BUT Executive Order was rescinded in 2001 by new President

Fully consider political economy of resource price reforms

48

6. Estimating Changes in Natural Capital: Land Concepts and Approaches, On-site Uses

„ Change in the physical attributes of land for

a particular use

„ Change in the productivity of the land for this particular use

„ Change in net value (land rent) of land

„ + , appreciation

„ -, depreciation

„ Adaptation to degradation through

amelioration, rehabilitation or relocation

6.1 Change in the physical attributes of land for a particular use

„ Land for agriculture: crops and livestock „ Soil structure, depth, nutrients, permeability, temperature „ Water table, availability, and quality „ Exposure to wind „ Risk from pests and rodents „ Distance to markets, transport costs „ What is the limiting factor?

49

6.2 Change in the productivity of the land

for specific uses: crops, livestock, trees, medicinal plants, combinations

„ Production = f (economic inputs, land attributes, t)

„ Productivity of an input = output per unit input, at the margin, other things being equal

„ Examine production function estimates that include

environmental attributes to discern Dose-Response relationships

„ Including impacts of climate variability and climate change

„ Examine production costs including unpaid labor

6.3 On-site Costs of Degradation

At any point in time t: „ Gross returns (P X Q) are affected by „ Price changes (as influenced by quantity and quality) „ Quantity changes „ Costs are affected by changes in P and Q of each input „ Net returns = GR – C NPV „ = Sum of discounted values of (expected) net returns over time, T „ T depends on how long such land is expected to be in that particular use

Change in NPV „ < 0 degradation, „ otherwise, it is appreciation

50

6.4 Philippines: Soil Depletion, Land Rent Source: H. Arroceros-Francisco, et al (1994)

NO. OF YEARS Pedo- EFFECTIVE SOIL LOSS TO DEPLETE REGION Ecological SOIL DEPTH (t/ha) Zone (cm) SOIL DEPTH 1CM

VII I 75 114 106 1.1 II 100 27 1.1 III 112 139 1.4 Average 96 91 1.2

Philippines I 95 81 136 1.4

II 91 121 1.4 III 104 148 1.4 Average 97 135 1.4

Average Land Rent in 1993 = P3400/ha >> P800/ha nutrients lost from erosion (1988 prices)

Soil conservation techniques are not adopted spontaneously and en masse because of ‘long’ depletion period, land rent >> value of lost nutrients, and uncertain property rights.

6.5 Alternative Estimates to Degradation

„ Replacement Cost „ for amelioration or rehabilitation „ higher estimate of land degradation

„ Relocation costs „ search costs „ actual cost of moving „ social costs of resettling elsewhere

51

7. Coping with the limiting factor(s)

„ Explore options: land management practices, social processes, financial resources available

„ What are the scenarios for land use at optimal levels of inputs that maximize NPVs „ What is the switching point from one land use to another?

„ What are the social processes that will enable improved, sustainable land uses, associated with adjusting for these limiting factors? „ (non-declining NPVs)

„ What are the transactions costs? „ Information, negotiations, enforcement and monitoring

7.1 Social Aspects of Degradation

„ Appropriation of Net returns or how the land returns are shared affect „ the overall Net Value specially if the monetary value differs to each stakeholder group „ Use different weights of welfare impacts of land use „ Cohesiveness and concensus building mechanisms either help or destroy the ability to realize the total land value „ In situtations where concensus building is feasible the costs of this should also be factored into the calulation of Total Value

52

7.2 The Nature of Degradation Source: A. Bouzaher (2006)

„ Land degradation is a heterogeneous Land degradation is a heterogeneous biophysical process driven by socioeconomic

and political causes, leadingleading to the loss of actual or potential productivity or utility as a result of or potential productivity or utility as a result of natural or anthropic factors

„ Causes of land degradation:

„ Natural fragility

„ Biophysical (land use and land management, including deforestation and tillage methods)

„ Socioeconomic (e.g. landland tenure, marketing, institutional support, incomeincome and human health)

„ Policy (e.g. macro-economic, commodity prices, input markets, trade)

