LAKE MALAWI /NIASSA/NYASA ECOREGION -...

WWF Ecoregion Conservation Programme

LAKE MALAWI /NIASSA/NYASA ECOREGION

Report on the Donors and Partners Meeting

Compiled and Edited

by

Alaphia Wright Facilitator

&

Jonas Chafota WWF-SARPO

Club Makokola 12 - 13 May, 2003

LMNN Ecoregion Report on the Donors and Partners Meeting

2

Annex C

THE CHALLENGES OF DEVELOPING AN INTEGRATED

APPROACH TO THE MANAGEMENT OF LAKE

MALAWI/NIASSA AND ITS CATCHMENT RESOURCES. Alexander E. Bulirani Deputy Director Department of Fisheries P O Box 593 Lilongwe Malawi Tel: +265 1 788094 Fax: +265 1 788712 E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract: The area covered by the three Great Lakes of Africa and their catchments comprises

one WWF Ecoregion. Lake Malawi/Niassa part of the ecoregion is an extensive area

covering approximately 75,000 square kilometers with parts of it in Malawi,

Mozambique and Tanzania. The area has been a subject of study and conservation

action by a multitude of scientists, governments and international conservation

organizations. The region is best known for its flora and fauna especially cichlid

fishes which constitute a species flock that is by far the most diversified in the whole

world. The area has in the last decade received substantial subventions from donor

organizations to fund conservation action but the nature and approach of the

interventions funded has not produced the expected effects or prevented what was

intended to be prevented. Most of the interventions were short term and most of the

time focusing on a particular problem at a selected localities which in many cases

were small compared to the size of the ecoregion.

An integrated approach to the whole question of sustainable management and

conservation of this priceless gift of nature would seem the only way to maintain the

integrity of the systems and ensure maximum carrying capacity for aquatic as well as

terrestrial life.


The region is home and a source of bread for 1.6 million people, many of whom are

in situations of abject and debilitating poverty. Effects of volatile macro-economic

imbalances have caused a general instability of welfare for the individuals as well as

the states. Community based management of natural resources have been introduced

and are at different degree of acceptance and effectiveness in the countries

constituting the ecoregion but the general precariousness of the population posses a

big challenge to any programme. This paper will look into the major challenges of

developing and implementing an integrated approach to the management and

conservation of the resources of the ecoregion.

Key words: Ecoregion, community based management, integrated approach, species flock


INTRODUCTION At no time in the recent history has Man (Homo sapiens) faced greater environmental crises than in the twenty-first century. One of the WWF's major responses to the global crises in the biodiversity loss is the development of an Ecoregion Conservation (EC) approach aimed at 200 priority ecoregions around the world. The Ecoregion Conservation (EC) programme is concerted effort to halt and reverse current trends in biodiversity loss by implementing conservation programmes at much larger spatial and temporal scales than ahs previously been the general practice. This means working on regional scales to conserve ecosystems, over time scales of evolutionary significance and with populations of species whose sizes are large enough to sustain evolutionary processes. It also means working at socio-economic scales that is appropriate and sustainable. An objective of EC is to develop, with the people of the ecoregion, a biodiversity vision with a perspective of 50 years or more to encourage the development and implementation of long-term conservation strategies that should ideally function in perpetuity. These strategies, together with the vision on which they depend, provide governments, resource managers and communities (who are the primary stakeholders), as well as donors, aid organizations, NGO's and researchers, a basis from which they can achieve shared conservation goals. DESCRIPTION OF THE LMNN ECOREGION The three Great Lakes of Africa comprises of a single WWF Ecoregion. However,

each lake lies within its own separate basin, with its own assemblage of endemic

organisms, most notably the cichlid fish species-flocks. Each lake differs

substantially with respect to limnology, catchment dynamics and human impacts.

Accordingly, the lakes will be tackled separately within the context of their respective

drainage basins. This reconnaissance of the Lake Malawi/ Niassa/Nyasa Basin is in

the first of the African Great Lakes Ecoregion Conservation initiatives.

The definition of the Freshwater Ecoregion used herein is:

"A relatively large area of land and water containing geographically distinct

assemblages of natural communities that share large majority of their species and

ecological dynamics; share similar environmental conditions; and interact

ecologically in ways that are critical for their long-term persistence."

Boundaries to the upstream components of the lake are defined by the catchment.

This takes into account that all-inflowing streams and rivers are themselves affected

by land-based activities that will ultimately have an impact on the water quality of

the lake. It is more difficult to define the lower limits of the system. Water draining


from Lake Malawi/Niassa/Nyasa flows down the single exit, the Upper Shire River,

into Lake Malombe and then into the Middle Shire, the Lower Shire River and

ultimately to the Zambezi River. In the original concept of the lake ecoregion, only

the main lake was considered. However, at the June workshop the collective decision

was that Lake Malawi/Niassa/Nyasa, the Upper Shire River and Lake Malombe do

constitute an ecoregion and all should be included. Reasons for this are that all

comprises an integral part of the basin; they contain geographically distinct

assemblages of natural communities, sharing many species and ecological dynamics;

they share similar environmental conditions; they interact ecologically in ways that

are critical for their long-term persistence.

Accordingly, this ecoregion includes Lake Malawi/Niassa/Nyasa, All inflowing rivers and streams, the catchments, terrestrial component of catchment, the Upper Shire River, Lake Malombe


Figure 1: Map of the ecoregion with political boundaries


Figure 2: Ecoregion map with drainage boundaries.


