SADC Regional Consultative Workshop on the

Development of a SADC Regional FLEGT Programme

26-28 October 2011, Birchwood Hotel,

Johannesburg, South Africa

Workshop Documentation Report

2

Table of Contents

1. Background and Introduction................................................................................................. 6

2. Workshop Approach.............................................................................................................. 7

3. The Workshop Process and Outcomes ................................................................................. 7

3.1. Opening Session............................................................................................................... 7

3.1.1. Introductory Remarks- Mr. Moses Chakanga, SADC Secretariat ................................... 8

3.1.2. Remarks by FAO and EU- Mr. Robert Simpson ............................................................ 8

3.1.3. Official Opening Remarks - Mrs. Pumeza Nkhwashu, Director Commercial Forestry ... 9

3.2. Stakeholder Collaboration in Enhancing the FLEGT Process in the SADC Region ............. 9

3.2.1. Lessons learned from the TRAFFIC East/Southern Africa Forest Governance Reportfrom Tanzania: Relevance to SADC.......................................................................................... 10

3.2.2. FLEGT Perspective and Initiatives in an African Context ............................................. 11

3.2.3. Civil Society Involvement in Monitoring and Legality Assurance .................................. 15

3.2.4. Regional Collaboration on FLEGT: History of the Process........................................... 17

3.2.5. What is FLEGT and the Voluntary Partnership Agreement .......................................... 18

3.2.6. FAO-ACP FLEGT Support Programme....................................................................... 21

3.2.7. FLEGT Process in Cameroon..................................................................................... 23

3.2.8. Redefining the Frontiers of Good Forest Management in Ghana - the Ghana-EUFLEGT VPA Experience ........................................................................................................... 27

3.2.9. The Democratic Republic of Congo FLEGT VPA Experience ...................................... 27

3.3. Background Paper on FLEGT Issues in the SADC Region............................................... 29

4. Elements for a SADC Regional Programme ........................................................................ 32

4.1. Validation and Additional Issues for the SADC FLEGT Background Paper ....................... 34

4.1.1. Forest Policies and Laws............................................................................................ 34

4.1.2. Forest Governance..................................................................................................... 34

4.1.3. Forest Data and Information ....................................................................................... 35

3

4.1.4. Forest Trade and Markets........................................................................................... 35

4.1.5. Incentives for Sustainable Forestry Management........................................................ 36

4.1.6. Land-use Dynamics and Sustainable Forestry Management ....................................... 36

5. Input to the SADC Regional FLEGT Programme Document ................................................ 37

5.1. Forest Policies and Laws................................................................................................. 38

5.2. Forest Governance ......................................................................................................... 39

5.3. Law enforcement............................................................................................................. 40

5.4. Sustainable Forest Products Trade.................................................................................. 41

5.5. Land use Dynamics......................................................................................................... 42

5.6. Sustainable Forest Management ..................................................................................... 42

5.7. Research and Development ............................................................................................ 43

5.8. Community Participation and Incentives for SFM............................................................. 43

6. Overall Recommendations .................................................................................................. 45

7. Closing Session .................................................................................................................. 45

8. Workshop Evaluation .......................................................................................................... 48

Annexes:

Annex 1: Workshop Agenda

Annex 2: List of Participants

4

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms

AFF African Forest Forum

CIFOR Centre for International Forestry Research

CSO Civil Society Organizations

EC European Commission

EU European Union

FAO- ACP FLEGT Africa-Caribbean Pacific Forest Law Enforcement ProgrammeSupport

FAO Food and Agricultural Organization

FANR Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Directorate

FLEGT Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade

FSC Forestry Stewardship Council

NGOs Non-Governmental Organization

REDD+ Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation

SADC Southern African Development Community

SFM Sustainable Forestry Management

TCF Technical Committee on Forestry

TRAFFIC Trade Records Analysis of Flora & Fauna in Commerce

VPA Voluntary Partnership Agreement

5

List of Tables

Table 1: Plenary Discussion on Lessons Learned from Traffic East/Southern Africa ForestGovernance Report from Tanzania

Table 2: Plenary Discussion on FLEGT perspectives and initiatives in an African context

Table 3: Plenary Discussion on Civil Society Involvement in Monitoring and LegalityAssurance

Table 4: Plenary Discussion on Regional Collaboration on FLEGT and the History of theProcess

Table 5: Plenary on FLEGT and the VPA

Table 6: Plenary Discussion on the FAO-ACP FLEGT Support Programme

Table 7: Plenary Discussion on the FLEGT Process in Cameroon

Table 8: Plenary Discussion on the Ghana EU-FLEGT VPA Experience

Table 9: Plenary Discussion on the FLEGT-VPA Process in the DRC

Table 10: Discussion on the Background Paper on the FLEGT Issues in the SADC Region