7.3 Poverty-Environment Links: Kenya Source: J. Kabubo-Mariara et. al. PREM 06-06

„ Factors influencing adoption of soil and water conservations activities:

„ Tenure security „ Household assets „ Farm Characteristics „ Presence of village institutions „ Development domain

53

7.4 Ghana: Cost of Land Degradation and Impacts on Poverty Source: X. Diao and D.B. Sarbong, “ Cost Implications of Agricultural Land Degradation in Ghana”, IFPRI Discussion Paper, 2006-98

CROPS and Yield 1993-2003 2003-2015 Scenarios (tons/ha) Ave

Without With Erosion With With Historical Erosion Conventional Modern SLM SLM

Maize 1.50 1.72 1.08 1.60 2.26 Sorghum 0.93 1.19 0.69 1.12 1.28

Cassava 12.40 14.39 10.94 13.92 16.05 Yam 12.50 12.87 10.10 12.49 15.07

Cocoyam 6.56 6.95 3.6 6.38 7.44

Groundnut 1.64 1.25 0.82 1.19 1.64 Pulse 0.95 10.01 0.61 0.95 1.29

Poverty 39.5 23 28.4 23.9 20.5 Rate

C. TOTAL ECONOMIC VALUE: all goods and services; on site and off-site impacts

Total Economic Value

Use Value Non-use Value

Actual Use Altruism, Bequest Option Value Existence

54

Global Values Eco-products Carbon sequestration Migratory species

Source: Philippine ENRAP Mountain & other land –based ecosystems • production • community welfare • biodiversity, habitat • hydrological services • landscape beauty • recreation Urban ecosystems • firms, settlements • infrastructure, transport Natural resource depreciation • waste disposal: Water ecosystems • livelihood impacts production & consumption • user groups • env’l services • similar concerns • vulnerability/risk Air pollution loads; water as other ecosystems flows fishery depreciation • health damages • nonhealth damages • coral reef damages infrastructure,production • direct nature services

Techniques of Environmental Valuation

Revealed Preference Methods : actual behavior - indicates preferences and implies willingness to pay 1. Production function approach 2. Surrogate market approach 3. Travel Cost Method (TCM) 4. Hedonic Pricing (HP) 5. Avertive/coping expenditures Cost-based Approaches 1. Replacement Costs 2. Mitigation Expenditures 3. Potential Avertive expenditures Stated Preference Approaches 1. Contingent Valuation Method (CVM) 2. Cojoint Analysis 3. Choice Experiments Benefits Transfer Method (BTM) : rapid approach - adapt relationships, impacts, values from other sites

55

1. Upper Niger River: Composition of Present Values

with Different Levels of Dam Infrastructure Source: van Beukering et al (2005)

2. Philippines: Economic Values of Three Mangrove Ecosystems NPV US$/Hectare/Year in 1994

Item Old-growth Secondary growth Plantation (Palawan) (Pagbilao) (Bohol)

Wood products: timber and 5,198 2,599 4,434 fuelwood (formal market value) Alternative uses: 4,791 4,679 230 Fish products (formal market 349 918 - values) Informal (household use) values: 3,073 2,735 230 Timber and fuelwood Nipa 100 96 - Fish products 991 622 - 1,982 2,017 230 Non-market values: 1,369 1,026 - Litterfall as fertilizer and fish food 430 275 - Nursery service 939 751 -

Source: M.S. delos Angeles, et al, PIDS Mangrove Valuation Project

56

3. Indonesia: Examining all threats to fisheries

and aquatic ecosystems and stakeholders

Total Net Benefits and Losses Due to Threats to Indonesian Coral Reefs ( Present value; 10% discount rate; 25 yr. Time-span; in U.S. $1000; per km2 )

Net Benefits Net Losses to Society to Individuals

Total Net Total Net Coastal Food Function/Threat Fishery Tourism Biodiversity Others Losses Benefits Protection Security (quantifiable)