THE LMNN ECOREGION: DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT

The macro-economic and environmental contexts for the ecoregion’s social and

economic development are far more complex than one would think. The early years of

the second republics in Malawi and Tanzania were marked by serious attempts to

reduce macroeconomic imbalances, broaden market-oriented reforms and improve

performance in the social sectors, but the pace of reform has since slowed,

expenditure control has weakened, and agricultural prospects have become more

mixed. In Malawi, tobacco revenues fell in 2000 in response to declines in prices,

yields and quality. This, together with a sharp depreciation of the national currency,

high annual inflation (30 percent in February 2001) and high real interest rates, has

resulted in slow growth of about 2 percent in 2000. The economies of the three

countries remain heavily dependent on international aid, and poverty remains deep

and pervasive in the ecoregion. In March 2000 Malawi started the process for

obtaining debt relief under the HIPC initiative, and in compliance with one of the

conditions of this initiative produced a Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper in

December 2001.

The economies of the ecoregion depend heavily on the country’s natural resource

base. Agricultural production, almost 70% of which comes from smallholder farmers,

accounts for more than 90% of export earnings in Malawi and contributes 45% of

GDP and supports more than 80% of the population. In Mozambique and Tanzania,

the contribution stand at 35% and 56% respectively.

Despite the central importance of agriculture, the basis of agricultural production –

the soil – is declining in fertility as a result of decades of neglect in Malawi. Evidence

for long-term soil degradation and soil erosion in Malawi includes physical

measurements of soil loss, declining yields from unfertilised crops, declining

responses to fertilizer application and impaired watershed performance. Similarly,

with more than 90% of energy requirements met from biomass supplies and national

wood consumption standing at double the sustainable production, the three countries


face a looming fuel wood crisis as energy needs are met through the liquidation of

forest capital. Although environmental degradation is often quoted as an unavoidable

side effect of poverty, there is strong evidence to suggest that most users of natural

resources in the three countries remain in ignorance of the basic information they

need to make good resource use decisions.

The socio-political and institutional contexts for development are equally problematic.

In Malawi for example, following the 1994 election “democracy” was quickly

interpreted as carte blanche, to do anything one needed to do to the environment or

fellow person. There was a perceptible and immediate slackening in NRM-related law

enforcement. This situation created conditions favorable to an explosive growth in the

commercial abuse of natural resources. At the same time, a post-democracy wave of

violent crime has swamped the police service and the courts, leaving environmental

infringements a low priority and inhibiting rural enterprise development as

enterprising people were and are still being targeted by violent crime in the rural and

remote areas.

Institutions of traditional authority, weakened by the Colonial administration in

Mozambique and Malawi, and politicized by the first independent regimes in the 60s

now stand conspicuously sidelined from a new generation of natural resources

legislation, leaving confusion at the local level and neutralizing a potentially potent

force for improving natural resources management.

Community based common-interest institutions were nurtured during the pre-

democratic independent era, and although they are now expected to play an important

role in agricultural development and natural resources management in the three

countries, their development remains at a very early stage. The decentralization

process embodied in Malawi in the 1998 Local Government Act offers, in theory,

considerable promise for improving the accountability of government services to their

local constituencies, but in practice there are many risks, and progress on the ground

is slow.


Finally, the public service in the three countries, weakened and demoralized by real-

terms declines in salaries and operational budgets, has had to cope with a succession

of fundamental changes. In Malawi, since 1993 a quick succession of back and forth

changes such as budget centralization cash budget system (1995-96), activity-based

budgeting (1997) and decentralization (1998, ongoing) has caused much confusion in

the public service. In addition to these, senior, central-level professionals have

become increasingly preoccupied with the demands of a bewildering complexity of

donor initiatives which now leave little time for the management of field programmes.

The net results include government’s persistent failure to spend the development

budget, and unacceptably low levels of service delivery in the field. The public

service, supposedly the principal agent of change, is close to total paralysis.

ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES ISSUES IN THE LMNN

CATCHMENT.

Environmental conditions and the status of natural resources in the Lake

Malawi/Nyasa/Niassa basin are the product of the area’s intrinsic geophysical and

ecological characteristics (geology, landform, soils and indigenous plant and animal

communities), long and short-term trends in climate (temperature, rainfall, lake

levels), and, most importantly, the human influence on many of these. In the last

respect, environmental conditions in the LMNN and its catchments mirror those

prevailing throughout Malawi, and are indicative of a poor and densely populated

land in which:

(a) Virtually all the people living within the LMNN catchment and along the

shores of the lake are almost entirely dependent upon renewable and non

renewable natural resources. Practically all of them are involved either in

fishing and agriculture. Their economic activity therefore depends, initially at

least, on the use of natural resources;

(b) Manufacturing is very limited and that which does occur, in the LMNN is also

natural resource based and is mainly to do with adding value to natural

resources by crafting products from them;


(c) Levels of education and technology are very low 56% in Malawi, 40% in

Mozambique and 68% in Tanzania;

(d) Open access conditions prevail in most circumstances, in the three countries as

the right to use natural resources is synonymous with survival. There are very

few existing alternatives to which the population can turn to alleviate their

poverty;

(e) The ability of the Governments to intervene in the way natural resources are

used is weak due to budget constraints, low capacity to implement

programmes and unclear articulation when request for donor support.

In addition, there are special features related to LMNN, its waters, its fish resources as

well as its terrestrial flora and fauna, to the ecological factors that link the Lake with

its multiple catchments.

