This file has been cleaned of potential threats.

If you confirm that the file is coming from a trusted source, you can send the following SHA-256 hash value to your admin for the original file. f4712bc2de7650182712f2dad39c70bca6540f08d59c6ec1ee7ea03823c0c73f

To view the reconstructed contents, please SCROLL DOWN to next page. Analysis of stakeholder interactions and involvement in thicket restoration, Western Baviaanskloof, South Africa Who is willing to restore and why? Emmanuelle Noirtin

Thesis report

April 2008

Analysis of stakeholder interactions and involvement in thicket restoration, Western Baviaanskloof, South Africa

Who is willing to restore and why?

As part of

Ecosystem Approach for Subtropical Thicket Conservation And Restoration (Eastern Cape, South Africa)

Emmanuelle Noirtin

Supervisors Matthew Zylstra, Dieter van den Dr Dolf de Groot, Broeck, Environmental Systems Analysis group, EarthCollective Wageningen UR Email: [email protected] PO Box 47, 6700 AA Wageningen, [email protected] The Netherlands Email: [email protected]

Master thesis project assigned by Subtropical Thicket Restoration Programme - STRP, South Africa. Co-funded and supported by

Speerpunt Ecosysteem- en Landschap Services (SELS)- WUR Department of Water Affairs and Forestry – DWAF/ Working for Water and Gamtoos Irrigation Board - GIB, South Africa. In collaboration with Rhodes Restoration Research Group - R3G, South Africa and Wageningen University and Research Centre (WUR), The Netherlands. Facilitated by PRESENCE - Participatory Restoration of Ecosystem Services & Natural Capital (Eastern Cape) platform and EarthCollective. This thesis has also been supported by Région Picardie (France) and European Union. Front page Pictures: Portulacaria Afra, “spekboom”, from an STRP experimental plot in Rooihoek, Baviaanskloof, and Baviaanskloof landscape, by Kim Janssen

Citation: Noirtin E. 2008. Analysis of stakeholder interactions and involvement in thicket restoration, Western Baviaanskloof, South Africa: Who is willing to restore and why? MSc thesis. Wageningen University, The Netherlands. Commissioned by the PRESENCE learning network

Aknowlegements

This report is the result of a research field work that was carried out in the Western Baviaanskloof in South Africa between September and December 2007 in the framework of the Master of Science degree in Environmental Sciences and more specifically under the Environmental Systems Analysis Group.

First of all, I would like to thank Dolf de Groot for his valuable comments and advises during the whole process of this thesis. I am very grateful for the time he took to guide me.

I would like to thank also the EarthCollective team who facilitates this research and helped us to feel comfortable. Many thanks to Silvia, Coen, Bas, Dieter and Matt for the nice memories and positive ideas. Thank you specifically to Matt and Dieter for your supervision and good advice. Your help was priceless. Thank you to the two other member of the Kouga team, Lea Ezzy and Jannecke Spekkie for their good mood.

I would like to thank Mike Powell from R3G for taking time to answer our questions, for welcoming us in Grahamstown and for your friendship.

Thank you also to DWAF, GIB, R3G and WUR for their support during this research.

Thank you to Edwill Moore, Pierre Joubert, Reinette Colesky, from GIB for facilitating our stay in Kouga Dam and answering our questions. Your help was very precious. Special thank to Yolandi Vermaak for helping us gaining time…

I would like to thank also Wayne Erlank and Hein from Eastern Cape Parks for their assistance and for letting us staying in the beautiful Geelhoutbos during the interview time.

Many thanks to all the farmers and their wives for their welcome, their collaboration and their friendship. You really took the time to answer our long questionnaire. Without your collaboration, this research would not have been possible. Thank you especially to Pieter Kruger and Chris Lamprecht for their precious help. You made the field work much easier for us. Thank you for sharing your stories and your “braais”.

Thank you also to the communities, Sewefontein, Saaimanshoek and Tchnuganoo, and all other interviewee for their collaboration and time. This research depended on their willingness to collaborate.

Finally, thank you to all my friends in Wageningen for supporting me during these last two years. Special thanks to Sugandha Gurung and Carolina Lemarie for welcoming me in your rooms. You collaborated to this thesis too by supporting me.

The last but not the least, thanks to the three other “scientific officers”, Kim Janssen, Eliska Lorencova and Ignacio de la Flor for the nice group work. I really enjoyed working with you three.

ii

List of acronyms

BMR Baviaanskloof Mega Reserve

CAPE Cape Action for People and the Environment

CFR Cape Floristic Region

CI Conservation International

DWAF Department of Water Affairs and Forestry

DEAT Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (provincial level)

DEAET Department of Economic Affairs, Environment and Tourism (national level)

EASTCARE Ecosystem Approach for Subtropical Thicket Conservation And Restoration (Eastern Cape, South Africa)

ECPB Eastern Cape Parks Board

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

GIB Gamtoos Irrigation Board

MCA Multi criteria analysis

PRESENCE Participatory Restoration of Ecosystem SErvices and Natural Capital (Eastern Cape)

SA South Africa

STEP Subtropical Thicket Ecosystem Planning

STRP Subtropical Thicket Restoration Programme

SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

WF Wilderness Foundation

WUR Wageningen University and Research Centre

iii

Summary With its nomination as a World heritage site by UNESCO in 2004, the Baviaanskloof Natural Reserve of Eastern Cape, South Africa, has received much attention. Several programs are developed to increase the sustainability of the country and protect its biodiversity, of which the Baviaanskloof Mega-reserve and Subtropical Thicket Restoration Program are the main ones and both occur in the study area of this thesis which is the Western Baviaanskloof. This thesis is part of an integrated assessment project directed by EarthCollective1 concerning an Ecosystem Approach for Subtropical Thicket Conservation And Restoration (Eastern Cape, South Africa) (EASTCARE) in the Western Baviaanskloof as a pilot case study for implementation under PRESENCE (Participatory Restoration of Ecosystem SErvices & Natural Capital (Eastern Cape) (see box 1)). The study has been realised in collaboration with three other thesis-projects studying the socio-cultural values, economical values and institutional capacity of the study area, respectively. The main objective of this thesis is to evaluate the involvement of stakeholders in land restoration in relation to the thicket ecosystem of western Baviaanskloof. To reach this objective, a stakeholder analysis has been conducted in combination with a so-called „ecosystem function analysis‟ to select the six main thicket ecosystems services that are relevant to the stakeholders in the western Baviaanskloof: food production, medicinal resources, water supply, carbon sequestration, refugium (i.e. biodiversity protection) and recreation and tourism. Stakeholders have been identified and categorised in primary (mostly local people), secondary (mostly conservation organisations and municipalities) and tertiary stakeholders (mostly governmental departments), according to their influence and dependence on the thicket services considered. In order to determine the relationship between the different stakeholders and the thicket ecosystem, the eleven farmers having an activity in the study area have been interviewed through a questionnaire as well as three communities living in the area, Sewefontein, Saaimanshoek and Tchnuganoo. Other stakeholders having an interest in the study area have been interviewed through more open-questions, among which Eastern Cape Parks, Gamtoos Irrigation Board, Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, the Cacadu district, the Baviaans municipality and the tourism association. The main negative impact that the thicket ecosystem is facing is the overgrazing due to intensive farming activities that are developed in the Western Baviaanskloof. However, the growing tourism activity is developing over the farming activities as well as is growing the general awareness about the necessity to restore the lands. As degradation is a big general issue in Eastern Cape, some programmes are created to counterbalance the negative impacts

1 EarthCollective is a network bringing together diverse groups to build new partnerships and synergies. It acts as a catalyst in creating, supporting and facilitating initiatives that reinforce links between a healthy natural environment and human well-being (EarthCollective website). iv

of human activities on the ecosystems in order to facilitate the restoration and conservation of the ecosystems, such as the Baviaanskloof Mega-Reserve that aims at creating biologically, economically and socially sustainable conservation area including private landowners, state protected areas and communal concerns; and the Subtropical Thicket Restoration Programme that aims at researching the scientific and practical feasibility of restoring thicket at the farm scale in a pilot project. Both projects involve the Western Baviaanskloof in their Planning domain. Since not all stakeholders have the same interests in the ecosystem services, depending on ecological, economical or socio-cultural points of view, they do not place the same value on the thicket ecosystem and thus competing interests appear, including mainly farming activities, tourism development and water use such as: - Competing interests over values or beliefs: the agricultural development is promoted by the local people, and is in competition with the conservation policy of different organisations such as Eastern Cape Parks or Wilderness Foundation who have the objective to protect the nature. There is also a competition between transformed landscapes created by the local people through agricultural activities and wild landscapes wanted by tourists. - Competing interests over interpersonal relationships: there is a general mistrust of the residents of the valley towards new organisations that want to implement new programmes due to a history of promises that were not kept; Competing interests over needs: the water, as a limited resource, is the main issue of the area. There are conflicting situation for the share of sources between neighbours but also competing interests between upstream/ downstream people, the later being dependent on the consumption of the first ones. The Subtropical Thicket Restoration Programme offers the possibility to involve the local people in more sustainable management of the area. The project was welcomed by the residents of the valley even if there are still doubts about the effective implementation on it. The farmers are willing to participate in this project on the condition that their income is not affected. The local communities, though doubtful, see a good opportunity to get jobs through the Working for Water program that is in charge of the implementation of the STRP. The main challenge is now to maintain the communication open in order to keep the trust of the local people. A participatory management of the project taking into account the point of view of the different stakeholder would certainly be appreciated and valued. In order to determine what are the different trade-offs that are existing and have to be considered by STRP for the effective implementation of the project, more information is needed on the different types of values of the main services of the (restoration of) the Thicket ecosystem such as ecological, socio-cultural and economic values. Though further researches would be necessary, especially on the ecological valuation of the thicket ecosystem, the socio-cultural and economic valuations have been realised by two other students, Kim Janssen and Ignacio de la Flor respectively. The three reports should be combined in order to get a general overview of the Western Baviaanskloof.

v

Box 1: description of EarthCollective and PRESENCE (source: www.earthcollective.net)

EarthCollective is active in working with partners in South Africa to facilitate research aimed at restoring degraded landscapes for the benefit of local communities.

EarthCollective has proposed PRESENCE (Participatory Restoration of Ecosystem SErvices & Natural Capital (Eastern Cape)) as a way to facilitate collaboration between „North-South‟ partners to deliver additional research and technical expertise needed to effectively restore degraded landscapes and support poverty alleviation and livelihoods.

PRESENCE combines research from diverse scientific disciplines as well as local knowledge to ensure outcomes that are: ecologically sound (conserving biodiversity); stakeholder-driven (community participation); socio-economically beneficial (supporting rural livelihoods); financially viable (e.g. through carbon, biodiversity and/or water credits); and institutionally feasible (good governance arrangements).

With PRESENCE, EarthCollective is committed to ensuring open and transparent communication and information flows between participating groups and to ensure that partnerships are not only mutually beneficial but work for the long-term future of the Eastern Cape region.

vi

Table of Contents

Summary

Chapter 1 Introduction...... 1 1.1 Background and context ...... 1 1.1.1 Land degradation issues ...... 1 1.1.2 Biodiversity ...... 3 1.1.3 Climate Change & Governance ...... 4 1.1.4 Landscape Restoration ...... 5 1.2 Context of this thesis project ...... 6 1.3 Problem statement...... 10 1.4 Purpose of the study and Research questions...... 10 1.5 Outline of the report ...... 11

Chapter 2 Study Area: western Baviaanskloof ...... 12 2.1 Location ...... 12 2.2 Thicket biome ...... 14 2.3 Conservation Plans and Restoration Programmes ...... 16 2.3.1 Subtropical Thicket Ecosystem Planning (STEP) ...... 17 2.3.2 Baviaanskloof Mega-Reserve Project (BMR) ...... 17 2.3.3 Subtropical Thicket Restoration Programme (STRP)...... 20

Chapter 3. Research Methods ...... 24 3.1 Conceptual framework and research methods ...... 24 3.1.1 Ecosystem function analysis ...... 24 3.1.2 Stakeholder analysis...... 25 3.1.3 Stakeholder interactions ...... 26 3.2 Data collection...... 27 3.2.1 Literature review ...... 27 3.2.2 Questionnaire/ interview design ...... 28 3.2.3 Field work and observation ...... 29 3.3 Data analysis ...... 33

Chapter 4. Thicket Functions, Services and Stakeholders ...... 34 4.1 Identification of thicket functions and services ...... 34 4.2 Stakeholder identification ...... 35 4.2.1 Global and international Stakeholders ...... 36 4.2.2 National Stakeholders ...... 37 4.2.3 Provincial stakeholders ...... 39 vii

4.2.4 District level stakeholders ...... 42 4.2.5 Local stakeholders ...... 42 4.3 Relations between Stakeholders and ecosystem functions and services in the study area 47 4.3.1 Plant dependent functions: food production, medicinal resources, carbon sequestration and refugium functions...... 48 4.3.2 Water supply service ...... 50 4.3.3 Recreational services ...... 52 4.4 Stakeholder dependence and impact on ecosystems services in Western Baviaanskloof ...... 53 4.5 Consequences of the different negative impacts on the thicket ecosystem...... 55

Chapter 5: Competing interests and synergies ...... 58 5.1 Evaluation of the cooperation between the different stakeholders ...... 58 5.2 Competing interests and synergies between stakeholders ...... 60 5.2.1 Plant dependent functions: Food production, medicinal resources, carbon sequestration, refugium functions...... 60 5.2.2 Water supply: ...... 62 5.2.3 Recreation/ tourism ...... 64 5.2.4 Others disagreement: ...... 66 5.3 Willingness of the farmers to cooperate with other stakeholders ...... 66

Chapter 6 : Involvement of stakeholders in the Subtropical Thicket Restoration Program ...... 69 6.1 STRP in western Baviaanskloof ...... 69 6.1.1 Private restoration activities in the western Baviaanskloof ...... 69 6.1.2 Willingness to participate ...... 70 6.1.3 Conditions ...... 71 6.1.4 Possible restoration plans ...... 74 6.2 STRP Uncertainties ...... 74 6.3 SWOT analysis of STRP ...... 75

Chapter 7. Discussion ...... 76 7.1 Discussion of methods ...... Fout! Bladwijzer niet gedefinieerd. 7.1.1 Stakeholder and function analysis ...... Fout! Bladwijzer niet gedefinieerd. 7.1.2 Field Work ...... Fout! Bladwijzer niet gedefinieerd. 7.1.3 Data analysis: ...... Fout! Bladwijzer niet gedefinieerd. 7.2 Results ...... Fout! Bladwijzer niet gedefinieerd. 7.2.1 Thicket functions and stakeholders ...... Fout! Bladwijzer niet gedefinieerd. 7.2.2 Competing interests and synergies...... Fout! Bladwijzer niet gedefinieerd. 7.2.3 Involvement of stakeholders in STRP ...... Fout! Bladwijzer niet gedefinieerd. 7.2.4 Comparison with a similar case-study: ...... Fout! Bladwijzer niet gedefinieerd. viii

Chapter 8. Conclusion and recommendations ...... 83

References ...... 88

Appendixes Appendix 1: Thesis research context I Appendix 2 : Conservation plans and restoration programs involved in the western Baviaanskloof IV Appendix 3: Questionnaire asked to the farmers XV Appendix 4 : Contacts details of the interviewee XXVIII Appendix 5 : Western Baviaanskloof ecosystem functions, goods and services. XXX Appendix 6 : Pebble distribution method XXXII Appendix 7: Programmes supported by the Department of Economic Affairs, Environment and Tourism XXXIII Appendix 8: Cacadu District information XXXIV Appendix 9: Baviaans municipality information XXXVII Appendix 10: Economic overview of Western Baviaanskloof XXXIX Appendix 11: Cooperation and Competing interests between stakeholders XLV Appendix 12: Graphs tables LXIV Appendix 13: Criteria assessment LXV

ix

1 Chapter 1 Introduction

1.1 Background and context Covering an area of close to 42 000 km² in the Eastern and Western Cape provinces, the subtropical thicket biome is a major centre of diversity and endemism for plants, reptiles and invertebrates (Kerley et al.1999; Cowling et al. 2005). However, South Africa‟s globally significant subtropical thicket biome has been severely impacted through human activity. (Mills et al., 2005). Only 5000 km² (10.6%) of the original thicket cover remains in its „pristine‟ state (Lombard et al., 2003). Continued degradation due to economic and social issues has transformed the dense shrub and tree forest into an open savannah-like system, resulting in, as described by Earth-collective (2007b): the depletion of natural resources necessary for the fulfillment of local communities requirements (Cocks & Wiersum 2003); deterioration of the aesthetic appeal of the landscape for tourism development; declining soil quality (Mills & Fey, 2004); biomass and carbon losses greater than 8.5 kg-1m2 (Mills & Cowling, 2006; Mills et al., 2005); reduction in the availability of wood, fruit and medicines for local communities(Cocks and Wiersum 2003); and an overall decline in natural capital2 due to decreased diversity (Lechmere-Oertel et al., 2005). Excessive herbivore by domestic livestock, invasive alien species, unsustainable harvesting, poor land-use planning and land- use transformation due to agriculture and urbanization has put at risk thicket ecosystem balance. Thicket degradation results in the loss of biodiversity, ecological integrity and ecosystem functions. This ultimately affects the well being of people who depend directly or indirectly upon these functions and the benefits derived from them (ecosystem services). Therefore it seems essential to undertake restoration initiatives that could restore the lost natural capital and that could at the same time tackle global climate change issues. However, in an attempt to mitigate and reconcile human activities and natural resources, it is of utter importance understand the value of nature under a socio-cultural, ecological and economic perspective (de Groot, 2006). Research aimed to a better understanding of ecosystem services will encourage stakeholders to integrate ecosystem services in their development plans, making them more sustainable. An Integrated Assessment of these values will generate important inputs for natural resources management and policy making. 1.1.1 Land degradation issues In Nairobi, Kenya, the United Nations Conference on Desertification highlighted the occurrence of what is arguably the first global environmental problem described as such desertification (Meadows & Hoffman, 2002). According to the United Nations definition, areas under desertification risk are so-called “susceptible drylands”. In South Africa Nearly 91% of the country surface is classified as arid, semi-arid or dry sub-humid and falls broadly

2 Costanza and Daly 1992 define natural capital as a stock that yields a flow of valuable goods or services into the future. 1

within the UNCCD definition of affected dry lands (Hoffman et al, 1999). These are highly dry areas where the rainfall is low, and the potential evaporation is high. Dryland systems are often very sensitive to change and therefore need to be managed carefully in order to avoid land degradation (Stocking & Murnaghan, 2000). Land degradation can be seen as the result of the alteration of one or more of the land resources (soil, water, vegetation, rocks, air, climate, relief), thus having an impact on the local climate and biodiversity. It corresponds to a temporary or permanent decline in the productive capacity of the land. Others describe it as “the aggregate diminution of the productive potential of the land, including its major uses (rain-fed, arable, irrigated, rangeland, forest), its farming system, (…) and its value as an economic resource” (Stocking et al, 2000). In essence, land degradation, which can occur everywhere, becomes desertification in the dryland context. Hoffman et al (1999) identified three causes of land degradation in South Africa, which are the cause of thicket degradation. These causes involve biophysical characteristics of the area. In addition, climatic and human-induced factors have a range of causative impact on land resources. Indeed, in the last two decades, natural precipitation has declined in South Africa. Current trends on climate change indicate that the country will face a reduction of precipitation and temperature increase that will affect ecosystem functions and biodiversity negatively (Turpie et al 2002). Moreover, human factors are also a significant cause of land degradation (Hoffman et al 1999; Stocking et al 2000; Meadows and Hoffman 2002). These are attributed to high population densities, inappropriate land use and overgrazing in addition to unsustainable farming systems disregarding the agrobiological management of soil, incorrect and/or poor land use planning and catastrophic natural disasters (Hoffman et al, 1999). Competition for the natural resources and an increase of the pressure on land, especially on limited arable land, is a direct result of population growth, which in South Africa is on average 3% per year. Exploitation of the resources for many years has resulted in “less fertile soils, in an overall decline in soil organic matter content, vegetation denudation, plant invasion and bush encroachment, which adversely affects water and nutrient availability and soil structure, resulting inevitably in all kinds of soil and land degradation” (Hoffman et al, 1999). Consequently, pressure on the land is the major threat to unsustainability and poverty. A report drown up by the South Africa‟s National Botanical Institute suggests that land in 25% of magisterial districts in South Africa is already severely degraded. Many of the land problems are a result of apartheid, including desertification that is exacerbated by inequitable land ownership. The homelands where millions of people were settled are amongst the most severely degraded areas in the country (Hoffman et al, 1999). As a result of the unfair distribution of land, agricultural land in the former homelands has been overgrazed and over-cropped for decades and in many cases is degraded almost beyond repair (Meadows & Hoffman, 2002). In addition, land tenure laws and practices in the former homelands and townships did not encourage people to conserve their land.

2

This situation replicated all over the country has induced thicket degradation. Looking deeply into the causes of the thicket degradation it appears that, as briefly mentioned before, excessive herbivore by domestic livestock, land clearing for cultivation, harvesting of woodfuel and medicinal plants, alien plant invasion, mining and urbanization have been the main cause of the ecosystem degradation (Boshoff, 2006). Mining is not anymore a driver for thicket degradation. On the contrary, urbanization and rural village construction means the total removal of thicket. New communal rural village are established in thicket biome and each villager is encouraged harvesting the land. As there are no incentives to dwellers to protect thicket, cultivation remains as one of the main patterns of degradation. This rural settlements present high levels of poverty, they do not have access to other sources of energy different than wood, as a consequence thicket hardwood species are depleted. Medicinal plant use is also high and contributes towards thicket degradation. Overgrazing by domestic livestock has been historically the main cause of degradation as enormous amounts of livestock where grazing on thicket exceeding its grazing capacity. Finally and as consequence of the ecosystem degradation new species more adapted to extreme conditions colonize the area where thicket used to be present (Mills et al, 2005). Thicket is defined as a semi-arid ecosystem (Mills et al, 2005) that does not regenerate easily once degraded, without costly long-term management (Lechmere-Oertel et al, 2005). Therefore, as long as the drivers that originated the ecosystem degradation continue desertification will be a fact within thicket (Kerley et al., 1995; Lechmere-Oertel, et al, 2005). For developing nations like South Africa, a relatively recent democracy that is struggling to come to terms with the interaction of historical and contemporary social, political, economic and physical environmental constraints, it is essential that the land degradation issue be addressed. Desertification may only manifest itself in rural areas, but food security, poverty, rural–urban migrations are all associated processes that act on metropolitan and rural areas alike (Hoffman and Meadow, 2003). 1.1.2 Biodiversity One of the main consequences of land degradation is the lost of natural diversity. South Africa is unique by its massive biodiversity. It contains between 250,000 and 1,000,000 species of plants and animals, many of which occurring nowhere else (Crane, 2006). About 80% of the 18-20,000 plants species are endemic (Crane, 2006), which make the country special by its biodiversity. However, this treasure is in danger. Indeed, South Africa has the highest concentration of threatened plants, and the highest extinction estimation in the world. (Wynberg, 2002). Extinctions of species are mainly due to the destruction of the habitats mainly because of the increase of human activities and especially agriculture. On the other hand, South Africa will face substantial impacts due to climate change over the next 50 years (Turpie, 2003). Hence with actual prediction of climate change and existing level of human pressure over South Africa ecosystems, current vegetation mosaic will be replaced by unknown vegetation or desert (ibid). Such a change will be accompanied by large losses of species. In the case of thicket, its levels of degradation and its difficulty to regenerate once degraded, makes it susceptible to biodiversity losses.

3

Due to this situation, South African government and other South African stakeholders, such as Non-Governmental Organizations, realized about the necessity to conserve their natural patrimony. However, although sustainable development is entrenched in South Africa‟s legislative and policy framework, socio-economic issues tend to override calls for biodiversity conservation (Crane, 2006). Indeed, lack of awareness of the importance of biodiversity and ecosystem services, and incentives that encourage unsustainable land use turns into ineffective calls for biodiversity conservation. Moreover, the historical legacy of a grossly skewed distribution of population and wealth underlie the government‟s intent to increase conservation‟s contribution to poverty alleviation and economic development (Crane, 2006). To proper addressed natural capital deterioration (biodiversity losses) local stakeholders dependent on ecosystem services must embrace habitats and biodiversity conservation. Often conservation runs opposite to poverty alleviation or to the socio-cultural and economic situation of the area that must be conserved. All around the world the creation of protected areas has often resulted in the alienation of indigenous populations from their land and resources (Oviedo, 2005; Schmidt-Soltau, 2005 cited in Crane 2006). In this case conservation is not effective and generates conflicts. Overcome this pitfall is the first step and challenge towards biodiversity conservation. The process and effect of human mismanagement of landscapes impacts on biological diversity and is potentially exacerbated by global climate change. 1.1.3 Climate Change & Governance Climate change, including changes in short-term variation, as well as long-term gradual changes in temperature and precipitation, is expected to be an additional stress on land degradation leading to an amplification of the process (UNDP, 2008). Climate change-induced land degradation is expected through (UNDP, 2008): - Changes in the length of days and/or seasons; - Recurrence of droughts, floods and other extreme climatic events; - Changes in temperature and precipitation which in turn reduces vegetation cover, water resource availability and soil quality; - Changes in land-use practices such as conversion of lands, pollution, and depletion of soil nutrients; In order to stabilize atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases at the origin of climate change and emitted through human activities, a major global effort is needed. The international community decided to react and take measures against the raising pollution rates due to industrialization. In 1992, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was adopted by the United Nations and entered into force in 1994. The UNFCCC is a framework convention addressing the problem of climate change at an international level. It reflects a consensus in establishing institutions and procedures to reduce the human impact in climate change. 4

The Kyoto protocol was adopted in 1997, at a Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC in Kyoto, Japan and enters into force the 16 of February 2005. (UNFCCC, 2008) The protocol was designed in a flexible way giving some recommendations and allowing the parties to adopt domestic policies and measures. Furthermore the targets fixed to the different countries to reduce their emissions should be achieved at the lowest possible cost, in other words, in cost effective way. For this purpose three mechanisms were created: emission trading (creation of a carbon‟s emissions market); joint implementation (Annex 1 countries3 obtain emissions reductions units by investing in green house reducing activities in others Annex 1 countries); and Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) that allows Annex 1 countries to obtain certified emissions reduction by investment in greenhouse gases reduction activities in Non Annex 14 countries (UNEP-UNFCCC, 2002). The idea is that countries that find it particularly expensive to reduce emissions at home can pay for cheaper emissions cuts elsewhere. The global economic efficiency of reducing emissions is increased while the overall 5% reduction target is still met. The Protocol stipulates, however, that credit for making reductions elsewhere must be supplementary to domestic emissions cuts (UNEP- UNFCCC, 2002). In this context, the carbon market can be used for the implementation of restoration programs that would be profitable for all parties. 1.1.4 Landscape Restoration South Africa is involved in this general movement. The country signed the Convention in 1994 and ratified it on 29 August 1997. Ratifying the Convention has direct consequences for South Africa in terms of activities that the country is obliged to perform. The ratification also has indirect consequences for sectors such as trade, economic development, agriculture, mining, energy, transport and the environment generally as they will have to follow regulations and specific measures linked with climate change (Internet 1).South Africa is also part of the Kyoto protocol since 2002, as a Non Annex 1 country (Internet 1). As such, South Africa does not have a commitment to reduce carbon emissions or any cap (or upper limit) on its carbon emissions. On the contrary, the country can sell some carbon credits through the three mechanisms cited above that would help implementing restoration programs on its territory and thus preserve its rich biodiversity. The Protocol ratification is involved in a general process of environmental policies. The general national policy for the protection of the environment is increasingly formulated on the basis of global concerns and several plans and policies have been developed. The right to environmental protection is indeed now guaranteed by the new Constitution (1996), which “secures ecologically sustainable development and use of natural resources while promoting justifiable economic and social development” (Crane, 2006). To perform its constitutional obligations towards biodiversity conservation, as well as commitments under regional and international environmental agreements, the South African government facilitates the

3 Developed countries identified in the Kyoto Protocol that are supposed to reduce 5% of their emissions in 1990 in the commitment period 2008-2012. 4 Developing countries, which do not have reductions obligations 5

expansion of conservation land. For example, South Africa is signatory for the Convention on Biological Diversity (CDB), which requires signatory states to integrate conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity into relevant plans, programmes and policies. As a result, the government created the National Environmental Management Act (RSA, 1998) and the Biodiversity Act (RSA, 2004). Consequently to these regulations, the amount of land under formal conservation increased by over 457,000 ha between 1994 and 2003 (Crane, 2006). However, dealing with environmental issues generates some difficulties. Indeed, because of the result of apartheid, the economic structure of the country is deeply divided. The policies that have to be made for a sustainable development must focus on the reduction of inequalities and poverty (72% of individuals living under the poverty income line in Eastern Cape in 2001 (Internet 3)). Environmental issues are generally not priorities and are often included into a socio-political field more concerned with human rights, poverty, and access to natural resources, social justice, equity and sustainability (Wynberg, 2002). Compromises have to be made for a more sustainable development. This difficulty has to be taken into account in the conservation/ restoration area. The government of South Africa is taking measures in this sense. A successful example concerns the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry that developed the Working for Water Program that combines landscape restoration and poverty alleviation. It consists at the origin in clearing alien species, employing local people. These teams are employed with the objective to develop the country in a more sustainable way, involving everybody. They are involved in several conservation programs all over the country. Options for restoring thicket and fynbos biomes (including riparian areas) to meet both socio-economic needs and ecological objectives are being investigated. For example, the potential of „spekboom‟ (a dominant species of shrub found in thicket) to sequester carbon dioxide for trade on the carbon market is being investigated through the Subtropical Thicket Restoration Programme (EarthCollective website). 1.2 Context of this thesis project The project of which this thesis has been part is an initiative of Wageningen University and Research Centre (WUR) in collaboration with PRESENCE (Participatory Restoration of Ecosystem SErvices and Natural Capital, Eastern Cape) and Earth-Collective. EarthCollective is a “network that creates supports and facilitates initiatives that improve understanding of the links between nature, ecosystems and human well-being” (Verschuuren, 2007). The aim of EarthCollective in South Africa is to facilitate research to restore degraded landscape for the benefit of local communities, working with partners in South Africa. EarthCollective has proposed PRESENCE as a way to facilitate collaboration between „North-South‟ partners to deliver additional research and technical expertise needed to effectively restore degraded landscapes and support poverty alleviation and livelihoods. PRESENCE addresses key scientific knowledge gaps (specifically surrounding subtropical thicket restoration.). It combines research from diverse scientific disciplines as well as local knowledge to ensure outcomes that are: ecologically sound (conserving biodiversity); stakeholder-driven (community participation); socio-economically beneficial (supporting

6

rural livelihoods); and financially viable (e.g. by exploring possibilities for carbon trading and biodiversity credits) (EarthCollective, 2007b). PRESENCE has been proposed as a collaborative effort with STRP for building applied research capacity and addressing critical knowledge gaps in ecosystem restoration (EarthCollective, 2007b). In this context, EarthCollective developed a programme called EASTCARE, Ecosystem Approach for Subtropical Thicket Conservation And Restoration (Eastern Cape, South Africa), which is a pilot case study for implementation in western Baviaanskloof falling under the PRESENCE framework. This case study employs the Ecosystem Approach for reaching an exhaustive understanding of natural and cultural values present in the western Baviaanskloof. (Zylstra, in press) The Ecosystem Approach (EA) of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) aims to perform an adequate balance of conservation and development and therefore includes a holistic, integrated approach to the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity. It constitutes the primary framework for action under the CBD and comprises of twelve principles. This approach is used as a basis for developing strategies and options for a stakeholder-driven restoration implementation aimed at addressing land degradation and associated loss of ecosystem services and diminished natural capital (Zylstra in press). Emphasis will be placed on stakeholder engagement and participation as an essential element in ensuring long-term conservation goals. Promoting awareness of the many benefits the sustainable use of thicket ecosystem services provide in supporting regional livelihoods will be central to achieving this objective. (Zylstra, in press) EASTCARE utilises an integrated ecosystem services approach to assess: which services are meaningful to stakeholders; how stakeholders‟ perceive subtropical thicket; the benefits (and values) derived from their land; relationships between stakeholders; and defining areas and boundaries suitable for restoration (Zylstra, in press). The first part of EASTCARE consists in an integrated assessment of ecosystem goods and services of Baviaanskloof realised by four students of Wageningen, studying different aspects of the region. This thesis is part of it (see appendix 1). The three other students are: - Kim Janssen, studying the socio-cultural aspect of the western Baviaanskloof - Ignacio de la Flor, studying the economic aspect of the western Baviaanskloof - Eliska Lorencova, studying the institutional capacity concerning the CDM (Clean Development Mechanism) and the Voluntary carbon offsets. It will support the Subtropical Thicket Restoration Program (STRP) pilot project developed by the South African Government as part of the national Working for Woodlands program - to investigate options for restoring the valuable thicket biome to meet both socio-economic needs and ecological objectives (EarthCollective, 2007b). The integrated assessment will result a report that can be used as a resource for management and policy advice as well as for indicating and prioritising research needs for PRESENCE, STRP and BMR. The success of the assessment depends on more than just the sum of the individual theses: 7

students will work in an international multi-cultural team with the purpose of integrating various scientific and practical disciplines The following figure illustrates the relationships between the different institutions involved in the subtropical thicket rehabilitation.