6

1. Background and Introduction

The Southern African Development Community (SADC) is a membership organization offifteen (15) southern African countries. SADC’s overarching goal is to achievedevelopment and economic growth, alleviate poverty, enhance the standard and qualityof life for the people of its region and support the socially disadvantaged throughregional integration. The Council meeting of August 2007 in Lusaka, Zambia approvedthe following re-prioritized programmes of regional co-operation and integration:

Peace and security co-operation as a pre-requisite for achieving the RegionalIntegration Agenda;

Trade/Economic liberalization and development; Infrastructure in support of regional integration, and; Special programmes of regional dimension under Education and Human

Resource Development, Health, HIV and AIDS and other CommunicableDiseases, Food Security and Trans-boundary Natural Resources, Statistics,Gender Equality, as well as Science, Technology, Innovation, Research andDevelopment.

Anchored in the last prioritized area of special programmes, is SADC’s responsibility toenhancing integration in the field of sustainable forest management. TheDirectorate of Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources (FANR) that is housed at theSADC Secretariat is among others responsible for the strategic planning,coordination and management of forestry issues. The Technical Committee on Forestry(TCF), which consists of Directors of Forestry of all Member States, is the officialSADC organ that formulates recommendations regarding key issues on forests andforestry for approval by higher level SADC structures.

In recognition of the key challenges in forestry faced by the region, the TCFrecommended the convening of a workshop on Forest Law Enforcement,Governance and Trade (FLEGT) with the following objectives:

To discuss the common issues related to FLEGT in the region; To find ways of fostering close collaboration between various players at

national and regional levels in order to alleviate the problems related toFLEGT; and

To develop elements or the main components of a regional FLEGTprogramme that will facilitate activities towards enforcement of regulationsand best practices related to trade in wood products in the region.

7

The workshop on Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade was successfullyheld from the 26-28 October, 2011 in Johannesburg, South Africa. The three-dayAgenda for the workshop is provided as Annex 1.

Participants included a broad range of forestry stakeholders representing governmentministries, departments, civil society organizations and the private sector predominantlyfrom the SADC region. Other participants were drawn from Forestry institutions andnetworks from other African countries as well as donor agencies with an interest inongoing programmes in the forestry sector. The full list of participants is provided asAnnex 2.

2. Workshop ApproachThe workshop was facilitated using participatory techniques and was highly interactive.The dinner table room set up enabled interaction across stakeholders while small groupdiscussions and the use of the visualization in participatory programmes (VIPP) methodenhanced participation throughout the workshop discussions. Case studies documenting theexperiences of different stakeholders enabled lesson-sharing and shed light on goodpractices in sustainable forest management. The presentations by different experts inthe forestry sector provided a useful framework and context for the group work thataimed at identifying the key components of a regional FLEGT programme. Plenarydiscussions also provided the space for a deeper understanding of the key emergingissues and grounded the learning from the presentations.

3. The Workshop Process and Outcomes

This section of the report provides the process that the workshop followed as well as theoutcomes of the sessions.

3.1 Opening Session

The opening session included introductory remarks, sharing the objectives and agenda forthe workshop, introductory remarks by the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) andEuropean Union (EU) as well as the official opening remarks by the host country, SouthAfrica. The opening session also provided the opportunity for participants tointroduce themselves and the organization they represented.

8

3.1.1. Introductory Remarks- Mr. Moses Chakanga, SADCSecretariatThe Forestry Adviser to the FANR Directorate, Mr. Moses Chakanga delivered theintroductory remarks and shared the objectives of the workshop. On behalf of theSADC Chair (Angola) who was not able to attend the workshop and on behalf ofSADC Secretariat the Forestry Advisor welcomed participants to the workshop. In hisintroductory remarks, Mr. Chakanga expressed confidence that participants wouldengage with the process to ensure the achievement of its main objectives, namely: todiscuss and identify common FLEGT issues that affect member states at regionallevel; and to identify the main elements or components that would form a RegionalProgramme on FLEGT.

3.1.2.Remarks by FAO and EU- Mr. Robert SimpsonThe opening remarks from the FAO and the EU were delivered by Mr. RobertSimpson, Programme Manager ACP-FLEGT Support programme on behalf of theFAO Representative in South Africa. The highlights of these opening remarks were:

Appreciation of the broad range of stakeholders from all sectors present. Recognition and appreciation of the support from the EU for the process. Acknowledgement of the FLEGT Action Plan and the issues contained in it as the

cornerstones for sustainable forest management Registered concern about the significant, negative impacts arising from poor forest

governance and trade as well as the huge losses in revenue due to illegality in theforest sector.