SYNTHESIS OF ECOLOGICAL PROBLEMS LINKING THE LMNN TO ITS

CATCHMENT

Summarising from observation son the ground, and the section above, the following

nexus of environmental and social problems emerges:

(1) The governments’ inability to enforce forest management legislation has led to

a de facto open access to forest resources, which, in combination with a

national demand for wood that far exceeds the sustainable supply in Malawi,

has led to massive deforestation over much of the LMNN catchment in the

Malawian side. Although fuel wood harvesting has provided a source of

livelihood to many rural households, communities that have sold all their

forest resources experience new depths of poverty as both their source of

income and their supply of forest products for domestic use disappear. The

new labor burdens associated with the loss of forests is borne mainly by

women. It is now common in Malawi for town people to buy firewood on the

way to their villages.


(2) In Malawi, increased land pressure, continuous cropping and the farming of

fragile areas at very low levels of farming technology have together

contributed to soil structure degradation, loss of soil fertility and widespread

soil erosion. In the longer term these contribute to the loss of base flows from

rivers, or the total loss of dry season flow, and to reduced crop yields and

deepening poverty. Most smallholder farmers remain in ignorance of basic soil

processes, and attribute their problems simply to a lack of fertilizer.

(3) In critical (and perhaps quite small) parts of the Lake Malawi catchment these

two processes, singly or in combination, can result in the disproportionate loss

of soil and nutrients that subsequently enter the Lake via its afferent rivers.

The parts of the catchment most at risk would appear to be the steep

escarpment slopes. The river catchments that yield most sediment and

nutrients are those most altered by agriculture and deforestation (e.g. the

Linthipe, the Dwangwa in Malawi and the Songwe on the border between

Malawi and Tanzania) – these contribute 5-10 times more nitrogen (N),

phosphorus (P) and sediment to the Lake than rivers with less disturbed

catchments.

(4) Except for Mozambique, the fish resources of the LMNN are also under

pressure from intensive low-technology fishing, principally by artisanal

fishers. Most fishing pressure is concentrated in the inshore margins of the

Lake and in the sheltered shallows of its southern arms in Malawi. These are

also the areas in which biodiversity and endemicity are highest, and the fish

stocks of these areas should be considered vulnerable to fishing pressure. The

currently heavy reliance on small dugout canoes exacerbates this problem by

confining the offshore extent of the fishery.

(5) Although overall production continues slowly to increase, the decline in catch

per unit effort in most gears, and in annual catch per fishing enterprise, has

resulted in declining incomes and a steady and unsustainable reduction in

mesh sizes in an attempt to stem such decline. The effect of this is simply to

accelerate the removal of the more valuable commercial species.

(6) Although not a problem in itself, it is remarkable that the kind of classic over-


fishing decline seen in Lake Malawi exists alongside large and unexploited

stocks of fish – both pelagic and demersal – in the Lake’s offshore waters. The

fishing industry is aware of these stocks, but does not have the technical

means to access them.

SYNTHESIS OF THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC ISSUES ON THE LMNN AND

CATCHMENT

The socio-economy of Malawi, Mozambique and Tanzania all impact on

Lake/Niassa/Nyasa to varying degrees. All three countries are richly endowed with

fertile soils, forests resources and a diverse flora and fauna of which the uniquely rich

and diverse fish resources stand out. The deterioration of these natural resources,

particularly in Malawi, are of concern and several policy and legislative measures

have been put in place to better manage these resources in the future.

However, the challenges to achieve better management are influenced by a complex

interaction of several socio-economic factors that include:

• The rapid population growth in the areas bordering the Lake that imposes and

ever rising pressure on the natural resources, human habitat and the economic

and social infrastructure.

• High dependency of the economies on rain fed agriculture

• Depletion of forest resources due to agriculture expansion and wood extraction

for fuel and other purposes.

• Poor land management practices that lead to excessive soil erosion and land

degradation in general.

• Degradation and depletion of water and fish resources caused by soil erosion,

uncontrolled industrial and domestic waste disposal and fishing practices.

• In the case of Tanzania and Mozambique, the lack of infrastructure and

available markets

• These problems highlight the critical challenges between economic growth on

one hand and environmental protection and management on the other. The


socio-economic factors that impact on the Lake Malawi and its environs are

summarized in Figure 1. These are:

• Poverty

• Population density

• Inadequate development policies

• Illiteracy

• Lack of environmental awareness

The consequences and effects of these factors has resulted in variety of environmental

issues that include:

• Soil erosion

• Deforestation

• Water Resources degradation

• Threat to fish resources

• Threat to biodiversity

• Human habitat degradation

THE LMNN ECOREGION PROGRAMME: OBJECTIVES The overall goal of this programme is to put in place activities designed to build

capacity of local people and institutions to manage the natural resources of the LMNN

basin and alleviate poverty and reverse the degradation of natural resources.

The project activities will be designed in such as way as to focus on better use of the

lake basin resources in order to maintain wetland values and functions that will create

better economic environment in healthy and productive ecosystems.

The table below shows the important macro socio-economic indicators of the

economies of the ecoregion.


Table 1. Key socio-economic indicators of the economies of the ecoregion.

Key Socio-economic Indicators Malawi Mozambique Tanzania Total Area km² 118480 801590 945090 Population 10 million 19.1million 31.2million Population density km² 106 24 33 Population Growth Rate 3.2% 2.54% 2.14% Birth Rate/100 39.54 42.75 40.37 Death Rate/100 23.84 17.31 16.75 Infant mortality/100 132.14 117.56 95.27 Life Expectance 36.3Years 45.89 46.17 Fertility rate Children/Women

5.48 5.88 5.40

HIV/AIDS Population-7.4% 15 to 49 age-14.92%

Population-6.57% 15 to 49 age-14.17

Population 4.4% 15 to 49 age-9.42%

GDP US$2.47 Billion US$16.8 Billion US$22.1 Billion GDP Growth 3.2% 9% 3.8% GDP per capita US$238 US$168 US$162 GDP by sector Agriculture-45%,