8

BMR- Baviaanskloof Mega-Reserve South African Government DEAT- Department of Economic Affairs and Tourism DWAF- Department of Water Affairs and Forestry ECP- Eastern Cape Parks South African GIB- Gamtoos Irrigation Board WUR Coordinates Universities R3G- Rhodes Restoration Research Group TERU STEP STEP- Subtropical Thicket Ecosystem Planning DWAF STRP- Subtropical Thicket Restoration Programme DEAT TERU- WUR- Wageningen University and Research Centre Partners Funding PRESENCE- Participatory Restoration of Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital (Eastern Cape) Creator EASTCARE- Ecosystem Approach for Subtropical Thicket Conservation and Restoration (EasternCape, South Africa) R3G Scientific advisor GIB

Manages ECP Working for Water/ Woodlands Partners Facilitates/ Supports coordinates Implements Supports Created Will manage STRP PRESENCE Supports from 2009 Facilitates/ Earth Collective coordinates

Supports Sub-project Implements Wilderness Foundation Sub-project Facilitates/ BMR coordinates Located in

WUR students EASTCARE Pilot Project Take part in Takes part in Legend

Institutions

Programmes

Figure 1-1 Different institutions involved in the subtropical thicket restoration. The position of this thesis between the institutions involved in thicket restoration is indicated in the green square, based on Dieter Van den Broek figure in Verschuren, 2007.

9

1.3 Problem statement. South Africa is in a phase of environmental development. Several issues have to be taken into account to make it sustainable. Unfortunately, the wilderness areas are shrinking because of development activities and poor management practices on private and government land, and mountains (Shroyer & Blignaut, 2003). As highlighted before thicket is not an exception and land degradation is putting into risk the whole biome. In response, South African Government is developing the Subtropical Thicket Restoration Programme, as part of the national Working for Woodlands Programme, to investigate options for restoring the valuable thicket biome to meet both socio-economic needs and ecological objectives (INREF, 2007). On the other hand, conservation organizations, as the Eastern Cape Parks Board, are seeking as well for thicket restoration and its sustainable management. However, to undertake any conservation-restoration initiative and success into its application, it is necessary to conduct a research, aimed at a better understanding of ecosystem services and the use and dependence upon them of local stakeholders. Generally, conservation- restoration projects are developed from a scientific point of view but not having into account the beneficiaries or prejudice of these projects, in other words the stakeholders involved. At the end, this leads to the failure in the implementation of the project. An integrated assessment will provide information on what are the perceptions, uses, values and benefits that different stakeholders derive from thicket ecosystem (ecosystem services) (Zylstra, in press). Understanding the area in order to help optimising the implementation of conservation and restoration programmes by considering the residents needs is crucial: What are the existing values? Is restoration (economically & socially) realistic? Who benefits? Who loses? Who is willing? are key questions to answer. The present study, within EASTCARE, aims for his last point. 1.4 Purpose of the study and Research questions The objective of the study is to evaluate the involvement of stakeholders in land restoration in relation to the thicket ecosystem of Western Baviaanskloof. This objective will be achieved by studying stakeholders‟ interests and interactions with selected ecosystems services. Specific Research questions: RQ 1 Who are the main stakeholders involved in the Western Baviaanskloof? RQ 2 What are stakeholders‟ interests in selected ecosystem services of the thicket ecosystem? RQ 3 What are the impacts of the different stakeholders on the thicket ecosystem in the Baviaanskloof study area? RQ 4 What are the conflicts and synergies between stakeholders involved in the restoration process? RQ 5 What are their views on the restoration options of the Baviaanskloof Mega-Reserve thicket ecosystem especially for the Subtropical Thicket Restoration Programme? 10

RQ 6 What are the different trade-offs that could result from the restoration measures? 1.5 Outline of the report The following chapters are aiming at evaluating the interaction of the different stakeholders having an impact in the western Baviaanskloof and evaluate the vision of the stakeholders on the Subtropical Thicket Restoration Programme in the area. Chapter two is focused on the presentation of the study area by locating the Baviaanskloof Natural Reserve in South Africa and describing the general organisation of the study area. A brief presentation of the thicket ecosystem has been included as well as the description of the Baviaanskloof Mega Reserve ant STRP which are the main programs occurring in the study area and that they are part of the framework of this study. Chapter three presents the different methods used during this study: the theoretical methods such as the functions analysis and the stakeholder analysis, and the presentation of the field work. Chapter four presents the different stakeholders involved in the study area and their classification according to selected functions and their impact on it. As all the stakeholders do not use the thicket ecosystem functions for the same purposes, some competing interests can appear. The chapter five gives an overview of the main competing interests that have been noticed during the field work. Chapter six evaluates the acceptation of the farmers to participate to STRP and their point of view on it. The general discussion about the methods and results and the conclusion are developed respectively in chapter seven and eight.

11

2 Chapter 2 Study Area: western Baviaanskloof This chapter describes the study area from a geographical point of view, as well as a population point of view. A brief description of the thicket ecosystem has also been included, as well as a presentation of the Subtropical Thicket Ecosystem Planning, the Baviaanskloof Mega-Reserve and the Subtropical Thicket Restoration Programme. These three programs are developed in more details in Appendix 1.

2.1 Location The Baviaanskloof Natural Reserve, “Valley of Baboons” is located in the Eastern Cape Province in South Africa (Boshof 2005). It is a 199,476 ha valley of a 75km long and varying width and depth, lying between the parallel east-west running Baviaanskloof and Kouga mountain ranges (Boshof 2005). The eastern-most point of the valley is some 95 km NW of the coastal city of Port Elizabeth (Boshof, 2005; Crane, 2006) and its most southerly point is 50km from the Indian Ocean (Crane, 2006). It consists of three contiguous sections: the Western section (78,274 ha), the Cockscomb section (72,617 ha) and the Kouga section (39,113 ha). The western section includes the discontinuous Welbedacht sub-section (9,473 ha) (ECPB, 2007) (see figure 2.1). The Baviaanskloof is well known because of its exceptional natural beauty and because of it rich levels of flora and fauna diversity. The region is home to 1,406 threatened (Red Data Book) plant species, one of the highest known concentrations of such species in the world. Seven of South Africa‟s eight biomes are found in the area namely Fynbos, Subtropical Thicket, Nama-Karoo, Succulent Karroo, Grassland, Savana and Forest (Boshoff, 2005; Kirkman, 2006; Crane, 2006) In addition, the area is at the convergence of three biodiversity hotspots – the Cape Floristic Region, the Succulent Karoo and the Maputo-Pondoland- Albany hotspot (R Cowling pers. Comm. Cited in Zylstra, 2008). This natural treasure was internationally recognised with the World Heritage Site award in 2004. . The study area where this research is situated forms part of the Baviaans municipality. The Baviaans Municipality covers a surface of 7727,01 km² including two cities, namely Willowmore and Steytlerville. Willowmore serves as the administrative core of the area where the local municipality offices, the district offices of national government departments and provincial government departments are situated (Baviaans IDP, 2007). The Baviaans municipality is scarcely populated (0 – 100 people per km²). The Baviaanskloof Nature Reserve is situated to the south and covers 90% of the local municipality area. Agriculture, tourism and service industries form the basis of the area‟s economy. Unemployment is a big issue in the municipality. Only 19% of the people in the area are employed, 86% of the population earns an income of R0 – R800 per month (Baviaans IDP, 2007) The focus of this research concerns the Western part of the Baviaanskloof Natural Reserve and more specifically the private properties of the area that do not belong to the Reserve managed by Eastern Cape Parks Board as represented by the white part into the red circle in 12

figure 2.1. The western Baviaanskloof is populated with approximately 1000 people. The area consists of around 15 white family-owned farms who cover approximately 50 000 ha entirely surrounded by the formally protected state-owned Baviaanskloof Nature Reserve. The farms practice a mix of agricultural land uses including pastoralism (goats, sheep, ostrich) and irrigated cropping (Crane, 2006). On the other hand two coloured communities: Sewefontein and Saaimanshoek inhabit as well the zone. A third community - Coleske – is situated within the Baviaanskloof Nature Reserve but currently subject to advanced negotiation arrangements for its inhabitants to be relocated to communities outside of the Reserve. Together these communities make up over 70% of the western Baviaanskloof community and are mostly comprised of pensioners, farm workers and their extended families largely dependent on government pensions and disability grants (Crane, 2006). Another community, Tchnuganoo, known as the “hippy community” is also living in the area. Due to socio-economic pressures, a steady decline in the regional economy, agriculture is no longer seen as a profitable activity, leading to a growing unemployment such as in the Western Baviaanskloof. (Boshoff, 2005). Moreover, as the agriculture is not considered as profitable enough, some parallel activities are being developed such as eco-tourism. These activities are less labour intensive than agriculture what produce an increase of unemployment among local coloured communities. Consequently, the young people are trying to leave the valley in order to find more opportunities outside. The population is declining in western Baviaanskloof as people migrate to towns in search of work and subsidised housing. (Zylstra, in press)

13

Figure 2-1: Location of Eastern Cape Parks Board Baviaanskloof Reserve Cluster; including the Baviaanskloof Nature Reserve, Groendal Nature Reserve and Formosa Nature Reserve (ECPB, 2005). The study area is indicated by the circle. It consists of the private properties that are in white, surrounded by the reserve in green.

2.2 Thicket biome Of the seven biomes that the Baviaanskloof Natural Reserve possesses, the thicket ecosystem is the one that is dominant in the research area, and therefore the only one considered for the following research. The thicket biome is formed by a dense canopy of largely evergreen shrubs and low trees (0.5–3.0m) often straddled by woody lianas, and a sparse understorey of shade-tolerant herbs, mostly comprising geophytes and succulents, but also C3 and C4 grasses poorly represented within the thicket clump, but may be common in the spaces between them. In general, large succulent shrubs may dominate the canopy (e.g. Portulacaria afra, Crassula ovata) or emerge from it (Aloe spp., Euphorbia spp.) (Vlok et al, 2003). The thicket biome is found mainly where the annual rainfall varies from 200mm to about 1050mm (Vlokl et al, 2003) and where soils are mostly deep and relatively fertile, and in sites that are protected from fire. The thicket biome is centred in the south-eastern part of South Africa (mainly in the Eastern Cape) where it is most extensive in the major river valleys (such as the Gouritz,

14

Baviaanskloof-Gamtoos, Sundays, Great Fish and Kei). Three of the four major types of thicket occur in the Baviaanskloof: Mesic Thicket (with much river euphorbia Euphorbia triangularis) in the Gamtoos Valley; Valley Thicket (with “spekboom” Portulacaria afra and valley bush euphorbia Euphorbia grandidens) on the lower slopes from Cambria to Coleskysplaas (see figure 3); and Arid Thicket (with spekboom Portulacaria afra and wildepruim or jacket plum Pappea capensis on screes and lower slopes of Bokkeveld shale and Enon deposits from Sandvlakte to Nuwekloof. Only the so called Dune Thicket is not presented in the area. Thicket also forms a diversity of mixtures or mosaics with vegetation of other biomes; in the Baviaanskloof, thicket clumps are interspersed with fynbos, renosterveld, grassland and karoo(Cowling, 2006).

Figure 2-2: Thicket has a rich array of plant forms: evergreen shrubs and trees, vines, tree succulents, creeping succulents, and herbs. It is an ancient vegetation type that pre-dates fynbos, karoo, savanna and grassland. Consequently, it includes many very old lineages. Valley Thicket, Cambria. Source : Cowling, 2006) Historically, overgrazing has extensively degraded thicket vegetation, resulting in the loss of phytomass and plant species and the replacement of perennials by annuals (Kerley et al 1995; Centre for African Conservation Ecology Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, 2006) as pastoralism has been the main land use. However, progress has been made identifying other services that thicket can provide to people as ecostourism and wild life (Knight & Cowling, 2006). It is also remarkable the high biomass and carbon storage capacity of thicket for its rainfall, similar to other forest that receive two or three times the amount of rainfall (Knight & Cowling, 2006). Such a high biomass is due to three things according to Cowling (2006):  Firstly, solid thicket doesn’t burn, so that plant material remains intact from one decade to the next. Browsing animals such as kudu, black rhinoceros and elephant remove large quantities of stems and foliage, and create feeding trails visible in the landscape, but they do not destroy the dense canopy. If anything, they make it denser, 15

since the canopy shrubs respond to browsing by producing even more stems.  Secondly, the thicket canopy produces inordinately large amounts of leaf litter, some 450 tonnes per hectare per year in spekboomveld. This amount is comparable with wet forest ecosystems and between five and 35 times higher than the rate for other semi-desert ecosystems.  Thirdly, the dense thicket canopy not only keeps the thicket floor cool, but also intercepts rain, thereby keeping it relatively dry as well. This combination of coolness and dryness results in slow decomposition of the organic mulch on the thicket floor as well as the carbon-rich organics in the soil. Consequently, large amounts of organic carbon accumulate in the soil, improving dramatically – compared with the mineral soil – its fertility and ability to retain moisture. Thus, spekboomveld stores about 130 tonnes of carbon in the soil, a value equivalent to that recorded in many forest types and 10 to 50 times more than in other semi-arid ecosystems. In addition to a high biomass production, thicket creates a microenvironment. Indeed, the features of this environment are more typical of a rainforest than a semi-desert ecosystem. It has been suggested that this skin of organic rich soil, continually stock up from above, enables the development of this luxurious growth at such low rainfall. The injury of this process through overgrazing by goats causes thicket to rapidly degrade. When the protective canopy is destroyed and the floor exposed to rain, heat and hooves, the organics are lost, and the thicket ecosystem soon collapses (Cowling, 2006). Because of this special characteristics of thicket The Department of Water Affairs and Forestry‟s Working for Woodlands , as it will be explained further down, is investigating and developing a pilot project (Suptropical Thicket Restoration Programme, STRP) for driving restoration and thicket conservation trough the carbon economy

2.3 Conservation Plans and Restoration Programmes In 1995, the Cape Floral Kingdom into which is located the Baviaanskloof has been proclaimed World Heritage Site by UNESCO, which hopes to encourage the „biodiversity economy‟ in the region and wants to promote better management and planning of the region‟s rich but vulnerable ecosystem (UNESCO Site). As a result of this recognition, research, planning and implementation initiative between government, civil society and the private sector aims to coordinate and maximize efforts to conserve the highly threatened Cape Floristic Region (Boshoff 2005). Consequently, the Baviaanskloof Natural Reserve is the object of several programmes and plans aiming at protecting the biodiversity and developing a sustainable management of the area. From the different programmes, the three main ones with the most interest for this research are developed below. The three programmes are: the Subtropical Thicket Ecosystem Planning, the Baviaanskloof Mega-Reserve and the Subtropical Thicket Restoration Programme.

16

2.3.1 Subtropical Thicket Ecosystem Planning (STEP) As highlighted before, The Baviaanskloof Nature Reserve , has been proclaimed in 2004 World Heritage Site by UNESCO along with seven other reserves in the Cape Floristic Region, which hopes to encourage the „biodiversity economy‟ in the region and wants to promote better management and planning of the region‟s rich but vulnerable ecosystem (UNESCO Site). As a result of this recognition, research, planning and implementation initiative between government, civil society and the private sector aims to coordinate and maximize efforts to conserve the highly threatened Cape Floristic Region (Boshoff 2005). The Subtropical Thicket Ecosystem Planning has been created in July 2000 is order to ensure the biodiversity endurance in the Eastern Cape region of South Africa (Boshoff, 2005) and fight the degradation of the Subtropical Thicket biome that the Country is facing. It aims to raise awareness about thicket degradation and promote the conservation of globally significant biodiversity in the thicket biome (Knight et al, 2003b). The STEP program highlighted the fact that the thicket ecosystem is highly degrades, mainly because of goat grazing. Consequently, the Baviaanskloof Natural Reserve is the object of several programmes and plans aiming at protecting the biodiversity and developing a sustainable management of the area.

2.3.2 Baviaanskloof Mega-Reserve Project (BMR) The Baviaanskloof is one of three areas in the Cape Floral Kingdom that have been identified for mega-reserve status (a conservation landscape of> 400 000 ha BMR 2006) by the bioregional conservation initiative, Cape Action for People and the Environment, a multi- stakeholder initiative between government, civil society and the private sector to coordinate and maximise the efforts to conserve the highly threatened Cape Floral Kingdom (BMR, 2006). Mega-reserves are conceptualised as partnerships between private land owners and existing nature reserves towards sustainable utilisation of the unique biodiversity in these areas. The focus is on exposing people to more sustainable ways of using the land and natural resources, promoting the adoption of conservation-based farming possibilities. (Crane, 2006). The purpose of the consolidation and expansion of the existing Baviaanskloof Conservation Area to form the Baviaanskloof Mega-Reserve (Figure 2-3) is to ensure effective conservation of 12 major vegetation types representative of all of South Africa's seven biomes, almost all the major biological patterns of the Southern Africa region (Boshoff, 2005).

17

Figure 2-3: the Baviaanskloof mega reserve planning domain. source: BMR, 2006 The BMR project started in 2002 when the Eastern Cape Provincial Department of Economic Affairs, Environment and Tourism (DEAET) contracted the Wilderness Foundation of South Africa (WF), a not-for-profit organisation based in the Eastern Cape, as the BMR implementing agent. Following its formation in 2005, the Eastern Cape Parks Board (ECPB) has played the principal government agency role in the implementation of the BMR. The WF has appointed a BMR Project Management Unit (PMU) to realise the vision of, and implement the Conservation Strategy for the BMR. The Eastern Cape Parks Board is now the lead government agency in terms of conservation in the Baviaanskloof region and is as such, the principal partner to the WF in this project (BMR, 2006). The focus of ECPB is on the formal protected areas, while the PMU drives many “off-reserve” conservation interventions and plays a supporting role to the ECPB “on-reserve” work. An exit strategy is currently being put into place whereby the ECPB and DEAET will take over many of the functions from the PMU when the CAPE project funding ends in 2009 (ECPB, 2007).A Baviaanskloof Steering committee, on which a wide range of stakeholders is represented, is part of the BMR process (Boshoff, 2005) in order to communicate and share the results of the different actions set up to manage the BMR programme. The principles underlying the vision for the Baviaanskloof Mega-Reserve are: a “biologically, economically and socially sustainable conservation area incorporating private landowners, state protected areas and communal concerns” (BMR, 2006). The Mega-reserve has a long-term vision of the conservation of the Baviaanskloof rare biodiversity, scenery and cultural history, and the promotion and facilitation of an economy based on the biodiversity in the surrounding area (BMR, 2006). It seeks also to protect its role 18

as a provider of water. This project provides an occasion for local, provincial and national government to improve the economic development of the region‟s communities (BMR, 2006). The project has 5 main outcomes:  “securing a large consolidated core formal protected area, the primary management objective of which is the conservation of biodiversity  establishing a multi-owner contractual reserve network around the core area in which different land use patterns and forms of conservation status are reconciled and aligned with biodiversity conservation initiatives,  managing the mega-reserve network through a partnership between government, the private sector and civil society,  realising prospects for improving the livelihoods of people leaving in the rural parts of the region, and  exposing people to sustainable ways of using the area‟s natural resources, and incentivising their adoption”. (Boshoff, 2005) Figure 2-4 illustrates the different organisations involved in the BMR organisation.

Figure 2-4: Relationships between the stakeholders involved in BMR, based on ECPB/PMU, 2007

19

Box 1’: The Project Management Unit (PMU)

The Project Management Unit has been created by the Wilderness Foundation, designated as the implementing agent of the BMR project by the Eastern Cape Provincial Department of economic Affairs, Environment and Tourism in order to design and implement the BMR project.

The PMU will be in place until mid-2008 after which its functions will be taken over by the Eastern Cape parks board (for the nature reserve component) and by DEAET (for the off-reserve component). Dating at lifespan the PMU will mentor staff from DEAET and the Parks Board to assist these organisations in acquiring the skills necessary to manage the mega reserve project after 2008 (Boshoff, 2005)

The PMU reports on a quarterly basis to the Baviaanskloof Steering Committee, made up of representatives from 30 stakeholder groups. The executive committee of the BSC, made up of the WF CEO, the Chief Director of Environmental Affairs at DEAET and the CEO of the ECPB, oversee the project on a more regular basis. (BMR, 2006).

A variety of sub-projects and initiatives falling within the Mega -reserve Planning Domain will be overseen by the Project Management Unit (PM U). For example the R 16 million DEAT Poverty Relief project including the development of a world heritage site interpretive centre and the Ri .2 million LOTTO board sponsored tourist infrastructure project have been approved. The project seeks to align developments within the mega-reserve with the municipal Forward Planning structures (such as IDP and SDF), as well as Department Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) and Department of Agriculture initiatives such as Working

for Water and Land Care. (BMR, 2006).

2.3.3 Subtropical Thicket Restoration Programme (STRP) The Subtropical Thicket Restoration Program (STRP) focuses on the restoration of the globally significant subtropical thicket biome in order to preserve the fragile ecosystem. Indeed, some studies concluded that severely degraded subtropical thicket degrades the supply of critical ecosystem services and, without effective human intervention, has a very low chance of recovery to restore natural capital (Earth Collective, 2007). Moreover, there is a general need to improve the impacts of global warming by capturing carbon that is accumulating in the atmosphere as carbon dioxide. |Thicket, and especially “spekboom” (Portularia afra), has the ability to capture high levels of carbon. (Cowling, 2006). It was found that ecosystem carbon storage of intact thicket in the Eastern Cape exceeds 20 kg-m2 – an unusual large amount for a semi-arid ecosystem (Mills & Cowling, 2006). One species given particular attention until now has been the native succulent shrub „spekboom‟ in terms of the extent to which it can support viable restoration and provision of ecosystem services given its exceptional regenerative abilities, unusual ability to rapidly fix carbon in semi-arid environments (3.4 t C ha-1 yr-1), its contribution to large increases in biomass, and its potential role in reducing soil erosion and water infiltration and retention (Mills & Cowling, 2006). For these reasons, this species has been chosen as the key element for the thicket restoration. Some studies are occurring in order to better understand the physiology and performance of this plant. The pilot BMR project has found mixed results with regard to spekboom mortality (ranges from 20%-100%). A partnership between the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry Working for 20

Woodlands and the Baviaanskloof Mega-reserve Project initiated in January 2004 the STRP that aims at researching the scientific and practical feasibility of restoring thicket at the farm scale in a pilot project. The STRP pilot project was established to - Determine the most effective way of maximising carbon return in degraded landscapes; - Promote return of biodiversity; - Develop strategies for sustainable use of restored thicket by rural communities; - Facilitate the private sector‟s involvement in large-scale restoration The STRP aims at evaluating: the potential of existing ecosystem restoration methods; the prerequisites for developing new techniques; the costs and benefits of restoration; and the financial feasibility for tapping into emerging economies for biodiversity, carbon, water, desertification and other payments for environmental services. (EarthCollective, 2007). The directive of the project is to establish baselines about biodiversity and carbon and restore lands with active planting, in order of being able to qualify for carbon and biodiversity credits in the medium to long term (Powell et al, 2007). The strong initial focus is on the potential role of carbon sequestration as a funding source. The restoration via the carbon market could be possible Restoration of Thicket biome using Payments of Ecosystem Services (such as carbon sequestration) might be viable. The sale of the carbon sequestration possibility on the international market can potentially recoup the costs of restoration and provide a substantial return to investors. The main area where this project is being undertaken at the moment is at Goede Hoop in the Cambria area of the Baviaanskloof. Already 180 hectares have been planted in an experimental context, in order to identify the best techniques of restoration. (Cowling, 2006). The idea is to start the program in the Baviaanskloof and then to extend it to the Eastern Cape scale (see figure 2-5). The BMR as an optimal location to test new techniques is used as an experimental location to get species other than spekboom to establish and grow (Powell et al, 2006). The implementation has been given to Gamtoos Irrigation Board (See figure 2-6). GIB will be responsible for the financial management and administration of the programme (Powell et al, 2006).It has to supply plant stock from the nursery. (Powell et al, 2007). The nursery that has been implemented at the Kouga Dam is needed to continue trials to restore the species back to degraded thicket, following successful establishment of spekboom. At each site an area of approximately five hectares are divided into a number of treatments, with the associated specific control methods. The same methodology will be employed in the Fish River Project, but fencing will be required to keep small stock from damaging the truncheons (Powell et al, 2006). STRP recognizes that additional scientific research and technical expertise is critical to the program‟s long-term success (Earth-collective, 2007). In this context, PRESENCE is being proposed as a collaborative effort for building applied research capacity and addressing

21

critical knowledge gaps in ecosystem restoration in order to effectively integrate ecological and socio-economic objectives and achieve desired outcomes. In this context, PRESENCE created the EASTCARE described in the previous chapter in order to have a better understanding of the ecosystem services in western Baviaanskloof.

Figure 2-5: Project boundaries of the Subtropical Thicket Restoration Programme (Powell et al, 2007)

22

Figure 2-6: Relationships between the stakeholders involved in STRP

23

3 Chapter 3. Research Methods In this chapter, the methodology that has been used to realise the study are described. The methods can be classified into two different categories: the methods and concept, which is the theoretical background, and the data collection, which is more practical.

3.1 Conceptual framework and research methods The conceptual framework consists of the two analyses that have been used during this study. These analyses are the function analysis and the stakeholder analysis.

3.1.1 Ecosystem function analysis The western Baviaanskloof as described in the previous chapter is a part of an ecosystem. An ecosystem is a dynamic complex of plant, animal, and microorganism communities and the nonliving environment, interacting as a functional unit, humans being an integral part of it (MA, 2005). One of the main elements of the analysis is the concept of ecosystem or landscape functions. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment highlighted the fact that the transformation of ecosystems through human activity compromises biodiversity and ecological integrity (EarthCollective 2007a). Consequently, it affects the well-being of people who depend directly and indirectly on the benefits derived from them (MA, 2005). Ecosystem services are defined as „„the benefits people obtain from ecosystems‟‟ by the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, (2005), including both natural and human-modified ecosystems as sources of ecosystem services. These services have ecological, socio-cultural and economic value. People seek many services from ecosystems and thus perceive the condition of an ecosystem in relation to its ability to provide desired services.The ecosystem benefits are generally not fully considered in environmental planning and decision-making (de Groot, 2005), due to the difficulty to express the value in monetary terms. However, an integrated assessment can evaluate the conditions of the ecosystems, the provisions of services, and their relation to human well-being. This enables a decision process to determine which service or set of services is valued most highly and how to develop approaches to maintain services by managing the system sustainably. The ecosystems services are depending on ecosystem functions that can be defined as “the capacity of natural processes and components to provide goods and services that satisfy human needs, directly or indirectly.”(de Groot et al, 2002). Each ecosystem function is the result of natural processes which results of complex interactions between biotic and abiotic components. The functional grouping has been chosen in this study with the categories described by Groot et al (2002). Four main categories of functions have been determined, all of them regouping ecosystems goods and services which have direct or indirect benefits to human (de Groot et 24

al, 2002). Regulation functions: relate to the capacity of the ecosystem to regulate essential ecological processes and life support systems through bio geochemical cycles and other biospheric processes. Habitat functions: concern the provision by the ecosystem of refuge and reproduction habitats to wild plants and animals. Production functions: the ecosystem provides products usable by humans for consumption, ranging from food and raw materials to energy resources and genetic material. Information functions: natural ecosystems provide an essential “reference function” to human culture and contribute to the maintenance of human health by providing opportunities for reflection, spiritual enrichment, cognitive development, re-creation and aesthetic experience. The regulation and habitat functions are essential for the maintenance of natural processes and components and therefore have a crucial influence on the maintenance of the two other function-groups. (de Groot et al, 2002). The importance of the function analysis in the study is to know how the thicket ecosystem is used and focus the study on the main services.

3.1.2 Stakeholder analysis The definition of the term „stakeholder‟ is partly adapted from the report of Brown et al 2001. Therefore, the definition applied for this research is as following: A stakeholder is a person, organisation or group with interests in services provided by the thicket ecosystem functions. Stakeholders are both the people with power to control the use of thicket ecosystem functions as well as those with no influence, but whose livelihoods are affected by changing use of functions. The stakeholder analysis can be defined as „a holistic approach or procedure for gaining understanding of a system and collecting information on the identification and description of groups or individuals on the basis of interests related to a certain function that provides services, interrelationships between stakeholders, and explaining possible competition between stakeholders‟ interests‟ (Ypma, 2005). Stakeholders‟ identification: they are persons, organizations or groups with interests in the land restoration in the BMR area, or who can be affected by the outcomes of the STRP. This step is necessary to “determine the main policy and management objectives, to identify the main relevant services and assess their value, and to discuss trade-offs” (de Groot et al, 2006). The objective is to determine their roles, interests, power and influence on the thicket ecosystem. Identifying the extent of cooperation or conflict in the relationship between stakeholders is also part of the recognition. The stakeholder can be ordered according to their spatial distribution, as in table 3-1.

25

Table 3-1:The typology of stakeholders on a macro to micro continuum Spatial distribution of Continuum level Examples of stakeholders stakeholders

International agencies Global and international wider Marco level society Future generations

National governments National NGO’s

Regional authorities Regional Downstream communities

Micro level Local on-site Farmers

Stakeholders‟ prioritisation: according to different criteria such as power, interests, influence or importance in the project, giving information on their level of involvement and their importance in decision making on how functions with the related services must be managed. The stakeholders have different status: primary, secondary or tertiary stakeholders (Schmeer, 1999):  Primary stakeholders are mainly local people, who have low influence over the outcomes of decisions, but their welfare is important to the decision-makers. Often, the primary stakeholders are those who stand to lose the most from a management decision.  Secondary stakeholders are organisations who represent local people‟s interests. They can be important and influential. These secondary stakeholders do not greatly depend on the thicket ecosystem functions. The organisations are predominantly the link between the primary stakeholders and decision-makers. They can both be important and influential; they influence the decision makers through lobbying.  Tertiary stakeholders are mainly are those engaged in the process of decision making, such as the thicket ecosystem management. Therefore they have influence on the outcome of a process but they are relatively unimportant, as their welfare is not a priority. The categorisation of stakeholders can be complicated by the fact that stakeholders tend to fall into more than one category (Brown, et al 2001) 3.1.3 Stakeholder interactions The stakeholder‟s interactions result from the stakeholder analysis. It concerns cooperation and competing interests between different stakeholders concerning the thicket ecosystem restoration in BMR. The competing interests are “situations of competition and potential disagreement between two or more stakeholder(s) or group over the use of one or more service(s) / good(s), provided by the [ecosystem] function” (Ypma, 2005) 26

The thicket ecosystem plays a central role in stakeholders‟ lives, all of them having a different way to use it. It leads to four main categories of competing interests adapted from Brown et al. (2001) in Ypma (2005): Synergies: when the stakeholders use the function for the same purpose. Competing interests over values or beliefs: for example, conservation versus development; cultural value versus economic value… Competition about inter-personal relationships: this occurs when different stakeholders defend their position and stake personal feelings on certain outcomes. Competition of interests or needs: when stakeholders do not use the thicket ecosystems functions for the same purpose, one use being on the disadvantage of the other, or when they use it for the same purpose but they are competing each other. These competing interests can result in trade-offs, meaning making a balance or compromise between stakeholders interests. Remark: competing interests between two stakeholders do not mean that there is no collaboration between them stakeholders

3.2 Data collection The study itself started with the proposal presentation in August 2007. The case study being in South Africa, three months were dedicated to the fields work, from September until December 2007.

3.2.1 Literature review The literature review is the main tool that was used. It is necessary to start with it to get an idea about the topic and the ideas and concepts that were already developed about the specific topic. The literature research for this study mainly focused on scientific literature, on research journals, books and on official websites, from the early stage of the research, as part of the research planning and research questions. It has been used later to get some information on the situation of the study area and on the people living there. It is present in the whole document, and was used during the whole study. The literature research is the first step of the research, but last until the last one. Different kinds of documents have been consulted: scientific articles, reports provided by the interviewee, website of the organisations involved in the research (governmental departments, research institutions, associations, NGO‟s), brochures. The literature research has been used to get the preliminary information for the study but also to get contact details and other information (activity, location, maps…) of the different stakeholders interviewed

27

and the documents necessary to the analysis of the information as well as to get additional information. 3.2.2 Questionnaire/ interview design In order to realise an integrated assessment of the Baviaanskloof, different student are analysing the area according to different perspectives: economic, socio-cultural, institutional, and evaluation of the stakeholders involved in the area. In order to realise it, a correlational survey is useful. It is not a simple descriptive survey but a multivariable survey, seeking a wide range of information. The questionnaire seeks factual information such as background and biographical information, knowledge and behavioural information, but it also includes measures of attitudes, values, opinions and beliefs (Punch, 2005). The creation of the questionnaire necessities the definition of variables (here, socio-cultural, economic, relational and institutional) that are translated into questions that can be consulted in appendix 2. The main stakeholders involved in the western Baviaanskloof are the farmers and communities. As we were four students (Kim Janssen, Ignacio de la Flor and Eliska Lorencova) willing to interview the local people, it has been decided to realise one common questionnaire for the four of us, in order to save time and for a better cooperation of the local people. Each of us created their own questionnaire at first, and then we put everything together, combining some redundant questions. The creation of the questionnaire was realised during the first month. Meanwhile, we had to get acquainted with the area. The questionnaire has been revised and modified by local supervisors and other help. The questionnaire was created for the farmers, the communities being less easy to reach as few of them speak English. It had to involve questions about the economic activities of the farmers, their social life and relationships with the thicket ecosystem, the land restoration point of view, and their relationship with other stakeholders. The sampling corresponds to the 11 farmers that have an activity in the valley and whose contact details were communicated to us by the farmers‟ union chairman, Chris Lamprecht. The four of us went to interview the farmers. The interviews lasted around three hours. Generally, the farmers showed us their property afterwards. Two people were taking notes while two others were asking questions. However, anybody could ask a sudden question anytime. The roles were exchanged when we interviewed another farmer. Eleven farmers were interviewed (see picture 3-1). During the interviews, the farmers were asked to draw the properties borders and to locate on their maps the different land uses and restoration areas possibilities for the implementation of STRP. The properties of the farmers interviewed are reported in figure.