Recognition by G8 countries of the significant socio-economic and environmentalimpacts of unsustainable forest management and trade.

Acknowledgement of the pioneering role played by the World Bank to address globalFLEG issues and the EU’s subsequent contribution to integrate forest trade issues.

Emphasis on the joint responsibilities of producer and buyer countries in ensuringlegality and sustainability in the forest trade.

Acknowledgement of the partnership between SADC and the ACP FLEGT SupportProgramme.

Validation of the issues identified in the SADC FLEGT Background Paper asprevalent in other parts of the world.

Wished participants fruitful workshop discussions that will subsequently need to betranslated into concrete actions for sustainable forest management.

9

3.1.3.Official Opening Remarks - Mrs. Pumeza Nkhwashu, DirectorCommercial ForestryThe official opening of the workshop was performed by an official of the host country,South Africa. Mrs. Pumeza Nkhwashu, the Director of Commercial Forestryperformed the official opening on behalf of her Deputy Director General Dr. MoshibudiRampedi who could not attend the workshop due to other pressing demands. Thehighlights of the speech were:

Emphasized the key FLEGT related issues affecting the SADC region. Recognition of the importance of dialogue and co-operation between governments, the

private sector and civil society to address the FLEGT issues identified. Emphasized the seriousness of the FLEGT issues affecting the region and the need to

develop forward looking strategies for the implementation of the recommendationsadvanced in the FLEGT background paper during the workshop discussions.

The significant progress that South Africa has made around the enforcement of forestrylegislation in the border control environment.

The collaboration of SADC member States as an indicator of regional integration and thekey to successful development and implementation of policies and strategies.

Noting that South Africa would be hosting COP 17 Conference, encouraged participantsin their discussions to establish how FLEGT can be one of the pillars to contribute toReduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+).

Commended the SADC Secretariat and Working Group on FLEGT for their efforts atensuring this workshop takes place as well as GIZ, the FAO and African Forest Forum(AFF) for funding the consultative process.

The participants to the workshop were also thanked in advance for their participation andinput to the FLEGT process in the SADC region.

3.2. Stakeholder Collaboration in Enhancing the FLEGT Processin the SADC Region

The purpose of this session was to enable forestry specialists and practitioners toshare their experiences and perspectives on FLEGT issues of relevance to SADC.Furthermore, this session provided a useful context for the group work to engagewith the key FLEGT issues and to develop the elements of a SADC FLEGTprogramme. This section of the report provides the presentations made and a briefdescription of their content. Following each presentation, participants were accordedthe opportunity to respond through comments and posing questions. The outcomesof the discussions that followed each presentation are also provided.

10

3.2.1. Lessons learned from the TRAFFIC East/Southern AfricaForest Governance Report from Tanzania: Relevance to SADCThis presentation by Mr. Jumapili Chenga, Programme officer of the Trade RecordsAnalysis of Flora and Fauna in Commerce (TRAFFIC) organization, provided insightsinto the lessons learned from the organizations’ Forest Governance Report and therelevance of its findings to SADC. The presentation provided an introduction toTRAFFIC; its new four-year Timber Trade Programme; the organization’s previoustimber trade work, the lessons from this experience, addressing governanceshortfalls and the way forward in terms of relevance to SADC.

The plenary discussion that followed this presentation is provided in Table 1 below:

Table 1: Plenary Discussion on Lessons Learned from Traffic East/Southern AfricaForest Governance Report from Tanzania

Question/comment/observationsThe key issues emerging from the presentation areindicative of the need for a regional SADC body toaddress the FLEGT in the regionIn the experience of Tanzania and TRAFFIC, whatare the gaps that exist in forest management andpolicies?

African countries need to stop allowing the Chineseto get concessions on our land.

Instead of engaging the Chinese government, thereis more to be gained from dealing with buyers whoare key actors in the supply chain.Governance is a key factor in forest managementand closing the gaps alone is not enough.The presentation is reminder that the worldeconomic system is flawed and the private sectordoes not have a soul.Corruption starts from grass roots to the top.Government is also not clean. The experience ofTanzania is a powerful lesson for all of ourcountries. Tanzania clearly did not realize that theywere sitting on valuable forest resources.Stakeholder engagement and participation toenhance business appreciation in government,communities and timber millers is critical. Illegaltimber trade has resulted in revenues and profitsgoing to China instead of remaining in Tanzania.This issue is a regional concern that needsworkable responses and strategies.

Response from presenter

Tanzania has very good forest policies that touchon all aspects of conservation. The biggestchallenge is in the effective implementation ofthese sound policies. Another problem is that thecustodians of natural resources are also not wellremunerated and serve to contribute to the illegaltrade practices in the sector.