Industry/Services Agriculture-35% Industry/Services-56%

Agriculture-56% Industry/Services

Pop below poverty line 54% ? 51% Inflation rate 52% 2.5% 13.5% External debt US$2.3 Billion US$2.2 Billion US$8.3 Billion Debt per Capita US$239 US$115 US$256

Source: Lake Malawi/Nyasa/Niassa Ecoregion Socio-Economic Reconnaissance report May 2000. The following are the specific objectives of the proposed project:

• To develop a transboundary ecosystem approach towards the conservation of

LMNN;

• To institute an international Lake Basin Commission as a co-ordinating

mechanism through an agreed and signed Memorandum of Understanding, such

as that already exists for Lake Chad;

• To identify and influence key sectoral policies (national and regional) that favour

decentralisation of natural ownership and use of natural resources to local

communities;

• To institute a range of participatory activities explicitly serving to raise the

capacity of local communities within the lake catchments to more effectively


manage their natural resources at the trilateral lake-wide basin level while

improving their livelihoods.

• To integrate the LMNN Ecoregion programme with strategic processes such as

national and regional (SADC) sectoral approaches and important international

conventions such as Ramsar and CBD.

JUSTIFICATION OF THE LMNN ECOREGION PROGRAMME

WWF’s Southern Africa Regional Programme Office (WWF-SARPO) has been

working in the area since 1998. The main focus of its initial work has been to consult

with government and local stakeholders in order to identify threats to the lake and

opportunities to develop a regional Conservation Master Plan to reach an agreement

on the collaborative mechanism to implement such a plan. This Conservation Master

plan aims to identify focal areas for conservation and of the lake’s biodiversity and to

determine and address the socio-economic factors that provide threats and

opportunities for the conservation of the lake and its catchments in the long term. In

this respect a long term vision for the lake was defined as:

• a clean, healthy and living lake where resources are being used in ways that

improve and support human well being without reducing the natural capital of

the system;

• catchment and atmospheric inputs to the lake are known and are not

compromising its health;

• the functional integrity and evolutionary capacity of the lake ecosystem is being

maintained;

• the full range of biological diversity is being maintained.


COMPONENTS OF THE LMNN ECOREGION PROGRAMME

The programme as conceptualized comprises seven components the combined effects

of which is expected to produce varying impacts on the elements of the ecosystems of

the ecoregion. The following seven paragraphs narrates each of the components.

DEVELOPMENT OF SUSTAINABLE TRANS-FRONTIER MANAGEMENT APPROACHES TO THE CONSERVATION OF THE LAKE BASIN ECOSYSTEM THROUGH THE FORMATION OF AN INTERNATIONAL LAKE BASIN COMMISSION.

Four strategies will be used to achieve this component. The programme will develop

trilateral, national and local forums that enable all LMNN stakeholders to participate

in decision making process relating to the management and use of the lake, its natural

resources and habitats. Additionally, communities and traditional authorities will be

engaged in work to link into existing social institutions or develop new ones in order

to facilitate the introduction of CBNRM into these processes. Link will be created

with relevant NGOs, development agencies and regional governance structures to

establish protocols and memoranda of understanding and define roles and

responsibilities for the parties. Maintain trilateral stakeholder dialogue

DEVELOPMENT OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES, REFORESTATION AND FISHERY MANAGEMENT IN ORDER TO REDUCE POVERTY AND IMPROVE THE CONSERVATION STATUS OF SOIL, WATERSHED, AND BIODIVERSITY.

As most of the people living in the ecoregion depend on agriculture for their

livelihood and that in the short term it would not be possible to change the survival

strategy of the people, this component will be one of the most important in the

programme in the short run. The component will aim at reducing the amount of

sedimentation and nutrients coming out of key catchment areas to ecologically

tolerable levels in order to maintain the agricultural productivity of the land and that

of the fishery resources on the lake. Most of the activities of this component will aim

at creating awareness on the negative consequences of deforestation including the

promotion of the use of alternative sources of fuel wood, promotion of better yielding


crop varieties to increase the productivity per unit of land. At national level, the

programme will promote cross-sectoral consultations and planning in affected areas to

prevent soil erosion and siltation into the lake. This component will include a targeted

reforestation.

IMPROVEMENT OF THE GOVERNANCE PROCESS BY INFLUENCING THE SECTORAL POLICY ENVIRONMENT INCLUDING THE DEVOLUTION OF OWNERSHIP OF NATURAL RESOURCES FROM CENTRAL GOVERNMENT TO LOCAL COMMUNITIES.

This component will cause the regional, national sectoral policy as well as the various

international conventions to undergo review in order to identify those that impact

positively or negatively on socio-economic development of the people. Activities of

the component will include the promulgation of enabling policy environment

including devolution of ownership and use of natural resources so that lakeshore

communities can participate and benefit from the management processes of the

LMNN ecoregion processes. Encouragement to develop and implement policies and

national economic plans that enable communities to access support and micro-

financing for entrepreneurial activities and opportunities apart from fishing especially

those relating to tourism. Finally, the component will maintain dialogue with relevant

government authorities and SADC sectors and advocate for improved enabling policy

environment.

ENHANCEMENT OF THE CAPACITY OF LOCAL COMMUNITIES TO MANAGE AND BENEFIT FROM NATURAL RESOURCES THROUGH EDUCATION AWARENESS AND SKILLS DEVELOPMENT.

The strategies to successfully implement this component include the development of

outreach programmes to raise awareness on sustainable management and use of

natural resources by local communities. Institute a range of activities explicitly

serving to raise the skills and capacity of local communities within the lake

catchment to more effectively manage their natural resources while improving their

livelihoods.