28

Picture 3-1: Interview with Chris Lamprecht The communities were interviewed by Kim Janssen and Ignacio de la Flor, as they needed specific information for their thesis. We decided not to go altogether, the four of us, not to intimidate people who would not feel comfortable. Kim and Ignacio were the most relevant people to do the interviews. The interviews were done through a translator, as the community people could not speak English. While the communities were interviewed by Kim and Ignacio, Eliska and I interviewed other stakeholders. Semi-structured interviews were conducted. We designed some general questions about restoration involvement and institutional organisation and roles. Some additional questions were asked during the interview, according to the topics and willingness of the interviewee to develop this topic.

3.2.3 Field work and observation During the stay in South Africa, we were based at the Kouga Dam see picture 3-2 below on the border south-east of the reserve. One vehicle was at our disposition that we shared with the PRESENCE facilitators. To get in the study area, 3.5 h of driving were necessary on a 4x4 road.

29

Picture 3-2: Kouga Dam, Eastern Cape, South Africa. We managed to visit to the study area several times:  For meeting the farmers union chairman and explain him the project and ask if it was possible to meet the farmers in order to present them the project and introduce ourselves in the purpose of future interviews;  For a presentation about the STRP realised by Mike Powell and followed by an introduction of the four students and their work in the Baviaanskloof, in order to have a first contact with the farmers and get their contact details;  For the interviews with the farmers during a week. Two farmers were interviewed in a day;  For interviews with the communities for five days (followed by two weeks for Kim and Ignacio), mainly Sewefontein and the farm manager, who could speak English and introduce ourselves and the project to the community trust;  For four days in order to interview one more farmer and for a presentation of STRP to the communities realised by Yolande Vermaak (STRP project manager)  For the farmers‟ union meeting to present the first results of our research.

30

The interviews were completed with observation. Observation is necessary to detach from what was said during the interviews and determine what the situation is from a more objective point of view. After the interviews with the farmers and communities, other official organisations have been interviewed such as:  The Baviaans municipality  The tourism office  The Department of Agriculture and Land Affairs  The Cacadu District, Department of Environmental Health  The Gamtoos Irrigation Board  The Department of Water Affairs and Forestry  Eastern Cape Parks Board in Patensie Further information about the contact details of the persons interviewed during the meetings is gathered in appendix 3. Further interviews have been conducted by Eliska Lorencova, in January 2008. Apart from the interviews, we participated in two meeting of the Baviaanskloof Mega-reserve Steering committee in Port-Elizabeth, with a presentation of our work during the second one. The steering committee gathers all the stakeholders involved in the Mega-Reserve every three months The meetings were attended on the 26/09/07 and the 05/12/07 We attended also to a workshop organised by Earth Collective for the PRESENCE programme. The purpose of the workshop was to determine the research priorities and capacity needed to “guide and effect the broad-scale mainstreaming and implementation of restoration” (EarthCollective, 2007b). The workshop lasted three days and took place in the Baviaanskloof, at Zandvlakte, property owned by a farmer, Pieter Kruger. The participants came from different organisations involved in restoration and in contact with Earth Collective and the STRP.

31

Legend

Pieter Kruger

Chris Lamprecht

Rume van Rensburg David Smith

Thys Cilliers

Quentis Bezuidenhout

Willie van Ransburg Pete Hatting

Boetie Terreblanche

Nico Smith

Linden Booth

Zaaimanshoek

Sewenfontein

Tchnuganoo

Water points

Figure 3-1: Western Baviaanskloof study area. This figure shows the different properties located in the study area .

32

3.3 Data analysis The analysis has been realised considering the valley inhabitant perspective. The farmers and communities are the people we communicated the most with. They are the one with the most staked in the study area. SPSS The data analysis was realised with the help of the SPSS programme. Considering the small size of the representative groups, detailed statistical analysis would be meaningless, which is why only the descriptive analysis were used, and more specifically the descriptive frequencies. The frequencies are useful to visualise trends for a specific variable. GIS Arcview The GIS programme was used with the help of Matthew Macgonaghie, a South African Student, to create some maps to visualise the different land uses and restoration possibilities on the farmers‟ properties.

33

4 Chapter 4. Thicket Functions, Services and Stakeholders The land use of the Baviaanskloof depends on different functions of the thicket ecosystem. This ecosystem provides several services to the stakeholders in the area and supports their quality of life. This chapter is focused on the identification and selection of the relevant functions in a restoration project context, and the identification and prioritisation of the different stakeholders according to the different functions.

4.1 Identification of thicket functions and services The thicket ecosystem provides different services to the different stakeholders of the Baviaanskloof. The functions providing the services are categorised into four classes: Production functions; Regulation functions, Habitat functions and Cultural functions. The thesis study is developed in the context of STRP (and BMR) whose main issues are biodiversity and carbon sequestration that are threatened by deforestation and highly dependent on land cover. The modification of this element influences all of the goods and services provided by the thicket ecosystem to the different stakeholders. In the following table the main functions of the thicket ecosystems in Western Baviaanskloof that have been identified noticed during the field work are grouped, considering the land uses and in the restoration context. A table with more functions of western Baviaanskloof can be seen in appendix 2. Table 4-1: Functions, ecosystems processes and Goods and services of the thicket ecosystem in Western Baviaanskloof (source: adapted from de Groot et al (2002)) Ecosystem processes and Services provided by the Functions and services components providing the ecosystem in western functions Baviaanskloof

Production functions- Provision of natural resources Hunting game (e.g. Kudu, spingbok), Food Vegetation for livestock food edible plants and animals (goats, sheep, cattle), Crops (luzern), vegetables growing capacity Variety in biochemical substances Medicinal plants (e.g. Aloe ferox, Medicinal resources in natural biota Clausena anisata,…) Provision of water for domestic Filtering, retention and storage of Water supply (accommodations) and agricultural fresh water (e.g. in aquifers) uses (irrigation) Regulation functions- Maintenance of essential ecological systems and life support processes Role of ecosystems in bio- Carbon sequestration geochemical cycles (e.g. carbon Influence on climate sequestration) Habitat functions- Providing habitats (suitable living spaces) for wild plants and animals Maintenance of biodiversity (e.g.: Suitable living spaces for wild black rhino, vervet monkeys, Refugium function plants and animals Portulacaria Afra, Willowmore cedar, ) through land cover;

34 Information functions Providing information for cognitive development Variety in landscapes with Eco-tourism, nature study, Recreation/ tourism recreational uses entertainment

Six main services have been selected. They all relates to the main activities in the area (food, medicinal resources, water supply) and to the main issues of the restoration project (refugium function, carbon sequestration). Food production supports the main economical activities of the area that is the farming activity and essentially the livestock breeding. The goats, sheep and cattle production is highly dependent on the land cover as the thicket is a big part of their alimentation, with a complement of luzern. The thicket ecosystem also supports the production of vegetables and game meat. Medicinal resources medicinal plants are the main component to cure for the communities. There is no doctor in the valley, but a healing man that use plants to cure his patients. The closest medical centre is in Willowmore that is between an hour and two away, depending on where the patient lives in the valley. However, most of the people do not have any transportation. In case of emergency, an helicopter is sent to transport people at the hospital. Water supply has been selected because it corresponds to the main issue taking place in the valley, as it has been classified as the first concern by the communities when using a so-called Pebble distribution (see appendix 5), realised by Ignacio de la Flor (see his thesis for more details). It was also considered as very important by the other stakeholders when asked to rank some criteria (see appendix 13) during interviews.The water can be considered also as a regulation function, however, in this case, only the production service is considered as a life support. The surface water is considered. Carbon sequestration is one of the main functions involved in STRP. One of the project‟s objectives is to be involved in carbon trading through land restoration (see chapter 2). This function is totally dependent on the land cover of the area. The refugium function is necessary for the preservation of the biodiversity. The thesis study being in the context of conservation and restoration of lands, it is important to consider it. It is also highly dependent on the land cover. Recreation and tourism are sectors in expansion which tends to be a main activity in the valley, replacing farming activities.

4.2 Stakeholder identification The Baviaanskloof valley is used by multiple stakeholders using different functions of the thicket services. All of the stakeholders have interests in the thicket ecosystem, such as biodiversity conservation, historical sites, grazing areas, water supply… The different stakeholders have different valuation of the services of the ecosystem. According to their level and type, their interests are different. The stakeholders can be classified according to their hierarchical status from a macro-level to a micro-level.

35

Table 4-2:Stakeholders with interests in Baviaanskloof Spatial distribution of Stakeholders with interests in Continuum level stakeholders thicket ecosystem Future generations Macro level UNESCO International tourists UNFCCC Global and international World Bank Wageningen University Government of The Netherlands EarthCollective (PRESENCE, EASTCARE) DWAF DNA National DEAT National tourists DEAET Department of Agriculture Gamtoos Irrigation Board Eastern Cape Parks Board Provincial Wilderness Foundation (PMU) Landmark Foundation Micro level R3G Regional tourists District Cacadu Municipality Police / rangers Farmers Local tourists Local communities Local Other private owners Baviaans municipality Tourism association WfW contract teams

4.2.1 Global and international Stakeholders The main international stakeholder having an influence for the Baviaanskloof is the UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation) The Cape Floral Region, in which Baviaanskloof is located has been recognised in June 2005 together with seven other South African protected areas, as a World Heritage Site. Baviaanskloof was included in UNESCO‟s decision because of its exceptional biodiversity: seven out of eight of South Africa‟s biomes are depicted in this nature reserve (Boshoff, 2005). World Heritage sites belong to all the peoples of the world, irrespective of the territory on which they are located (Internet 6). The future generations and international tourists (as well as national, regional or local tourists) have the right to know the Baviaanskloof and benefits from the functions and services of its ecosystem, and especially the information functions. Both of these categories are interested in the rehabilitation and sustainable management of the thicket ecosystem, in order to be able to benefit from the same functions and services. UNFCCC (see chapter 1) created the opportunity for projects such as STRP to be develop in order to reduce the impact of human activities on climate change. It created a carbon market

36 that has the possibility to finance such projects and create cooperation between developed and developing countries. The World Bank gives a financial support to the creation of the BMR through the Global Environment Facility fund. The STRP coordinators also plan to submit the project for funding possibilities (Powell, 2004, unpub.). Wageningen UR provided the seed funding for PRESENCE to establish the programme, organise a workshop and report on outcomes. The Dutch government is also involved in the Baviaanskloof to conduct hydrological studies and explore the potential of Payments for Environmental services for water These stakeholders are the support of the different projects (e.g. BMR, STRP); however they do not have a direct influence on the study area. For this reasons, the impact analysis and competing interest‟s analysis do not involve them.

4.2.2 National Stakeholders The national stakeholders are the governmental departments. They have the purpose to develop the country (in a sustainable way) through the creation and implementation of regulations and development of programs specific to their specialty. These departments are national organisations but also have provincial offices. Department of water affairs and Forestry (DWAF) Despite the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry has a provincial office, it is considered for this study as a national agency, as people from different offices are involved in STRP. Indeed one of the initiators of the project is based in the city of Cape Town. DWAF is the guardian of water and forestry resources of South Africa. They have to ensure that people get access to clean water and safe sanitation. They promote “efficient water resources management to ensure sustainable economic and social development” (Internet 7). DWAF is involved in the governmental programme Working for Water (sub-programme: Working for Woodlands) that aims at eradicate alien species (see box nb 2). This programme is also involved in the financing and implementation of STRP which pilot project is located in the Baviaanskloof and which expertise falls under the Working for Water programme. STRP is managed by the Gamtoos Irrigation Board, a “water service authority” that has been chosen by DWAF as the implementing agency. The Working for Water programme employs three teams of 17 people for the nursery at the Kouga Dam, and two2 other teams for the planting of spekbooms in experimental areas in the |Baviaanskloof, during the period of September-December 2008. The project has probably moved on since this period. To be approved, and initiated by DWAF, any project concerning forestry and water affairs have to fall under the Water Management Act or the National Forest Act.

37 Box 2: Working for Water: (Internet 5) Working for Water programme was initiated in 1995 by the South African Government in order to deal with the problem of invading alien plants, and at the same time address unemployment among less skilled people, focussing mainly on rural women, the youth and the disabled. It started as a complementary programme, with the “left-over money from other programmes”. It is now entirely part of the budget of the government (from DWAF contact).

It is a multi-departmental public work programme in which DWAF is involved.

The objective is “to enhance water security, improve ecological integrity, restore the productive potential of land and promote sustainable use of natural resources, and to invest in the most marginalized sectors of South African society. “ Since 1995, different actions have been realised: -water security have been improved with enhanced streamflow and improved water quality, more productive wetlands, estuaries and water tables; -degraded land have been rehabilitated with a strong emphasis on Land Care by the Departments of Agriculture and Land Affairs, to secure the sustainable productivity of land; -Conservation of biodiversity has increased as well as catchment integrity and the reduction in the frequency and intensity of fires and floods; -Industries based on the cleared wood were developed -Labour-intensive approach of work gives people more power

Working for Water, although not without its problems, has certainly been one of the most successfully integrated environmental and social rehabilitation projects undertaken by the new ANC government of this country.

Designated National Authority (DNA) Involved in the national Clean Development Mechanism, the DNA is the authority that approves national project for the trade of carbon. The main task of the DNA is to assess whether proposed CDM fulfil sustainable development criteria to determine whether they will assist South Africa in achieving its sustainable development goals and to issue formal host country approval where this is the case. It will have to evaluate the STRP in order to determine its possibility to enter the carbon market through the CDM. It is located at the moment in the Department of Mineral and Energy (DME); however the decisions about carbon sequestration projects are debated between four representives from several different departments but with an environmental background. All the decisions made by the DNA have to be approved by director general of the DME (Internet 1). Presenting STRP for CDM to DNA corresponds to the main objective of STRP coordinators to get a long-term economic viability of the project. The proposal will be submitted after several reviews. As this stakeholder is not yet involved in STRP, it was not considered during the impact and competing interest‟s analysis. Department of Environment and Tourism (DEAT) The DEAT has the mission to lead to a sustainable development of the environment and tourism (Internet 1). At the provincial level, it is known as the DEAET (Department of Economic Affairs, Environment and Tourism). It is located in Bisho.

38 DEAT is involved in programs linked with climate change (Internet 1). The department supports and finances organisations such as SA Weather Services, the Agricultural Research Council or the National Department of agriculture in their researches for minimising effects of activities (such as the agricultural activity) on climate change (see appendix 6). It is involved in the creation and financing of the BMR and collaborates with the Working for Water program (WfW, 2004). 4.2.3 Provincial stakeholders The provincial stakeholders can be categorised according to their type: governmental organisations, Non-Governmental Organisations (NGO‟s) and other organisations. Governmental organisations Department of Agriculture and Land Affairs The department seeks to facilitate, support, promote and co-ordinate sustainable small scale food production and commercial agricultural development, through equitable access to and optimal use of resources with a meaningful participation by all stakeholders in an integrated manner (Internet 8). More concretely, the purpose is to “develop funding in order to improve the cultural production, to encourage the young people to work and to try to set up things that bring fast cash”, according to the interviewee from the department. The Department of Agriculture has an environmental sensitivity as it is investing in a restoration project named Land Care on communal lands that aims at filling dongas. It is also collaborating with the Working for Water program. The department distinguish different land status: Private land State land Land owned by communities/ groups (the chief is officially responsible of the land) Church land Commonages (the land is owned by municipalities; people living on the land has to pay taxes to the municipalities, the taxes being settled by the municipalities) In the Western Baviaanskloof, three types of land status can be found: private land (farmers), church land (Saaimanshoek) and land owned by communities (Sewefontein and Tchnuganoo). Concerning the study area of the Western Baviaanskloof, the Department of Agriculture has little power, as all the properties are private. Indeed, when farms are on state land, the farmers have to follow standards such as the stock rates on the properties, but the department cannot impose anything but advices on private properties such as in the Baviaanskloof. This situation can explain certain abuses on the lands. However, all users, whether they are owners, tenants or are occupying the land illegally, are subject to government (national, provincial or local) legislation.

39 NGO‟s Wilderness Foundation It was founded in 1972. It sustains African wilderness and wild lands through integrated conservation and social and educational programmes. The organisation is involved in the Baviaanskloof Mega Reserve, a project creating one of the largest wilderness and wild land areas in South Africa through the consolidation and collaborative management of 500,000 hectares of land owned by government and the private sector in the Eastern Cape.(Internet 9) the Wilderness Foundation created the PMU (Project Management Plan) in order to organise the Baviaanskloof Mega-reserve management. Every three months, a Baviaanskloof Steering Committee Meeting is organised in Port Elizabeth with the BMR stakeholders, headed by the PMU involving Wilderness Foundation and ECP to discuss the progress of different actions such as: The launch of new tourism routes The World Heritage Site Interpretive Centre The Heritage Booklet, about the touristic sites of the BMR and some History Proud Partner Programme of BMR, that gives a signage to the farmers for example as well as documentation about the BMR Transfer of responsibilities for the PMU to Eastern Cape Park for the effectiveness of the BMR project. The WF is currently responsible for the implementation of Conservation Strategy of the BMR (BMR, 2006). Landmark Foundation The Landmark Foundation aims at building the conservation economy so that landscapes can effectively be conserved. The Landmark Foundation was founded in 2004 (Internet 10). The Landmark Foundation is involved in the Baviaanskloof by a programme of leopard protection. This Leopard and Predator Project aims to address the persecution of predators, and leopards in particular. The Landmark Foundation, even if it does not have a real impact in the restoration activities in the valley is considered as an important stakeholder as it is well-known by the farmers in Western Baviaanskloof. Indeed, there were several remarks on the fact that it was a rare association that came to do something concrete and not only just research. Their objective is to give the farmers some cages to catch leopards and put collars to track them. By being involved in the leopard project, the farmers protect their own interests: the collars allow the farmers to follow the leopard. When a sheep or a goat is killed and that it is proved that a leopard was in the area by the tracking collars, the farmers receive financial compensation. Other organisations Gamtoos Irrigation board (GIB) Gamtoos Irrigation Board is a private organisation, established in accordance with the

40 National Order Act and the Water Act. GIB is an implementing agency registered as a water service authority. GIB is working according to the regulations created by DWAF. GIB is depending on the water catchment in which Western Baviaanskloof is located. Indeed, the water from the Gamtoos river that run in the Western Baviaanskloof is collected at the Kouga Dam and distributed for irrigation and domestic use in the Gamtoos valley by GIB, until Port Elizabeth. GIB is working on different projects such as STRP for DWAF. The main influence of GIB in the western Baviaanskloof resides in their involvement in STRP through the Working for Water programme. They employ people from the valley in order to plant the experimental plots. The project manager employs contractors that manage their own teams. GIB has to make sure that the contracts from the contracts from the contractors are legal. Rhodes Restoration Research Group (R3G) It involves scientists from Rhodes University, Stellenbosch University, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan university and private consultants. It is the scientific advisor of GIB for the STRP. They are financed by DWAF for this project. It is responsible for the research on the spekboom and the funding of research for the project, as well as for other projects such as the Kouga Riparian Rehabilitation Project. R3G are looking for funding from different sources, such as World Bank. R3G are consultants working for GIB. Their main focus is currently on landscape rehabilitation. Eastern Cape Parks (ECP) Eastern Cape Parks is a parastatal entity: it receives funding from the government if it is not enough; they have to find their own funding. It was established according to the Provincial Parks Board Act 12 of 2003. Its mains objective is associated with the biodiversity conservation inside the Nature Reserves. The Nature Reserves managed by the Eastern Cape Parks cover an area of 438 000 ha (Internet 11). It is mainly funded by the provincial government. All the policies are set by a board. It is also involved in tourism. Accommodation ranges from luxurious lodges and renovated classic Cape-style farm homesteads to wooden chalets, bungalows and hikers huts. Picnic and camping sites are available at selected reserves. Eastern Cape Parks objective is devoted to “responsible conservation management and utilisation of natural resources within the Eastern Cape‟s protected areas, in a manner that promotes broad community involvement and upholds the principles of custodianship, sustainability and excellence in all its activities” (Internet 11). There are 46 people working for ECP in Baviaanskloof, mainly originally from the valley. However, more staff is needed. The strategy at the moment is to expand the reserve and get corridors to link different isolated areas belonging to ECP. During an interview, the ECP manager expressed several plans: Expansion of the rhinoceros project: 6 black rhinoceros have been introduced recently. The plan is to reintroduce some other animals such as zebras or other elands

41 Develop tourists‟ accommodations: transformation of Gelhoutboos wooden houses in three stars accommodation, and linking it with Kondomo through vehicle traffic. The ECP Baviaanskloof collaborates with DWAF and the Working for Water project: 112 000 ha have been cleared from alien species by the working for water teams that have to work only on state lands. ECP is also involved in the Baviaanskloof Mega Reserve project described in chapter 2. ECP is also involved in land restoration through the carbon trading with the American Society for Conservation of Biology: it gets 60 000 Rands/year to plant 10 ha/year. 4.2.4 District level stakeholders Cacadu District The Cacadu District (formerly Western district) covers the rural western areas of the province. It is the largest of the six districts with an area of 58,242 square kilometres. The district forms the rural hinterland beyond Port Elizabeth. It comprises 9 municipalities, including the Baviaans municipality (see appendix 7). It counts the Baviaanskloof Natural reserve between its boundaries. The head offices of the Cacadu district are located at Port Elizabeth. The Cacadu area is the third largest economy of the Eastern Cape Province. Agriculture is the dominant sector in the district and accounted in 2000 for 28% of the district‟s domestic product per region and the sector employs over 31 000 people. Agricultural activities range from live stock farming, crops forestry to fishing. The growing sectors are the manufacturing the agriculture and the tourism sectors through the national parks such as Tsitsikamma, Baviaanskloof and Addo elephant park; but also due to the conversion of traditional commercial farming for game farming (Internet 12). The Cacadu District includes a number of areas of high conservation importance, including three priority river corridors and extensive areas along the coast and central interior that are considered critically endangered, threatened and vulnerable (Cacadu district IDP, 2007/08). The bioregional programmes – Cape Action for People and the Environment (CAPE), Subtropical Thicket Ecosystem Project (STEP) and the Succulent Karoo Ecosystem Plan (SKEP) converge in the area of the Cacadu District Municipality. The outcomes and products of these bioregional programmes and their associated projects, provide the Cacadu municipality and the local municipalities in the District with environmental tools and guideline for planning and decision-making in their IDPs. These bioregional programmes specifically seek to align local economic and social development needs of the region with biodiversity conservation targets. Linked to these programmes, there are a number of landscape scale initiatives being implemented in the area of the Cacadu District, including the Garden Route Initiative, the Baviaanskloof Megareserve Project and the Greater Addo Elephant Park Project. These projects have as their primary aim the conservation of critical biodiversity and ecosystems, but they also provide vehicles for addressing social and economic upliftment through community involvement (Cacadu district IDP, 2007/08). 4.2.5 Local stakeholders Baviaans municipality

42 The municipality of Baviaans is quite independent from the Cacadu. It is more like a bottom- up relation than the opposite. Indeed, Cacadu district provides Baviaans municipality with funding, and the municipality manages it as it wants. The Cacadu district is very helpful, especially concerning money issues, as long as the request is involve in the Baviaans IDP. The municipality is also responsible for the police station located in the Baviaanskloof. The list of the power and functions attributed to the municipality can be consulted in appendix 8, as well as the services that the municipality can provide. About 80-90% of the Baviaans municipality falls under the influence line of the mega-reserve project, making it sensitive to biodiversity conservation and land restoration, and thus to the development of STRP. The Baviaans municipality has no environmental department. For any environmental issue, people have to refer to the Cacadu district in Port Elizabeth. The Baviaans municipality is a priority of development for Cacadu district (Cacadu district IDP, 2007/08) The farmers The farmers are all white Afrikaans generally originally from the region. Of the 11 farmers interviewed, three just arrived in the area and have not been raised in the valley. They are more or less from the same generation and grew up together apart for two of them who are older. They are all married with children who go to boarding schools out of the valley when they are six. Although most of the farmers living in the Western Baviaanskloof grew up in the area or in similar conditions, it is generally not the case of their wives, who have sometimes some difficulties to adapt to this isolated life and environment. There is a Womens Association, based in Willowmore to which some women attend to. However, only the women living the closest to Willowmore have really the opportunity to participate. Indeed, some of the farms are between 1.5 and 2 hours away from the Willowmore. The farmers are organised in an association to discuss every two months about farming topics and take decisions. Some more details about the economic activities are gathered in appendix 10. The chairman of the association changes every two years. During the field work, Chris Lamprecht was responsible. The farmers are also living with the farms dwellers who are Coloured people living on their property and who used to work for the farmers. However, the general farming activites nowadays are not able to employ all the dwellers of the property. Thus the unemployment is a big issue for these people leading to alcohol abuses which is a real problem in the valley (this alcohol problem is also found in the independent communities who also have a high unemployment rate). The communities There are four distinct communities in the study area: Sewefontein, Zaaimenshoek, Coleskeeplaas and Tchuganoo. Sewefontein is a community farm of 1300 ha bought 7 years ago. There are 75 shareholders sharing the farm benefits. As the property can not hold all of the beneficiaries, they are spread into the whole valley, working in other farms. Only 20 families live on the property. Most of

43 the houses are made of “blouboswood”, “riet”, bamboo and clay. The decisions concerning the community farm are taken by a trust of 12 people, including men and women. Their main concern is the community well-being and benefits. However, the decisions are difficult to be taken with so many deciders, who do not always live on the property. The whole community meets once a year. There is running water for every house but no electricity. As it is a private property they have to get the electricity from a company (ESKOM) and make the arrangements themselves. There is only one public phone near the road. There are no phone lines in the community because as a private property, the community would need to pay for the lines. Until December, the farmers of the community were helped by a consultant in order to try to run the farm in an efficient way and develop a business plan to get subsidies. The community possesses 500 goats, 200 sheep and 40 ha planted with luzern. The farm contains 150 ha of arable land, only the lack of suitable systems and manpower do not allow an optimal use of the land. However, the farm is blessed with a fountain that provides about 50 000litres/hour. The community shares the source with two farmers. There are also 10 ha of land on which the shareholders can grow vegetables (by themselves) and an organic garden. The vegetables are for the individual consumption and not trade. However, exchanges are also made within the community. Saaimanshoek is a church community created in 1930. This community has the only school still on activity in the area. The community comprises about 40 families, with an average of six people in one household. The community as it is not a private property benefits from the Baviaans municipality services. Therefore, on the contrary from Sewefontein, there is electricity since approximately six years. However there is no running water in the houses except in the church (teacher) houses. The houses have biological toilets. Flushing toilets can be found in the church (teacher) houses which are made of brick stone. The decisions are made by church leaders, five of them living in Saaimanshoek. They are elected every 2 years; they also take care that people don‟t drink alcohol, (which is a big problem) in the community, and that there is no „dagga‟ (marihuana) grown/smoked. People do not keep vegetable gardens as in Sewefontein. Men mostly work on the land (but not their own land), and women mostly do housework and on occasions they help on the field. However, some men and women also participate to the Working for Water program such as within the STRP context. The community do not have a farming activity as a business activity. Some vegetables are grown and a few livestock are bred for private consumption. Celebrations only include weddings, birthdays, church festivities (there is one annual church festivity for Sewefontein, Zaaimanshoek and Coleskeplas). For more details about the socio-cultural values of the communities, see Kim Janssen‟s thesis. Coleskeplas is a third community located in the Baviaanskloof Natural Reserve. The community is subject to negotiations for relocation with relevant provincial organisations. Due to these sensitive negotiations, the community was not assessed. The last community is much different from the two others described above. The

44 “Tchnuganoo community” is composed by 8 Afrikaans people coming from different areas and a Czech woman on a property that is owned by a trust. The community is composed by people coming from different areas. The property comprises 650 ha and is owned by a trust, which does not have any contact with the 9 people living on the property. As some have been living on the property for more than 5 years, they have become “legal squatters” and thus have legal rights to live on the property. They have to pay a fee mentioned at 10 000 rands to live on the property. They build their own houses and earn money by doing small jobs. They live quite isolated from the other people of the valley. A small nursery has been implemented and its development is on project in order to replant degraded areas of the property. There is willingness from the runner of the nursery to collaborate with ECP and create jobs opportunity for the two communities neighbouring the property. The main focus of the people living in the property is to maintain their own livelihoods by growing their own crops and being self-sustainable. The farm is not supposed to make any profit. If some are made, it should go to charity organisations.

Figure 4-1 illustrates the links between all the stakeholders described in this paragraph and involved in Western Baviaanskloof. The stakeholders involved in the two programmes STRP and BMR described in chapter 2 are also highlighted.

45 DWAF DEAET DALA

WUR

Supports Employs BMR- Baviaanskloof Mega-Reserve Support DEAET- Department of Economic Affairs, Environment Supports and Tourism DWAF- Department of Water Affairs and Forestry GIB Cacadu district ECP- Eastern Cape Parks Supports GIB- Gamtoos Irrigation Board R3G- Rhodes Restoration Research Group STRP- Subtropical Thicket Restoration Programme PRESENCE Supports WUR- Wageningen University and Research Scientific advisor BMR steering committee executive

Partners STRP stakeholders R3G Baviaans municipality Western Baviaanskloof Implements through Supports WfW Baviaanskloof Natural Reserve

Supports

Manages ECP

Involved in Wilderness Foundation Tchnuganoo Saaimanshoek Sewefontein Farmers

Involved in Landmark Foundation

Figure 4-1: Stakeholders involved in the Western Baviaanskloof.

46

4.3 Relations between Stakeholders and ecosystem functions and services in the study area By providing services, ecosystems support and sustain the livelihood of human beings, societies and economies. The different goods and services that are provided by the thicket ecosystem functions are used by the different stakeholders mentioned in the previous part. According to the functions, the stakeholders can be of primary, secondary or tertiary influence and can be prioritised. However, for every function the stakeholders who are the most important (see chapter 3) and consequently always cited as primary are the farmers and communities who live all year in the Baviaanskloof. The table 4-3 shows the different functions and the stakeholders who depend on each function. Table 4-3: Dependence of stakeholders on functions of western Baviaanskloof. Functions Stakeholders (goods and Primary Secondary Tertiary services)

Production functions Department of Agriculture Livestock/ Farmers Baviaans municipality Cacadu district (department of cropping Sewefontein environmental health) Sewefontein Tchnuganoo Vegetables Cacadu district (for Saaimanshoek) Saaimanshoek farmers Medicinal Sewefontein, ECP resources Saaimanshoek Gamtoos irrigation board (Gamtoos Farmers valley + Port Elizabeth residents) DWAF Water supply Communities ECP Baviaans municipality Tourists Regulation functions Gamtoos irrigation board (Working for DWAF Woodlands programme) DEAT (environmental quality Carbon Farmers R3G and protection directorate) sequestration Communities ECP Wageningen university STRP Earth collective Global Population Habitat functions All residents Wilderness Foundation DEAT (Biodiversity and Refugium Tourists ECP conservation directorate) Information functions tourists DEAT (tourism directorate) Recreation/ Tourism association All residents Baviaans municipality tourism ECP Cacadu district Wilderness foundation The stakeholders depend differently on the functions. The relations between stakeholders and the thicket ecosystem functions can be determined through the meetings and interviews that have been realised.

47 The different stakeholders can appear several times. However, depending on the function, their impact on it is different. The following part is describing the different dependences and impacts of the stakeholders for each function. Because the food production, medicinal resources, carbon sequestration and refugium function are all extremely dependent on the land cover and especially the plant system, they have been analysed together, to avoid redundancies. They are referred as the “plant dependent functions”. Note: the farmers have been considered as a group, named “the farmers”, in general. However, there are some differences of behaviour when taking individually. It was considered more relevant to consider the general impact of their combined activities, because the impact of individual farmers is limited and too diverse.

4.3.1 Plant dependent functions: food production, medicinal resources, carbon sequestration and refugium functions. The four functions are dependent on the plant system: the food production is dependent on the leaves of the plants as food; the medicinal resources are from the plants chemical compounds, the carbon sequestration resides in chemical reactions in the leaves and the refugium function is dependent on the vegetation density. Of course, this is arguable. The main purpose of this group is to avoid repetitions. Any activity caused by the different stakeholders that disturbs the vegetation density will lead to a modification in the benefits provided by the ecosystem. The use of the thicket ecosystem and the impact of the different stakeholders have been gathered in table 4-4. The use corresponds to the different activities on the thicket ecosystem. The impacts are the different activities in which the different stakeholders are involved in that have a positive or negative impact on the vegetation, thus on the plant dependent functions. The impacts however have not been weighted. It is only classified as positive or negative. Some of the impacts can be negligible relatively to others. Table 4-4: Stakeholders use of thicket ecosystem influencing vegetation dependent functions and impact of the stakeholders on the thicket biome of western Baviaanskloof due to their use.