11

The key lesson learned in the TRAFFICpresentation is how much timber is exported fromTanzania and unaccounted for. China needs to beproperly taxed and should actually also pay penaltyfees for such bad business practices in the timbertrade.Corruption is a global problem and a two-way There is need to create viable economicprocess. It should thus not just be seen as some opportunities for forest dependent communities topressure exerted from the north which provides the reduce illegal activitiesmarket for illegal timber.

3.2.2. FLEGT Perspective and Initiatives in an African Context

This presentation which aimed at sharing the experiences on FLEGT and initiatives inan Africa-wide context was made by Professor Godwin Kowero of the Africanforest Forum (AFF). The presentation gave a background to FLEGT and the process itfollowed in the Central Africa Forests Commission (COMIFAC); its achievements; theFLEGT process in East Africa; some FLEGT related considerations in SADCspecifically focusing on key actors in forest and timber issues, namely, rural peopleand local communities, government and the private sector.

The responses to the presentation are provided in Table 2 below.

Table 2: Plenary Discussion on FLEGT perspectives and initiatives in an Africancontext

Question/comment/observationsFLEGT has been sitting and discussing theseissues since 2005 and there is no change.How come positive changes are not taking place inthe forest sector? We need implementation.Numerous consultants are getting donor funding tocarry out activities in the sector without effectivelyengaging the critical stakeholders in timber trade.Forest experts at the local level also need to be apart of the consultant teams.

Is the REDD+ system working well?

How does AFF ensure the engagement and active

Response from presenterAgree that changes are slow and things take a longtime. However, this is how the internationalsystems work as close to 80% of funding goes intoprocesses as investments in projects are seen asthe role of the private sector. There is, however, anabsence of a viable private sector to effectivelydeal with these issues.There is need to look at ourselves and address theFLEGT issues ourselves through our own Africansolutions. An area of need is for example, theestablishment of a certification system. The north iskeen on our forests which are global gold.

The REDD+ system is about the enhancement ofcarbon stocks and yet the problem is not onlycarbon. The other problem is that as a sector, weare not strategic enough in offering solutions,noting that 80% of carbon is outside the forestsector. We should not only be thinking aboutcarbon.

AFF works closely with timber producers. The

12

participation of timber producers in its initiatives?

One of the challenges stated is that one of theproblems we have in the industry is lack of ethicsand professionalism on the part of those in chargeof forest related activities. In my view, the issuegoes far beyond that as the major problem is notwith those who are technically in charge but thepolicy makers who are in charge of the wholepolitics of the countries. What has AFF been doingto influence policy makers to change the way theydo business and lead their countries in terms offorestry related issues?

The presenter stated that 90% of the destruction offorests in Africa is due to farming encroachment.With the exception of South Africa and Zimbabwemost African countries are dependent onagriculture and most of their people make theirliving out of agriculture. What is your comment onthis?

forum has a project aimed at empowering small-holder stakeholders in forestry. It started on a smallscale and currently resources are being sought to goon a larger scale. AFF has also started a project onimproving professional associations andsocieties. There is need to engage all those dealingwith forestry issues to improve ethics andprofessionalism so that these problems can becontained.The question of lack of ethics and professionalism:if you have forest personnel who cannot becorrupted, you will export what is legal. We need towork with people with proper work ethics and theforestry sector needs to set a good example forothers such as mining and not be corrupt.

Regarding policy makers, policies are made atdifferent levels even through directives. A keyquestion we need to answer revolves around thequality of the information we feed into policymaking. Policy makers at the political level havedifferent priorities at different points of their careersand are more concerned about survival. They havevery little time to work on these issues. There isneed for us to be strategic in terms of who wetarget with these messages. Is it the politicians atthe highest level or those responsible for planningto ensure that FLEGT issues are integrated intonational development plans? There is need for usto be very strategic about the officials we involve inthese issues.Recent literature and statistics (especially sinceAfrican governments feed into the FAO their lateststatistics from their forests) do show that 90% ofthe destruction of forests on our continent is closelyassociated with agricultural activities.

The majority of people are indeed dependent onagricultural activities. There is a need to keep insight the local people through providing them withincentives to do other activities. Incentives includeother opportunities for livelihood apart fromagriculture which encroaches on the forest margin.Agriculture needs to be carried out in sustainableways and not encroach on the forest margin. Iffunds for REDD+ were readily available to us, wewould give 80% for Africa to the agricultural sectorto improve productivity at the forest margin. This iswhere the poorest people are and by so doingthere will not be any need for a lot of space forproduction. And there will be less encroachment.This is one way of containing this.