Poison Fishing 33.3 40.2 0.0 2.6 - 435.6 n.q. n.q. n.q. 42.8 - 475.6 Blast Fishing 14.6 86.3 8.9 - 193.0 2.9 - 481.9 n.q. n.q. n.q. 98.1 - 761.2 Coral Mining 121.0 93.6 12.0 - 260.0 2.9 - 481.9 n.q. n.q. > 67.0 175.5 - 902.5 Sediment - loggin 98.0 81.0 - 192.0 n.q. n.q. n.q. 273.0 Sediment - urban ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Overfishing 38.5 108.9 - n.q. n.q. n.q. n.q. 108.9

Source: Cesar (1996)

4. Alternative Land Uses, Arenal-Tempisque Watershed, Costa Rica

4.1 Baseline matrix (in presentpresent value, million dollars)

Forest Dairy/Cattle ICE Irrigated Farms Wetland Fishermen Realized Reserves Farms Benefit Forest Maximize (39.7) Reserves forest area (39.7)

Dairy - Maximize dairy (37.5) Cattle & cattle Farms income (37.5)

ICE - Siltation of Optimize (1,118.5) reservoirs electricity (-703.1) production (1,821.6)

Irrigated - - - Maximize crop Bird damage (174.8) Farms income to crops (194.9) (-20.1)

Wetland - - - Agro-chemical Maximize (19.1) pollution and soil conservation runoff (70.7) (-51.6)

Fishermen - - - Agro-chemical Reduced Maximize (26.5) pollution and soil Agro- fish runoff chemical and income (-111.6) soil runoff (121.2) (16.9)

Net Benefit (39.7) (-665.6) (1,821.6) (31.7) (67.5) (121.2) (1,416.1)

Source: J. Dixon

57

4.2 The Payoff matrix – what it shows

„ The diagonal elements are the different users/ sectors in the watershed and show their net return from their

activity without taking externalities into account

„ The off-diagonal elements represent externalities – either those that affect others downstream (below the diagonal) or that affect the sector’s net benefits

(elements on the same row)

„ A social welfare measure is found in the final column (realized benefit) and final row (net benefit)

4.3 Major lessons from the Costa Rica case

„ Most externalities (off-diagonal elements) are negative

„ Electricity and irrigation provide 90% of the benefits

„ Dairy and ranching provide negative benefits worth $665 million. They should probably not be undertaken

„ Irrigation also has high negative impacts

„ Externality costs are equal to 38% of potential benefits

„ Major losers are the electricity authority, fishermen and wetlands

58

4.4 Payoff matrix-The “Responsive ICE Manager” scenario (in present value, million dollars)

Forest Dairy/Cattle ICE Irrigated Farms Wetland Fishermen Realized Reserves Farms Benefit Forest Maximize (39.7) Reserves forest area (39.7)

Dairy - Maximize dairy (38.0) Cattle & cattle income Farms (38)

ICE - Siltation of Optimize (1,816.2) reservoirs electricity (-5.4) production (1,821.6)

Irrigated - - - Maximize crop Bird damage (174.9) Farms income to crops (195) (-20.1) Wetland - - - Agro-chemical Maximize (19.1) pollution and soil conservation runoff (70.7) (-51.6) Fishermen - - - Agro-chemical Reduced Agro- Maximize (26.5) pollution and soil chemical and fish runoff soil runoff income (-111.6) (16.9) (121.2)

Net Benefit (39.7) (32.6) (1,821.6) (31.8) (67.5) (121.2) (2,114.4)

5. Valuation: Can be a basis for watershed protection, payments by downstream, irrigated farmers to upstream pasturalists; global payments

How much are downstream beneficiaries likely to pay? How much are pasturalists likely to accept?