The activities will aim at facilitating the establishment of Natural Resource

Management (NRM) institutions and mechanisms such as Community Based

Organisations (CBOs), clubs, local natural resource management committees

including traditional structures. Developing training manuals and modules on

conservation, natural resource management and identification of alternative sources of

livelihoods. Carrying out an awareness campaign and raise awareness on appropriate

natural resource use and management including good agricultural practice. Identifying

and assisting in the implementation of appropriate natural resources management

skills development at community level. Assisting local communities in the

development of appropriate entrepreneurial skills. Enhance alternative economic and

enterprise opportunities for communities, especially ecotourism-based opportunities

in key catchment areas in order to reduce dependence upon inappropriate land and

natural resource use practices. Facilitate the identification and implementation of

income generating projects. Assist communities to identify and access credit and

capital for entrepreneurial development. Assist with product development and the

identification of markets and access to markets to sell goods and services. Assist

communities to carry out land use planning including protected natural resource

management areas. Implement exchange visits to share learning experience

DECISION MAKING DATABASE DEVELOPED THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A SCIENCE-BASED ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT MONITORING SYSTEM.

A strategy to support decision making will be to develop and implement a science-

based data gathering and monitoring system to support adaptive management of the

ecoregion conservation program and show impacts and lessons learned.

The activities will include the design of a participatory monitoring system which will

set indicators and testing feasibility of relevant data collection; Collaboration with

partners in the Development and maintenance decision making information database

including the development of a GIS database; and Carrying out the socio-economic

assessments including the identification of the necessary parameters for linking

natural resource use by local communities to socio-economic development.


TRANSBOUNDARY RAMSAR SITES OF LMNN ESTABLISHED WITH A MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR ITS WISE USE AS PER OBJECTIVE DEFINED BY RAMSAR.

In order to implement this the main strategy will involve assistance in the preparation

and implementation of management plans at trans-boundary level

Main activities will be in form of collaboration with government partners in

identifying sites to be designated and the future of LMNN Basin; defining options

for sustainable management of LMNN trans-boundary sites; Providing assistance in

the preparation of technical information for Ramsar designation; Providing assistance

in the preparation of work plans and implementation of project activities on

designated sites; Cooperating and co-ordinating with regional and international

institutions/ organizations already involved or about to be involved (SADC,

DANIDA, GEF, DGIS, SIDA, FAO etc) in the management of the LMNN basin.

ECOREGION SUPPORT STRUCTURE IN WWF-SARPO AND NATIONAL CO-ORDINATION CENTRES ESTABLISHED

The strategy here would be to establish ecoregion support structure in the SARPO

office and national co-ordination centres. Support will be provided by the Secretariat

to Trilateral as well as national Commission.

The main activity of the component will the recruitment of staff and monitoring of

operational requirements; facilitation of activities of technical committees in the

trilateral and national commissions.

EXPECTED OUTCOMES FROM THE PROGRAMME

Development of sustainable agricultural practices, reforestation, and fishery

management in order to reduce poverty and improve the conservation status of soil,

watershed and biodiversity;


Increased capacity of local communities to manage and benefit from natural resources

through education and awareness and skills development;

Improved governance processes by influencing the sectoral policy environment

including the devolution of ownership and use of resources to local communities;

Instituting sustainable transfrontier management approaches to the conservation of the

lake basin ecosystem through the formation of an International Lake Basin

Commission;

Decision making database developed through the development and implementation of

a science-based adaptive management monitoring system;

Transboundary Ramsar sites of LMNN established with a management plan for its

wise use as per objective defined by Ramsar.

PROBLEMS TO BE RESOLVED.

Based upon the information provided by the stakeholders at national consultations

organized by WWF in collaboration with the focal government ministries involved in

the fisheries functions, the three countries identified critical issues listed below related

to the management and use of LMNN and its natural resources. The critical issues

may be viewed as the socio-economic drivers which have a direct influence in the

manner in which communities use natural resources which may result in specific

impacts on human livelihoods and biodiversity loss on LMNN. WWF's efforts

towards capacity building will focus on empowering communities to deal with these

issues in order to improve human livelihoods.

• Biophysical degradation and habitat degradation resulting from poor land-use

practice

• Lack of education and awareness

• Lack of capacity at many levels


• Improper natural resource governance processes

• Lack of decision making data

• Lack of enabling economic environment

• Lack of infrastructure

• Human population pressures

CHALLENGES OF DEVELOPING AN INTEGRATED APPROACH TO THE MANAGEMENT OF LMNN AND ITS CATCHMENT RESOURCES.

The biggest challenge to successful conservation of the of the land based as well as

aquatic based natural resources will be in the balancing act between the need to meet

the immediate requirements for survival without regard to principles of sustainable

exploitation and use for all the 1.6 million people who live in the ecoregion and

depend directly on the resources. Most of the inhabitants of the ecoregion are without

formal employment and the opportunity cost of their labor is very low. They would

therefore continue to harvest the resources of the ecoregion even when the returns

from such harvesting can barely meet their requirements. The following paragraphs

outline and discuss the main challenges that the WWF Ecoregion programme will

encounter during its implementation in the three countries.

1. EXCEPTIONAL DIVERSITY OF THE RESOURCES OF THE

ECOREGION.