The agricultural sector is not at a stage where it iseffectively engaging with discussions on climatechange. The sector just makes recommendations

13

along the way. Although this needs improvement,the forest sector to its credit, got into theconversation two years ago. There is also limitedinteraction across sectors, even at the governmentlevel as every ministry protects its own turf.

The African Union has set itself a target ofincreasing agricultural production by 6% annually toimprove food security. This begs the question,where is the land to do this? There are seriousproblems with our land which is destroyed in termsof activity and structure. The investments that aremade in fertilizers are not producing as much onthe same land as they did ten years ago. Smallholder farmers in most countries are buying morefood than they are selling to the market. Incentivesin terms of alternatives for livelihoods are thus verycritical.

What has been Cameroon’s experience with theFLEGT VPA process?

The pace of change seems to be determined bygovernments and excludes the private sector. Astimber traders, we are willing to die for our landbecause without raw materials we have nolivelihood. There is need to increase the pace andscale of change. There is need for a seriousbroadening of paradigms where FLEGT issues areconcerned.

There is need for serious paradigm shifts throughprivate sector engagement, lobbying and advocacyfor FLEGT issues to be effectively addressed.

Aware of the progress of the negotiations within theCOMIFAC countries and by 2007 Cameroon hadmade head way around the VPA process. Thispresentation on the VPA and where Cameroon ispresently will be shared by another presenter laterin the workshop process.The pace within individual countries of the FLEGTprocess depends on how governments are willingto internalize this. If they move slowly, otherinstitutions that have good will like FAO, the WB willmove at high speed and we will lose resources.Some institutions have budgets for theseprocesses but if the region does not have adequatemomentum they cannot take advantage of theseresources. We need a framework at the nationallevel for FLEGT as well as at the regional level.There are issues that require interventions at thenational level while others need regional responsesfor them to move faster. Just as we move muchfaster at the global level on climate change issuesas an example. At the country level we still have aserious challenge internalizing issues of climatechange across sectors.Local communities, government and the privatesector are the cornerstones of FEGT issues. Weneed to develop the private sector. On the issue oftransactions, we are very much aware of theindustrial wood shortage that is going to face thisregion and even west Africa. We have undertakensome studies right from Sudan down to south. InDecember this year we plan to share the results ofwhat is happening in the plantations and from therewe will see how we move forward. Plantationforestry is about the private sector, small holderfarmers and people who have trees on their farms

14

who we need to work with. So we do have theprivate sector in focus. All these things to the extentpossible we need to do ourselves and havedevelopment partners to help as their mandatesdictate.

Coming from a civil society perspective we havecome to see several contradictions. In my country,Botswana, there are laws around diamonds thatare strict and effectively enforced. However aroundtimber and forest products in general no such strictlaw enforcement exists. This is clear evidence thatthe value of forest products is not appreciated.There is a need to raise awareness on the value oftimber and commodification of natural resources.Rural communities residing within the vicinity offorest resources have become detached, feel noownership and hence do not play any role inmonitoring or protecting these. Even if there areillegal activities taking place in the forests, theytake no action. Monitoring and policing thus need tobe strengthened.Harmonization and rationalization is a keyframework for trade related issues on forests and theSADC Protocol gives some background on landencroachment, the effects of population explosionand ownership.

Ownership issues: these discussions about FLEGTstarted outside our region and in some quarters thisis viewed as a top-down approach. There is need forinterventions at different levels - national,regional and global. Top down and bottom upapproaches can be combined with positive results.There is thus need to cultivate ownership of theFLEGT process because it did not originate inAfrica. This process is similar to the approach ofinvolving the communities in the management offorest resources. We need to dismiss connotationsthat the FLEGT process is from outside andtherefore negative. It is good for us, we need tointernalize it and take ownership of FLEGTprocesses.

We are very conscious of the issues of landownership which include land grabbing. We areworking on these issues slowly and in the next twoyears we will have substantial work on thecontinent on the nexus between food, fiber andfuel. All these are land based resources with manyinteractions between them which are beneficial andat times not mutually beneficial. We need to look athow land is switching hands. Switching between forexample investors to the region and between localpeople. The elite own a lot of land, buying hugetracks of land, do nothing with it but own it forspeculation.

Harmonized framework for policies will be talkedabout in the context of the SADC protocol andstrategy and how they intend to deal with theseissues. This is an issue that also came up in theSahelian countries and AFF is hiring a consultant tosee how we can harmonize the policies in thisregion; what are the key issues; what are thecommonalities and differences between policiesand where countries can come together and whatneeds to be specific to individual countries. Arecommendation on this issue at the SADC levelalso needs to be considered as the workshopunfolds.