LAND USE: ALTERNATIVE: Deforestation and Conservation with use for pasture payment for service Minimum payment Payment Benefits to land users

Costs to downstream Maximum payment populations

Source: S Pagiola

59

6. Sustaining Natural Capital: Summing Up

6.1 Some Advantages of Total Economic Valuation Economic of Land Use Alternatives

ƒ Provides a more complete picture of an action’s true worth - recognizes both on-site, and offsite, benefits

and costs

ƒ Encourages more careful and systematic

consideration of the environmental consequences

ƒ Produces clear and defensible arguments

for accepting or rejecting land use alternatives, a project, a policy decision, or a resource management strategy

6.2 The Advantages of Valuing Environmental Impacts During Economic Analyses

„ An integrated approach to Sustaining Natural Capital identifies all goods and services, the winners and losers and potentials for gain from proposed management choices

„ Economic valuation can enhance the stakeholders’ voice about the appropriate sharing of the benefits and costs from management options

„ Coalitions are needed to reduce costs of externalities and increase net social welfare- consensus building!!

„ Institutional reforms are needed to realize maximum net benefits from natural capital

60 6.3 The Requirements of Valuing EnvironmEnvironmentalental Impacts During Economic Analyses

ƒ Agricultural, resource and environmental economists, ecologists, engineers, sociologists and specialists work together.

ƒ Iteration of various analyses to allow for options for mitigation to be considered.

ƒ Analysis is built into the decision-making as early as possible.

61 Annex 7: Guidelines for group works

Atelier d’Echanges sur La Valorisation Des Ressources Naturelles pour le Développement Local Jeudi 05 Juillet 2007

Travaux de Groupe et Etapes Suivantes

Les participants seront repartis en deux groupes. Chaque groupe choisit son président et son rapporteur pour la prise de note des conclusions et importantes considérations qu’il aimerait partager avec tous les participants. De préférences, les notes doivent être prises sur ordinateur en format PowerPoint ou Word, ceci pour être clairement présentées en plénière. Les groupes commencent leurs travaux à 14 H00 pour deux heures d’exercice.

Le résultat de chaque groupe est une liste prioritaire des problèmes de gestion du Capital naturel à analyser, une ébauche de vision et d’un document de plan d’action qui indiqueront l’incorporation de l’approche SNC dans le contexte Camerounais. Cette ébauche inclura aussi les ressources et approches qui seront utilisées pour la mise en œuvre de ce plan, ainsi que les suggestions sur les auteurs et reviseurs primaires, un ou deux.

La vision et le document de plan d’action sur les priorités du Cameroun seront développés dans les prochaines mois jusqu’à Mi-septembre 2007. Ces deux documents seront présentés au séminaire régional avec les autres pays participants à la fin du mois de Septembre, séminaire qu’organisera le programme SNC au Cameroun. Les participants à cet atelier et le “Advisory Group” qui sera constitué auront à réviser ces documents (préparés par les auteurs et reviseurs primaires) aux fins de leur finalisation à titre de contribution (intrant) du Cameroun au séminaire régional.

Les sujets de discussions sont:

Groupe A: Un cas pratique: Intégrer les principes et approches du programme SNC au Programme GEF/PNDP de GDT – Niveau opérationnel/mise en œuvre de l’approche SNC

Groupe B: Une Stratégie Nationale: Incorporation des principes et approches SNC dans un cadre de collaboration entre les Ministères, autres institutions publiques, ONGs et autres organisations de la société civile–.Aspects politique, légal et institutionnel, niveau Macro.

62 Annex 8: Presentation of Group A

RAPPORT DU GROUPE A

LISTE DES PROBLEMES PRIORITAIRES

• Non maîtrise du concept ; • Déficit de compétence au niveau des opérateurs de terrain;

• Méconnaissance du stock des ressources naturelles ; • Méconnaissance de la valeur des ressources naturelles ; • Insuffisance des informations sur les innovations existantes ; • Absence d’un mécanisme de coordination de la gestion des ressources naturelles ; • Absence d’incitations à intégrer ce concept dans le Projet ; • Scepticisme des communautés bénéficiaires aux innovations ;

• Influence des us et coutumes ;

• Insuffisance des infrastructures

2 . EBAUCHE DE VISION ( à 2015)