STAKEHOLDERS USE IMPACT ON THICKET BIOME Primary Positive Negative  Livestock breeding - STRP Spekboom - Livestock: Goats grazing  Provide Workers for the neighbouring farms planting for STRP Collection of medical through WfW plants for livestock breeding and crops growing - Plants culture -Wood removal, Sewenfontein  Employment: Workers for the working for destroying habitats water program for STRP Wastes disposal  Collection of medicinal plants in the veld - Recreation activities in  Culture of some medicinal plants in gardens the thicket that can disturb  Fuel wood collection the ecosystem

 Provide Workers for the neighbouring farms - Spekboom planting for - Plants collection for STRP through WfW medicinal purposes for livestock breeding and crops growing - Wood removal, Saaimanshoek  Employment: Workers for the working for destroying habitats water program for STRP - Wastes disposal  Collection of medicinal plants - Recreation activities in  Fuel wood collection the thicket that can disturb the ecosystem

48

 Nursery - Vegetation from the - Wastes Tchuganoo  Vegetables growing nursery is planted on - Recreation in the veld 5  Restoration activities on degraded land degraded areas that can disturb the ecosystem

- Goat, sheep, cattle grazing in the veld;  Livestock breeding - Game removal for  Crops (for animal food) - Some of them give consumption, Farmers  Game hunt lands to plant spekboom - Thicket vegetation  For some of them, STRP involvement for STRP exclusion in cropping  Nature-based tourism areas - Recreation in the veld that can disturb the ecosystem (e.g.quad)

- Increase the - footprint  Recreation: 4x4 routes, camping sites, hiking, willingness of the Tourists quad biking residents to preserve the nature to attract the tourists Secondary  STRP researches part to determine the optimal conditions for spekboom growing thus - Planting spekbooms optimising the carbon sequestration - Carbon sequestration R3G/ GIB possibilities development  Experimental plots implementation through the - Biodiversity restoration WfWoodlands program by GIB

 Involved in vegetation conservation and land - Protected area for a - Fires restoration, biodiversity conservation ECP  ECP is involved in carbon market purpose  Fire management of the land - Restoration activity  BMR management  Biodiversity conservation policy  education to conservation of the local people, - Protection of Wilderness with the programme “Proud partner of biodiversity through the Foundation Baviaanskloof Mega-reserve BMR  BMR management

Tertiary  Collaborate with R3G, GIB and Wageningen Wageningen university to collect information for STRP - STRP and restoration University/ implementation activities promotion PRESENCE

- promote agricultural  Promote the economic development of the Cacadu district/ development, destructing area Baviaans municipality the thicket ecosystem  Services, advices provided - no waste disposal management

- Regulations to make - Help farmers with  Give some advice the agriculture activity subsidies to develop their Department of  Promote agriculture (within the thicket) sustainable activities; thus promoting Agriculture and Land through subsidies to develop agriculture - Standards creation, in the grazing; Affairs  Involved in restoration programs order to protect the thicket ecosystem - Restoration projects

 Fund STRP. Decide the budget. - STRP creation, DWAF  Is responsible for the programme Working for allowing thicket Water which is used for the implementation of restoration through STRP spekboom planting

5 Name given to the thicket ecosystem by local people

49  BMR creation  Implement/ support programs, researches and - involved in biodiversity DEAT projects aiming at reducing the impact of the protection through BMR country in climate change -Potential STRP support  Create environmental regulations No direct impact on the thicket biome, but on the  All people on the planet are dependent on the Global population creation of policy to reduce human impact on the carbon rate in the atmosphere climate change The negative impacts on the thicket ecosystems are due to activities that destroy or perturb the land cover of the thicket ecosystem. Consequently, vegetation density is decreasing leading to: - a decrease of the food availability of the thicket ecosystem: the plants do not have time to regenerate, animals do not have enough food in the area to stay; - a decrease of the carbon sequestration: the vegetation general capacity for carbon sequestration is diminished. - a decrease of the refugium capacity: the habitats are destroyed - a decrease of the medicinal resources: medicinal plants are removed The economy of the western Baviaanskloof has a negative impact on the thicket ecosystem. It is based on livestock production that grazes in the thicket that cannot always handle the pressure and regenerate in a sustainable way. This economy is supported by different stakeholders: the farmers, the municipalities (local and district levels) and the department of agriculture. Biodiversity is part of the economy of the area through tourism. The study area being surrounded by a reserve, the conservation of the biodiversity is a particularly important issue. Therefore, any stakeholder with a conservation or restoration objective has a positive impact on the thicket biome in the western Baviaanskloof as it will increase the ecosystem capacity to provide the services. It concerns for example stakeholders involved in STRP and BMR projects, from the creation (e.g. DWAF for STRP, DEAT for BMR) to the implementation (e.g. GIB, communities, farmers for STRP; ECP, WF for BMR). Their actions can go from the prevention and education, to the plantation of vegetation. It concerns also the governmental department that provide the regulations and a positive context for the implementation of such projects. 4.3.2 Water supply service The water supply is the most important service for the residents of the valley as they could not live in the area without it. It has been evaluated as the most important issue by the communities (see Ignacio de la Flor thesis). Table 4-5: stakeholders use of thicket ecosystem influencing the water supply function and impact of the stakeholders on the thicket biome of western Baviaanskloof due to their use.

STAKEHOLDERS USE IMPACT ON THICKET BIOME Primary Positive Negative Sewefontein,  Use of sources for irrigation and Saaimanshoek, -Decrease of quantity of domestic use Tchuganoo surface water available  Use of sources for irrigation, Farmers domestic use and tourists -Decrease of quantity of accommodations surface water available

50

 Use of water in tourists Tourists -Decrease of quantity of accommodations surface water available Secondary

 Provide water to Saaimanshoek -Distribute water to the Baviaans municipality (running water only in the church church house of houses) Saaimanshoek  Dependent on water in the water catchment located in the -Surface water taken to GIB* Baviaanskloof in order to supply be distributed in the gamtoos valley farmers and Port Gamtoos valley Elizabeth residents

 Tourist accommodations -Removal of alien -Surface water used by  Vegetation conservation species in the park, tourists ECP*  Working for Water program giving more water -Vegetation of the park implementation available for using the water available indigenous plants in the water catchment of the valley -increase the knowledge of the Dutch government  Hydrology studies water supply possibilities Tertiary  Responsible for the regulations and management of SA water affairs -Working for Water DWAF*  Responsible for the Working for programme Water program * their involvement in restoring land by replanting vegetation or clearing alien species may have an impact on the water fluxes thus making more water available. However it is not proved. A study is occurring at the moment: see Lennart Van der Burg Master thesis, student at Wageningen UR, taking part of a second phase of EASTCARE. A positive impact on this function would increase the water availability in the western Baviaanskloof. However, the supply of the area with water in mainly dependent on natural processes, making the survival of the residents in the area sensitive to climate change and rain supply. The only positive impact noted is the removal of alien species in the area through the working for water program. A negative impact uses and removes available water from the environment. The main users of the water in the Western valley are the communities and the farmers for irrigation and domestic uses, as well as the tourists. As they only use the water, they have a negative impact on the quantity, as well as on the quality of the resource because of the pesticides and domestic wastewater. ECP is also depending on water supply. It is considered as having a negative impact because of the projects of expansion of tourism facilities, needing water for domestic uses. GIB has also a negative impact because of the need of water in the Gamtoos valley. Baviaanskloof being in the water catchment, water that is used in the Gamtoos valley come from Baviaanskloof valley (amongst others), collected in the Baviaanskloof river that is flowing into the Kouga river and directed in the Kouga dam, which supply the downstream valley. The Baviaans municipality do not provide any water to the residents in the Western Baviaanskloof but only to Saaimanshoek church houses. They have to use their own fountain or to share. Consequently, they have a negative impact on the resource as they use it for their farming activities, tourism facilities and their own consumption. As a consequence of their

51 use, it has been reported that the water table is going down, giving worries to the farmers. The use of some pesticides put the quality of the water in danger. Moreover, during drought periods, the water supply is becoming an issue. DWAF is responsible for the water management in the Baviaanskloof water catchment as well as for general water regulations. It has the power to regulate and advice for an equitable water supply management.

4.3.3 Recreational services The recreational service concerns mainly tourism and recreation for the residents of the valley when they have free time. It is tightly linked with the biodiversity of the area that is attractive for the tourists and relaxing (according to interviewee) for the residents. It has to be noted also that the recreational services are dependent on the state of the environment and thus to water supply and plant dependent functions. The stakeholders having a positive impact on the function are the stakeholders involved in the tourism sector. Indeed, they are developing activities that have to be attractive for tourists, thus increasing the recreational potential of the area. These stakeholders are the tourism association, Baviaans municipality (for the economic benefits tourism can bring to the municipality), ECP, Wilderness Foundation, DEAT. ECP and the Wilderness Foundation also benefit and have a positive impact with its participation in the BMR, which is putting in light the historical, cultural and biological heritage of the area, in order to develop environmentally friendly tourism in the area. ECP contrary to Wilderness Foundation gets direct financial benefits from the tourism sector through accommodations for example. The farmers are already (or will be for most of them) be involved in tourism, thus benefiting from the recreation service provided by the thicket biome. The recreation service of the thicket ecosystem is then enhanced. For the communities, the situation is different. They are mainly involved in the function for their own recreations. They do not have any tourism activity yet. However there is a possibility (and willingness for) of involvement in the tourism sector in the future (there is a plan for a guest house in Sewefontein). Moreover, if the tourism sector develops a lot, manpower can be recruited in the communities. Table 4-6: stakeholders use of thicket ecosystem influencing the recreational function and impact of the stakeholders on the thicket biome of western Baviaanskloof due to their use.

STAKEHOLDERS USE IMPACT ON THICKET BIOME Primary Positive Negative

-Cultural relationship with Saaimanshoek,  The function supports the daily life the thicket ecosystem Tchnuganoo and the personal development (e.g. history)

 The function supports the daily life -Cultural relationship with -Grazing modify the and the personal development Sewefontein, the thicket environment aspect  Plan to open tourists’ ecosystem(e.g. history) making it less accommodations attractive for tourist

52

 The function supports the daily life -Cultural relationship with -Grazing modify the and the personal development as the thicket ecosystem environment aspect Farmers well as tourism activities and (e.g. history) making it less facilities: caves, guest houses, 4*4 -Promote tourism leading attractive for tourist routes to a willingness to have an attractive environment

-Recreational activities developed in the area for Tourists  Entertainment in the area the tourists -Thicket biome is promoted by tourists to other potential tourists

Secondary

 Promote tourism- -Tourism development: -Increased traffic Tourism association  Help the farmers to be involved in recreational activities -Increased wastes the tourism sector and accommodations

 Want to attract tourists -Development and -Increased traffic ECP/ wilderness promotion of spiritual and -Increased wastes foundation  Involved in BMR and natural heritage site with tourism routes recreational activities in the area

- the idea of leopard’s Landmark Foundation  Leopard protection presence is attractive for tourists Tertiary  Interested in the economic development linked with the tourism - Value and supports the -Increased traffic Baviaans municipality development using thicket tourism development -Increased wasted landscapes Cacadu district  Control tourism accommodation (environmental health hygiene: Approves or not the - Supports tourism department) tourists facilities development

 Involved in BMR and thicket - Supports tourism DEAT landscapes as tourists attractions development

The positive impacts correspond to the activities that promote the recreational function of the thicket ecosystem. The negative impacts correspond to the activities that discredit the recreational activities of the thicket ecosystem. The development of tourism is important for the region. Most of the farmers are converting their activity. They often mentioned in the interview that nowadays they could not live on farming only and most of them have another activity, often in tourism, the status of the area as a reserve making it easier.

4.4 Stakeholder dependence and impact on ecosystems services in Western Baviaanskloof The different impacts and dependence of the stakeholders have been developed in the previous paragraph. The following table illustrates the categories in which each stakeholder belongs according to the different thicket functions, in the western Baviaanskloof.

53 Table 4-7: Stakeholder dependence and impact on ecosystems services in Western Baviaanskloof. The table design has been adapted from Bernard, 2005.

Food Medicinal resources Carbon sequestration Water supply Refugium function Recreation/ tourism

Governmental DWAF + + + + + organisations DEAT + + + + + DALA +/- +/- +/- +/- Cacadu district - - - - + Baviaans municipality - - - - - +/- NGOs Wilderness foundation + + + + + Landmark foundation + other ECP +/- +/- +/- +/- +/- + organisations GIB + + + - + EarthCollective/PRESENCE Local people Farmers ------+ Sewefontein +/-- -/+ +/-- +/- +/- Saaimanshoek +/- -/+ Tchnuganoo + + + - + + other Tourists +/- +/- +/- - +/- + Tourism association +/- R3G + + + +

Legend: Strong dependence on the ecosystem Weak dependence on ecosystem + Positive impact on the thicket ecosystem‟s function - Negative impact on the thicket ecosystem‟s function No direct dependence with the function in the Western Baviaanskloof

54 From this table, four groups can be identified: the stakeholders benefiting from the ecosystem services and having a positive impact on it by preserving the thicket ecosystem. It regroups mainly the Wilderness Foundation, ECP and Tchnuganoo community at a smaller level; the stakeholder group benefiting from the ecosystem services but having a negative impact. These are the residents of the valley who are using the thicket functions and transforming the environment for their economy and daily life. it regroups the farmers and three communities (Sewefontein, Zaaimenshoek and Tchnuganoo); the stakeholder group with no direct dependence on the ecosystem service but an impact (positive or negative) on it. It regroups essentially the governmental department responsible for decision-making and regulations that can have an impact on the western Baviaanskloof thicket ecosystem function (DWAF, DEAT, DALA) the stakeholder group having a dependence on the ecosystem service but no direct (or negligible) impact on it. It concerns natural resources that stakeholders need to be able to live, but their negative impact on it is negligible and the stakeholders are not involved in any programme to improve the functions. It concerns for example the carbon sequestration for breathing, water supply for the tourists who are visiting the area. It concerns stakeholders who use the function indirectly, only for a support, such as the Landmark Foundation which uses the refugium function for leopard protection. 4.5 Consequences of the different negative impacts on the thicket ecosystem The situation in western Baviaanskloof is an example of the pressure occurring on the thicket biome in general. Large areas (thousands of hectares) have been severely impacted because of human activities, mainly due to the unsustainable use of the thicket ecosystem such as overgrazing. The dependence of the stakeholders to the ecosystem services has lead to the degradation and transformation of the vegetation: degradation has transformed in some areas the dense shrubs and tree forest of thicket into an open savannah-like system (Zylstra, 2008), resulting in: - the depletion of natural resources necessary for the fulfilment of local stakeholders requirements, - the declining soil quality and erosion; - loss of biodiversity - biomass and carbon losses The land degradation can lead to the depletion of natural resources necessary for the fulfilment of local stakeholders‟ requirements and a loss of biodiversity. It can influence in a decreasing way different activities of the valley such as:

55 - the farming activity and the grazing of livestock: if there is a desertification of the veld, there is not enough food for the livestock. Consequently, in order to keep the farm viable, the farmers will have to either buy some food for the animals, which is another non-negligible cost, or to reduce the number of heads, but then compensate by another activity, which is already the case for most of the farmers in the valley. - The change of activity which generally leads to unemployment of the local communities and dwellers because the new activities are less labour demanding than farming. Consequently, the population migrates towards cities in order to find other opportunities. The area is depopulating and more and more isolated. - Recreation. All of them declared that the veld help them to relax and consists of the main element of their free time activity which generally consist of hiking in the valley. - the harvest of fuel wood which is an important activity for the communities in order to get energy and dwelling constructions, such as in Sewefontein where there is no electricity. The desertification could lead to a increase in poverty. - The tourism activity. The degradation of land makes the ecosystem services corresponding to the landscape splendour being spoilt. As the study area is surrounded by the Natural Reserve, the landscape corresponds to the main attraction to the tourists. The deterioration of the aesthetic appeal of the landscape could be a brake for tourism development. If it is degraded, it is not attractive anymore. Consequently, the tourism activity has the risk to decline too, which would be a problem as if farming is not possible anymore as most of the farmers are converting into tourism accommodation and activities. - the medicinal resources that the people declare have to collect further than decades ago. The land degradation make the possibility to find the different species more uncertain. Land degradation can lead to a decline in soil quality and to erosion. Laker (in Rowntree, 2004) states that „overgrazing is the main human induced factor causing accelerated water erosion in South Africa‟ (Rowntree, 2004). Vegetation coverage, resulting from interactions between climate, soils, topography and herbivory management, is a key factor to control soil loss. There should be a balance between animal consumption and plant production. When the balance is not reached, and where stocking densities of livestock are higher than the capacity of the land, the land cover decreases and the erosion risks by wind and water are increasing. equilibrium through mutual feedback. Overstocking, beyond the carrying capacity, causes a shift in the vegetation towards a sub-climax phase dominated by pioneering species (Rowntree, 2004). A 30 per cent cover is often given as a critical threshold between erosive and non-erosive conditions (Rowntree, 2004). Erosion, even if it is a natural process, can be

56 accelerated by inappropriate land use practices. The land being without cover, there is no obstacle for the sediments and nutrients that are taken/ blown away, especially on hillsides. The creation of dongas (several farmers mentioned them on their properties, see picture 4-1) proves that the erosion process is real. The degradation of the land leads also to a loss of biodiversity. The habitats of the different species are removed by the grazing. As a consequence, the ecosystem services consisting of serving of nursery for the development of the species are not fulfilled. The genetic pool opportunity is declining. As a result, some species can not develop anymore in the area. Moreover, only the species that are not palatable can develop, changing the landscape shape and the general dominant biodiversity. Indeed, the spekboom consists of 80% of the ecosystem in the valley and is appreciated by the mohair goats (Powell et al, 2006). If the spekboom density decreases, other species can take its space, changing the general vegetation, letting some possibilities for alien species to invade the free spaces. One of the greatest challenges in preventing further loss and restoring the degraded sites in the thicket is to understand the processes which drive the patterns of change in the eco- system and to use this knowledge to halt or retard the trend. Integrating the STEP conservation targets into the regional plans for district municipalities remains a challenge. Efforts to inform the National Department of Agriculture about STEP and its goals should be more actively pursued (Palmer et al, 2004).

Picture 4-1: Donga in the Western Baviaanskloof, November, 2007.

57 5 Chapter 5: Competing interests and synergies Private lands surrounded by a protected area can present some disagreements between Reserve managers, farmers and other involved institutions. As it was developed in the previous chapter, all the stakeholders have different interests in the thicket ecosystem services. This chapter will then develop the competing interests and synergies that exist between the stakeholders of the Western Baviaanskloof. More details about the cooperation activities and competing interests can be consulted in appendix 10.

5.1 Evaluation of the cooperation between the different stakeholders During the different interviews that were realised during the field work, a general view of the relationships between the different stakeholders has been observed. The relationships were sometimes clearly signified and confirmed by observation, others were refuted. The table 5-1 illustrates the different stakeholders who cooperates that where noticed during the field work. It is of course not exhaustive as some cooperation activities might not have been noticed. Table 5-1: Cooperation between stakeholders having an impact in western Baviaanskloof. This table is not exhaustive. It is based on the information and observation realized during the field work. The + represents a

direct cooperation concerning the western Baviaanskloof.

llective

GIB

ECP R3G

DEAT

DALA

DWAF

Farmers Tourists

Tourism Tourism

Baviaans Baviaans

Landmark Landmark

foundation foundation

Wilderness Wilderness

municipaliy association

Sewefontein

Tchnuganoo

Saaimanshoek

Cacadu district Cacadu Earth co Earth

DWAF + + + DEAT + +

DALA + +

Cacadu district + + +

Baviaans + + + + + + municipality Wilderness + + + + + + + + + + + + foundation Landmark + + foundation Earth collective + + + + + + + ECP + + + + + + + + +

GIB + + + + + + + + Farmers + + + + + + + + + Sewefontein + + +

Saaimanshoek + + +

Tchnuganoo +

Tourists + + + + Tourism + + + + + association + R3G + + + + + +

58 The general overview is that there is some good cooperation between the different organisations. The stakeholders cooperate in projects such as STRP or BMR. The details of the cooperation activities can be seen on appendix. However, some general remarks can be highlighted. Concerning the governmental departments, it seems that the communication between departments is not optimal, and some remarks have been made about it during the interviews, especially between the upper levels of the departments (provincial level). The governmental department have an indirect impact on the study area through the development of projects and regulations. Indeed, the main contact that the residents have with the government is through pensions, social grants and subsidies. The farmers and communities do not really have direct contacts with governmental departments, apart for pensions (870 rands/ month/ person) and subsidies, for fencing for example or compensations when a leopard kills the livestock. The Wilderness Foundation is cooperating with most of the stakeholders during the BSC Steering Committees that have been created for the BMR project. At a more local level, it seems that the Baviaans municipality has few relationships with the residents from western Baviaanskloof. There are general complaints that has been identified in the IDP of the municipality (see appendix), such as problems unemployment, medical cares or electricity supply. Indeed, the municipality only provide Zaaimenshoek with electricity as it is the only property that is not private. Some other conflictual relationship has been noticed between the Baviaans Municipality and the farmers concerning the services and especially the waste management. Indeed, the farmers are complaining that they have to pay some taxes but do not have any services from the municipality in return. However, considering the isolation of the valley, the wastes minimum fare is complicated. The waste management is becoming an issue in the area, as the waste disposal is not managed: wastes are left in a hole in a part of the properties. A specific study about it is occurring at the moment by a student from Wageningen UR to help finding a solution. The farmers’ community maintain a good relationship between each other. 100% of the farmers qualify the relationships with the other farmers between good and excellent. They justify this (rare) behaviour by the fact that they all depend on each other in their daily-life, the valley being isolated from the “outside” world the nearest city, Willowmore, being indeed from 1 to 2 hours from the different farms. The stakeholders that are the most recognised as being involved in the study area by the farmers are the Landmark Foundation, the Wilderness Foundation and ECP. The farmers indeed cited these names when asked which organisation they are collaborating or having contact with. The general atmosphere in the western Baviaanskloof is generally good. There is no insecurity and the communities (black and white) are collaborating. However, the history of the country and the cultural differences cannot be erased and some racial remarks can be shocking for foreigners.

59 5.2 Competing interests and synergies between stakeholders The different organisations involved in western Baviaanskloof, though having the purpose to develop the country, do not have the same objectives and do not focus on the same issues. They have different interests but also synergies, that are different according to the thicket ecosystem function that is considered. The following part gathers the main competing interests and relationships noted. However, some more details for each stakeholder can be seen on appendix 10. The following tables have been realised according to the information gathered during interviews and the different observation on the field work. It is based on qualitative data and thus mainly subjective. It was realised to illustrate the different competing interests between the stakeholders.

5.2.1 Plant dependent functions: Food production, medicinal resources, carbon sequestration, refugium functions The different synergies and competing interests concerning the land cover dependent functions have been illustrated in table 5.2. Table 5-2: Competing interests and synergies between stakeholders involved in western Baviaanskloof about vegetation dependent functions (food production, medicinal resources, refugium function and carbon

sequestration)

ation

GIB R3G

ECP

DEAT

DALA

DWAF

Farmers Tourists

Tourism Tourism

Baviaans Baviaans

Landmark Landmark

foundation foundation

Wilderness Wilderness

municipaliy associ

Sewefontein

Tchnuganoo

Saaimanshoek

Cacadu district Cacadu Earth collective Earth DWAF

DEAT

DALA

Cacadu district

Baviaans

municipality Wilderness

foundation Landmark

foundation Earth collective

ECP

GIB

Farmers Sewefontein

Saaimanshoek

Tchnuganoo

Tourists

Tourism

association R3G

60 Legend:  Synergies: common interests/ objectives  Competing interests over values or beliefs  Competing interests about interpersonal relationships  Competition of interests or needs

Competing interests and synergies between primary stakeholders: The residents of the valley have common their economic activity, based on agriculture and more recently on tourism. Consequently, they all have the same interests on the ecosystem services, however, with different intensities. They all want to make the land economically profitable. However, some tensions between neighbours still appear, especially between people from different communities. For example, borders between properties are contested. “we would like to have the land back as we had it before; the neighbouring farmer has taken it from us and it is not easy to get back. There is also a problem with water” (woman 44 years old, Saaimanshoek community). This touches upon the fact that the landowner–when he bought his farm 4 years ago- just decided to put a fence around his area, accidentally (or not) taking part of Saaimanshoek property with it. For Saaimanshoek it would mean taking steps to high court to get their piece of land back, and they don‟t have the financial means to actually do this. Competing interests and synergies between primary and secondary stakeholders There are competing interests over values and interests between the farmers and the conservationist‟s organisations. The farmers and Sewefontein are willing to develop or maintain their economic activities, thus provoking a decline in the services availability. On the other side, conservationists organisations would like to protect or restore the land, such as the STRP stakeholders (R3G, GIB, DWAF), ECP, and Wilderness Foundation. These organisations developed projects in order to preserve the lands on the private properties. There is a disagreement in the land management methods. To counterbalance this, R3G promotes STRP, to restore the lands, thus increasing the carbon sequestration capacity of the area. On the other side, ECP would like to get the land management on the private properties, without the ownership, in order to restore them. The farmers would still own their lands, but would not be allowed to manage them as they want. A dysfunction in the communication (or maybe a previous plan) conducted the farmers to think that the organisation wanted to push them away from the valley, making them suspicious and revolted. Their relationships with ECP are sometimes uncertain. However, any plan to evict people from their land would meet some difficulties considering the sensibility of the government towards land-tenure issues, especially concerning black communities. These organisations try to raise the kloof residents‟ awareness about environmental issues by education through the Proud Partner program and employment through the Working for Water program.

61 The Wilderness Foundation and ECP have common interests, and cooperate, such as in the BMR application. However, it has been notice some interpersonal tensions between the two organisations, probably due to the PMU planning and sharing responsibilities. Interpersonal tensions exist also between Tchuganoo and ECP concerning the creation of a nursery for land restoration. Tchuganoo, as already invested in a nursery would like to cooperate with ECP to expand it. ECP has not agreed yet. An issue has been reported during the interviews concerning the medicinal resources. As the resources are less and less available in the communities‟ surroundings, people have to go further in the veld, sometimes reaching the Natural Park borders where it is forbidden to remove any plants. There could be the same problem with the farmers, however, nothing has been reported yet. Competing interests and synergies between primary and tertiary stakeholders: The governmental department are the main representatives of the tertiary group. They have an indirect influence on the study area. They have the same interest in developing the country in a sustainable way. They do not have any real contact with the primary stakeholders who sometimes did not even know the acronyms.

5.2.2 Water supply: The different synergies and competing interests concerning the water supply function have been illustrated in table 5.3. Table 5-3: Competing interests and synergies between stakeholders involved in western Baviaanskloof about

water supply function (food production, medicinal resources, refugium function and carbon sequestration)

n o

ciation

oek

GIB R3G

ECP

Earth Earth

DEAT

DALA

DWAF

district

Cacadu Cacadu

Farmers Tourists

Tourism Tourism

Baviaans Baviaans

collective

Landmark Landmark

foundation foundation

Sewefontei Saaimansh

Wilderness Wilderness

Tchnugano

municipaliy asso DWAF

DEAT

DALA

Cacadu district

Baviaans

municipality Wilderness

foundation Landmark

foundation Earth collective

ECP

GIB

Farmers Sewefontein

Saaimanshoek

Tchnuganoo

62 Tourists

Tourism

association R3G

Legend:  Synergies: common interests/ objectives  Competing interests over values or beliefs  Competing interests about interpersonal relationships  Competition of interests or needs

Competing interests and synergies between primary stakeholders: Though they have the same interests (livestock breeding, vegetables growing, entertainment), some competing issues can cause pressures. It concerns mainly the water supply. Indeed, for their irrigation or consumption in the valley, the farmers settled some facilities. However, all the properties do not have the benefits of sources, and some dwellers of the valley have to share, leading to tensions. Moreover, the farms being settled along the valley and a river, the farms located downstream (meaning the farms the most at the east side of the study area) are dependent on the good willingness and management of the properties upstream to get a proper water supply. Indeed, if the water is devious or if there is an abuse of the consumption or even pollution, the consequences on the properties downstream can be serious, leading to an impossibility to use any water. Another conflict resides in the share of sources. For example, Tchnuganoo and Thijs Cilliers use a fountain from Sewefontein property. The agreement settled is organised around cycles of 20 days. During these 20 days, Tchnuganoo can use the water 2 days, Mr Cilliers 8 days and the community 10 days. However, there are no written agreements about using the water supply. Therefore, this issue brings arguments between the three stakeholders. There are also tensions about the diversion of water flows towards properties by rudimentary installations. Concerning this topic, downstream farmers complained about a governmental measure that was taken years ago. The natural flow of water in the area finds its way down from canyons in the mountains. At the foot of those mountains, water spreads over an area in the valley, called floodplains. These floodplains are what farmers are interested in as the water captured there can be used for irrigation of their farm lands. That is exactly why in the 1970‟s, farmers, encouraged and subsidized by the government, built farrows to capture the water before entering the flood plains, without evaluating the consequences. Salt remains in the water and ends up in the main water stream. Farmers are still using this system now, and some farmers would like to remove them and allow the water to stream in its traditional way. The diverted water created problems with the downstream supply. Consequently, a farmer is trying to get subsidies from the government to destroy the farrows and recreate the natural environment of the valley, without any success. As a result, some farmers started to do it themselves, but without any appropriate equipment or finances to do it properly.

63 Competing interests and synergies between primary and secondary stakeholders Otherwise, there is a reproach from farmers saying that GIB reproaches them to use to much water in the valley, fact that farmers deny because they “use what they need”. However, there is no measurement of the deductions made by the residents in the valley (that should be done by DWAF). There are no possibilities for GIB to obtain restrictions from the residents. Saaimanshoek and Baviaans municipality are cooperating for the supply of the church houses (not all the community has running water). GIB and DWAF are cooperating for programmes involving water. Moreover they are linked in both ways for financing: DWAF finance projects implemented by GIB, but also GIB, as a water consumer, has to pay taxes to DWAF. Competing interests between tertiary stakeholders DWAF and the Cacadu district have the purpose to distribute water to the inhabitants of their jurisdiction. However, though the general water supervision is given to DWAF, the Cacadu district is more independent in its water management. In the district, local municipalities decide about the water issues themselves, according to interviewee.

5.2.3 Recreation/ tourism The recreation is mainly linked with tourism. Tourism is starting to develop the Baviaansloof thanks to the UNESCO World Heritage site designation. More and more tourism are visiting the area, pushing the farmers and other organisation to invest in this sector. The different synergies and competing interests concerning the recreation function have been illustrated in table 5-4. The tourism is developing in the area through different ways: - The Wilderness Foundation through the creation of the BMR is developing tourism routes and encouraging the preservation of the Baviaanskloof patrimony in collaboration with other stakeholders involved in the BMR steering committee. - ECP is developing/ improving facilities on the natural reserve for tourist. - The farmers develop also the tourism capacity of the area through guest houses, camping sites, 4*4 routes, caves… Competing interests and synergies between primary stakeholders: Most of the farmers are already involved or willing to invest in this sector, as well as Sewefontein that plans to create a guest house. The tourists are satisfied and willing to come back (see Ignacio de la Flor thesis), generating a favourable context for the stakeholders to invest in this sector. Competing interests and synergies between primary and secondary stakeholders: Though having the same interests towards tourism development, a competitive economic relationship can develop between the ECP and farmers activities.

64 The Cacadu district is responsible for the environmental health of any tourism facilities. It has to check the hygiene and conditions of the guest houses and camp sites and give an agreement for the good functioning, which could create tensions between the provider of the accommodations and the District. Competing interests and synergies between secondary stakeholders The responsible authorities that aim at promoting, marketing and developing of any tourism attraction of the area are both the district level and the local level in the Cacadu district. This leads to competition of power between the two levels of management, in tourism but also in any other areas as the needs and interests have different scales. Competing interests and synergies between tertiary stakeholders: The DEAT has the objective to develop tourism, thus providing assistance such as financial assistance especially to projects that creates job opportunities for communities. There might be an opportunity for the residents of the valley to create a dynamic tourism activity that would both benefit to the environment and to poverty alleviation, as it has been reported that the unemployment in the valley is a problem. Table 5-4: Competing interests and synergies between stakeholders involved in western Baviaanskloof about

recreation function (food production, medicinal resources, refugium function and carbon sequestration)

GIB R3G

ECP

DEAT

DALA

DWAF

Farmers Tourists

Tourism Tourism

th th collective

Baviaans Baviaans

Landmark Landmark

foundation foundation

Wilderness Wilderness

Tchuganoo

municipaliy association

Sewefontein

Saaimanshoek

Cacadu district Cacadu Ear DWAF

DEAT

DALA

Cacadu district

Baviaans

municipality Wilderness

foundation Landmark

foundation Earth collective

ECP

GIB

Farmers Sewefontein

Saaimanshoek

Tchuganoo

Tourists

Tourism

association R3G

65

Legend:  Synergies: common interests/ objectives  Competing interests over values or beliefs  Competing interests about interpersonal relationships  Competition of interests or needs

5.2.4 Others disagreement: Some other conflicting relationships have been noticed between the Baviaans Municipality and the farmers concerning the services and especially the waste management. Indeed, the farmers are complaining that they have to pay some taxes but do not have any services from the municipality in return. However, considering the isolation of the valley, the wastes minimum fare is complicated. The waste management is becoming an issue in the area, as the waste disposal is not managed: wastes are left in a hole in a part of the properties. A specific study about it is occurring at the moment by Natasha Haider, student from Wageningen UR to assist with finding a solution. Though collaborating with it, some conflicting interpersonal relationships have been identified between the Landmark Foundation and some farmers. However, in general, the action of the Landmark Foundation and the collar program reduced the conflicting relationship between the stock-farmers and the leopards, pushing the Baviaanskloof residents towards a more cooperative and conservation-minded mentality (however with a financial motivation). A last conflicting point concerns groups of people who have not been identified as stakeholders but are active in the area, such as Friends Of Baviaanskloof Wilderness Area (FOBWA). There are actually tensions with the farmers as members of the group ask for permits to enter the Natural Reserve to the tourists. However, no permit is necessary to use the public road, only for accommodation located in the Reserve. The farmers received complaints from the tourists about it.