15

3.2.3.Civil Society Involvement in Monitoring and LegalityAssuranceThe presentation by Mr. Cassian Sianga of the Forest Governance Group providedparticipants with the lessons learned by the Tanzania Natural Resources Forum incivil society involvement in monitoring and legality assurance systems. Thepresentation provided the goal and mission of the organization; an overview of thepolicy environment/monitoring and legality assurance system; government shortfallsin timber trade gleaned from the TRAFFIC report; CSOs engagement in forestgovernance as an outcome; highlights and achievements in CSO engagement;programme implementation challenges; independent forest monitoring; monitoring ofwood and wood products trade between Tanzania and Kenya. In concluding thepresenter highlighted the unique role and capacity for communities to effectivelymonitor their own resources through active stakeholder engagement, participationand recognizing their expertise and capacity.

The ensuing plenary discussion is found in Table 3 below.

Table 3: Plenary Discussion on Civil Society Involvement in Monitoring and LegalityAssurance

Question/comment/observationsCo-management between communities andgovernment is hailed as a best practice in policies.Challenges exist, however in community capacityto, for example, develop management plans. Thisissue brings to the surface the power differentialsbetween government authorities and communities.Excellent policies are in place but communities lackfull awareness of the value of tree resources anddue to poverty sell them for next to nothing.Mozambique requires export and transit permits fortimber products. Can the presenter clarify theissues raised regarding the timber trade betweenMozambique and Tanzania?

The presentation is evidence of the brilliant workdone by civil society. There is need to take thisfurther and make sure that we drill into ourcommunities in the villages that a truckload of logsmeans we are sending away our jobs and profits. Inaddition to educating people the real challenge is thatwe need to equip our people whether they cut byhand or they improvise. The challenge isensuring that people add value. If societies do notadd value and send away raw materials, we willremain poor for a long while. Africa is endowed with

Response from presenter

Timber trade between Tanzania and Mozambique isriddled with problems which are compounded by thelanguage barriers wherein most documentation iswritten in Portuguese. This demands thatlanguage interpreters are in place to ensure legalityin timber trade. Situations in which permits havebeen signed by non-existent companies have beenexperienced. These problems of illegality in thetimber trade between countries need to be urgentlyaddressed.Good comment because in the next phase theproject will be making sure that communitiesunderstand that they are losing out on positivelivelihood outcomes in the timber trade. We need toplace a strong emphasis on this and ensure thatpeople understand that we are losing jobs andprofits.

16

resources. The challenge is that we talk and don’timplement. Africa should never send basic, rawtimber out.The problems faced in the timber business in Africaare coming from outside, we are being used.China/ Africa trade policies and practices are unfairThe Chinese come here to manipulate timbertraders, contribute to over-exploitation of ourresources while they have some of the best forestland in the world.

Chinese timber traders have had serious, adverseimpacts on the price of timber in our region and wethe owners and producers of the resource benefitthe least while Chinese companies reap largeprofits. The Chinese buy illegal timber from ourregion and those of us who sell legally are thus notable to compete with illegal timber traders who sellat very low prices.The nature of trade especially across bordersshows we are dealing with really big fish from bothsides and not small people from the villages. A fulllorry full of timber cannot be bought by an ordinaryvillager and successfully ferried through the borderwith false documents. Villagers have often not hadexposure to urban areas where these documentsare obtained. The timber trade is clearly about bigfish. We cannot just blame one country as goodstransit through places where they are moved by anorganized network of people in government and theprivate sector that facilitate illegal trade.

Current food shortages in Somalia have seen manytrucks exporting food at night into that country. Thisis never an ordinary farmer exporting his maizeharvest. Admire the fact that the Natural ResourcesForum is assisting villagers to be more vigilant in thefight against illegal forest product trade. Thechallenge is people who are in high places who areresponsible for the facilitation of intra-regional tradeand trade between our countries and China, Indiaand other importing countries. We need to learnfrom organizations like the Tanzanian NaturalResources Forum, who are evidence that we havethe capacity to address the challenges weexperience with the little money accessed fromdevelopment partners. We need to scale upactivities within countries and across the region inorder to contain illegal trade in forest products. Weneed to build more institutions like these in order tocontain this menace.

There is need for the region to collaborate to ensurea reversal of these trends and tendencies in theforest products trade.

Part of what our organization has been doing israising community awareness of their rights to landand resources. There are currently court cases inwhich people have invested in their areas withouttheir knowledge because District Authorities gavesuch investors certificates to own that land.Communities have started taking action tochallenge District Authorities.