The reconnaissance of the Lake Malawi/Nyasa/Niassa Ecoregion showed that the

region is by far the most diversified in world. The ecoregion is best known for its

great species flock of cichlids fishes which are believed to have 800 species. The

region also supports an extremely rich, hitherto incompletely known diversity of

mammals of about 188 species; birds about 620 species; reptiles about 140 and

approximately 90 amphibian species. In addition to this, the ecoregion is also home to

about 8000 species of invertebrates; 5760 species of vascular plants and 500 species

of non vascular plants and a diversity of planktonic algae. All this diversity functions

as a unit and successful conservation of the ecoregion need to ensure that each of the


constituting species kept at a certain critical level of representation. This is not easy as

some of the species are food for the people while the others are not but are important

for the effective functioning of the whole.

The picture is further complicated for the aquatic resources. The different fish species

are of different sizes at full maturity and are therefore caught even if they are not

specifically targeted by the gears being used for the fishing operations of small scale

fishers which is the major occupation on the lakes of the ecoregion and channel to

survival and social development of the people.

Faced with such a high diversity and limited resources to implement a huge and

expensive programme, the challenge to have a successful conservation programme

will be how to identify the interconnections between the different species, the part

played by each species in the sustenance of the ecosystem as a whole and the

critical numbers for each species that is needed to maintain it. This is by far the

biggest challenge.

On the terrestrial environment, the adoption of a targeted approach to restoring

selected micro-catchments that yield disproportionate amounts of nutrients and

sediments to the lake environment is a keystone in any Integrated Watershed

Management program to install sustainable agricultural practices. The catchments

cover 6.5 million ha or 75,000 square kilometers, and without the possibility of at

least some level of targeting any intervention could not be expect to achieve a level of

impact likely to be measurable in the Lake. Without targeting, this set of interventions

would simply be a land husbandry project, with no effect on the Lake ecosystem.

Leaving aside for a moment the application of the AGNPS model, quite a lot may

already be said about the qualities and relative performance of individual entire river

catchments. The SADC/GEF studies, together with information already held by

government line agencies in Malawi regarding agricultural activity, land use practices

and forestry, provide an entirely adequate basis for selecting individual catchments


that are either already severely impacted by human influences (such as the Songwe, or

the Linthipe) or are at specially high risk of rapid change were land use to alter such

as the North Rumphi in Malawi and the Lago District in Metangula, Niassa Province.

Existing understanding of land use practices, landform and rainfall also already

provide the basis for more location-specific targeting within individual catchments,

using either a “common-sense” approach or using GIS to predict erosion hazard under

different land use scenarios. The skills are already present in Malawian institutions to

enable this to be accomplished.

The modeling approach shows considerable promise for adding much more precision

to targeting interventions. Training in the use of the AGNPS and RAISON (Regional

Analysis On Intelligent On Micro-computers) models has been conducted in Malawi,

the model has to date been set up and calibrated using data from the river catchments

of Linthipe, Bua, Dwambazi, Dwangwa, South Rukuru, North Rukuru and Lufira.

The outputs from the AGNPS model, while performing well in the gross-catchment

sense, has yet to be tested in detail within the individual catchments in Malawi and the

other major river drainage basins in Mozambique and Malawi..

In summary, there exists sufficient information especially in Malawi to permit initial

targeting of a small number of micro-catchment pilot interventions, while the

modeling approach can be refined and applied more widely. This strategy even

though it presents a big challenge to the scientists in the ecoregion ,it is technically

feasible, and should be pursued.

2. UNFAVORABLE SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONDITIONS OF THE THREE

RIPARIAN COUNTRIES IN THE ECOREGION.

A number of studies in the three countries sharing the ecoregion indicate that the

socio-economic indicators are unfavorable for successful conservation and sustainable

use of natural resources of the ecoregion. With over 50% of the population living

below the poverty line, the high average population growth rate of about 2.6 %


coupled up with high average population densities of 106 people per square kilometer

in Malawi, 24 people per square kilometer in Mozambique and 33 people per square

kilometer in Tanzania it means that any gains made in resource recovery in cases

where these are on the verge of complete collapse would quickly be used up and

protection of the resources that are at the moment not seriously impacted on will be

very difficult indeed. The situation of external debt which in 2000 stood at U$12.8

billion for the three countries sharing the ecoregion and which is being serviced at a

substantial rate relative to GDP means that the governments of the ecoregion will in

the foreseeable future not be able to fund any conservation efforts on their on using

spin-offs from resources.

The population is bound to grow and regardless of the how effective any management

interventions will be, there will still be an upper limit of what the ecosystem can

produce to feed the ever increasing number of people. The challenge here would be

how to reduce the direct dependence on natural resources of the majority of the

people in the ecoregion by for example substituting the low value consumptive use

of the resources of the region by non-consumptive high value use such as eco-

tourism

3. WEAKNESSES IN THE REGIONAL POLICIES

At regional level, there are a number of policies which guide the conduct of State

Parties in relation to the use of natural resources. The SADC Protocol on Fisheries

under its articles 7 and 8 clearly outlines respectively the national responsibilities,

brings out the need to harmonize fisheries legislation. Article 9 lays out the approach

to enforce fisheries legislation in cases in cases where the resource is shared. The

SADC Protocols on Shared Watercourse Systems, on mining and on Wildlife

conservation and Law Enforcement again puts in place specific and laudable

measures to be followed by State Parties in using the common resources in a water

body such as the Lake Malawi/Nyasa/Niassa or terrestrial systems.


But because of the voluntary nature of their application and a lack of effective

enforcement institution at regional level, the effectiveness on natural resources

conservation of the measures contained in these documents is unnoticeable. The

challenge then would be how to render these regional policies and measures

obligatory and establish a central authority at regional level which would oversee

the enforcement of the measures and monitoring compliance.

4. DIFFERENT POLICIES EMPHASIS IN THE THREE COUNTRIES.

All three countries have passed a number of policies and legislations and have

departments responsible for regulating the use of natural resources such as fisheries,

forestry, water and soil. However the emphasis is different in each country as the

legislation and policies were developed separately and without consultations. The

following examples illustrate this point

Fisheries policy.