• -Existence dans l’ensemble des communes couvertes d’un plan d’utilisation et de gestion des terres ; • - Adoption de bonnes pratiques de gestion durable des terres , respectueuses de l’environnement (au moins 80%) ; • - Maintien de la biodiversité dans les zones couvertes ; • -Augmentation des terres cultivées • Prise en compte de la valeur des ressources naturelles dans les politiques, programmes et projet de développement 63 3. PLAN D’ACTION

•3. • Renforcement des capacités des acteurs impliqués dans la mise en œuvre du PDGT ; • Sensibilisation et vulgarisation des bénéficiaires et politiques ; • Mettre en place des cadres de résolution des conflits entre les différents utilisateurs des terres ; • Inventaire et diffusion des bonnes pratiques sur la GDT ; • Mener des études spécifiques en vue d’améliorer la connaissance de stock et valeur des ressources naturelles ; • Intégrer l’utilisation des SIG dans la gestion du Projet ; • Mise en place d’un mécanisme adéquat de coordination intersectorielle ; • Mise en place des mécanismes d’incitation des bénéficiaires

64

Annex 9: Presentation of Group B

ValorisationValorisation dudu

CapitalCapital NaturelNaturel pourpour lele

DD ééveloppementveloppement LocalLocal

wb262508 F:\Mirella\clinics\Cameroon\Report SNC Mission_Cameroon rev.doc 09/10/2007 11:04:00 AM

Rapport du Groupe B Rapport du Groupe B

Président: M. TENTCHOU

Rapporteurs: Mme EBANGA Agnès Rapporteurs: Mme EBANGA Agnès

M. Jonas KEMAJOU SYAPZE M. Jonas KEMAJOU SYAPZE

TermesTermes dede referencereference

ƒ Stratégies d’intégrations des

Principes d’approche du SNC avec les

ministères sectorielles, autres

institutions, ONG, etc. Aspects

politiques, légal et institutionnel pour

mettre en œuvre le PGDT

65

PlanPlan dede travailtravail

ƒƒListeListe desdes problproblèèmesmes

ƒƒEbaucheEbauche dede lala visionvision

ƒƒPlanPlan dd’’actionaction

A.A. ListeListe desdes problproblèèmesmes

(1/2)(1/2)

1. Multitudes d’acteurs sans coordination /

harmonisation

2. Manque de synergie

3. Absence de vision globale partagée 4. Nouveauté du concept SNC et difficulté

d’appropriation

5. manque de visibilité

6. Absence d’une politique d’IEC en matière de gestion durable

7. Pesanteurs culturelles

66

A.A. ListeListe desdes problproblèèmesmes

(2/2)(2/2)

8. Manque d’un cadre global de développement 8. Manque d’un cadre global de développement

9. Faible capacité d’autofinancement

10. Problèmes de gouvernance

11. Faible capacité d’absorption financière

12. Faible capacité technique, managériale

13. Centralisation excessive des pouvoir de

décisions

14. Attentisme des populations

B.B. EbaucheEbauche de la vision

ƒ Le Cameroun, Modèle en matière de

gestion durable du capital naturel en gestion durable du capital naturel en

Afrique d’ici 2025

67

C.C. PlanPlan dd’’actionaction

ƒ Mettre en place un cadre de

concertation plurisectoriel et

multidisciplinaire multidisciplinaire

ƒ Diagnostiquer et capitaliser les

actions menées ou en cours de

réalisation

ƒ Vulgariser les concepts et définitions

liées au SNC à tous les niveaux

ListeListe desdes membresmembres

ƒ Mes Dames et Messieurs. ƒ Munakwa E. ƒ BENGONO B. H ƒ KUETCHE ƒ KEMAJOU J. ƒ NDOMBOL P. ƒ TEKEUBENG ƒ FONG NZOSSIE E. ƒ NGWEN NGANGUE

ƒ DJILO

ƒ YOMI NONO ƒ POUKA M. ƒ EBANGA A. ƒ TENTCHOU J. ƒ DZOKOU ƒ TCHOUALAK

68 Annex 10: Summary report of the field visits

Summary report of country visits under the WBISD Sustaining Natural Capital (SNC) program