5.3 Willingness of the farmers to cooperate with other stakeholders The cooperation between the different organisations is a necessity for the peaceful management of the Western Baviaanskloof. In order to determine the general impression of the different organisations by the residents of the valley in case of future collaborations, a table was filled in by the farmers during the interview. Because of the difficulty to communicate with the communities and the nature of the questionnaire, it was complicated during the field work to get their point of view which would also be interesting to have. The number of answers has been added in order to have a relative idea about the degree of participation for each answer. It was generally 10 answers, and one missing for most of the questions

66 The result of the questionnaire is that in general, the farmers are willing to collaborate with any organisation, under the conditions that there advice and point of view is taken into account, feeling that they do not always have or had with some programs or researches. Figure 5.1 shows the general feeling that is developed in the valley towards the different organisations. The percentage considers are relative to the number of answered questionnaire. Indeed, sometimes, a question concerning one of the organisations was not answered. Generally, there are 10 answers to the table and 11 interviewees. For one interviewee, we could not finish the questionnaire due to a lack of time. The institution that is the least well-considered is the Cacadu district, with only 60% of willingness and 20% of “no”. No particular reasons were given about this. Actually, there were more complaints about the Baviaans municipality because of waste management and the fact that it is perceived as wanting to manage all the tourism of the area. But the willingness to collaborate is good. Probably because of the need of interactions between the two

stakeholders in order to manage and develop properly the area.

Percentage ofrespondent Percentage

Figure 5-1: Farmers‟ willingness to collaborate with other organisations, in Western Baviaanskloof, autumn 2007. See annex for more details During the interview, some other organisations which were not cited in the main stakeholders were inserted in the questionnaire (Wildlife & Environment Society of SA, Private

67 consultant, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan university, Botanical Society of South Africa, Agricultural Research Council and University of Fort Hare) in order to get a feeling of the farmers about environmental or nature organisations in general and research institutes. It can be noticed that, as they said in general, most of the farmers do not have any problem with working with other organisations, even environmentally sensitive. This can show that the farmers are conscious that agriculture and environmental are not antagonist. A fact that was redundant is that most of the farmers do not know the names or acronym (DWAF, DEAET or GIB for example) of the governmental organisation and that it was necessary to explain what it was. An explanation could be that they did not know the English name, but only the Afrikaans, or that the communication of these institutions does not reach them. The interviewee also mentioned that they do not have any interactions with some organisations, like GIB and that is why they do not know them. The farmers are willing to collaborate with any institution, on the condition that they can give their point of view and will be heard. Residents of the valley are mistrustful towards new research and restoration programmes because of the past and communication is generally inexistent between stakeholders or unclear. In the past, many promises were made that were not kept, but also clumsy action were undertaken. For example, an anecdote that concerns Sewenfontein (and probably Saaimanshoek too) and the government that has been attributed to DWAF as it concerns alien species removal. However, the exact name of the department involved was not mentioned. It concerns an event that occurred thirty or forty years ago, related by a member of Sewefontein. There used to be an alien cactus (Opuntia ficus) that used to grow in the Baviaanskloof. The local people used to eat the fruits, use them as fodder for the animal or to make sugar. However, as the cactus was declared as a weed, it has been removed from the area, without taking into account the needs of the local people. The problem is here that decisions were taken without consulting the different concerned people. The communities are now mistrustful of environmental actions, such as STRP. Another example concerns the farmers and the previous institution, before ECP (referred by the farmers as Nature Conservation) that wanted to dispossess the farmers. These are examples of miscommunication or plans that do not take into account the interests of the local communities, thus provoking mistrust towards the “outsiders” of the valley when they propose new projects. The residents of the Baviaanskloof are willing to participate in the management of their valley. The communication is the main asset of a project to be implemented in a proper and long-term way.

68 6 Chapter 6 : Involvement of stakeholders in the Subtropical Thicket Restoration Program

6.1 STRP in western Baviaanskloof Until now, the STRP is still at its experimental phase in Baviaanskloof. Several experimental plots of 1ha have been implemented in different areas of the reserve in order to determine the optimal conditions of development for the spekboom. More experimental plots would be interesting in order to optimise the results, which is why the farmers‟ properties are interesting as they present different characteristics. The farmers being the people with the most influence considering the general land uses of the area, their cooperation is necessary. The communities having a much lower proportion of land, they are more interested in the employment that the project can generate. 6.1.1 Private restoration activities in the western Baviaanskloof The private restoration activities have been evaluated in the farmer‟s community. Apart from one farmer who is environmentally focused and strongly cooperating with STRP, the other farmers are not involved in any restoration or conservation measures on their land. The measures consist mainly to fight against erosion along the stream, moving stones in degraded areas or filling dongas. At the moment, concerning the farmers, 3 farmers are involved in a restoration or conservation programme, especially the programme about the leopard developed by the Landmark foundation. Seven farmers are not involved in any programme, one farmer did not reply. However, when asking if they would like to be involved in any restoration/ conservation project, nine answered yes, one answered sometimes, and one did not answered. These results illustrate the general awareness of the farmers concerning their environment and the necessity to protect it.

Box 3: Restoration/ conservation definitions by the farmers:

« to try and get your ecosystem as it was in a healthy state where it can live and look after itself without human intervening »

“[restoration/ conservation activities] concerns management. ”

“to have the nature as it should be”

“[restoration/ conservation] is maintening what we have, educate people (tourists) and study ourselves to learn about nature and not to destroy it.”

The“Conservation black communities is to leave are thenot natureinvolved regenerates in any restoration itself and activity. restoration Tchuganoo arrive to that point where nature is in equilibrium”

“it means everything goes to the right direction”

69 6.1.2 Willingness to participate When asked the question “Do you consider your farmland healthy?”, four of the nine respondents said yes. However, 9 of 10 respondents to the question “Do you have any areas on your farm which you think would benefit from rehabilitation work?” answered yes, which show that the “healthy” concept can be interpreted differently such as in an environmental way or economic way. It shows also that the farmers are conscious of degradation and are willing to fight it. All of them declared they would consider rehabilitating the lands. Concerning the communities, and especially Sewefontein, they do not consider their land as degraded. In this context, the project has been presented to the local population. During the three months, three presentations were realised: the first one was in English to the farmers by Mike Powell from R3G, the same day we, students, introduced ourselves to them, the second to the communities in Afrikaans, still by Mike Powell, and another one in Afrikaans, by the project manager Yolande Vermaak to the farmers during the farmers‟ association meeting. The purpose was to keep them informed about this project and future possible collaboration with them. The people generally welcomed the project: six of eleven of the farmers who have heard about STRP are interested, three had not heard about it before we interviewed them. However, some scepticism occurred (two farmers) because of a general lack of trust towards projects that promise a lot and are never implemented, as they already experienced it. Several researches occurred in the area, however they are “forgotten and nobody is implementing the results of the research”, as said a farmer. On the other hands, some of them were very enthusiastic with the project and started their first plot of spekboom during the field work and after the interviews, which is a good sign of motivation. The farmer‟s community being close, there is a good possibility that these farmers influence others. The three communities, Sewefontein, Saaimanshoek and Tchuganoo, are interested too and see it as a way to create jobs opportunities in an area where unemployment is a big issue and as a way to eventually earn money through the carbon market and tourism. STRP is described as “a good project. [It] gives people jobs and is good for nature and for the air”, said a community member. Concerning other stakeholders, all stakeholders of the interviewee were in favour of the project, all of them being sensitive to the opportunity that STRP can bring to the Baviaanskloof in terms of environment and economy (employment and tourism attractiveness).

70 Box 4: Point of view of the farmers and communities about STRP

 « [STRP seems to be] a long term viable thing, very good idea, such a clever plan » (farmer)  “100% in favor of it” (farmer)  The spekboom project will not give them as much as profit as the goats and sheep. (saaimanshoek member)  She does not know what to think about this project, she had never work with them and does not know. She would like to work with them, but men are the ones who have to work with them, women in the house (Saaimanshoek member)  He likes the project of spekboom but he says that the plants must be fenced when they are small, after when spekboom is big the animals will not be able to eat it (Saaimanshoek member)  About restoration in general: “[it is] a Good thing. Tourist also likes spekboom and tourism will create a lot of jobs for people (Saaimanshoek member)  They think the spekboom project will not give them as much as profit as the goats and sheep.(Sewefontein member)  [restoration] bring nature back is positive as everything looks more beautiful but people come here speaks and nothing happen. Anyway the project looks nice and she is happy that her children are in the Working for Water programme. (Sewefontein member)

NB: the citations of the communities were reported through a translator. 6.1.3 Conditions

The farmers, who possess the land and are the main stakeholders to convince in order to get an area that is big enough to make the project useful and profitable, are generally willing to participate, as said in the previous paragraph. However, under certain conditions: four of them agree to the sentence “I would consider reducing my production activities even if I was not offered any incentives”, three farmers disagreed and one is neutral. Three farmers did not reply. On the contrary, to the sentence “I would consider reducing my production activities if offered the appropriate incentives”, the eight farmers who answered gave a positive answer. They are indeed willing to participate if their level of life and general income stays similar to the current one. Consequently, involvement of the farmers in STRP is a possibility, under certain conditions. In order to determine the type of incentives that would push the farmers to be involved in STRP project (or any other restoration project), they were asked their degree of interests into selected incentives of different types. The different incentives selected are: - Tax rebate: a reduction of the taxes that the farmers has to pay for his activities - Vegetation fencing subsidies: the fences needed to protect the vegetation on the restored land obtain a financial support

71 - Soil erosion work subsidies: the farmer gets some subsidies to help him executing some measure to fight against soil erosion - Financial payment: by getting involved in a restoration project, the farmer gets some direct payment - Targeted alien species removal by working for water: as a return for the involvement in the restoration project, the farmers gets its property cleaned from any alien species by the WfW teams - Access to a support network of like-minded farmers: the farmers are put in contact with other farmers who have the same point-of-view about restoration so that they can share their ideas and experiences - Signage for voluntary conservation agreements: the farmers gets a kind of label saying that they take parts in some environmental project, such as the label Proud Partner of Baviaanskloof Mega-reserve that can be seen at the gate of many farms - Extension officer support: the farmers get some support about a specialist from the restoration project - Access to scientific information and support: the information susceptible to interest the farmers are communicated to them - Access to eco-tourism support: the farmers get access to any support to help them developing eco-tourism The results are illustrated in figure 6.1. The percentages graph has been realised according to the answers only of the farmers who replied to the questionnaire. The missing number is also indicated. The y axe represents the number of replies. See appendix 10 for details. The farmers are interested in most of the incentives, with a general preference for the soil erosion work subsidies, vegetation fencing subsidies and financial payment, that all of them mentioned, even those who did not finished to answer the question.

72

Figure 6-1: Interests of the farmers into the different kinds of incentives coming from a synthesis of the different interviews realised during the field work. To get a better idea of the interests of the farmers, they had been asked to rank the incentives according to their preferences. The incentives have been ordered first by the number of interested farmers, then number of medium, then number of possibly interested. The general result is that soil erosion work subsidies and vegetation fencing subsidies. The kinds of incentives that are preferred are generally the ones considering money. Indeed, the farmers would like some guaranties that they would not lose money if they get involved in a restoration project. The farming activity is recognised as a not being enough now to survive in the valley, or at least to keep their current level-of-life. They consider they cannot allow losing money in restoration activities. However, some farmers are also ready to be involved and give parts of lands to restoration without any incentive, as long as they do not lose money in it and get help for the planting for example.

73 6.1.4 Possible restoration plans Even if most of the famers or communities do not consider their land as degraded, most of them indicated some area of their property that they are willing to submit to restoration. These areas can be visualised on the Figure 6.2. All of the suggestions of the farmers have been gathered in figure. However, several said that they are not experts and that they would like that someone check their lands and advice them about the states of their lands and restoration measures possibilities.

Figure 6-2: Restoration land possibilities identified by the farmers.

6.2 STRP Uncertainties Though the STRP is welcomed and approved by local people and other stakeholders, the project is still at its early stage. Some major uncertainties still exist: The optimal conditions of growing of the spekboom are still not specified. Research is still occurring. The purpose is to find the optimal conditions in order to have the less losses possible when planted in the degraded land. It would ensure a proper cooperation between the credit buyer and the seller and a better efficiency of the carbon absorption if the carbon storage capacity at the end of the determined period is in accordance to what was scheduled at the beginning. It is then necessary to reach the 90-100% of survival to be able to trade efficiently. The funding capacity is still not determined. The project has not been approved yet by the carbon market. The funding possibility is still not fixed. If the project is approved by the carbon market, there are still transaction costs that could be a brake to the project.

74 Moreover, the project being a long term project as it concerns forestry, the financial viability is uncertain. To be viable, the project has to involve a large amount of land, to reduce the transaction costs. The difficulty is to find long-term volunteers. The methodology for the involvement of forestry projects in CDM is not settled yet. Moreover, the DNA has not much experience in forestry as they never had any submitted projects and there is not much potential for forestry CDM in South Africa, according to the DNA director.

6.3 SWOT analysis of STRP

There are still difficulties to ride out. In order to get an overview of the general feeling of the project, the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats are gathered in the following table. Table: SWOT general evaluation for STRP project

Strengths Weaknesses

Willingness to collaborate from farmers Doubts about the implementation of the and communities project Expectations from the people gives Lack of awareness about the STRP and motivation its potential benefits Involved in a global fight towards Need a large area to be economically environmental goals efficient Participate to poverty alleviation through Many stakeholders have not heard Working for Water programme about the project Bad communication between governmental departments Uncertain funding capacity Opportunities Threats

Carbon market involvement Reuse of lands for cattle once restored Jobs creation for the communities Dependent on government for the Incorporation of the program in funding Baviaans municipality‟s IDP (the Change of government that may stop program has been submitted to the the project after elections municipality) Carbon market does not proceed after 2012

75

7 Chapter 7. Discussion

8 Chapter 7. Discussion This study is part of a long-term project created by Earth-collective named EASTCARE aiming to increase understanding of the diverse ecosystem values present in the Western Baviaanskloof. The project uses an integrated ecosystem assessment approach in order to create a basis for developing restoration strategies aimed at addressing land degradation and associated loss of ecosystem services and natural capital. EASTCARE consists of several subprojects dealing with four aspects: socio-cultural valuation, economic valuation, stakeholder analysis and assessment of policy and institutional aspects. Each topic was investigated by a different student. This thesis focussed on the stakeholder analysis. Although the information was gathered jointly with the other students, the analyses of the information were done separately. Each thesis report is therefore a stand-alone product although cross-references are made when appropriate.

8.1 Discussion of methods

8.1.1 Methodological framework Classification and selection of ecosystem functions and services Concerning the ecosystem function analysis, the classification used was derived from de Groot et al (2002) who used five categories: production, regulation, habitat, carrier and information functions. Ecosystem functions, and associated services can however also be classified differently, for example clustering services that are associated with certain species, that regulate some exogenous input, or that are related to the organization of biotic entities (Norberg 1999 cited in MA, 2005). It could be interesting to determine the organization of the different functions around the spekboom perspective in order to evaluate the impact of this plant on the western Baviaanskloof‟s activities, and the direct benefits that the restoration with the spekboom could bring. However, focusing on the spekboom only is a restrictive perspective. In our study, the relationship between the stakeholders and the overall thicket ecosystem was considered. Indeed, the spekboom is only the first species to start the restoration of the land, and it is supposed to bring favorable conditions to bring back other species on the degraded land. The restoration of the land involves the whole ecosystem. Another possibility could have been to use descriptive groupings, such as renewable resource goods, non-renewable resource goods, physical structure services, biotic services, biogeochemical services, information services, and social and cultural services (Moberg and Folke 1999 cited in MA, 2005). However, in the case of land degradation, the classification of the Baviaanskloof services in the renewable resource goods and non-renewable resource goods categories is disputable. Indeed, the land degradation in some areas is such that the recovery of a supposed renewable service such as food production is impossible and thus not

76 renewable by itself. A third classification has been proposed by Costanza (cited in Costanza 2008) and classifies the ecosystems services according to their spatial characteristics. Five categories are distinguished: global non-proximal (does not depend on proximity), local proximal (depends on proximity), directional flow related: flow from point of production to point of use, in situ (point of use), user movement related: flow of people to unique natural features. This could have been a possibility but the typology as proposed by de Groot et al (2002) and used in the Millenium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) seemedmore appropriate for this study.

Stakholder analysis Stakeholder analysis is a powerful tool to help the decision-maker to evaluate a situation, especially regarding complex environmental issues. It should be realised however that the results are very time and context dependant. Another problem is selection of stakeholders. For example, during the field work, we met Dutch government representants who are planning to do hydrological studies in the water catchment which we were not aware of at the start of our study. It is also possible that other stakeholders that use or affect the thicket ecosystem functions and services have not been identified. This has to be taken into account in further studies. For the interviews, the criteria were chosen by the researcher and the list is probably not exhaustive. Moreover the sample size was only 10 people, which is insufficient to validate the results statistically. Preferably, criteria should be identified by the stakeholders during group meetings. All stakeholders should be considered in the assessment which was not the case here. However, in order to give a general idea and to support further analysis, the results of the assessment have been included in appendix 11. The identification of the trade-offs was not possible since the economic and socio-cultural analyses (2 other student projects) were not finished at the time of writing this thesis report. Consequently, also a multi-criteria analysis was not possible, although it would be interesting to quantify the compromises that the different stakeholders have to make in the context of STRP and land restoration. 8.1.2 Field Work and interview-process The field work mainly consisted of conducting interviews with the main stakeholders (esp. farmers and local communities) and took place from September until December 2007. Communication with the farmers was relatively easy but because most community members did not speak English, the data collection was more difficult. It has to be noted that the dwellers, on the farms, whose number depends on the farms sometimes going until 70 like in Zaandvlakte, who are not included in the communities were not considered. These people work for the farmer or are unemployed and live from pensions and social grants. Also a few other land owners who were not farmers were not included in the study but they do not live all year in the area and have a negligible impact on degrading the land. The questionnaire for the farmers lasted around three hours which is a long time. In addition, the farmers were

77 talkative and generally the discussion derived from the original questions. However, it created confidence between interviewer and interviewee. The reason of the long questionnaire was that we were four students who were looking for different information. This combination was realised in order to save the time and enhance the willingness of the farmers to collaborate. It apparently worked as they were very cooperative and seems to be as cooperative with the students who came later for studies, which means they do not keep a bad memory of the experience. During the questionnaires, two students were taking notes while the others were asking the questions. The roles were exchanged for the next interview. This had the purpose to practice making interviews but also some students felt more comfortable for a certain job. Keeping the same role for each student would be better in order to stay consistant in the notes that were taken for all interviews. Some notes on certain topics are now more developed for some interviews than for others. However, it also depended on the interviewee willingness to give the information. Some constraints had to be taken into account during the field work: - We were four people doing an integrated assessment. We all needed information for our own research. Consequently, some compromises had to be made especially for the questionnaire with the farmers. However, the working in group is a good way to get a more complete picture (but less details), everybody adding his own vision about a topic. - The distances are big and meetings are time-consuming, especially because of road- trips. - The time spent in South Africa was only three months, with one month spent to create the questionnaire and getting acquainted with the area. We actually started to feel comfortable in the project and the country at the end of the trip. - It has also to be taken into account that most of the people involved in the study are not native English speaking. Consequently, some misunderstanding might have influenced questions or answers, leading to involuntary misinterpretations. These reasons explain why the stakeholder analysis is still rather general, especially concerning information about stakeholders who are not living in the Baviaanskloof and who were more difficult to identify and to reach. On the other hand, the general organisation in Kouga Dam by the Earth-Collective team was very helpful to meet the people and get their trust. The contact with people in general was very good. It was generally easy to meet them and they take time to answer the questions. Probably the fact that we were foreigners made them more indulgent.

8.1.3 Data analysis and presentation Concerning the data analysis, the programme SPSS was used, but statistical analysis was not relevant for this case study due to the small sample of interviewees. Because the program was also rather complicated to use for some calculations, excel was also used to make the graphs. A GIS program was used to create maps, with the help of a South African student, with a

78 good knowledge of the program. The creation of maps is a good tool to visualise results and facilitate communication. The map about the different land-uses was exposed during the workshop and good comments and questions were made by the participants, showing the benefits of such tools to share information.

8.2 Discussion of the results The qualitative information collected is difficult to analyse in an objective way. Thus the following results have a rather high level of subjectivity. It has also to be kept in mind that they are not exhaustive and also depend on what interviewees were willing to share.

8.2.1 Thicket services and stakeholders The stakeholders from governmental departments (e.g. Department of Economic Affairs, Environment and Tourism) have been considered in the study because they have a regulation power. But most of them do not seem to have much direct action in the Baviaanskloof, especially at the provincial level of the departments. When we ask the farmers which organisation they are in contact with, they mainly reply Wilderness Foundation, ECP and Landmark Foundation. Most of the time, they do not cite anybody. The question is now if they properly understood the question, or if they have in mind “environmentally” organisations. They indeed, never mentioned the Department of Agriculture for example, which suggests that there are not many contacts with governmental organisations. A limited number of ecosystem services was selected in order to be specific in the relationships between stakeholders who can have common interests for a given service but competing interests for another. The services selected are those that are most related to land degradation and restoration within the STRP context, i.e food production, water supply, medicinal resources, carbon sequestration, refugium and recreation and tourism. However, other functions are also relevant and important and might be considered in follow-up thesis research within the EASTCARE integrated assessment project (such as water regulation, pollination, soil retention or science and education…) Some functions have been grouped under the category “plant-dependent functions”. This is disputable since almost all ecosystem services are somehow related to plants and vegetation cover. However, the identified actions that have impacts on the thicket ecosystem and thus on the thicket services are similar for all the four services: they concern the use of plants. Thus to avoid repetition in the analysis in the description of the impacts and competing interests of the different stakeholders, it was necessary to find a category that included the food production, the carbon sequestration, the refugium service and medicinal plants. All of them provide different benefits, but they are all directly threatened by removal of plants (eg. due to grazing) which is the main negative impact on the thicket ecosystem. On the opposite, the main positive impact concerns restoration through vegetation planting.

8.2.2 Competing interests and synergies

79 Unfortunately during interviews it was not always possible to go into depth about competing interests between stakeholders. One reason is that it depended on the stakeholder to provide such information and another reason is that the course of the interview sometimes took another direction than planned. Therefore, it was difficult to get in-depth insight into all the competing interests at stake. The information gathered thus comes from a mix of interview- results, supported by literature and observations. Consequently some competing interests can have been missed. The competing interests between stakeholders have been illustrated into cross-tables for the different ecosystem services. For each kind of competing interest (over values or belief, over interpersonal relationships and over needs) or synergies, a colour was assigned. These tables were created to identify quickly where difficulties might appear because of different interests and thus where attention has to be paid. However, a part of subjectivity in the analysis is involved. Moreover, the tables illustrates competing interests that where identified, but might not be totally exhaustive. The farmers are willing to collaborate with any institution, on the condition that they can give their point of view and will be heard. Residents of the valley are mistrustful towards new research and restoration programmes because of the past and communication is generally inexistent between stakeholders or unclear. In the past, many promises were made that were not kept, but also clumsy action were undertaken. Miscommunication or plans that do not take into account the interests of the local communities provoke mistrust towards the “outsiders” of the valley when they propose new projects. The residents of the Baviaanskloof are willing to participate in the management of their valley. The communication is the main asset of a project to be implemented in a proper and long-term way. Another main issue concerns the Baviaans Municipality and the residents who lack many services, especially waste management and medical care. The low concentration of people and the isolation of the valley make the provision of any service difficult to realise in an economically efficient way. However, the development of the Baviaans municipality is a priority in the Cacadu District Integrated development plan. We suppose that services will be improved in the future.

8.2.3 Involvement of stakeholders in STRP The farmers and communities are willing to participate in the STRP project. The general environmental consciousness is rising. Farmers are conscious that degraded land is not good for their economy. The communities see the opportunity to get some jobs and income through the Working for Water (WfW) programme. The advantage of the WfW is that it provides training to people such as in machine operation, driving, first aid, teamwork, supervision, personal financial management and business management skills. It gives a certification that allows workers to get a better chance to get work afterwards. The ultimate aim is to arrive at a situation where workers empowered by the programme can form viable business due to the generic management and entrepreneurial skills they have developed through the programme. The programme is also contributing to overcome the old racial barriers in the country by building multiracial teams.

80 The danger of this environmental rehabilitation programme on which is based STRP is that the follow-up of the project is based on the willingness of the government and funding agencies as well as land owners. It is an expensive and long-term programme (based on the clearance of long-living alien species) that will most likely last longer than the initiators life- span. The funding is the main uncertainty of STRP. The long-term life-span does not secure maintenance of the restored land. As soon as a tree is cut, the carbon stored in it is released. There is nothing preventing future land degradation of the restored lands either voluntary (economic reason, change in land owner) or involuntary (climatic conditions) which would release the carbon. The good opportunity of the restoration land is to stimulate the farmers towards a tourism-based economy that would reduce the agricultural activity and contain it in the valley, leaving the slopes of the mountain free of the threat of grazing. It has been observed that tourism has an important value for stakeholders (see appendix 13). The change is already happening. The condition is to get income-replacement guaranties. A change in their economy would involve two types of risks, identified by Crane (2006) as being: “One is reduced income from reduced stock levels in the short term, against uncertain growth of a biodiversity economy in a more distant timeframe. Second, the current practice of extensive mixed stock farming enables them to spread their risk, while shifting to intensive single stock farming increases risk”. The farmers need guaranties to change their activities and being able to maintain their level of wellbeing. “If such guarantees were forthcoming (which seems unlikely) farmers could focus on a single stock type such as ostrich and cultivate land for animal fodder in the valley near the river, thereby enabling the surrender of significant land areas to biodiversity conservation and expanded tourist facilities” (Crane, 2006). This guarantee can be given by STRP. Independent funding is necessary in order to make the rehabilitation come true and reduce the uncertainties. The best way would be to finance the restoration through the carbon market, either CDM or voluntary market as it is currently been investigated. However, the institutional capacity to implement properly the project is uncertain. This topic is being developed in one of the other thesis projects (Eliska Lorencova). The risk of changing activities is also to create unemployment among the farming workers. The STRP can provide some employment during the implementation phase, but it would only be a short-term solution. The focus should then be on the tourism sector to develop employment for the communities such as in the guiding sector, the maintenance or different services. The development of tourism is favourable to restoration, to a certain extent. The tourism capacity has to be assessed in order not to be overwhelming.

1.3 Comparison with literature, i.e. a similar case-study:

To be able to compare the results with lessons learnt from other studies a study by Ypma (2005) Integrated Assessment of Stakeholder Interests and Trade-offs in use of Wetland Functions: A Case Study of the Daly, Mary and Gunbalanya Wetlands in Northern Australia, was analysed The case study presented similar conditions as the one in western Baviaanskloof. It was a

81 stakeholder analysis involved in an integrated assessment realised by 6 students. The study area consisted of wetlands in Northern Australia. Some similarities can be noticed. As with this study, the Australian case noticed that some stakeholders are more difficult to ivolve: in Ypma‟s case, the primary stakeholders (i.e aboriginees) were the most inaccessible due to problems with contact details and permits. In this thesis, the secondary and tertiary stakeholders were more difficult to interview because of the difficulty to identify the key person and time issues. Indeed, a stakeholder analysis is time consuming and it seems that in both cases it presented a limitation. Ypma‟s research focussed on secondary and tertiary stakeholders was mainly-based on interviews with official people and documentation. This research is more primary stakeholders-centred. Consequently, the information gathered concerns more the local people and what they are willing to share. It is less based on documentation and thus probably more subjective. Ypma suggested that a quantification of stakeholder needs and interests in the thicket ecosystem could help to evaluate the competing interests and trade-offs in a more objective way, for example through a multi-criteria analysis. In the two case studies, it was found that the ecosystem function analysis is complex and should be carried out before the stakeholder analysis which was not possible yet within the integrated assessment project in the Baviaanskloof. The fact that this study was focused more on a small area, contrary to the Australian wetland case study, gives the advantage to get to know the people living there and create good relationships so that the people are not reluctant to talk and feel confident. It makes both parties (interviewee and interviewer) feel comfortable and share more experience than only the interview.

82

9 Chapter 8. Conclusion and recommendations This thesis is part of an integrated ecosystem assessment involved in a long-term project created by Earth-collective named EASTCARE aiming to increase understanding of the diverse ecosystem values present in the western Baviaanskloof based on an ecosystem approach. The integrated assessment aims at evaluating the relationships (socio-cultural, economical and environmental) of the different stakeholders involved in the western Baviaanskloof with the thicket ecosystem. This integrated assessment is assigned in the context of the Subtropical Thicket Ecosystem Programme (STRP) that aims at restoring the degraded thicket ecosystem of Eastern Cape. The STRP has the objective to finance the restoration through the carbon market. The Western Baviaanskloof has been chosen as a pilot area in order to determine the conditions (ecological, socio-cultural and economic) of an optimal restoration. The objective of this study is to evaluate the involvement of stakeholders in land restoration in relation with the thicket ecosystem in Western Baviaanskloof. This study included studying stakeholders‟ interests and interactions with selected ecosystems services. Some results have been evaluated, however, it has to be noted that the stakeholder analysis is not a fixed analysis and that the results can change over time. However, due to different timetables and scheduled, this thesis is the first to be completed. The results from the economic, socio-cultural and institutional studies were not settled by the time this research was written. Some complementary information could then be added to this report.

RQ 1 Who are the main stakeholders involved in the Western Baviaanskloof? Different stakeholders have been identified as involved in the Western Baviaanskloof area management the main ones being the local people (farmers, Saaimanshoek, Sewefontein and Tchnuganoo), Eastern Cape Parks, the Wilderness Foundation, the Gamtoos Irrigation Board, the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF), the Baviaans municipality and the Cacadu district. They were interviewed during the field work. The field work was realised in cooperation with three other students who had the mission to assess the socio-cultural values, economical values and institutional framework. Common interviews were conducted to gather information. A common questionnaire was realised to interview the eleven identified farmers of the area. An adapted questionnaire was created for the people of the communities, most of them being unable to speak English, a translator was needed. More open interviews were used for the other stakeholders. All of the interviewed stakeholders have different connections with the thicket ecosystem. Six ecosystems services appeared to be the one on which the stakeholders benefit the most: - the food production, as the support of the farming activity - the water supply, as the support of the farming activity, tourism activity and daily life

83 - the medicinal resources, because of the tradition of the communities - the carbon sequestration, as one of the main issue for the STRP - the refugium function, as the support of the biodiversity - the recreation and tourism function, as a support for an change of the economy of the valley. This selection regroups what seemed to be the most valued by the stakeholder, in the STRP context. However, other services are also highly valued in the area (such as pollination, water regulation or soil retention) and should be taken into account in follow-up projects.

RQ 2&3 What are the interests and impacts of the different stakeholders on the thicket ecosystem in the Baviaanskloof study area? The different stakeholders having an impact on these functions on the thicket ecosystem and thus with an influence on its management have been identified. Stakeholders have different connections to the ecosystem functions and consequently different impacts on the thicket ecosystem relatively to their occupations and objectives in the area. The main negative impact is overgrazing, as identified several years ago as being the major threat on the thicket ecosystem all over the country. The land uses are mainly used for farming activities, and more specifically livestock breeding (goats, sheep and ostriches) by the residents of the valley. However, the general economy seems to involve more and more the tourism and accommodations are created all over the valley. The function supporting the most negative impact concerns functions directly related with the plants: the food production of the thicket ecosystem, carbon sequestration, medicinal resources and refugium functions that are all victims of the overgrazing and the decline of the vegetation on large parts of the area. The water supply is also an issue. Indeed, the residents of the valley use the resource for their activities, especially irrigation and domestic use. The land degradation makes the water supply less and less retained in the soil. The irrigation makes the water table going down. In order to fight the negative impacts degrading the area, some organisations with a protection policy are operating to raise the farmers‟ awareness about the risks of degradation and the benefits of conservation (Wilderness Foundation, ECP, Landmark Foundation). As most of the Western Baviaanskloof consists on private properties, their influence is limited to conviction.

RQ 4 What are the conflicts and synergies between stakeholders involved in the restoration process? As soon as there are several stakeholders using the same resource, some competing interests and synergies appear. The farmers in the valley have good relationships between each other, due to the isolation of the valley. As they need each other in the daily life, they cannot allow having real conflicts. They are ten people in the Farming Association; one is not in it and lives more isolated. Officially there is not a person who has more influence than the other.