In Tanzania and Mozambique the focus is on marine fisheries rather than on inland

water bodies such as Lake Malawi/Nyasa/Niassa. In contract, Malawi has developed

a progressive policy that fosters greater community participation in the management

and regulation of the fisheries industry.

Land and Agriculture policies

There are severe shortages of land in Malawi to facilitate the expansion of agriculture,

while this is not an issue in Mozambique and Tanzania. The strategic action plans

developed in Malawi highlight the need for diversification, and stress the importance

of environmental issues that may impact on soil erosion and loss of soil fertility. But

even though this is the case, the national policies do not address issues such as

increasing streambed cultivation, access to affordable farm inputs to improve

productivity and the intensification of deforestation that has come about as a result of

increased burley tobacco farming by smallholder farmers.


The overall aim of the National Land Policy in Tanzania is to promote and secure

land tenure. Community involvement in resource management and conflict resolution

is being promoted as is resource sharing. Similar strategies have been adopted in

Mozambique where land ownership is vested in the state, but recognises the

legitimacy of customary law and the role of local leaders in land management and

conflict resolution.

National Forestry Policy

Compared to Malawi, Tanzania and Mozambique have vast forest resources. As a

result of this, policies adopted in these respective countries differ. Forestry policies in

Malawi, promote community, NGO and private sector participation in the

conservation and management of forest resources. Agro-forestry, is promoted to

increase soil fertility but the pricing of forestry products is creates market distortion.

The development of sustainable regimes for soil and water conservation as well as

forest protection seems to be the aim of the forestry policy in Tanzania . The policy

statement says that rational exploitation of forestry resources should go hand in hand

with reforestation and afforestation.

National Wildlife Policies

The policies of the three countries with regard to wildlife differ considerably. In

Tanzania, the emphasis is on maintaining the extensive network of protected areas,

including the establishment of Wildlife Management Areas. This could be because of

the availability of excess land. Similar strategies have been adopted in Mozambique.

On the contrary, Malawi, with its increasing human population pressures and poverty

has permitted its wildlife to be severely degraded to the point where most wildlife

can only be found in protected areas. The government is developing policies that

emphasize the involvement of communities in managing and benefiting from wildlife

resources on customary land and sharing with government the responsibility of


protecting wildlife resources in protected areas.

The challenge here would be to harmonize the different policies and legal frameworks

in the three countries and agree on a certain level of commitment to management and

sustainable harvesting of the resources of the ecoregion.

5. WEAK INSTITUTIONS AND INADEQUATE HUMAN AND FINANCIAL RESOURCES TO IMPLEMENT ANY MEANINGFUL PROGRAMME

No critical mass in human resources

The national governments involved in the ecoregion programme have mandated

institutions to carry out research and outreach programme aimed at putting in place a

sustainable harvesting regime for all natural resources. Records from Human

Resources Management and Development in Malawi in 1997 showed for example

that there were only 52 professionals in Agriculture, 17 in Fisheries, 21 in Wildlife

and less than 17 in the Water sector. The figures for Tanzania and Mozambique were

not available but could not be more than an order of magnitude if higher. With

HIV/AIDS affecting 12% on average of the most productive age range of 15-49, the

situation is frightening considering that these few professionals were expected to

cover a very large area of what is mostly a very diversified and complex ecosystem.

No co-ordination

The coordination of the different institutions at trilateral as well as at national level is

also problematic. At trilateral level there is no mandated central authority to

coordinate the activities of research, extension or enforcement of laws governing the

harvesting of the diversity of natural resources. The existence of such a body would in

fact identify the synergies from the different programmes in the three countries to

enhance their effects on the ecoregion ecosystems. In Malawi, during the preparation

of the Lake Malawi Ecosystem Management Project, it was noted that coordination of

institutions dealing with natural resources was not in place. The different government

institutions in the natural resources sector had different emphasis. For instance while


the Department of Fisheries was concerned with areas within the catchment that was

contributing disproportionate amounts of silt to the lake, the Land Husbandry

Department in the Ministry of Agriculture was not as its emphasis was land owned by

farmers that is under cropping regime. The same mismatch were also noted with

regard to Fisheries, Water Resources Ministry and Forestry Department where the

latter would not agree to put emphasis on areas that would improve the quality of run

off water to the lake and satisfy water supply programmes without a clear reward in

form of increased timber production. It was concluded that without coordination even

at national level, the effects or gains in conservation made by one department or

programme in one sector would be cancelled or attenuated by inaction or delayed

action of another synergic agency and its clear that the effects of individual

programmes in a number of natural resources sectors is less than those of a single

programme that is well coordinated centrally. The effects of trilaterally coordinated

programmes would therefore have much more effect because of the high amount of

investment and therefore a higher multiplier effect.

Institutions available.

The strength that the governments in the three countries have is that they all have the

necessary institutions to administer programmes. In Malawi, the Ministry of Natural

Resources and Environmental Affairs, the Environmental Affairs Department, the

National Council for the Environment, the Parliamentary Committee on the

Environment are in-charge. In Mozambique, MICOA is in charge and in Tanzania,

the National Environment Council in the Vice President’s office in charge.

It is therefore being recommended that structures of coordination be considered at

national as well as at trilateral level. The challenge here lies in the financial and

human resources required. A laudable suggestion would be legislate in the three

countries that all donor funded projects should have a certain proportion of their

investment channeled towards these national and trilateral coordination structures to

enhance their effectiveness.