This report is a summary of activities and outcomes of in-country missions undertaken during the period June-July 2007 under the WBISD Sustaining Natural Capital (SNC) program. Back-to office reports and annexes are available for individual countries as well by accessing the website: http://www.worldbank.org/wbi/environment/snc Destination, timing and composition of the teams were as follows:

Nigeria: June 11 – 22, 2007. Tidiane Diop, Pietronella van den Oever, Per Ryden Burkina Faso: June 25 – 29, 2007. Mirella Hernani, Per Ryden Burundi: June 25 – 29, 2007. Tidiane Diop, Pietronella van den Oever Cameroon: Ann S. Delos Angeles, Mirella Hernani, Jonas Mbwangue Senegal: Ann S. Delos Angeles, Tidiane Diop, Pietronella van den Oever

Background and rationale of country visits

The Sustaining Natural Capital (SNC) capacity building program was initiated in early 2007, under the auspices of the World Bank Institute, in close collaboration with the Africa Region Operations Department. The program proposal states that...” The overall objective of this thirty-month leadership development initiative is to establish a critical mass of human resources, tools & approaches, and communication channels to build capacity in and implement the principles of sound and efficient environmental management outlined in the recently published report entitled “Where is the Wealth of Nations”… Target countries include Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Chad, Ghana, Guinea Bissau, Kenya, Liberia, Nigeria, and Senegal. An inception meeting and a video conference were held in the period March-April 2007 to present the SNC program to the relevant World Bank task team leaders managing a variety of environmental projects in the target countries, and the potential target groups in the respective countries.

In the original SNC work plan we had scheduled a regional workshop at the end of June, 2007. This workshop would be the logical sequence to a telephone conference and a video conference that we had organized earlier this year, as mentioned above. However, we changed our strategy for logistic and strategic reasons; logistic, because we were unable to ascertain an appropriate venue at the desired time period, and strategic because we noticed that in several countries such as Nigeria, Burundi, Senegal, Burkina Faso, Cameroon and Ghana, task team leaders of the projects that are most appropriate to be included in our SNC activities had invariably shown great interest in the program during its early stages. Hence we decided to give a boost to SNC activities in five of the six countries just mentioned. A visit to Ghana is scheduled for September 2007.

69 Objectives of the country visits

The main objectives of the country visits were to:

1. Assess existing levels of knowledge and attitudes of country counterparts (key persons in the target countries, as well as task team leaders) with respect to the principles and concepts presented by “Where is the Wealth of Nations”, and compile information about counterparts’ ideas on ways to incorporate these principles and concepts in their operational work; 2. Establish a nucleus of a country team that will participate in capacity building and outreach activities, and prepare the country’s SNC shared vision and action plan;

Implementation of in-country activities

In each of the five countries we delivered a workshop for a group of key persons interested in the subject of Sustaining Natural Capital. In every country we had very strong support from the World Bank Country Office, as well as the appropriate counterparts in the field projects we were targeting. The length of the workshop varied between a meeting of just one half day in Burundi, to a two-day workshop in Burkina Faso. Workshop agendas all had similar items such as a presentation of the activities under the SNC program, and an overview of substantive issues that could possibly be tackled under the program. Furthermore, ample time was devoted to working groups to discuss the various pillars of the program, and identify priority subjects for their respective countries. In each country we had an average number of around 30 participants.

Outcomes of the country visits

1. Baseline data and information on knowledge strengths and weaknesses regarding SNC

All workshop participants were asked to fill out a questionnaire with questions representing the three pillars of the SNC program: 1) Valuing Natural Capital; 2) Sustainable Land Management in an Ecosystem Perspective; and 3) Sustaining Natural Capital in the Context of Socio-Demographic Change. The completed questionnaires – about 110 all together - provide us with two sources of information. First of all, they allow us to establish a bank of base line data, and secondly they provide information on the participants’ level of knowledge related to SNC, and the existing knowledge gaps, thus allowing us to prepare a suitable curriculum for learning activities. In addition we gathered knowledge from a variety of sources, such as staff of the World Bank country offices, and various relevant Ministries and other public and private institutions in the respective countries.