84 There is no leader, apart from the chairman, but he changes every two years. However, some of the farmers distinguished themselves by some characteristics that were observed during the field work: those involved in restoration and conservation activities, those involved in honey production, those developing the tourism activity over farming activities. The relationships between farmers and communities are officially declared as good, which sometimes feels like “politically correct” answers. Tensions exist, but mainly between neighbouring communities and farmers because they share water sources and borders. As all the stakeholders have different objectives in the Western Baviaanskloof, it can lead to competing interests between them. The two different visions (conservation vs economic development) lead to conflicts of interests, in addition to the traditional conflicts between neighbours (e.g. fences, water use). The main competing issues identified during the field work are: - competing interests over values or beliefs: the agricultural development is promoted by the local people, versus the conservation policy of different organisations such as ECP or Wilderness Foundation; - competing interests over interpersonal relationships: there is a general mistrust of the residents of the valley towards new organisations that want to implement new programmes due to a history of promises that were not kept; - competing interests over needs: The water supply, as a limited resource, is the major conflict topic in the area. There is no measurement by DWAF on how much is taken. Consequently, the downstream farmers and stakeholders such as GIB are dependent on the willingness and activities (good or bad such as deviations) of the upstream residents. There is no specific regulation for the water use in the valley. Another conflicting topic concerns the few services that the residents obtain from the Baviaans municipality (e.g. wastes management is inexistent). However, although the communication between the stakeholders could be improved, the relationships are globally good between the different organisations, as far as the interviews and field work could have identified. Moreover, the farmers are willing to cooperate with any organisation as long as their point of view is considered.

RQ 5 What are their views on the restoration options of the Baviaanskloof Mega-Reserve thicket ecosystem especially for the Subtropical Thicket Restoration Programme? In general, the STRP was very welcomed by the local residents even though a suspicion about the effective implementation still remains, due to ancient disappointments that involved promises that were not kept. The awareness of the residents of the western Baviaanskloof about restoration needs is rising. A few symbolic restoration activities are occurring, but not going more than filling dongas or consolidating the water streams, apart from two farmers who are really involved in conservation and restoration. However, the farmers are willing to collaborate if their income can be maintained in anyway, the preferred incentives amongst the proposed ones being soil erosion work subsidies and vegetation fencing subsidies. The communities see an opportunity to get some jobs through the Working for Water programme

85 that is implementing the project. The danger of the project is that there are still uncertainties occurring, the main one being the uncertain funding capacity as it has not been validated by the carbon market institutions yet and thus depends at the moment mainly on governmental funding. However, the fact that there is a general willingness of the different stakeholders to be involved or to support the project is strength, if the communication is maintained. The STRP could be an opportunity for the residents of the valley to transform their economy in a more sustainable way by for example reducing their farming activities and thus the overgrazing towards tourism activities that are less destructive, to a certain extent.

RQ 6 What are the different trade-offs that could result from the restoration measures? The different trade-offs were not identified due to the fact that the socio-economic evaluations realised by other students were not finished before the redaction of this report. The information should then be integrated together to obtain a better overview of the area.

Recommendations: • The study is based on the information collected during the three months spent in South Africa. Further interviews with stakeholders would bring more details and specifications on the results. • The STRP seems to have a good chance to be implemented and be effective in the western Baviaanskloof, under certain conditions: o developing communication between the stakeholders: employing for example someone to share the information and answer to the questions would be necessary to avoid misunderstandings and so that people know exactly what to expect; o participatory management: consulting the residents of the Western Baviaanskloof before making decisions that would modify their way-of- life, as it happened previously with the removal of cactus. • A detailed function analysis of the thicket ecosystem should be realised in order to determine the different goods and services that are valued in the western Baviaanskloof. A multi-criteria analysis could investigate the different thicket ecosystem functions that are the most valued by the stakeholders, thus leading to a possibility to identify the trade-offs that are the most acceptable by the different stakeholders. This provides also more information towards the conflict analysis that can be executed with qualitative and quantitative data. Stakeholders can be involved again on their perspective on how to manage or solve the competing interests and diminish the negative trade-offs. Group sessions for each stakeholder‟s group would be interesting in order to determine criteria that are the most important on a socio-cultural perspective, economic perspective and environmental perspective. These group sessions have to be organised so that the people feel comfortable enough to participate. The indicators can also be settled during these sessions. A selection of the most important criteria and of common criteria between stakeholders could then be the

86 basis for the multi-criteria analysis. However, this method needs time and willingness for participation from the stakeholders. • The results of this study should be combined with the three other studies involved in the integrated assessment of Western Baviaanskloof realised by: o Kim Janssen o Eliska Lorencova o Ignacio de la Flor

87

10 References Alcamo J., (2001). Scenarios as tools for international environmental assessments. Experts‟ corner report Prospects and Scenarios No. 5. Environmental Issue Report no.24. European Environmental Agency, Copenhagen, Denmark. P. 1-31

Bernard, F. (2005), Ecosystem Services of, and Financing Mechanisms for Protected Areas, Case Study of the Tapanti National Park Tropical Rainforest in Costa Rica, MSc Thesis in Environmental Sciences, Environmental System Analysis Group, Wageningen UR.

Binneman, Johan, (2006), Archaeological heritage: Site assessments and management, Baviaanskloof Mega- reserve Heritage Assessment Study and Heritage Resource Management Plans, p12- 28

BMR, (2006),Baviaanskloof mega-reserve background document for the Strategic Management Plan. Project Management unit.

Boshoff, A. (2000): The Baviaanskloof Mega-Reserve: An Environmentally, socially and Economically Sustainable Conservation and Development Initiative, Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit (TERU) Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University.

Boshoff, A., (2005); The Baviaanskloof Mega-reserve, An environmentally, socially and economically sustainable conservation and development initiative, TERU Report No 52.

Boshoff, A.; Wilson, S, (2004), The STEP stakeholder participation programme: summary, comments and some lessons learned, Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit University of Port Elizabeth 6031, Report No. 50

Cape Action for People and the Environment (C.A.P.E.), 2000. A Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan for the Cape Floral Kingdom. WWF South Africa, Cape Town.

Cowling, R. M., Proch, S., & Vlok, S. 2005, "On the origin of southern African subtropical thicket vegetation", South African Journal of Botany, vol. 71, no. 1, pp. 1- 23.

Cowling, Richard, (2006), Natural heritage of the Baviaanskloof Mega-reserve, Baviaanskloof Mega-reserve Heritage Assessment Study and Heritage Resource Management Plans, p 142- 169

Cowlinga R.M., Presseyb R.L., Rougetc M.,. Lombarda A.T, (2003) A conservation plan for a global biodiversity hotspot the Cape Floristic Region, South Africa Biological Conservation 112 p 191–216

Crane, Wendy, (2006), Biodiversity conservation and land rights in South Africa: Whither the farm dwellers?, science direct, Geoforum 37 (2006) pp 1035–1045

EarthCollective, (2007), PRESENCE, INREF seed proposal

EarthCollective (eds). (2007b). PRESENCE Workshop Booklet. Companion document to the PRESENCE Workshop held 11th – 13th November, 2007. Zandvlakte, Baviaanskloof, South Africa.

ECPB/PMU, (2007), Strategic Management Plan, Baviaanskloof, Cluster, Integrated Reserve Management Plan, version: draft 1.0, Eastern Cape Parks, 63 pages.

Groot de, R. et al (2006), Valuing wetlands: guidance for valuing the benefits derived from wetland ecosystem services, Ramsar Technical Report No. 3/CBD Technical Series No. 27. Ramsar Convention Secretaria, Gland, Switzerland & Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal, Canada

Groot de, R. Wilson, M.A., Boumans, R.M.J., (2002), A typology for the classification, description and

88 valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services, Ecological Economics, Volume 41, Issue 3, pages 393- 408.

Henderson, Z. and Ryneveld, K. van, (2006), Review of enabling and regulatory legislation and of national and international best practice, Baviaanskloof Mega-reserve Heritage Assessment Study and Heritage Resource Management Plans, p 113- 141

Hoffman, T., Todds, T., Ntshona, Z., Turner, S., (1999), Chapter 1: Land degradation in context, Land degradation in South Africa, pages 1-7

Hoffman, T., Todds, T., Ntshona, Z., Turner, S., (1999), Chapter 9: causes of degradation, Land degradation in South Africa, pages 164-193

Interdisciplinary Research and Education Fund (2007), PRESENCE proposal, Wageningen UR.

IPCC, (2001), Climate Change 2001: Impact, adaptation and vulnerability, summary for policy-makers, a report of working group II, Geneva Switzerland, 13-16 February 2001.

Kerley, G. I. H., Knight, M. H., & De Kock, M. 1995, "Desertification of Subtropical Thicket in the eastern Cape, South Africa: Are there alternatives", Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, vol. 37, pp. 211-230 Kerley, GHI; Knight, MH, Kock, M, (1995), Desertification of subtropical thicket in the Eastern Cape, South Africa, Environmental Monitoring and assessment 37:211-230

Knight A. et. al. (2006). Planning for implementation: an operational model for implementing conservation action. Conservation Biology 20, 549-561.

Knight, A.T. & Cowling, R. M. (2006). Into the thick of it: bridging the research implementation gap in the thicket biome through the Thicket Forum. South African Journal of Science 102, 2006

Knight, A.T. & Cowling, R.M. 2003b. The Megaconservancy Network Concept: “Keeping People on the Land in Living Landscapes”: report for the partners of the Subtropical Thicket Ecosystem Planning (STEP) Project. TERU Report No. 45. 6 pp. Knight, A.T., Boshoff, A.F., Cowling, R.M. and Wilson, S.L. (2003). Keeping People on the Land in Living Landscapes: A Co-operative Strategy for Conserving Landscapes and Enhancing Livelihoods in the Subtropical Thicket Biome. Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit, Report No.46, University of Port Elizabeth, South Africa.

Kormos C.; Vance G. (2003): Support is Building for Global wilderness Conservation, International Journal of Wilderness, Vol. 9, No. 2.

Lechmere-Oertel, R. G., Kerley, G. I. H., & Cowling, R. M. 2005c, "Patterns and implications of transformation in semi-arid succulent thicket, South Africa", Journal of Arid Environments, vol. 62, pp. 459-474. Logie, B., (2006), Historical assessment, Baviaanskloof Mega-reserve Heritage Assessment Study and Heritage Resource Management Plans, p 50-98

Logie, B., (2006), Historical sites: Assessment and management plans, Baviaanskloof Mega-reserve Heritage Assessment Study and Heritage Resource Management Plans, p 98-112

Millenium Ecosystems Assessment (2005); Ecosystems and Human well-being, a Framework for assessment, Island press.

Moodley, S., (2006), Rock art sites: conservation and management recommendations for Geelhoutbos and The Havens caves, Baviaanskloof Mega-reserve, Baviaanskloof Mega-reserve Heritage Assessment Study and Heritage Resource Management Plans, p 29- 49.

Muir A. (2002): Strengthening Wilderness in South Africa, Strategy and Programs of the Wilderness Foundation S.A. International Journal of Wilderness, Vol. 9, No. 2

89 National Research Council (NRC), (2001), Climate change science, an analysis of some key questions, Committee on the Science of Climate change, Division on Earth and Life study, National Academy Press, Washington DC.

Pierce, S.M. (2003). The STEP Handbook. Integrating the natural environment into land use decisions at the municipal level: towards sustainable development. Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit Report No. 47. University of Port Elizabeth, South Africa

Powell, M., Mills, A, Marais, C., (2006), Carbon sequestration and restoration: challenges and opportunities in subtropical thicket, Multiple use management of natural forests and woodlands: policy refinements and scientific progress, Natural forests and Savanna woodlands, symposium IV, 15-18 May 2006, Port Elizabeth.

Powell, M., Mills, A, Marais, C., (2007), Subtropical Thicket Restoration Programme, Business Plan 2007/8- 2009/10, second draft, unpublished. Punch, K.F., (2005), Introduction to social research: quantitative and qualitative approaches, second edition, London: Sage Publ. Reichert, K., (2006), Stakeholder engagement, Baviaanskloof Mega-reserve Heritage Assessment Study and Heritage Resource Management Plans, p 170- 228 Republic of South Africa (RSA), (1998). National Environmental Management Act, No. 107 of 1998. Government Gazette No. 19519, Cape Town.

Republic of South Africa (RSA), (2004). National Environment Management: Biodiversity Act No. 10 of 2004. Government Gazette No. 26436, Cape Town.

Schmeer, K. (1999). Guidelines for Conducting a Stakeholder Analysis. November 1999. Bethesda, MD: Partnerships for Health Reform, Abt Associates Inc.

Shroyer M.E., Blignaut P. (2003): Mountain Conservation in South Africa, USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS, pp. 27.

Stocking, M., Murnaghan, N., (2000), Land degradation- guidelines for field assessment, chapter 2: what is land degradation?, p 7-16

UNDP, 2008, United Nations Development Program, Impact of Climate Change, available on: http://www.undp.org/gef/adaptation/climate_change/maps/land.htm, Last visited, April 2008 UNEP-UNFCCC, (2002), Understanding climate change: a beginner’s guide to the UN framework convention and its Kyoto protocol

Verschuuren B, et. al. (2007), Integrated assessment and valuation of Thicket ecosystem services of Baviaanskloof MegaReserve (BMR), Preliminary outline for student involvement in the Integrated Assessment of Ecosystem Services at Baviaanskloof, Wageningen UR

Vlok, JHJ, Euston-Brown, DIW; Cowling RM, (2003), Acocks’ Valley Bushveld 50 years on: new perspectives on the delimitation, characterisation and origin of subtropical thicket vegetation, South African Journal of Botany 2003, 69(1): 27–51 Printed in South Africa

Working for Water (WfW) annual report 2003/2004, on www.dwaf.gov.za.

Wynberg, R., (2002). A decade of biodiversity conservation and use in South Africa: tracking progress from the Rio Earth Summit to the Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development. South African Journal of Science 98 (May–June), 233–243.

Ypma, O, (2005), Integrated Assessment of Stakeholder Interests and Trade-offs in use of Wetland Functions: A Case Study of the Daly, Mary and Gunbalanya Wetlands in Northern Australia, thesis report, Environmental

90 Systems analysis, Wageningen university.

Zylstra M, Verschuuren B, Shestra P, Broek D, Weel S (2007), Integrated assessment and valuation of Thicket ecosystem services of Baviaanskloof MegaReserve (BMR), Preliminary outline for student involvement in the Integrated Assessment of Ecosystem Services at Baviaanskloof, Wageningen university

Zylstra MJ. (in press). EASTCARE: Ecosystem Approach for Subtropical Thicket Conservation And Restoration, Eastern Cape (SA). In: Lessons Learned from the Ecosystem Approach (provisional title). IUCN Commission on Ecosystem Management (CEM).

Sites internet

1- Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism;, www.environment.gov.za/ClimateChange2005.htm, last visited: 05/04/2008 2- SANBI, South African National Biodiversity Institute, www.sanbi.org, last visited: 05/04/2008 3- SARPN, South African Regional poverty network, www.sarpn.org, last visited: 05/04/2008- 4- Earth Collective, PRESENCE, www.earthcollective.net, last visit: 05/04/2008 5- Science in Africa, the Working for Water Program, www.scienceinafrica.co.za/2001/june/wfw.htm, last visit: 05/04/2008 6- UNESCO, www.unesco.org. Last visit: 05/04/2008 7- DWAF, www.dwaf.co.za, last visit: 05/04/2008 8- The Province of Eastern Cape, www.ecprov.gov.za, last visit: 05/04/2008 9- The Wilderness Foundation South Africa, www.wildernessfoundation.org.za, last visit: 05/04/2008 10- SA Landmark Foundation, www.landmarkfoundation.org.za, last visit: 05/04/2008 11- Eastern Cape parks, Overview, Eastern cape nature reserves, http://www.ecparks.co.za/, last visit: 05/07/07. 12- Cacadu district: www.cacadu.co.za 13- Eastern Cape map, "http://cybercapetown.com/Maps/EasternCape/index.php" http://cybercapetown.com/Maps/EasternCape/index.php, last visit: 20/07/07

91

Appendix

Appendix 1: Thesis research context I Appendix 2 : Conservation plans and restoration programs involved in the western Baviaanskloof IV Appendix 3: Questionnaire asked to the farmers XV Appendix 4 : Contacts details of the interviewee XXVIII Appendix 5 : Western Baviaanskloof ecosystem functions, goods and services. XXX Appendix 6 : Pebble distribution method XXXII Appendix 7: Programmes supported by the Department of Economic Affairs, Environment and Tourism XXXIII Appendix 8: Cacadu District information XXXIV Appendix 9: Baviaans municipality information XXXVII Appendix 10: Economic overview of Western Baviaanskloof XXXIX Appendix 11: Cooperation and Competing interests between stakeholders XLV Appendix 12: Graphs tables LXIV Appendix 13: Criteria assessment LXV

I

Appendix 1 : Thesis research context

Remote Sensing & Geo-Information Systems

Transdisciplinary Assessment & Implementation Framework (TAIF)

Stakeholder and Expert Consultation

Monitoring,

Management Effectiveness & Evaluation

Stakeholder and Expert Participation

Decision Making Process & Implementation

2

Source: EarthCollective (2007b). Name Affiliation Nature of Study / Research

Andre Boshoff Various Authors of various publications and reports in recent years – including Richard Cowling Subtropical Thicket Ecosystem Planning (STEP) - which have described the Anthony Mills greater Baviaanskloof area, ecological functioning and related importance Mike Powell .... of the subtropical thicket biome in conservation and restoration.

Michelle Cocks RU-ISER & WUR PhD thesis: including contribution of biocultural diversity to rural (South African) livelihoods in Eastern Cape. Independent study on Coleskeplaas community, Baviaanskloof.

Matt RU MSc thesis: including an analysis of current costs involved in restoration McConnachie and linked with management effectiveness and potential restoration (South African) benefits.

Olalekan Adekola WUR (from May - MSc internship: review of lessons learned from ecosystem services (Nigerian) Aug07) approaches and restoration case studies implemented across diverse ecosystem types & locations.

The following explicitly focus on the EASTCARE Baviaanskloof pilot study the under the PRESENCE programme

Emmanuelle WUR (from Sept 07- MSc thesis: assessing the stakeholder networks, interactions, Noirtin Apr08) dependence on and willingness to restore ecosystem services in the (French) STRP R3G ECP* western Baviaanskloof.

Kim Janssen WUR (from Sept 07-Jul MSc thesis: assessing the socio-cultural values derived from ecosystem (Dutch) 08) services provided by subtropical thicket in the western Baviaanskloof. STRP R3G ECP

Ignacio de la Flor WUR (from Sept 07- MSc thesis: assessing the economic values derived from ecosystem (Spanish) Apr08) services provided by subtropical thicket in the western Baviaanskloof. STRP R3G ECP Economics of land-use.

Eliska Lorencova WUR (from Oct 07-Jul MSc thesis & internship: assessing policy and institutional aspects related (Czech) 08) to restoration across various scales with a focus on carbon sequestration STRP R3G ECP (CDM).

Haider Javed WUR (from Apr - Oct MSc thesis: assessing policy and institutional aspects related to (Pakistani) 08) restoration across various scales with a focus on water (PES mechanisms LNV STRP R3G DWAF & arrangements). ECP Lennart van der WUR (from Mar – MSc thesis: assessing the economic benefits of restoration for water Burg Aug08) regulation at various geographic scales (within and downstream of the (Dutch) LNV STRP R3G GIB Baviaanskloof) ECP Gloria de Paoli WUR (from Jul- Dec 08) MSc thesis & internship: assessing the potential to implement financing (Italian) LNV STRP R3G DWAF mechanisms (e.g. PES) for water (economics of willingness to pay/accept ECP etc)

Appendix 2 : Conservation plans and restoration programs involved in the western Baviaanskloof

The Baviaanskloof Natural Reserve is the object of several programmes and plans aiming at protecting the biodiversity and developing a sustainable management of the area. From the different programmes, the three main ones with the most interest for this research are developed below. The three programmes are: the Subtropical Thicket Ecosystem Planning, the Baviaanskloof Mega-Reserve and the Subtropical Thicket Restoration Programme. Subtropical Thicket Ecosystem Planning (STEP) The Subtropical Thicket Ecosystem Planning has been created in July 2000 is order to ensure the biodiversity endurance in the Eastern Cape region of South Africa (Boshoff, 2005) and fight the degradation of the Subtropical Thicket biome that the Country is facing. It aims to raise awareness about thicket degradation and promote the conservation of globally significant biodiversity in the thicket biome (Knight et al, ?.). The initial aim of STEP was to assess the Eastern Cape‟s unique thicket biodiversity within a three year time frame, and, during the process, it has developed itself into a program which addresses issues such as sustainable land uses, guidance for coordination of development projects together with preservation objectives, and the encouragement of a wise use of natural resources (Boshoff, 2005) It aspires at identifying areas for targeting action and to begin to implement actions which will conserve its globally significant flora and fauna thus improving the livelihoods of local communities ( Knight et al, ?) by working closely with key stakeholders. The STEP planning domain (Internet 1) The STEP planning domain covers 105 454 km² located at the south east of the country, where the Thicket Biome is thought to contain the most species-rich formations of woody plants in South Africa. The domain contains overlaps with regions that are also the subjects of major strategic conservation planning projects, namely, Cape Action for People and the Environment (C.A.P.E.), and Succulent Karoo Ecosystem Planning project (SKEP). It involves hundreds of thousands of people who rely on thicket products for their livelihoods, with a level of rural poverty being extraordinarily high. The STEP project has several objectives (Boshoff & Wilson, 2004):  to provide a conservation planning framework and implementation strategy for the conservation of subtropical thicket;  to suggest and prioritise explicit conservation actions (Figure 1);  to provide spatial biodiversity information for incorporation into regional, provincial and  national land-use planning frameworks;  to provide a capacity building service in the application of the spatial conservation  planning products, especially in the local government sphere;  to create an awareness of the value and plight of the Thicket Biome.

IV

Baviaanskloof

Figure 2-1: STEP Conservation classification, (source: Internet 1). More maps are available on bgis.sanbi.org, like the vegetation identification or conservation priority sites. The five STEP project activities (Boshoff & Wilson, 2004) 1. A GIS-based spatial analysis, at the landscape level, based on extant data and ground-truthing. 2. Compilation of a systematic conservation plan (assessment). 3. Information dissemination. 4. Capacity building 5. Development of a Conservation Planning Framework and Implementation Strategy Baviaanskloof Mega-Reserve Project (BMR) As a consequence of the government commitments into the preservation of threatened species, the recent years have seen the creation of biodiversity “mega-reserves”- large areas under some form of protection, based on the voluntary and cooperative participation of private landowners. Three mega-reserves have been established in the Cape Floral Kingdom- Baviaanskloof, Cederberg, Garden Route- as part of the Cape Action for People and Environment programme (CAPE), with substantial funding from the Global Environment Facility. They are conceptualized as partnerships between private land owners and existing nature reserves towards sustainable utilisation of the unique biodiversity in these areas. The focus is on exposing people to more sustainable ways of using the land and natural resources, promoting the adoption of conservation-based farming possibilities. (Crane, 2006). In 1995, the Cape Floral Kingdom has been proclaimed World Heritage Site by UNESCO, which hopes to encourage the „biodiversity economy‟ in the region and wants to promote better management and planning of the region‟s rich but vulnerable ecosystem (UNESCO Site). As a result of this recognition, research, planning and implementation initiative between government, civil society and the private sector aims to coordinate and maximize efforts to conserve the highly threatened Cape Floristic Region (Boshof 2005). V

Mega-reserve notion

The mega-reserves are a strategy for achieving landscape level conservation. The term „mega‟ is used here because the area must be large enough encompass landscape scale climatic gradients and topographic variation, and the associated range of habitat types or biomes. Accommodating animal movements and plant dispersal and gene flow over very large distances is important within a context of global climate change. Whole river catchments (or large portions of catchments), and the associated water and soil resources can be effectively conserved at this landscape scale (BMR, 2006)

The Baviaanskloof is one of three areas in the Cape Floral Kingdom that have been identified for mega- reserve status (a conservation landscape of> 400 000 ha BMR 2006) by the bioregional conservation initiative, Cape Action for People and the Environment, a multi-stakeholder initiative between government, civil society and the private sector to coordinate and maximise the efforts to conserve the highly threatened Cape Floral Kingdom (BMR, 2006). Mega-reserves are conceptualized as partnerships between private land owners and existing nature reserves towards sustainable utilisation of the unique biodiversity in these areas. The focus is on exposing people to more sustainable ways of using the land and natural resources, promoting the adoption of conservation-based farming possibilities. (Crane, 2006). Planning domain: The conservation estate of the Baviaanskloof Region currently comprises about 231,386 hectares, managed by the Eastern Cape Parks Board both as a protected area and a wilderness area (BMR, 2006). The area envisaged for a mega-reserve includes not only the BNR but also three separate small nature reserves to its west, namely Misgund (622 ha), Skilpadbeen (1108 ha), and Welbedacht (1816 ha), and three to its east, namely Stinkhoutberg (10 557 ha), Mierhoopplaat (1062 ha) and Groendal (27 914 ha). These seven reserves, collectively known as the Baviaanskloof Reserve Cluster, form the protected area core of the mega-reserve. A critical component of the mega-reserve is the link between this inland sector and the coast to create a reserve that includes both east-west and north south gradients, as well as a marked altitudinal gradient (Boshoff, 2005). The purpose of the consolidation and expansion of the existing Baviaanskloof Conservation Area to form the Baviaanskloof Mega-Reserve is to ensure effective conservation of 12 major vegetation types representative of all of South Africa's seven biomes, almost all the major biological patterns of the Southern Africa region. (Boshoff, 2005) The Baviaanskloof Mega-Reserve project is a partnership between the Eastern Cape Parks Board and the Wilderness Foundation to secure the conservation of the regions biodiversity and natural resources, while ensuring that people benefit. A vision for the project was created following 18 months of collaboration and consultation between public agencies, landowners around the Baviaanskloof nature reserve, and the broader public. A Baviaanskloof Steering committee, on which a wide range of stakeholders is represented, formed part of this process. (Boshoff, 2005) Objective The principles underlying the vision for the Baviaanskloof Mega-Reserve are: a “biologically,

VI

economically and socially sustainable conservation area incorporating private landowners, state protected areas and communal concerns” (BMR, 2006). The Mega-reserve has a long-term vision of the conservation of the Baviaanskloof rare biodiversity, scenery and cultural history, and the promotion and facilitation of an economy based on the biodiversity in the surrounding area (BMR, 2006). It seeks also to protect its role as a provider of water. This project provides an occasion for local, provincial and national government to improve the economic development of the region‟s communities (BMR, 2006). The project has 5 main outcomes (Boshoff, 2005):  “securing a large consolidated core formal protected area, the primary management objective of which is the conservation of biodiversity  establishing a multi-owner contractual reserve network around the core area in which different land use patterns and forms of conservation status are reconciled and aligned with biodiversity conservation initiatives,  managing the mega-reserve network through a partnership between government, the private sector and civil society,  realising prospects for improving the livelihoods of people leaving in the rural parts of the region, and  exposing people to sustainable ways of using the area‟s natural resources, and incentivising their adoption”. Institutional arrangement and funding The BMR project started in 2002 when the Eastern Cape Provincial Department of Economic Affairs, Environment and Tourism (DEAET) contracted the Wilderness Foundation of South Africa (WF), a not- for-profit organisation based in the Eastern Cape, as the BMR implementing agent. Following its formation in 2005, the Eastern Cape Parks Board (ECPB) has played the principal government agency role in the implementation of the BMR. The WF has appointed a BMR Project Management Unit (PMU) to realise the vision of, and implement the Conservation Strategy for the BMR. The Eastern Cape Parks Board is now the lead government agency in terms of conservation in the Baviaanskloof region and is as such, the principal partner to the WF in this project (BMR, 2006). The focus of ECPB is on the formal protected areas, while the PMU drives many “off-reserve” conservation interventions and plays a supporting role to the ECPB “on- reserve” work. An exit strategy is currently being put into place whereby the ECPB and DEAET will take over many of the functions from the PMU when the CAPE project funding ends in 2009 (ECPB, 2007).A Baviaanskloof Steering committee, on which a wide range of stakeholders is represented, is part of the BMR process (Boshoff, 2005) in order to communicate and share the results of the different actions set up to manage the BMR programme. The BMR is a landscape level conservation initiative focused on the Baviaanskloof region, that falls under the banner of CAPE and receive funding from the World Bank‟s Global Environment Facility, DEAET, Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund, WWF-SA, Global Conservation Fund and others. (ECPB, 2007)

VII

Institutional arrangements chronology (Boshoff, 2005): 2002: CAPE project appoints the DEAET, Eastern Cape provincial Government, as the implementing agents for the BMRP. 2002: DEAET contracts the Wilderness Foundation, an Eastern Cape based NGO to conduct the planning and initial implementation phases of the mega reserve project. Seed funding is provided by DEAET. 2003: the Wilderness Foundation established a Baviaanskloof Project Management unit (PMU) located in Port Elizabeth, to manage the planning and implementation processes. The PMU will be in place until mid-2008 after which its functions will be taken over by the Eastern Cape parks board (for the nature reserve component) and by DEAET (for the off-reserve component). Dating at lifespan the PMU will mentor staff from DEAET and the Parks Board to assist these organisations in aquiring the skills necessary to manage the mega reserve project after 2008 (Boshoff, 2005)

VIII

Box 1: The Project Management Unit (PMU)

The Project Management Unit has been created by the Wilderness Foundation, designated as the implementing agent of the BMR project by the Eastern Cape Provincial Department of economic Affairs, Environment and Tourism in order to design and implement the BMR project.

The PMU will be in place until mid-2008 after which its functions will be taken over by the Eastern Cape parks board (for the nature reserve component) and by DEAET (for the off-reserve component). Dating at lifespan the PMU will mentor staff from DEAET and the Parks Board to assist these organisations in acquiring the skills necessary to manage the mega reserve project after 2008 (Boshoff, 2005)

The PMU reports on a quarterly basis to the Baviaanskloof Steering Committee, made up of representatives from 30 stakeholder groups. The executive committee of the BSC, made up of the WF CEO, the Chief Director of Environmental Affairs at DEAET and the CEO of the ECPB, oversee the project on a more regular basis. (BMR, 2006).

A variety of sub-projects and initiatives falling within the Mega -reserve Planning Domain will be overseen by the Project Management Unit (PM U). For example the R 16 million DEAT Poverty Relief project including the development of a world heritage site interpretive centre and the Ri .2 million LOTTO board sponsored tourist infrastructure project have been approved. The project seeks to align developments within the mega-reserve with the municipal Forward Planning structures (such as IDP and SDF), as well as Department Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) and Department of Agriculture initiatives such as Working for Water and Land Care. (BMR, 2006).