Some villages have accrued significant revenuesfrom the sale of forest products in legal ways andpaying school fees for their children. Awareness isincreasing at village level that forest products areresources that people can benefit from. Ourorganization is also advocating for the revenuesaccrued from the sale of forest products to bepublicized so that all the villagers know what ishappening in the sector. This strengthens forestgovernance issues.

Regarding cross-border trade, these are part ofSADC trans-boundary issues because if timbercomes into your country and you do not questionhow it came, you are also a thief. We need to makesure we collaborate so that the trade chains arelegal. It is good that trade facilitators (clearingofficers) are attending this workshop because thereare fishy issues in their sphere. The problem ofillegal trade in forest products involves a broadnetwork of stakeholders.

17

3.2.4.Regional Collaboration on FLEGT: History of the ProcessIn order to ensure that all participants had a common understanding of the SADCFLEGT process, the Forestry Adviser to the Directorate of Food, Agriculture andNatural Resources (FANR), at the SADC Secretariat, Mr. Moses Chakanga provideda historical overview, key milestones achieved and the next steps of the initiative.This presentation also placed great emphasis on the principles of good governanceand sustainability in trade promotion embraced by SADC Member States.

The plenary session in response to this presentation follows below.

Table 4: Plenary Discussion on Regional Collaboration on FLEGT and the History ofthe Process

Question/comment/observationsIs the expectation of the Workshop that thegovernments of participating countries solelyprovide funding of activities? The role ofgovernment seems minimal.

The SADC Secretariat seems to have a problemreviewing some of the protocols that some of ourcountries have entered into which are to someextent a hindrance to smoothening forestry issues.As advocates, we have in the past approached ourgovernments for certain things to be changed andtold that because of certain protocols thesechanges cannot be made. We come up withobservations and solutions which are hindered bythe protocols that our countries are signatory to.How can the SADC protocols be reviewed toensure they are in line with the changing FLEGTenvironment?

The SADC Timber Association Constitution wasdrafted using policies existing in member countriesat the FSTCU in Malawi between the years 1993-1996. SADC needs to make reference to thisdocument because it sets out how achievementscan be made in forestry. Although national policieshave evolved since this period to date, we need toharmonize some of these documents - the earlierand later versions so that we do not lose directionof what we intended to do in the early years and asenriched by more recent changes. Rather than startfrom scratch, let us update whatever we have.On policies and legislation issues: There is atendency in workshops such as this one torecommend that policies and legislation be revised.

Response from presenterThis question needs to be answered during thisworkshop process given that the role ofgovernments in the envisaged SADC FLEGTprogramme needs to be clearly defined. We needto identify areas where member states should worktogether as a region and what they can be doing asindividual countries. We need to generate a list ofsuch ideas by the end of this workshop.The SADC Protocol on Forestry is in place and hasbeen agreed upon by all 15 Member States. Thisworkshop we are participating in is in fact part ofthe implementation of the Protocol on Forestry.Each Member State has its own forestry policiesand what is needed is the harmonization of thesepolicies and legislation. This could be one of therecommendations emerging from this process sothat they are the same across member states tofacilitate their implementation. There is need to alsodevelop the next steps towards implementation ofthe components of the SADC FLEGT programmewhich this group will identify. Once resources areavailable we can then implement the review ofnational policies in each country to make themcomparable with those of other Member States.There is indeed a lot of merit in going through pastforest documents as there is no need to duplicatewhat has already been done. We need to gothrough the records find this document on theSADC Timber Association to ensure it can enhancewhat we are going to do following this workshop.

Not all policies need not be overhauled. We needto learn from existing good policies and use theseto address those that are not good. Implementation

18

There is however a need to assess what iscontained in such policies first given that Africa hassome of the best forest policies in the world. Therewas a think-tank around forest policies in the worldand Rwanda took the gold medal, followed by theGambia and the United States respectively.

We have excellent policies and the challenge weface is rather the effective implementation of these.We need to strengthen existing policies and theirvigorous implementation rather than overhaul them.Such a conclusion may possibly emerge from theCOP 17 Process on Climate Change - how tomainstream REDD+ for example could be seen asan issue that requires an overhauling of policies.REDD + is in fact about forestry and we are doingall those things already except measuring carbon.

of existing policies needs to be strengthened tochange what is happening on the ground.

3.2.5.What is FLEGT and the Voluntary Partnership Agreement

This presentation which was prepared with assistance from the EuropeanCommission and the EFI FLEGT Facility was made by Mr. Robert Simpson,Programme Manager, ACP-FLEGT Support programme, FAO. The presentationserved to increase participants’ awareness on FLEGT and the Voluntary PartnershipAgreement (VPA) with a view on the benefits for importing countries of a regionalFLEGT approach in the SADC countries. This presentation gave an overview of theFLEGT Action Plan/VPA, the context within which it operates, a historical overview, theimportance and provisions of the EU FLEGT Action Plan as well as the role of FLEGTin the fight against illegal logging.