2. Enhanced country ownership of SNC activities

The country visits have significantly contributed to the in-country “ownership” of the SNC initiative. In all countries we now have a nucleus of a country team and a larger

70 group of interested people who will participate in future capacity building and outreach activities, and will contribute to the preparation of the country’s SNC shared vision and action plan. These groups are at the moment still rather unstructured, and only Burkina Faso and Nigeria have a beginning of an “anchor”; a place from which the core group operates and gets some type of administrative support. However, the country visits have greatly enhanced the likelihood that, by the end of the program, we will be achieving the SNC program’s objective, as stated in the beginning of this report:

“…to establish a critical mass of human resources, tools & approaches, and communication channels to build capacity in and implement the principles of sound and efficient environmental management outlined in the recently published report entitled “Where is the Wealth of Nations…”

3. Identification of strategic priorities

3.1 Valuing natural capital, and making the link with other forms of capital

During our country visits we met with great enthusiasm, and an undeniably strong interest in the subject of Sustaining Natural Capital. The key persons we met during our field visits are unanimously interested in the methodology of valuing natural capital, and they are all aware of the importance of putting numbers to natural resources for the sake of making informed policy choices. In spite of this obvious interest, we also noticed that the “how to” of valuing natural capital is in most countries lacking in two respects. First, expertise in natural resource economics is rather rare in several countries, although we encountered some studies carried out by local economists in Nigeria and Senegal, for instance. Second, the link between natural capital on the one hand and social, human, institutional and man-made capital is still not very clear. There is a certain understanding that these phenomena influence each other, but most people find it difficult to translate these dynamics in operational terms. Therefore, a brief course on basic principles of valuing natural capital should be the point of departure in our learning program, using as much as possible local expertise. Building upon this, there should be a clear introduction on the different forms of capital – human, social, institutional, man-made, and economic capital. Practical case studies on valuing natural capital, developed in the Africa region, should be used to illustrate the theoretical underpinnings of the concept of sustaining natural capital.

3.2 Sustainable land management at the ecosystem level, and good governance

The question of Sustainable Land Management (SLM) is perceived as a priority as well, and several of the projects with which we are collaborating, for instance in Burundi, Burkina Faso and Cameroon, are precisely addressing this issue. Particular attention should be paid to SLM at the ecosystem level, in which all elements, including vegetation, water, animals and human beings are considered as integral parts, each one with their unique imprints on the system. Valuing natural capital and SLM are intricately linked, in that new choices have to be made constantly, to avoid deterioration or even extinction of certain natural resources. For instance, the case of fisheries in Senegal is a clear example of a conjecture between a formerly integrated eco-system in which several elements are at present out of balance.

71

Throughout our target countries, land use is subject to complex governance systems, and it is clear that any learning module on SLM will need to emphasize the intricacies of land governance systems that hold promise of sustainability. Furthermore, there is a need for good case studies that have shown to be workable and sustainable in the longer-term. “Good” case studies should include the potentially conflicting features of different forms of land use governance, and the types of consensus building mechanisms that have shown to be successful in achieving solutions that are acceptable to all stakeholder groups, such as the case experienced by the PROGED in Senegal, referred to by Alassane Ngom during the Dakar workshop.