This will comprise piloting, in the Baviaanskloof are, the following:

 The establishment and maintenance of active partnerships and cooperative governance structures as a means of equitably sharing the socio-economic benefits of the BMR.  The dvt and implementation of a land consolidation and expansion strategy that addresses the objectives of the BMRP (this includes the approach to land consolidation, the range and appropriateness of options for contractual arrangements/ cooperative management arrangements and land acquisition, the socio- economic dvt opportunities, the communications requirements and the negotiation processes.  The mainstreaming of conservation as an alternative productive land use in the local and regional economy, thereby creating a new area for regional economic growth and job creation.  The payment for ecological services, notably provision of potable water, thereby creating new income streams and opportunities for employment and economic development.  The implementation of t nature-based tourism strategy- one of the key growth target sectors in the Eastern Cape regional economy- thereby stimulating the development of local and regional tourism- related businesses and creation of jobs.  The sustainable harvesting and utilization of natural resources from BMR, thereby optimizing natural resource use without collapsing the resource.  The targeting of socially and environmentally responsible private investment in the development of the area for tourism and related small enterprises. The support of small-scale businesses from local communities, and the dvt of entrepreneurial and technical skills in local communities, to deliver services to the biodiversity economy of the BMR

Subtropical thicket restoration project (STRP) The Department of Water Affairs and Forestry has initiated a pilot project to assess the viability of using Portulacaria Afra, named more commonly spekboom, to restore large areas of subtropical thicket (Powell et al, 2006). STRP is starting at the level of Baviaanskloof but aims at extending its influence on Eastern Cape. The strong initial focus is on the potential role of carbon sequestration as a funding source. Indeed, there is a general need to improve the impacts of global warming by capturing carbon that is accumulating in the atmosphere as carbon dioxide. |Thicket, and especially spekboom, has the ability to capture high

IX

levels of carbon. The restoration via the carbon market could be possible. Some studies have to be made to evaluate the economical feasibility (Cowling,2006). However, the growing interest worldwide in payments for ecosystem services (PES), has lead to investigation of other funding streams within the project. The Subtropical Thicket Rehabilitation Project aims to provide several key deliverables, namely improved water retention and quality, restoration of biodiversity, sequestration of carbon, containment of cactus (Opuntia spp.) and reversal of desertification, with the ultimate aim of kickstarting a larger restoration project across the entire biome. (Powell et al, 2006). Given this diagnosis, a partnership between the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry Working for Woodlands and the Baviaanskloof Mega-reserve Project initiated in January 2004 the Subtropical Thicket Restoration Project, aimed at researching the scientific and practical feasibility of restoring thicket at the farm scale. The main area where this project is being undertaken is at Goede Hoop in the Cambria area of the Baviaanskloof. Already 180 hectares have been planted in an experimental context, in order to identify the best techniques of restoration. (Cowling, 2006) Objective The directive of the project is to establish baselines about biodiversity and carbon and restore lands with active planting, in order of being able to qualify for carbon and biodiversity credits in the medium to long term (Powell et al, 2007). Subtropical Thicket Restoration Programme has carried forward the vision from the Baviaanskloof pilot and had determined the following key objectives key (Powell et al, 2007, unpub.).  Assess and develop methods of including spekboom and thicket restoration in the carbon trading, biodiversity and soil conservation economies.  Establish a peer-reviewed monitoring protocol for the project  Establish the rate of carbon sequestration in restoration sites planted with spekboom  Obtain a clear understanding of the factors that affect the success of spekboom survivorship  Provide data and information to the popular and scientific community.  Encourage the involvement and collaboration of local landowners  Establish standard procedures for the propagation of other thicket species. Strategy The next three years will see the strategy employed in 3 areas: 1) Baviaanskloof Mega Reserve (BMR), 2) Fish River Communal Lands, 3) Thicket-wide plots across the greater part of the Subtropical Thicket Biome (Powell et al, 2006). Part of the BMR is a World Heritage Site and area of prime conservation significance. The rural communities are extremely poor and rely heavily on govt. pension schemes, disability grants and poverty relief programmes. There are approximately 2000 hectares of degraded subtropical thicket that need to be restored. The project will maintain a workforce of 24 people over the next 3 years, to restore

X

as many of the critical areas as possible. The BMR as an optimal location to test new techniques will be used as an experimental location to get species other than spekboom to establish and grow (Powell et al, 2006). The nursery that has been established at the Kouga Dam is needed to continue trials to restore the species back to degraded thicket, following successful establishment of spekboom. At each site an area of approximately 5 hectares will be divided into a number of treatments, with the associated specific control methods. The same methodology will be employed in the Fish River Project, but fencing will be required to keep small stock from damaging the truncheons (Powell et al, 2006). The baseline assessment sites in the Baviaanskloof Megareserve will require monitoring and reassessment (fixed point photography, species diversity, spekboom survivorship and carbon stocks) (Powell et al, 2006). The pilot BMR project has found mixed results with regard to spekboom mortality (ranges from 20%- 100%). Currently the cause for these mortalities is unknown, but soil texture, soil moisture and rainfall periodicity are thought to play significant roles. The abiotic variability within the Eastern Cape is well recognised. Topography, rainfall, soils, frost, aspect etc. all act in concert to provide an extremely heterogeneous environment. It seems logical therefore that both spekboom mortality and later carbon accrual (growth rate) will vary considerably as a result of this. Knowing spekboom survivorship and spekboom growth in the vast and variable degraded areas of the E Cape is vital to formulating foolproof argument (with backing data) for qualification of carbon credits. In light of the above the technical advisory group has devised a “Thicket-Wide Plot” project (Powell et al, 2006). Funding and institutional arrangement: This project is funded and has been initiated by the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry through the Working for Water Programme. The implementation has been given to Gamtoos Irrigation Board(GIB). It has to supply plant stock from the nursery but also establish experimental plots; GIB is responsible for ground implantation as well as for the financial management and administration of the program (Powell et al, 2007). The vision for the provincial rollout would be to entice other institutions (govt. departments, DBSA, World Bank, district municipalities etc.) to become co-financiers. The Subtropical Thicket Restoration Programme has the vital responsibility to forge strategic partnerships in a cross-sectoral and multi-tiered manner. The majority of the degraded land lies in private lands or communal rangelands. The various forums (farmers unions) need to be engaged and made aware of the merits of the project. At the same time a strong interdepartmental alliance needs to be formed, primarily with the Department of Agriculture, also including Department of Land Affairs, Depart of Economic Affairs, Environment and Tourism. The two district municipalities (Cacadu and Amatola) and all their subsidiaries should also become cofounders in the greater Programme (Powell et al, 2006). The programme management team (senior project manager and the M & E Dev Unit) will strive to engage with the private sector. To date negotiations have been initiated with the Coega IDZ, Eskom, INVESTEC, DBSA, World Bank and others. It is fundamental premise that EPWP funding should be seen as a catalytic funding to galvanise private sector investment towards job creation and restoring degraded areas (Powell et al, 2006) XI

Major challenges Seven main issues have been identified and need to be considered (Powell et al, 2006): To get some attention to the condition of the thicket ecosystem: as the thicket biome has only been formally recognised a decade ago, there is a lack of “high profile attention for thickets in national woodland policies”. Considering the extension of degradation and the value of this ecosystem, it is suggested that the departments of Agriculture and of Economic Affairs and Tourism should become co- custodians of the restoration effort. To generalise the researches on the thicket ecosystem: there is a need to qualify and quantify findings relative to the 112 thicket types. To plan a holistic land use and integrate conservation planning: it is dangerous to proceed to large scale restoration projects without the appropriate forethought and planning. Society will need to make decisions regarding the most appropriate management options for the ecosystems (ranging from neglect to restoration) for anthropogenically altered states, using a multidisciplinary costs-benefit analysis. This approach requires testing and huge amount of planning and thoughts. A major provincial and national interdepartmental responsibility will be to manage the needs and aspirations of potential beneficiaries of carbon trading, and to ensure wise and sustainable development. Carbon investors may require cessation of pastoralism for a number of years, and this needs to be balanced with farmer needs and creation of alternative income streams. To have an inter-departmental cooperation: The full restoration of degraded subtropical thicket is going to require considerable financial and institutional resources, as well as a significantly long time line (with no guarantee of full ecosystem recovery). Society cannot allow the continued mining of natural capital through overstocking of livestock. The relevant authorities urgently need to start monitoring and controlling the unsustainable harvesting of agricultural resources in order to make land users accountable for their actions. To facilitate subtropical thicket regeneration: planting P. Afra may lead to the return of spekboom-dominated thicket types, however, it does no guaranty the return of the full complement species. Not only are many thicket plant species relatively slow growing relative to P. afra, but there is also very little evidence of natural recovery – probably as a result of poor seedling survival and lack of canopy recruitment. Some animal species can help for the recovery such as frugivorous birds or vervet monkeys. Powell et al. (2004) advocated a combined approach of rehabilitating with P. afra truncheons (some infected with V. crassulae), and large specimens of Aloe, Euphorbia, Crassula and other succulent species, effectively creating instant bush structure. In so doing, the catalyst will be created for an accelerated increase in biodiversity (via zoochorous seed dispersal). This could effectively convert pseudo-savannah and old lands, through the initiation and growth of bush clumps, back to intact subtropical thicket. A significant need exists for more research trials into a number of aspects within subtropical thicket restoration. Biodiversity offsets: Although biodiversity offset trading is considerably less developed than carbon trading, the possibility of future financial benefits to conserve biodiversity should be considered. The Kyoto Protocol has provided strong financial incentives, while the Convention on Biodiversity less so. This could skew the balance in trade-offs between carbon storage and biodiversity. A clear national policy directive is required to guide this issue. XII

To get stakeholder participation and mainstreaming: the prevention of further degradation will be more cost effective than trying to restore degraded landscapes. Where restoration is required the main challenge is to make it cost effective and to catalyse natural ecosystem recovery. Any ecosystem is complex and has the ability to reside at a number of altered states along an ecosystem trajectory. The position of these states is a function of a number of factors (such as the original natural state, the severity and nature of disturbance, and the nature and extent of restoration intervention). To achieve large-scale restoration, “mainstreaming” should be adopted. It can be defined as “as securing the goals (restoration or conservation) into the economic landscape, which would include development models, policies and programmes of the broader community. In a recent review of successful mainstreaming projects in South Africa”. Moreover an “effective communication with key stakeholders” was often cited as a common denominator. Pro-poor development programmes in the developing world, for example in Africa and South America, can be used as vehicles to restore natural capital while mainstreaming it by placing job creation and economic empowerment on the social agendas of countries and international agencies. The way forward The STRP complies with several goals from the Forestry White Paper on Sustainable Forestry Development in SA (Powell et al, 2006), such as:  “Fostering a spirit and ethic for stewardship for natural resources in the broader community  Addressing rural poverty issues  Encouraging local economic development Recognising the special value of woodlands and forest resources  The need to halt and reverse desertification  Sustainable land use management  Inter-departmental cooperation and cooperative governance  Promoting restoration of degraded forests and woodlands  Providing incentives and small scale funding for conservation and restoration” At this early stage in the growth of the project (a subset of Working for Woodlands), a number of key interventions is urgently required to ensure sustainability and cooperative governance (from Powell et al, 2006):  “Interdepartmental co-envisioning and co-operation as well as cross departmental policy coordination  Increased NGO awareness and more vociferous ecological watchdogs  Clear and unambiguous policy with regards to forest definitions relating to Kyoto and CDM  Continued research into key aspects of horticultural, ecological, biogeographic, social and economic aspects of the subtropical thicket restoration  Active and well-coordinated stakeholder engagement and a funded public awareness campaign  Comprehensive (multi-tier) performance monitoring and accountability for state officials charged with safeguarding agricultural resources, biodiversity and natural capital”. XIII

References: BMR, 2006,Baviaanskloof mega-reserve background document for the Strategic Management Plan. Project Management Unit. Boshoff, A.; Wilson, S, 2004, The STEP stakeholder participation programme: summary, comments and some lessons learned, Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit University of Port Elizabeth 6031, Report No. 50 Cowling, Richard, 2006, Natural heritage of the Baviaanskloof Mega-reserve, Baviaanskloof Mega- reserve Heritage Assessment Study and Heritage Resource Management Plans, p 142- 169 Crane, Wendy, 2006, Biodiversity conservation and land rights in South Africa: Whither the farm dwellers?, science direct, Geoforum 37 (2006) pp 1035–1045 Powell, M., Mills, A, Marais, C., 2006, Carbon sequestration and restoration: challenges and opportunities in subtropical thicket, Multiple use management of natural forests and woodlands: policy refinements and scientific progress, Natural forests and Savanna woodlands, symposium IV, 15-18 May 2006, Port Elizabeth. Powell, M., Mills, A, Marais, C., 2007, Subtropical Thicket Restoration Programme, Business Plan 2007/8- 2009/10, second draft.

- Internet 1: Biodiversity GIS, bgis.sanbi.org, last visited: 03/04/2008

XIV

Appendix 3: Questionnaire asked to the farmers

Interview Code: ______Date of interview ______Interview location ______

Interviewee Personal and Farm Information

Interviewee Name – ______

Property Name(s) – ______

1) Can you identify your property on this map? 2) How many years have you lived on this property? ______years 3) What is the size of your farm? 4) Who owns the farm? 5) How many years have you owned this property? ______years 6) How many generations has this property been in your family? ______generations 7) How many years have you been farming? ______years 8) How many hours do you work a week? ______hours 9) How many workers do you employ? 10) Does the bulk of your income derive from on-farm or off-farm activities? Does this include tourism? 11) Land uses (rank by largest area and amount of years) 11a) Amount of 11b) Number of 11c) Economic 11d) Reasons for this land use hectares or rank by years this land importance (Rank: 1 (tradition, passion, economy or largest area (1 use has been being the most advised/fashion side activity, being the largest) used important) other) 1-mohair production 2-sheep farming 3-Boer goats 4-Ostriches 5-cows 6-aloe production 7-medicinal plants 8-water catchments 9-game – eco-tourism 10-cropping (list types + amount produced-year, hectare):

11-Fuel wood

12-Other land uses

------

XV

Could you indicate on the map which zone is important for the mentioned land uses?

XVI

LIVESTOCK’S QUESTIONS

12) What size of your property do you use for grazing?

ha

13) How long have you been keeping cattle?

Years

14) In case you would not keep your livestock, what would you have in your farm?

15) Have you changed the number or type of livestock you were keeping in the last few years? If yes, why?

0- Yes, not profitable anymore 1- Yes, land degradation makes it impossible to produce 2- Yes, other reasons (specify) 3- No 16) Could your farm maintain a higher number of livestock?

0- Yes 1- No

17) What is the maximum number of animals that you consider you can have in your farm?

Heads of cattle

18) In case your farm could maintain a higher number of cattle, would there be enough food available for them (without the necessity of extra supplementary food)?

19) Is there any plant species from the bushveld that are relevant to feed your livestock?

0- Yes (specify the species that the livestock consume in bush veld) 1- No

20) What percentage of close bush and open pasture is ideal for the development of your pasture? What is best for you cattle: open spaces with patches of bushes or a higher density of bushes in a field?

21) Do you use any bush veld plant as forage (plants that you dry and then feed the animals)?

0- Yes (specify bush veld plant species) 1- No

22) If yes, when do you recollect it?

23) if yes, for which animals do you use it?

24) Could you indicate in the next table in which month your livestock graze free (spss) in the farm and in which periods the cattle in introduced in a plot with fences?

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec (a) Mohair (b) Boer goats (c) Sheep (d) Ostrich (e) Other

25) (Big table given at the end to be completed later)

XVII

26) Do you cut and store the plant growth in those plots to use them for the animals in case of necessity (emergency feed)?

0-Yes 1- No

27) If yes, when is it necessary to use that resource?

…………….

28) If yes, what quantity do you store?

……………..kg

29) Do you sell the forage/ fodder?

0- Yes 1- No

30) If yes, what quantity do you sell?

……………kg

31) If yes, at what price do you sell the forage/ fodder?

……………rand/ kilo

32) Do you buy fodder for you cattle?

0- Yes 1- No

33) If yes, has there been any increase in the amount of fodder you buy for your cattle in the last 10 years and why?

0- Yes, increase in the number of cattle 1- Yes, less food available ------ more the necessity of extra food 2- Yes, productivity reasons to increase the growth/ size of your cattle

34) How many workers do you have working in the management of cattle?

………….workers

35) Could you indicate what is the cost/ hour-day per worker?

36) Do you need to hire extra workers for a specific period of the year like for example to shear?

0- Yes 1- No

37) If yes how many?

……….workers

38) What is their salary per hour?

…………rand/ hour

XVIII

SOCIO-CULTURAL QUESTIONS

39) Which activities give you the feeling of fulfillment?

Not at all Not really Neutral Quite A lot of some fulfillment fulfillment

Family-based activities

(a) Spending time with my family at my house (inside or in the garden)

(b) Going on trips outside Baviaanskloof with my family

(c) Doing activities with my family in Baviaanskloof (please specify activities)

Individual activities

(d) From my activities at the farm (please specify which activities)

(e) Going for walks in my direct natural surroundings

(f) Playing land-based sports (please specify)

(g) Doing water-based sports (please specify)

(h) Fishing

(i) Hunting

(j) Àdventure, off-road (quad)

(k) Other:…………….

NB: take care on how you ask these questions, start with how they enjoy their activities of farming, if they get fulfillment out of it; then ask about the time they have left to do other things, like spending time with family, etc - >and how they value it.

40) Could you indicate on the map which areas are important for the most important fulfilling activities you mentioned in the former question? (or indicate by mentioning a place name)

41) How often do you do the activities as mentioned in the table?

XIX

42) What are for you signs that your farmland is healthy?

43) Do you consider your farmland healthy at the moment?

0- Yes 1- No

44) Has farmland health changed over the years and if yes, how and why do you think that is?

0- Yes, negatively 1- Yes, positively 2- No

45) Have you experienced the situations as mentioned in the following table on your property over the pas few year?

(a) Increase (b) Less (c) Less food (d) Less (e) Hillside (f) Degraded of floods growth of available water erosion soil quality animals and (plants) available harvested products Positive negative

46) Have you received any information about how to control these phenomena and if yes, is it positive information?

0- Yes, positive info 1- Yes, negative info 2- No info

47) What are for you signs showing that nature/valley bushveld in Baviaanskloof is healthy (what shows you that it is healthy)?

48) For the next statements, indicate your level of agreement

Totally Disagree to Neutral Agree to Totally disagree some extent some agree extent The valley bushveld: (and ask the same for the property) (a) helps me get rid of stress and fatigue (b) Is important to me because of its beauty (c) Is important to me because it allows me to enjoy recreation (d) Is important for my children to learn about nature (e) Provides me plants that I use for medicinal purposes (if yes, which and where do you find them?) (f) Contains plant species that are of special importance to me (if yes which and where do you find them?) 49) Do you do activities that involve art, music and/ or literature?

0- Yes 1- No

XX

50) If yes, which are those activities?

11 RESTORATION/ CONSERVATION QUESTIONS

51) What do you know about conservation/restoration activities in Baviaanskloof?

52) What does ‘conservation’ and ‘restoration’ mean according to you?

53) Have you heard about STRP?

0- Yes 1- No

54) If yes, What do you think about it?

55) Have you heard about STEP?

0- Yes 1- No

56) If yes, what do you think about it?

57) Do you think these activities or plans will influence you and your farm positively or negatively?

0- Yes, positively 1- Yes, negatively 2- No

58) In what ways/ what are your concerns?

59) Conservation/ Restoration Behaviour (10)

yes Sort no of a) Have you removed any alien plants from your property in the last 2 years? 0 2 1 b) If yes, which plant species are those? c) If yes, why have you removed them? d) ….and did it involve extra costs? e)0 Have you undertaken any soil conservation or land rehabilitation measures for 0 2 1 reducing soil erosion in the last 2 years? e.g. filling dongas? f) Have you undertaken any nature conservation activities to protect any areas in 0 2 1 the last 2 years (e.g., surveys, restoration)? g) Have you planted any plants on your property in the last two years (spekboom)? 0 2 1 h) If so, what types of plants did you plant? i) Why did you choose these types of plants? j) Do you have any areas on your farm which you think would benefit from 0 2 1 rehabilitation work? (can you show them on the map?) k) Would you ever consider rehabilitating these areas? 0 2 1 l) Is it worth your while to rehabilitate these areas? 0 2 1 m) Have you undertaken any nature conservation activities for any animals in the 0 2 1 last 2 years (e.g., surveys, re-introductions)? n) If bush encroachment is occurring on your property, do you actively attempt to 0 2 1 manage it? o) Do you run any ecotourism activities on your farm? 0 2 1 p) If so, what types of ecotourism activities do you run?

XXI

60) Attitude towards conservation/restoration of own property. Could you indicate the reasons for your answers?

Strongly Neutral / Strongly Disagree Agree disagree unsure Agree

1) It is possible for me to consider conserving land that 1 2 3 4 5 is useful for agricultural production

2) Protecting intact areas of vegetation on my farm 1 2 3 4 5 offers me significant advantages

3) Restoring degraded areas of vegetation on my farm

offers me significant advantages

4) If my livelihood could be assured, I would reduce my production activities to undertake nature conservation 1 2 3 4 5 and restoration activities

XXII

Willingness to be involved in Nature Conservation/ restoration

61) Are you at the moment involved in any nature conservation or restoration program?

0- Yes 1- No 2- Sometimes

62) Would you like to be involved in Nature Conservation/ Restoration action?

0- Yes 1- No 2- Maybe

63) What incentives would be useful in encouraging you to join a voluntary conservation agreement?

______

64) Indicate you interest in incentives in the following table:

65) Concerning the table, could you rank the best incentive for you?

XXIII

Rank best Not at all Possibly Neutral / Very How interested would you be to receive each incentive? Interested incentive for you interested interested unsure interested a) Tax rebate 1 2 3 4 5 c) Vegetation fencing subsidy 1 2 3 4 5 d) Soil erosion works subsidy 1 2 3 4 5 e) Financial payment (direct payment) 1 2 3 4 5 f) Targeted alien plant removal by Working for Water 1 2 3 4 5 g) Access to a support network of like-minded landowners 1 2 3 4 5 h) Signage for voluntary conservation agreement membership 1 2 3 4 5 i) Extension officer support 1 2 3 4 5 j) Access to scientific information and support 1 2 3 4 5 k) Access to eco-tourism support 1 2 3 4 5 l) Other 1 2 3 4 5

66) Indicate the level of agreement in the following table:

Strongly Neutral Strongly Disagree Agree disagree / unsure Agree a) I would consider reducing my production activities (even if I wasn’t offered incentives 1 2 3 4 5 which offset my losses from reduced production b) I would consider reducing my production activities (e.g., stocking rates) if offered 1 2 3 4 5 appropriate incentives which offset my losses from reduced production

XXIV

Only for persons in the meeting: 67) After the meeting with Mike, what are you impressions about replanting spekboom and about the carbon market?

68) Would you be prepared to replant spekboom and enter in the carbon market?

69) As Mike mentioned, to enter in the carbon market it is necessary to change land use, stop rearing cattle and leave the land free of grazing to allow spekboom to grow and then obtain the benefits derived from Carbon market. To what extent would you be willing to change your land use?

0- Stop completely the Livestock activities 1- Plants plots isolated of grazing to assess how spekboom develops and after evaluate the possibilities of Carbon Market 2- Other 70) Do you consider that, apart from the benefits derived from Carbon Market, enter in the STRP project would have other positives or negative consequences?

0- Yes, positive consequences 1- Yes, negative consequences 2- Yes, both positive and negative consequences 3- No 71) If yes, could you indicate which ones are the positive and/or negative consequences?

STAKEHOLDERS’ RELATIONSHIPS

72) Which organizations/ kind of people have you already/ are you working with?

73) Which organizations/ kind of people would you worked with? 74) Collaboration Willingness Index (13)

Rate your willingness to work with Willing to work Agency each agency you answered “Yes” to with them? work with Not Very Very yes sur No Low Mod. High Low High e A National: DWAF 0 2 1 Provincial / Local Government B Eastern Cape Parks Board 0 2 1 C Dept. Economic Affairs, Environment & 0 2 1 Tourism D Local Municipality 0 2 1 E District Municipality 0 2 1 f Gamtoos irrigation board 0 2 1 G Other 0 2 1 Non-Government Organisations H Wildlife & Environment Society of South 0 2 1 Africa I Botanical Society of South Africa 0 2 1 J Wilderness Foundation 0 2 1 K Project Management Unit (PMU) L Landmark Foundation 0 2 1 M Earth collective 0 2 1 N Other 0 2 1

Research Organisations

XXV

O Agricultural Research Council 0 2 1 P Rhodes University 0 2 1 Q Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University 0 2 1 (formerly University of Port Elizabeth) R University of Fort hare 0 2 1 S Other 0 2 1

Private Organisations T Your Conservancy 0 2 1 u A neighbouring Conservancy 0 2 1 V Your Farmers Association 0 2 1 W A neighbouring Farmers Association 0 2 1 X Your Industry group (please name it) 0 2 1 Y Private consultant 0 2 1 Z Other (please specify) 0 2 1

75) How many times in 2006 did you receive support from an extension officer? Which agency / organization?

XX) Rating Agency(s) Quality of support 1 Never 2 One time 3 Two times 4 Three times 5 Four times 6 More than four times

76) Quality of support

0 1 2 3 4 5 No visit from Poor Satisfactory Reasonable Good Excellent extension staff

77) Local Networks

Are you a member of any local farming / business organizations?

0- Yes 1- No

78) If yes, How often are you involved (on average) in activities with these organizations?

79) On this map could you describe your relationship with each of your neighbours, using the following categories:

1 2 3 4 5 No Poor Reasonable Good Excellent relationship relationship relationship relationship relationship

80) Who Are Your Local Champions?

XXVI

81) Do you hold any leadership positions in any local groups, e.g. Farmers Association, conservancy, industry group, or local sporting organisation?

______

82)

XX) Can you identify any influential, well- Does this person hold any leadership Contact details respected people in your community? positions? 1

2

3

Can you rank these persons according to their influence (1 for the highest influence)? Interviewee Personal Information 85) e-mail: ______86) Tel: ______87) Landowner gender: Female / Male 88) Age: ______

(White) (White) Xhosa Coloured Other English Afrikaans 89) Landowner race: 90) What language do you primarily use at home?

English Afrikaans Xhosa Other 91) What language is primarily used with farm staff?

English Afrikaans Xhosa Other 92) Marital status Single Married Separated Widowed Other or (please specify) Divorced 93) Gender and ages of children: 1)______5)______2)______6)______3)______7)______4)______8)______

94) Level of education completed: Diploma Post- Other Junior High Did some Full MSc PhD graduate (please specify) school school University degree degree degree diploma

XXVII

Appendix 4 : Contacts details of the interviewee Interviewed Stakeholders contact details

Organisation Date Location Contact Role Contact details

Baviaans 13/11/07 Willowmore Ewald Mayor 044 923 1004 Municipality Loock

Tourism office 13/11/07 Willowmore Jane responsible 044 9231702 Zaayman: [email protected]

Department of 22/11/07 Bisho Mr Project manager 082 774 4387 Agriculture and Dyonase, for land affairs Land affairs

Cacadu district, 06/12/07 Port Gcobisa Environmental 073 77 55 270 Elizabeth Mhlonyane Health Practitioner Department of Environmental Health

Gamtoos 7/12/07 Patensie Pierre Tel: 042-283 0329 Irrigation Board Joubert Cell: 082-553 0947 [email protected]

Gamtoos Patensie Edwill Area Manager Tel:042-2830329 Irrigation Board Moore Cell :082856417

[email protected]

DWAF 03/12/07 East London Mickael Implementation 043 604 5400 Kawa manager Working for Water; Eastern Cell: 082 807 5641 Cape [email protected]

Eastern Cape 30/11/07 Patensie Wayne Regional manager Tel: 042 283 0630 Parks Erlank West Cell: 072 430 6423 [email protected]

XXVIII

Farmers contact details:

Pieter Kruger 049-8391002

Chris Lamprecht 049-8391160 / 0828442080

Runei van Rensburg 049-8391162

David Smith 049-8391188 (8391010)

Thys Cilliers 049-8391122

Quentis Bezuidenhout 044-9232192

Willie van Ransburg 044-9231906

Pete Hatting 044-9231056

Linden Booth 044-9231751 / 044-921751 / 0828783688

Masha (Zaaimans Hoek) 049-8391045

Boetie Terreblanche 044-9231921

Nico Smith 044-9231511

Lois (Hippies) 049-8391178

Walter (community farmers) 049-8391088

XXIX

Appendix 5 : Western Baviaanskloof ecosystem functions, goods and services. Functions, ecosystems processes and Goods and services of the thicket ecosystem in Western Baviaanskloof (source: adapted from de Groot et al (2002))

Goods and services provided by Ecosystem processes and Functions thicket ecosystem in western components Baviaanskloof

Production functions- Provision of natural resources Food Hunting, game edible plants and animals Vegetation for livestock Building biomass for human construction Fuel wood Raw material and other uses Fodder (leaves) and fertilizers (litter) Genetic material and evolution in Resistance towards pests Genetic resources wild plants and animals Maintenance of biodiversity Variety in biochemical substances Drugs Medicinal resources in natural biota Variety of biota in natural Ornamental resources ecosystems with potential Resources for decoration ornamental uses Carrier functions Providing a suitable substrate for human activities and structures Living space (housing, farms habitation Soil stability facilities, tourists accommodation) Soil stability; soil fertility; Food Cultivation/ breeding topography; climate Waste disposal* Geology; soil stability; Space for solid waste disposal Transportation Soil stability; topography; geology Transportation by land, R332 Tourism activities: hiking, sports, Tourism facilities Soil stability; topography; geology game, 4x4 roads… *(problem in the area) Regulation functions- Maintenance of essential ecological systems and life support processes Role of ecosystems in bio- Gas regulation geochemical cycles (e.g. carbon Influence on climate sequestration) Influence of ecosystem structure on Disturbance prevention decreasing disturbances power/ Flood prevention frequency Role of land cover in regulating Water regulation Drainage and natural regulation run-off and river discharge Filtering, retention and storage of Provision of water for domestic Water supply fresh water (e.g. in aquifers) and agricultural uses Maintenance of arable land (mainly valley part of the area) Role of vegetation root matrix and Soil retention Prevention of damage from erosion soil biota (mainly slopes of the mountains in the area) Maintenance of productivity on Weathering of rock, accumulation arable lands (valley part) Soil formation of organic matter Maintenance of natural productive soils Role of biota in storage and Maintenance of healthy soils and Nutrient regulation recycling the nutrients (e.g. N, P, productive ecosystems K) Waste treatment Role of vegetation and biota in Pollution control/ detoxification

XXX

removal or breakdown of xenic Filtering of dust particles (air nutrients and compounds quality) Pollination of wild plants Role of biota in movements of Pollination Pollination of crops floral gametes Honey production Population control through trophic- Biological control Control of pests and diseases dynamic relations Habitat functions- Providing habitats (suitable living spaces) for wild plants and animals Suitable living spaces for wild Maintenance of biological and Refugium function plants and animals genetic diversity Maintenance of biological and genetic diversity Nursery function Suitable reproduction habitats Maintenance of economic activities such as game and tourism Information functions Providing information for cognitive development Aesthetic information Attractive landscape features Enjoyment of scenery Variety in landscapes with Development of eco-tourism and Recreation/ tourism recreational uses nature study Use of nature in books, Variety in natural features with Cultural and artistic information architecture, folklore, paintings, cultural and artistic value songs… Use of nature for religious or Variety in natural features with Spiritual and historic information historic value (e.g. bushman spiritual and historic value paintings) Variety in nature with scientific Science and education Use of nature for scientific research and educational value

XXXI

Appendix 6 : Pebble distribution method

Lynam et al (2005)6 defined the Pebble Distribution method (PDM) as being “a flexible, simple diagnostic scoring procedure that clarifies the understandings and the priorities of the participants. A preliminary discussion with the target group defines which aspects will be scored and the criteria for scoring to ensure a clear understanding among the participants. The facilitator then introduces a series of cards with a label and usually a picture symbolizing the aspects to be scored. The facilitator demonstrates how the counters should be distributed on the cards according to the quantitative relationships or values of the group. The participants then distribute counters onto the cards. The scoring is not the end point: the respondents are always asked to explain the final scores. There are innumerable possible applications of this tool. Evaluations applied in the Multidisciplinary Landscape Assessment of the Center for International Forestry Research included examining the relative importance of different types of landscape elements vs. types of use, e.g., food, medicinal products, etc”. During the field work, the medicinal plants used in the Western Baviaanskloof have been evaluated by Kim Janssen 7 by letting members of the communities distribute 100 grains between the cards. Another set of cards selected by Ignacio de la Flor8 has been evaluated by the communities involving criterias from economic activities such as farming activities, water, pensions…

Figure 6‟.1: Example of the Pebble distribution Card proposed to the communities about medicinal plants.

6 Lynam, T., Jong de W., Sheil, D., Kusumanto, T. and Evans, K., (2007), A Review of Tools for Incorporating Community Knowledge, Preferences, and Values into Decision Making in Natural Resources Management, Ecology and Society 12(1): 5 7 See her thesis for more details 8 See his thesis for more details

XXXII

Appendix 7: Programmes supported by the Department of Economic Affairs, Environment and Tourism “Government projects and programmes:In addition to work being carried out by research institutions and industry, the following projects and programmes are also being implemented by government agencies and departments.

SA Weather Services carries out monitoring and research of the ozone layer, solar radiation and monitoring of atmospheric trace gases and ozone depleting gases. The Weather Forecasting Research programme focuses on the consolidation of methods to evaluate and improve weather forecast accuracy. Ongoing research on cloud seeding is being conducted to enhance rainfall.

The Agricultural Research Council (with funding from the National Department of Agriculture) maintains a number of databases that store and process climatic data and other environmental parameters.

The National Department of Agriculture has launched a number of research projects intended to assist the agricultural sector in minimizing the effects of climate change. These include: an investigation into more effective water use in irrigation systems and evaluation of a number of irrigation models; the development of a national standard for potential evaporation; general of water saturation index values that can be combined with a vegetation index to indicate the status and severity of a drought; investigating water harvesting techniques to conserve rainfall; determining appropriate tillage practices; and compiling a provisional carbon map for South Africa that illustrates the organic carbon value of the soil.

The Department of Health: is planning to implement effective response mechanisms for the identification and control of epidemics at the national, provincial and local government level. The Medical Research Council has also established an atlas of the spatial epidemiology of malaria in Africa fir strategic planning for Malaria control.

A number of projects are being conducted to investigate the potential for renewable resources of energy and the use of energy efficiency mechanisms. These include projects that have been initiated by the Department of Minerals and Energy (e.g. Guidelines for energy efficient buildings and effective energy use). Eskom is also undertaking various feasibility studies on the potential use of wind and solar energy, as well as the promotion of efficient lighting technologies”.

For more details, visit DEAT website: http://www.environment.gov.za/ClimateChange2005/

XXXIII

Appendix 8: Cacadu District information Cacadu district Cacadu had an estimated population of 363,585 in 1999, the second smallest population of the provincial districts. This vast rural district has a very low population density of 6/square kilometre, with people living on the coast and in the small towns of the interior that are often 100km or more apart. The district has a substantial coloured population (36% of the population), with Africans in the majority (41%) and a higher proportion of whites (13%) than other districts. Afrikaans is a majority language in many interior towns. The main challenge of the Cacadu District is to both expand agricultural production and to reduce the dependence of the economy on agriculture by building agro-processing industries. Agriculture has been in relative decline for the past decade, primarily due to falling small- stock production. Many farmers have converted to game farming, which is now a major industry. Although the district has the lowest unemployment rate in the province (31%), the rate is far higher in the small Karoo towns where many farm workers have lost their jobs in the past decade. Social services and infrastructure are generally good. Only 22% of houses are informal, and 2/3 of households have potable water and a flush toilet or pit latrine on site.