6. SHORT TERM AND LONG TERM PERSPECTIVE

Because the process of natural resources degradation is continuing, there is need to

have in place measures to reduce the speed of degradation in the ecoregion in the

short term. As mentioned above national mandated institutions have no resources in

terms of trained personnel and finances to cover the activities of conservation and

management in the huge area. It would seem therefore that in the short term the

strategy should be to put as much resources as possible in the creation of capacity at

local level to mobilize the masses for conservation and management efforts in the

ecoregion. As the masses occupy the entire area this strategy would be the most

effective.

In the long term, this strategy would not work because of population pressure. No

matter how well the natural resources are managed there will be a definite level of

population where the natural resources will not suffice. The long term strategy

therefore should be articulated on non consumptive and high value use of the natural

resources. This strategy would require a transformation of the rural economies of the

riparian countries to create non natural resources based manufacturing.

7. SUSTAINABILITY

At the local level, reports indicate that awareness to environmental issues and

sustainable harvesting of natural resources by the majority of the resource adjacent

communities is very low mostly due to the high prevalence of illiteracy. It is clear that

no mount of money would be sufficient to fund an action plan based on classic central

government approaches. The mobilization of the masses who use the natural resources

in the ecoregion constitute the most important social capital for conservation as the

process once understood and the necessary capacity building done the process of

conservation would proceed without any further need for funds. It is therefore

concluded that the biggest achievement of the programme would the capacity building

objective and it would the same that would ensure the sustainability of the programme

for the entire 50 year vision.


BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ribbink, A. J. 2001. Lake Malawi/Nyasa/Niassa Ecoregion: Biophysical

Reconnaissance Report. WWF Southern African Regional Programme Office.

Ribbink, A. J. 2001. Lake Malawi/Nyasa/Niassa Ecoregion: Biophysical

Reconnaissance Appendix tables. WWF Southern African Regional

Programme Office.

Booth, V. 2000. Lake Malawi/Niassa/Nyasa Ecoregion: Socio-Economic

Reconnaissance report: WWF Southern African Regional Programme Office.

Chafota, J., Burgess, N and Johnson, S. 2001. Proceedings of the 2nd Trilateral

Technical Workshop For Lake Malawi/Nyasa/Niassa Ecoregion. WWF-

SARPO, Harare.

Isaksen, J. and Tjonneland, 2001. Assessing the Restructuring of SADC – Positions,

Policies and Progress. Chr. Michelsen Institute. Report commissioned by

NORAD

Banda, M.C. and T. Tómasson, 1996. Survey of trawling grounds and demersal fish

stocks in central Lake Malawi, from Domira Bay to Nkhata Bay in 1994 and

1995. Fisheries Bulletin No. 33. Fisheries Department, Lilongwe.

Banda, M.C. and T. Tómasson, 1997. Demersal fish stocks in southern Lake

Malawi: stock assessment and exploitation. Fisheries Bulletin No. 35.

Fisheries Department, Lilongwe.

BDPA, 1998. Customary Land Utilisation Study. Volume 2: Tracer Study. Final

Report. BDPA/European Commission/Government of Malawi. Lilongwe,

March 1998.

Bootsma, H. and R. Hecky (eds), 1999. Water Quality Report. Lake Malawi/Nyasa

Biodiversity Conservation Project. GEF/SADC, Salima.

Duponchelle, F. and A.J. Ribbink (eds), 2000. Fish Ecology Report. Lake

Malawi/Nyasa/Niassa Biodiversity Conservation Project. SADC/GEF.

Estate Land Utilisation Study, 1997. Land, People and Production on the Estates of

Malawi. Ministry of Lands and Valuation / ODA. Lilongwe.


Evans, J, A. Banda and T. Seymour, 1999. Opportunities for Better Soil

Management (2 vols). Land Resources Conservation Department / EU /

Danida / DfID / USAID, Lilongwe.

FAO, 1998. Malawi Soil Fertility Initiative. Concept Paper. Report No. 98/036 CP-

MLW. Rome, August 1998.

Gossage, S.J., 1997. Land Use on the Tobacco Estates of Malawi. Estate Land

Utilisation Study. Ministry of Lands and Valuation / ODA. Lilongwe.

Menz, A. and A.B. Thompson, 1995. Management Report of the UK/SADC Pelagic

Fish Resource Assessment Project (Lake Malawi/Niassa).

Malawi Government, 2002, Integrated Environmental and Social Analysis. Lake

Malawi Ecosystem Management Project

Malawi Government, 1994. National Environmental Action Plan. (2 vols) Lilongwe.

ISBN: 99909-26-11-0

Ministry of Forestry, Fisheries and Environmental Affairs, 1998. State of the

Environment Report. September 1998. Lilongwe.

University of Waterloo, WL/Delft Hydraulics and United Nations University /

INWEH, 2000. Preparation of a Preliminary Physical Processes and Water

Quality Model for Lake Malawi/Nyasa. Final Report,

Weyl, O.L.F., M. Banda, G. Sodzapanja, L.H. Mwenekibombwe, O.C. Mponda and

W. Namoto, 2000: Annual Frame Survey September 1999. Fisheries

Bulletin No. 42, Department of Fisheries, Lilongwe.

World Bank, 1992. Malawi: Economic Report on Environmental Policy (2 vols)

Country Operations Division, Southern Africa Department. Washington DC.

WWF-SARPO. 2003. Natural Resources management and sustainable livelihoods of

lakeshore communities of Lake Malawi-Niassa-Nyasa Ecoregion . Typescript.

WWF-SARPO, Harare.

LAKE MALAWI /NIASSA/NYASA ECOREGION -...

Documents

Transcript of LAKE MALAWI /NIASSA/NYASA ECOREGION -...