3.3. Socio-demographic dynamics, and development of alternative options for adding value to natural resources

It is clear in each of the countries we visited, that sustaining natural capital can not become a reality without explicitly considering competition between various population groups such as, for instance, cultivators, herders, and urban dwellers, who all make different claims on natural resources, not to mention other stakeholders who gather medicinal and other wild plants and extractive resources from common areas. This brings us to the socio-demographic context, which changes very rapidly in all of our target countries, with fast growing populations, changing age-sex structures, and increasing internal and international migration which significantly change the population distribution patterns, and cause accelerated social change. The changing age structure will bring about the much publicized “demographic dividend” this is, the large proportion of young people in the prime productive ages in our target countries. This young labor force can in principle be a blessing for the economy, by bringing in a large supply of young, vigorous labor, and creative ideas. However, in the absence of suitable jobs, the demographic dividend could potentially become a menacing force of young, dissatisfied people as well, unless a significant number of jobs are created. Here again, the countries’ natural resource base may be a sustainable asset, IF the right policy options are pursued. Brief, it is clear that the relationship between people and nature will change significantly and options will have to be developed to reduce pressure on the land, and develop alternative sources of income by developing institutions and the social, human, and man- made capital that would support local processing and efficient marketing of natural resources, thus adding significant value to primary products.

72

Annex 11: Matrix- overview of products and outcomes of SNC team visits to target countries

Overview of Products and Outcomes of SNC Team Visits to Target Countries Country Products Outcomes

Burkina Faso • 17 Completed questionnaires • Highly informed and with baseline data (French) committed (about SNC • Letter of invitation (French) objectives and principles) in- • Opening statement (French) country TTL • Trip report (English) • High-level government • Participants list (French) support (Minister of • Workshop program (French) Agriculture, Minister of • SNC Presentation (French) Environment) - Project • Two PPT country experiences coordinator highly motivated presentations (French) and committed • Two PPT presentations with • SNC core team secretariat in discussion group results place with clear objectives (French) until September 2007 Burundi • 23 Completed questionnaires • High-level moderator, familiar with baseline data (French) with the program • Letter of invitation (French) • Three thematic pillar leaders, • Opening statement (French) familiar with the subject • Trip report (English) • Core SNC group created in • Participants list (French) PRASAB project • Workshop program (French) • High-level government • SNC Presentation (French) support (Minister of • 3 PPT presentations with Agriculture, Minister of discussion group results Environment) (French) • Strong support from WB Country Office (TTL PRASAB, Country Manager, Portfolio Officer, and staff) Cameroon • 36 questionnaires completed • Strong Support from the with baseline data (French) WBCO (TTL PNDP/GEF- • List of participants SLM Projects, Assistant • Agenda of the workshop Program) • Workshop opening remark • Active involvement of the • SLM implementation WB-CDD (PNDP) Project framework-Cameroon (draft) Coordination Unit Team • SNC Presentations (PPT) • Receptivity and Support of the • Guideline for group works Government (Ministry of • Presentation group A (PPT in Agriculture, Livestock, Forest, French) Environment , Finance and • Presentation group B (PPT in Land Affairs) French) • Consensus establish two groups (the Advisory Group and the Technical Group) • TORs for the groups defined • PNDP/GEF-SLM Project will serve as secretariat of the Cameroon SNC Core Team

73 Nigeria • 24 Completed questionnaires • SNC Core Committee with baseline data (English) established • Letter of invitation (English) • 3 Groups identified, • Opening statement for representing individual workshop (English) substantive pillars • Trip report (English) • Next steps identified, • Participants list (English) including preparation of • Workshop program (English) papers on Valuing Natural • SNC presentation (English) Capital, Sustainable Land • 3 PPT presentations with Management, and Socio- discussion group results Demographic Dynamics (English) • Preliminary date set for • Meeting report prepared by follow-up workshop Nigerian SNC core committee • Anchor for SNC work (English) identified/established • Strong support at Country Office, from TTL, Sector Leader, and Country Manager

• Senegal • 17 Completed questionnaires • Core SNC Committee selected with baseline data (French) • In-country facilitator identified • Trip report (English) • Next steps enumerated, • 2-page workshop summary including search for the most (French) efficient anchor • Participants list (French) • Strong support from GIRMAC • Workshop program (French) and GIRMAC+ TTLs, and • SNC presentation (French) support at WB Country Office • 3 PPT presentations with from Sector Leader and staff discussion group results (French) • SNC presentation on Valuing Fisheries (English)

wb262508 F:\Mirella\clinics\Cameroon\Report SNC Mission_Cameroon rev.doc 09/10/2007 11:04:00 AM

74