About the Baviaans municipality, some priorities have been identified (Cacadu district IDP, 2007/08):

- Building institutions and employee capacity - Enhance community services - Economic development - Provision of basic infrastructures (e.g.: a satellite clinic in Baviaanskloof) More information:www.cacadu.co.za; Cacadu district IDP, 2007/08

XXXIV

Figure 8-1: Cacadu district municipalities

XXXV

Figure 8-2 : Services provided by the Cacadu District and the Baviaans municipality

XXXVI

Appendix 9: Baviaans municipality information The Baviaans municipality has the smallest population of South Africa (Cacadu District IDP, 2007/08)

Municipal Services Baviaans Municipality provides the following services in terms of the powers listed below: • Water • Electricity Reticulation • Sanitation / Sewerage • Refuse Removal and Waste Management • Housing Development • Motor Vehicle Registrations ( Agency) • Motor Vehicle Licensing and permits ( Agency) • Clinics ( Agency ) • Municipal Planning • Libraries • Tourism • Airfield • Storm water Management • Trading Regulations • Building regulations

Municipal Powers The municipality performs the above services in its area in terms of the following powers provided for in section 84 of the Municipal Structures Act, 1998  84(1)(e) - Solid waste disposal sites in so far as it relates to determination of a waste disposal strategy; the regulation of waste disposal; the establishment, operation and control of waste disposal sites, bulk waste transfer facilities and waste disposal facilities for more than one local municipality in the district 85(1)(f) - Municipal roads which form an integral part of a road transport system for the area of the district municipality as a whole.  84(1)(g) Regulation of passenger transport services  84(1)(h) Municipal airports serving the area of the district municipality as a whole  84(1)(j) Fire fighting services serving the area of the district municipality as a whole including planning, co-ordination and regulation of fire services; specialised fire fighting services such as mountain, veld and chemical fire services; co- ordination of the standardisation of infrastructure, vehicles, equipment and procedures and the training of fire officers.  84(1)(k) The establishment, conduct and control of fresh produce markets and abattoirs serving the area of a major proportion of the municipalities in the district.  84(1)(l) The establishment, conduct and control of cemeteries and crematoria serving the area of a major proportion of the municipalities in the district.  84(1)(m) Promotion of local tourism in the area of the district municipality.  84(1)(n) Municipal public works relating to any of the above functions or any other functions assigned to the district municipality.

More information : www.baviaans.gov.za

XXXVII

Figure 8-3: problems identified in the Baviaanskloof, Source: Baviaans municipality IDP 2007

XXXVIII

Appendix 10: Economic overview of Western Baviaanskloof This chapter will give a general overview of the land uses that are done in the western Baviaanskloof and their potential impacts. Consequently, it concerns the activities of the primary stakeholders, main users of the thicket ecosystem goods and services: the farmers and communities. 11.1 Thicket uses As it was presented in chapter 2, the main vegetation existing in the study area results from the presence of the thicket biome. The thicket biome has several functions and ecosystems goods and services that have been developed in chapter 4. These functions lead to different uses of the thicket ecosystem by the different stakeholders, and especially the residents of the valley who have a daily use of the ecosystem. Different activities have been developed in the kloof. They can be economic activities as well as cultural and social. 11.1.1 Economic activities Regarding the farmers, they all have more or less the same activities. They are used to decide together. Generally when one of them tries and succeed in a particular domain, the others follow. However, there isn‟t a particular person who is used (or designed) to lead the others. Indeed, for example, they used to grow vegetables seeds, however, the activity becoming not cost-efficient enough. They all decided to stop the activity. As farming is now considered by several farmers as not profitable enough as a unique activity as it was reported during the interviews conducted for this thesis research, most of them are turning their attention and investing in the eco-tourism and nature-based activities in order to have a supplement income. For example a substantial number of farms possess camping sites, 4x4 routes or guest houses. The land uses are mainly agricultural. It concerns: mohair production, sheep production, cattle, ostriches production, game and ecotourism, cropping. There are also some marginal activities such as hives management, aloe production or fuel wood collection. The frequencies of farmers involved in these activities are visible in figure appendix 2.

XXXIX

Figure 10-1 : the land use weight in the activity of the western Baviaanskloof. Livestock production The main farming activity in the valley is the livestock breeding, with 100% of the farmers involved in this sector. Mohair, sheep, ostriches and cattle consist of the economic activities of the valley. The representation of each species in the valley is illustrated in figure .

Figure 10-2: Frequencies (number of heads) of the different types of livestock in the Baviaanskloof realised from the results of the interviews conducted in autumn 2007. The representation of sheep, ostriches and mohair a approximately equivalent. However, the Ostriches production has been declared as the most economically efficient followed by the sheep production (see table). The mohair production is the second main economical activity. it has to be noticed that 100% of the farmers who answered the economical ranking question

XL

(80% of all the farmers) have cows, but none of them declare it as a profitable production. They generally have a few heads (from 5 to 50 according to the interviews): it represent only 4% of the number of animals presents in the valley. It has to be noticed for the ostriches production that this year several farmers did not produce any (3 of them mentioned it) however, they are planning to start again the breeding next year. The ostrich‟s production is considered as the most economically efficient production by the farmers, but also the most expensive as they have to be “artificially” fed: farmers have to by food supplements for them; they cannot eat in the veld as mohair or sheep. The ostrich‟s production is generally added with sheep production.

Table 10-1: economic importance of farming activities according to the farmers.

Most important Second important Producers*

Mohair 10% 50% 60%

Sheep 30% 20% 90%

Ostriches 40% 10% 60%

Cattle 0% 0% 100%

Game- eco-tourism 30% 10% 70%

* the number represents the frequency of producers who possess the different species amongst the producers who answered the questions about economic importance of their different kinds of livestock. Ostriches are kept in camps in the valley area, generally in the surroundings of the farms; they do not threaten directly the thicket ecosystem. The activity that is the most threatening the thicket ecosystem is the mohair and sheep breeding which are grazing in the mountains. The animals that are the most dangerous for the thicket ecosystem are the goats which eat the bushes, and especially the palatable spekboom. However, a general awareness about it occurred amongst the farmers and the goat production has decreased a lot (even if still high) with the actual farmers‟ generation, according to the farmers themselves. In general, the sheep, mohair and cattle are grazing in the veld, sometimes freely or in camps. The plots generally being divided, a system of camps rotation is realised, in order to let them recover for a period of time. The repartition of the land uses on the area can be visualised in figure appendix 4. It has to be noticed that almost 50% of the area is supporting grazing pressure. What is not clear on this map is that some farmers also have mohair or sheep in camps in the valley (in artificial pastures), adding to the pressure on the land. These artificial pastures include also the ostriches camps.

XLI

Concerning the communities, their activities are much less important. Sewefontein community has 500 boer goats (200 community goats + 300 personal goats) and 200 sheep in total for meat production (based on this study). The goats go freely in the veld to be fed. They do not consider their land as degraded. The goats are mainly a traditional production and the people are reluctant to change a production that they know with something they are not used to. The community made a new business plan which include the use of 150 ha or irrgable land for agricultural production and an increase of the number of goats on 1000 heads. Saaimanshoek do not really have a farm activity. Some households are growing vegetable gardens, but they do not have any livestock. People work in other farms (especially men) or in the working for water programme. Most of the community get money mainly from pensions. The Tchnuganoo community do not have any livestock. Apart from the individual gardens and the nursery, they do not use the land for anything specific.

XLII

Boer goats grazing free

Figure 10-3: Western Baviaanskloof land uses Cropping The cropping‟s purpose in the valley is to feed the livestock, and especially during winter. It consists of mainly luzern, maize, oat. Barley. The production is located on the arable lands of the valley There is no crop production for the human consumption, apart from individual vegetable gardens, especially in the communities.

XLIII

Tourism Most of the farmers are investing in the tourism sector, or are willing to do so. The tourism sector represents more and more of the farmers‟ income. Of the 8 farmers involved in tourism activities, 50% declared that this was their main activities, even more than farming. Some farmers not yet involve in the sector are willing to invest in it: some of them are already building some houses, (not in the Baviaanskloof however, but in Jeffrey‟s Bay). The tourism sector involve: tourists accommodations (camp sites and guest houses), but also tourism recreational activities (hiking roads, game viewing, 4*4 routes, quad biking). It is mainly managed by the farmers‟ wives. The communities are not involved in this sector yet. However, Sewefontein is planning to rehabilitate two buildings as guest houses for tourists. However, they do not have the financial support yet. Other Apart from the main farming activity, three other productions are occurring amongst the farmers‟ community: the fuel wood distribution (one farmer mentioned it), the bee?hives management (two farmers mentioned it) and aloe production (two farmers mentioned it as an occasional activity). There is also a famer growing bonsais as a hobby. Concerning the hives production, it consists only as a “hobby” activity for one farmer; however, the second one has 20 hives and would like to develop more and more this activity. He would like to transform his activity and reach 400hives. He is starting a honey production. The fuel wood production is mainly for tourists in camps-site.

XLIV

Appendix 11: Cooperation and Competing interests between stakeholders This appendix gathers 16 tables illustrating the relationships between the different stakeholders.

The tables consist of two parts: the first line corresponds to the collaboration activities that have been noted during the field work, and concerning the western Baviaanskloof; the second part of the tables corresponds to the different competing interests and synergies between the different stakeholders for the selected functions. Of course, these tables are not exhaustive. The information used to realize these tables comes from the different interviews and observation realized during the fieldwork. Much more information could complete these tables.

As a reminder of the methodology, the different categories of competing interests are:

Synergies: when the stakeholders use the function for the same purpose. Competing interests over values or beliefs: for example, conservation versus development; cultural value versus economic value… Competition about inter-personal relationships: this occurs when different stakeholders defend their position and stake personal feelings on certain outcomes. Competition of interests or needs: when stakeholders do not use the thicket ecosystems functions for the same purpose, one use being on the disadvantage of the other, or when they use it for the same purpose but they are competing each other.

XLV

Table 11-1 : Cooperation activities, competing interests and synergies between DWAF and other stakeholders for each function in western Baviaanskloof.

ive

DWAF k

GIB

ECP

R3G

Earth

DEAT

DALA district

Cacadu Cacadu

Farmers Tourists

Tourism

Baviaans

collect

Landmark

foundation foundation

association

Tchuganoo

Wilderness

municipaliy

Sewefontein Zaaimonshoe Employs GIB for Financial Collaboration on specific Water Supports Cooperation STRP support for projects affairs* PRESENCE implementation STRP Competing interests and synergies Plant Sustainable Sustainable Land Restoration Land cover management; dependent development development restoration promotion management STRP functions objective objective vision Provincial Water Water supply interests management function vs local activitiy interests Recreation/ tourism function

Legend:  Synergies: common interests/ objectives  Competing interests over values or beliefs  Competing interests about interpersonal relationships  Competition of interests or needs

XLVI

Table 11-2 : Cooperation activities, competing interests and synergies between DEAT and other stakeholders for each functions in Western Baviaanskloof.

DEAT

GIB

ECP

Earth

DALA district

DWAF

Cacadu

Baviaans

collective

Landmark

foundation foundation

Wilderness municipaliy

Collaboration Cooperation on specific supports Supports Collaboration on specific projects activities projects such BMR BMR as WfW Competing interests and synergies Sustainable Sustainable Conservation Biodiversity Biodiversity Restoration Plant dependent development development vs conservation conservation activities functions policy policy agriculture policy policy involvement Water supply

function Restoration Recreation/ Tourism Tourism Environmental Tourism projects tourism function development development initiatives development

supports

DEAT

R3G

Farmers Tourists

Tourism

association

Sewefontein Tchnuganoo Saaimanshoek Potential financial Cooperation relationship for STRP Competing interests and synergies Plant dependent functions Restoration activities Water supply function Tourism Tourism Recreation/ tourism function development Touristic activities and facilities development interest

Legend: Legend:  Synergies: common interests/ objectives  Synergies: common interests/ objectives  Competing interests over values or beliefs XLVII  Competing interests over values or beliefs  Competing interests about interpersonal relationships  Competing interests about interpersonal relationships  Competition of interests or needs  Competition of interests or needs

Table 11-3: Cooperation activities, competing interests and synergies between DALA and other stakeholders for each function in western Baviaanskloof.

DALA

GIB

ECP

Earth

DEAT

DWAF

Baviaans

collective

Landmark

foundation foundation

Wilderness

municipaliy Cacadu Cacadu district Collaboration Collaboration Cooperation on specific on specific Agriculture development projects projects Competing interests and synergies Agricultural Agricultural Environment development development Plant dependent Forestry vs Agriculture and tourism Agriculture development policy of land vs of land vs functions agriculture management vs agriculture wilderness wilderness conservation conservation Agriculture Water supply development function participation Recreation/

tourism function

DALA k

R3G

Farmers Tourists

Tourism

association

Sewefontein Tchnuganoo Saaimanshoe

Supports farming activities- subsidies Cooperation subsidies Competing interests and synergies Plant dependent Agriculture Agriculture development functions development Irrigation Water supply function Irrigation management management Different landscape beauty Agriculture Recreation/ tourism perspective : wild nature development vs function vs controled nature ecotourism

Legend:  Synergies: common interests/ objectives  Competing interests over values or beliefs XLVIII  Competing interests about interpersonal relationships  Competition of interests or needs

Table 11-4: Cooperation activities, competing interests and synergies between Cacadu district and other stakeholders for each function in Western Baviaanskloof.

Cacadu ditrict k

GIB

ECP

R3G

Earth

DEAT

DALA

DWAF

Farmers Tourists

Tourism

Baviaans

collective

Landmark

foundation foundation

association

Wilderness

municipaliy

Sewefontein Tchnuganoo Saaimanshoe

Supports the Water Coop Provide development supply Regulations/ specific erates vegetable seed, Cooperation of the management projects implementation for tools education municipality issues PMU about health * Competing interests and synergies Promote agricult Plantdependent ure functions develop ment Water supply Water

function shortage Tourists accomoda Tourism/ tion Recreation/ recreation controls tourism function development (e.g. support hygiana, standards) *conflictual relationship for power share Legend: Cacadu is facing a water crisis (Cacadu district IDP, 2007/08): droughts and increasing  Synergies: common interests/ objectives demand leads to water shortages (e.g. in Baviaans municipality)  Competing interests over values or beliefs  Competing interests about interpersonal relationships Baviaans municipality is a priority development issue for Cacadu District  Competition of interests or needs

XLIX

Table 11-5 : Cooperation activities, competing interests and synergies between Baviaans municipality and other stakeholders for each function in Western Baviaanskloof.

Baviaans

n o

ek

GIB

ECP R3G

municipality Earth

DEAT

DALA district

DWAF

Cacadu Cacadu

Farmers Tourists

Tourism

collective

Landmark

foundation foundation

association

Wilderness Sewefontei Tchnugano Saaimansho Provides Supported BMR BMR Services Collaborate Involvement Agriculture by the Provides Provides Provides Provides Cooperation involvement involvement (water to develop of STRP in development Cacadu services services services facilities (from 2009) (from 2009) church tourism IDP ? district houses) Competing interests and synergies Plant Development Supports Comprised Supports Supports dependent * vs agriculture in BMR agriculture agriculture functions conservation Water supply Water

function service Recreation/ Tourism Supports tourism delopment tourism function support development

*complaint about the fact that any project submitted to the Department of Agriculture is considered as not sustainable enough

NB : there is a general complaints about the few services provided in the Baviaanskloof. Legend:  Synergies: common interests/ objectives

 Competing interests over values or beliefs  Competing interests about interpersonal relationships  Competition of interests or needs

L

Table11- 6: Cooperation activities, competing interests and synergies between Wilderness Foundation and other stakeholders for each function in Western baviaanskloof.

Wilderness

GIB

ECP R3G

Foundation Earth

DEAT

DALA district

DWAF

Cacadu Cacadu

Farmers Tourists

Tourism

Baviaans

collective

Landmark

foundation

association

Sewefontein Tchnuganoo

municipality Saaimanshoek Proud BMR Cooperation BMR BMR partner BMR framework program Competing interests and synergies Grazing Grazing vs vs Plant Biodiversity Conservation Wilde Biodiveristy Wilderness Biodiversity biodiversity biodiver Natural area to attract dependent vs vs * rness conservation conservation conservation conservatio sity tourists functions agriculture development value n conserv ation Water supply function Tourism Recreation/ Supports Tourism Wilderness developme tourism ecotourism Promotes tourism * development (e.g.routes, conservation nt of the function Ecotourism booklet) valley

*interpersonal tensions about PMU Legend:

 Synergies: common interests/ objectives  Competing interests over values or beliefs  Competing interests about interpersonal relationships  Competition of interests or needs

LI

Table 11-7: Cooperation activities, competing interests and synergies between Landmark Foundation and other stakeholders for each function in Western Baviaanskloof.

Landmark

GIB

ECP R3G

Foundation Earth

DEAT

DALA district

DWAF

Cacadu Cacadu

Farmers Tourists

Tourism

Baviaans

collective

foundation

association

Wilderness

Sewefontein Tchnuganoo

municipality Saaimanshoek Leopard Leopard Cooperation program in the collars Baviaanskloof Competing interests and synergies Farming Plant Wilderness Wilderness transforms the dependent conservation conservation leopard‟s functions habitat* Water supply

function Recreation/ Leopard: Leopard: tourism Tourists tourists function attraction attraction *There is a conflicting situation between the conservation of the leopards and the livestock breeding as leopards kill Livestock. Some radical measures are sometimes used against leopards to protect the livestock.

Legend:

 Synergies: common interests/ objectives  Competing interests over values or beliefs  Competing interests about interpersonal relationships  Competition of interests or needs

LII

Table 11-8: Cooperation activities, competing interests and synergies between Earth-Collective and other stakeholders for each function.

Earth-

AT

GIB ECP

Collective R3G

DE

DALA district

DWAF

Cacadu Cacadu

Farmers Tourists

Tourism

Baviaans

Landmark

foundation

association

Wilderness

Foundation

Sewefontein Tchnuganoo

municipality Saaimanshoek Support Supports Supports Supports Cooperation PRESENCE PRESENCE PRESENCE PRESENCE Competing interests and synergies Plant Supports Supports Supports Supports Supports dependent conservation/ conservation/ conservation/ conservation/ * conservation/ functions restoration restoration restoration restoration restoration Water supply function Recreation/ tourism function *good relationships with Sandvlakte

Legend:  Synergies: common interests/ objectives  Competing interests over values or beliefs  Competing interests about interpersonal relationships

 Competition of interests or needs

LIII

Table 11-9: Cooperation activities, competing interests and synergies between ECP and other stakeholders for each function in Western Baviaanskloof.

-

ECP

GIB

Earth

DEAT

DALA district

DWAF

Cacadu Cacadu

Baviaans

Landmark Collective

foundation

Wilderness

Foundation municipality

Cooperation BMR BMR BMR PRESENCE Competing interests and synergies WfW : Conservation Plant Biodiversity Conservation clearing vs Conservation Wilderness Restoration Restoration dependent conservation vs * alien agricultural policy protection facilitator programs functions policy development species land uses Use the Water supply water of the function catchment Recreation/ Tourism Tourism Tourism tourism development development development

function policy

ECP

R3G

Farmers Tourists

Tourism

association

Sewefontein Tchnuganoo Saaimanshoek

tourism Discussion about land Cooperation accommodations activities management development Competing interests and synergies Beauty/ Restoration Plant Legend: conservation of Attractiveness willingness dependent Conservation vs agriculture the nature of the of the area functions  Synergies: common interests/ objectives area  Competing interests over values or beliefs Water Natural competition of water supply supply between vegetation of the park and on  Competing interests about interpersonal relationships function provate lands  Competition of interests or needs Recreation/ Tourists Recreational Tourism tourism concurrency attraction possibilities development function

LV

Table 11-10: Cooperation activities, competing interests and synergies between GIB and other stakeholders for each function in Western Baviaanskloof.

-

GIB

ECP

Earth

DEAT

DALA district

DWAF

Cacadu Cacadu

Baviaans

Landmark Collective

foundation

Wilderness

Foundation municipality

Collaborate for Supplies agricultural water to Cooperation Implementing agency PRESENCE issues in Port Gamtoos Valley Elizabeth

Competing interests and synergies Conse Agriculture Plant dependent Restoration project : STRP Restoration rvatio Restoration development Restoration policy functions with the help of WfW policy n facilitator participation policy No measurements Agriculture Water used for the kloof vs Water supply Water Water of water use in development: water used for the Gamtoos function supply supply the Kloof irrigation valley Recreation/ tourism

function

n o

GIB ek

R3G

Farmers Tourists

Tourism

association

Sewefontei Tchnugano Saaimansho Employs R3G Implementation of experimental plots on as a scientific Cooperation farmers properties advisor for STRP Competing interests and synergies Restoration Restoration Restoration Plant dependent Restoration Restoration activities particiâtion through participation activities: functions activities WfW through WfW STRP Water supply Water used for irrigation and domestic use not available for the gamtoos valley function Recreation/ tourism

function Legend:  Synergies: common interests/ objectives LVI  Competing interests over values or beliefs  Competing interests about interpersonal relationships  Competition of interests or needs

Table 11-11: Cooperation activities, competing interests and synergies between Farmers and other stakeholders for each function in Western Baviaanskloof.

-

s s n

Farmers n

ity

ECP

Earth

DEAT

DALA district

DWAF

Cacadu Cacadu

Baviaans

foundatio

municipal

Foundatio

Wildernes Collective Landmark

Subsidies, BMR (PMU) Leopard Land management Cooperation Services* advices Proud Partner Program program discussion

Competing interests and synergies Agriculture Agriculture Agricultural activities vs conservation policy Plant dependent functions management development Water used by vegetation Water supply function of the park not available in the study area Bring Tourism Recreation/ tourism Tourism activities for development of ** Tourism facilities function development the the kloof

municipality

n

Farmers o

ein

GIB

R3G

hoek

Tourists

Tourism

Sewefont

Zaaimons associatio Tchugano Workers from Farmers employ the community Neighbouring Accommodations, Promotion STRP Cooperation STRP experimental plots workers from the work in the relationships activities provision of the area presentation communities farms Agriculture Appreciate the Plant dependent functions Agriculture activity vs restoration activity vs nature restoration Water taken in the kloof not Water supply in Water supply function Share sources Share sources available for gamtoos valley accommodations Accommodations Tourism development Tourists Recreation/ tourism function Benefits from plans attraction recreation activities

Legend:  Synergies: common interests/ objectives  Competing interests over values or beliefs LVII  Competing interests about interpersonal relationships  Competition of interests or needs

Table 11-12: Cooperation activities, competing interests and synergies between Sewefontein and other stakeholders for each function in Western Baviaanskloof.

-

s s n

Sewefontein n

ity

ECP

Earth

DEAT

DALA district

DWAF

Cacadu Cacadu

Baviaans

foundatio

municipal

Foundatio

Wildernes Collective Landmark Workin g for Subsidies, Land management Cooperation water Services* BMR (PMU) advices discussion involve ment Competing interests and synergies Agricultur e Agriculture Agricultural activities vs conservation policy Plant dependent functions managem development ent Water used by vegetation of the park Water supply function not available in the study area Recreation/ tourism **

function

n

Sewefontein oo

GIB

R3G

hoek

Farmers Tourists

Tourism

Saaimans

associatio Tchnugan Farmers employ Share church and Neighbouring STRP Cooperation workers from the school relationships presentation communities Competing interests and synergies Agriculture Agriculture activity vs Appreciate Plant dependent functions activity vs restoration the nature restoration Water taken in the Water supply function kloof not available for Share sources Share sources gamtoos valley Recreation/ tourism function

* farmers are complaining about the little services they get from the municipalities **Mistrust towards some people of the organization that are reproached not to keep promises. NB: reluctance of the farmers and communities towards the Nature Conservation (previous ECP) that planed to evict the people of the valley LVIII

Table 11-13: Cooperation activities, competing interests and synergies between Saaimanshoek and other stakeholders for each function in Western Baviaanskloof.

-

ipal

s s n

Saaimanshoek n

ity

ECP

Earth

DEAT

DALA district

DWAF

Cacadu Cacadu

Baviaans

foundatio

munic

Foundatio

Wildernes Collective Landmark Working Programme for water BMR Cooperation to plant Services Land management discussion involveme (PMU) vegetables nt Competing interests and synergies Plant dependent functions Water used by vegetation of the park not Water supply function available in the study area Recreation/ tourism

function

n

Saaimanshoek oo

ein

GIB

R3G

Farmers Tourists

Tourism

Sewefont

associatio Tchnugan Farmers employ Share church and Neighbouring STRP Cooperation workers from the school relationships presentation communities Competing interests and synergies Agriculture Appreciate Plant dependent functions Share borders activity vs the nature restoration Water taken in the Water supply function kloof not available for Share sources gamtoos valley Recreation/ tourism function

Legend:  Synergies: common interests/ objectives  Competing interests over values or beliefs  Competing interests about interpersonal relationships  Competition of interests or needs

LIX

Table 11-14: Cooperation activities, competing interests and synergies between Tchnuganoo and other stakeholders for each function in Western Baviaanskloof.

-

s s n

Tchnuganoo n

ity

ECP

Earth

DEAT

DALA district

DWAF

Cacadu Cacadu

Baviaans

foundatio

municipal

Foundatio

Wildernes Collective Landmark

BMR Cooperation (PMU)

Competing interests and synergies Nursery Plant dependent functions project* Water supply function Recreation/ tourism

function * There are projects for implementing a nursery in the valley from both sides to provide plants for restoration, however, the collaboration seems to be willing only from one

side

Tchnuganoo n

ein

GIB

R3G

hoek

Farmers Tourists

Tourism

Sewefont

Saaimans associatio Neighbouring Neighbouring Neighbouring STRP Cooperation relationships relationships relationships presentation Competing interests and synergies Appreciate Plant dependent functions Share borders the nature Water taken in the Water supply function kloof not available for Share sources gamtoos valley Recreation/ tourism function

Legend:  Synergies: common interests/ objectives  Competing interests over values or beliefs  Competing interests about interpersonal relationships  Competition of interests or needs LX

Table 11-15: Cooperation activities, competing interests and synergies between Tourists and other stakeholders for each function in Western Baviaanskloof.

-

s s n

Tourists n

ity

ECP

Earth

DEAT

DALA district

DWAF

Cacadu Cacadu

Baviaans

foundatio

municipal

Foundatio

Wildernes Collective Landmark

Accommodations Cooperation Recreation activities

Competing interests and synergies Plant dependent functions Landscape conservation Water availability for Water supply function landscape preservation Recreation/ tourism Recreational activities

function

n

Tourists oo

ein

GIB

R3G

hoek

Farmers

Tourism

Sewefont Saaimans

associatio Tchnugan Accommodations, Recreation activities Information, Cooperation (4x4 routes, game accommodations viewing, camping sites, hiking) Competing interests and synergies Agriculture vs Landscape Plant dependent functions landscape Beauty of landscapes restoration conservation Irrigation vs Water availability to domestic use Water supply function preserve the beauty of Irrigation vs natural the nature vegetation supply Development of Recreation/ tourism function Recreation activities recreational activities NB: the development of tourism will increase the amount of wastes and traffic that already are a problem in the area as there are yet no services taking care of the problem Legend:

 Synergies: common interests/ objectives  Competing interests over values or beliefs LXI  Competing interests about interpersonal relationships  Competition of interests or needs

Table 11-16: Cooperation activities, competing interests and synergies between Tourism association and other stakeholders for each function in Western Baviaanskloof.

lity

-

Tourists

ECP

Earth

DEAT

DALA district

DWAF

Cacadu Cacadu

Baviaans

Landmark Collective

foundation

Wilderness

Foundation municipa

Develop Accommodations Cooperation ment of BMR Recreational activities tourism Competing interests and synergies Plant dependent functions Landscape conservation Water availability for Water supply function landscape preservation Recreation/ tourism Recreational activities

function

Tourists

GIB

R3G

Tourist

Farmers

Sewefontein Tchnuganoo

Saaimanshoek Promotion of the Information, Cooperation accommodation through Accommodations website, advices Competing interests and synergies Agriculture vs landscape Landscape Plant dependent functions Beauty of landscapes conservation restoration Irrigation vs domestic use Water availability to Water supply function Irrigation vs natural vegetation preserve the beauty of supply the nature Development of Recreation/ tourism function Recreation activities recreational activities

Legend:  Synergies: common interests/ objectives  Competing interests over values or beliefs  Competing interests about interpersonal relationships  Competition of interests or needs LXII

Table 11-17: Cooperation activities, competing interests and synergies between R3G and other stakeholders for each function in Western Baviaanskloof.

-

R3G

ECP

Earth

DEAT

DALA district

DWAF

Cacadu Cacadu

Baviaans

Landmark Collective

foundation

Wilderness

Foundation municipality

STRP STRP funding Cooperation funding- STRP possibility?

Competing interests and synergies Restorat Restoratio ion of Restoration of Plant dependent functions n biodiver biodiversity activities sity Water Water supply function regulation interest Recreation/ tourism

function

R3G k

GIB

Tourist

Farmers

Tourism

association

Sewefontein Tchnuganoo Saaimanshoe STRP- scientific Presentation of Presentation Presentation Cooperation Presentation of STRP adviser STRP of STRP of STRP Competing interests and synergies Restoration Plant dependent functions Livestock breeding vs restorationn Restoration objective Water regulation Water supply function interest Recreation/ tourism function

Legend:  Synergies: common interests/ objectives  Competing interests over values or beliefs  Competing interests about interpersonal relationships  Competition of interests or needs LXIII

Appendix 12: Graphs tables

Table 12-1: Willingness of the farmers to collaborate with other stakeholders, based on interviews.

yes no not sure nb answers missing DWAF 80 10 10 10 1 ECPB 90,9 9,1 11 DEAET 90 10 10 1 Baviaans municipality 80 20 10 1 Cacadu District 60 20 20 10 1 GIB 70 10 20 10 1 Wilderness Foundation 90 10 10 1 Landmark Foundation 90 10 10 1 Rhodes University 80 20 10 1 Farmer association 90 10 10 1

Nelson Mandela Metropolitan university 88,9 11,1 9 2 University of Fort Hare 77,8 22,2 9 2 Private consultant 90 9 2 Wildlife & Environment Society of South Africa 90 10 10 1 Botanical Society of South Africa 80 20 10 1 Agricultural research Council 80 10 10 10 1

Table 12-2: Classification of the different incentives according to the farmers preference, based on the interviews.

not at all interested possibly interested medium interested missing Soil erosion work subsidies 1 1 0 9 0 vegetation fencing subsidies 1 1 0 9 0 financial payment 0 1 0 9 1 Access to eco-tourism support 0 0 2 8 1 tax rebate 1 1 1 8 0 Access to scientific information and support 0 0 1 8 2 Access to a support network of like-minded farmers 1 1 0 8 1 Extension officer support 1 1 0 8 1 Signage for voluntary conservation agreement membership 0 0 0 8 3 Targeted alien plant removal by working for water 1 0 2 7 1

LXIV

Appendix 13: Criteria assessment This analysis is only as an indication and example, to provide some information for a possible further analysis. This can help to get an overview of the values shared by a sample of stakeholders. During the different interviews realised with the stakeholders, some criteria have been evaluated to determine their importance. However, this analysis is succinct as the criterion were chosen arbitrary by the researcher. The criteria have been evaluated in a general context. There is no project linked with it. Some representants of different groups of stakeholders have evaluated the different stakeholder. However, the sample regroups only 10 people and is not representative. Only one person (maximum two) of each stakeholder was interviewed, due to a lack of time during interviews or a incompatibility such as in the communities were the people do not speak English. To be representative, the criteria should be selected by the stakeholders and assessed by a larger sample. The sample regroup: - DWAf (1 representant) - Cacadu district (1representant) - ECP (2 represetants) - Baviaans municipality (1 representant) - Tourism association (1 representant) - GIB (1 representant) - Farmers (2 representants) - Tchuganoo (1 representant). Method: The method used is the one described by the CIFOR (Guidelines for applying multi-criteria analysis to the assessment of criteria and indicators). Some indicators have been selected according to three main catagories: Social criteria: traditions, medicinal use of plants, well-being, spiritual use of land, recreation, social cooperation, communication Economic criteria: employment, income, incentives, pensions, crops, livestock, tourism, local development, land rights, hunting, fishing, transparency of management Environmental criteria: soil quality, land cover, water quality, water quantity, erosion risks, biodiversity, Co2 rate, local climate, scientific support. The criteria were presented in three distinct tables, according to the category. It was asked to the stakeholders to rank and rate the criteria according to their professional activity. However, their personal point of view is difficult to avoid and influenced the results.

LXV

The first step was the regular ranking. The interviewee had to assign a rank among the following proposition to each criteria.

0-not important 1-very low importance 2- low importance 3-neutral 4-important 5-very important The second step was to rate. Each stakeholder gave a percentage score to the criteria. The sum of the criteria being equal to 100.

Results: After analysis, the results are illustrated in the following graphs. I

Figure 13-1: Assessment of the environmental criteria. It is clear that the water is considered as the most important good that the environment can provide, followed by the biodiversity.

LXVI

Figure 13-2: Assessment of the economic criteria Employment is the criteria that is the most valued. The tourism is also considered as an important value. These two criteria are even higher valued that any of the environmental criteria. The development economic is more valued that the nature. The transparency of management seems to be also an important issue.

Figure 13-3: assessment of the social criteria. The cooperation is considered as the most important, following by the well-being and the communication. These three criteria are even more valued than the economic criteria. The social values are more important than the economic ones.

LXVII