The second part of this presentation was dedicated to the FLEGT VPA Processproviding a detailed description of the agreement, its objectives, what the VPA is not, itscomponents, stages of development of existing partnerships, steps in the VPAprocess, EU interests in the VPA, challenges experienced in its implementation andsome of its impacts thus far.

Table 5 provides the plenary discussion that followed this presentation.

19

Table 5: Plenary on FLEGT and the VPA

Question/comment/observationAn observation as a typical timber trader/producer ina remote part of Zambia or Mozambique is that:while we appreciate the donor funding from the EUthere are challenges in the area of trade. The EU isa good market for timber from Africa but we are notbenefiting from this because of too manyprocedures such as forest certificationrequirements.

Unfortunately some of the timber entering the EUmarket comes from our countries - enters the EUillegally and the EU accepts it. China and SouthAfrica for example take timber to Europe and youfind this timber originates from our countries. In itssupport the EU primarily focuses on capacitybuilding and holding meetings when the priorityneed for timber manufacturers is technical andassistance in accessing equipment for valueaddition. Forest certification is difficult in ourcountries and working with our governments to thisend is problematic due to capacity issues. There arejust too many rules and regulations thatprevent us from accessing the EU market andresources,Is the VPA done on a permanent basis or is it for aperiod of time and thereafter renewed?

How different is the VPA from forest certification forexample the forest stewardship council process?Could it be a substitute?

Response from presenterIt seems to be very simple for donors to comeforward and support workshops and much morechallenging to provide technical support to industrythrough for example the provision of equipment toimplement projects. We recognize this as achallenge and will take this information back andpush more in that direction. During theimplementation of VPAs at least those signed thusfar, there has been massive amounts of funding percountry anywhere from 5 to between 15 and 20million Euro to help subsidize the design and startoff of the chain of custody systems, to hireindependent companies that develop them andprovide the equipment to do the monitoring, if usingbar codes or whatever types of verificationsystems. Support has also included the provision offunding for equipment and capacity building inthose specific areas. While this is not coming toevery country, projects are increasingly stretchedthinner and thinner, significant support is providedfor a number of these partnerships to beimplemented.

The VPA once agreed, is passed by the legislatureof that country and by Parliament in the EU. As anagreement it remains static. In order to renew orkeep the FLEGT license that permits importingtimber into the EU, there is an annual audit andthey evaluate the various criteria that are specifiedwithin the definition of legality and the informationprovided by the oversight mechanisms like theChain of Custody and any independent monitoringthat is sanctioned under the VPA. As long as theypass that audit annually, they continue to have thelicense available to that country and it covers allindustry within that country,This is a frequently asked question. The VPA andforest certification cannot be used interchangeably.If a forest is certified through for example the FSC orother certification mechanism, it is notnecessarily recognized by the EU. Discussions onthe issue are on-going to look at possibilities ofhaving a harmonized system. Part of the reasonwhy it has not been recognized yet (not speakingfor EU) is that FSC standards and others can bechanged over time. The EU is thus not putting itinto their regulations that certification standardswould be recognized. If certification starts at a highlevel, then it is recognized and then the certificationstandard is eroded or changes over time, then theywould still be obligated to recognize it. So this

20

would be an ad-hoc decision as we move closer tothe 2013 date of timber entering the EU markets.

It seems at this stage that the EU is only workingwith individual countries. Can the EU work with aregional organization, for example, in this caseSADC which is looking to developing a regionalFLEGT programme?

The EU can work with regional organizations and italready works with a number of them. The EUcannot, however, negotiate a VPA with a regionalorganization. A regional organization can be usedas a mode of communication for all countries or ifthere are cross-cutting issues between all thecountries which they wish to work on together andhave identified jointly as priorities, then it is apossibility. In terms of defining the actualagreements because they are legally binding andthere are always risks involved, the agreement hasto be country specific.

21

Participants actively listening to FLEGT presentations

22

3.2.6 FAO-ACP FLEGT Support Programme

This presentation also made by Mr. Robert Simpson provided the objectives andoperations of the FAO-ACP FLEGT Support Programme, its assistancemechanisms, its contribution to FLEGT. The presentation was concluded byemphasizing that all projects supported have the overarching goal of achievingsustainable forest management which is a vision that needs to be borne in mind. Thepresentation also recognized among other things the consistencies between theprojects supported through the ACP FLEGT Support Programme with the issuesidentified in the SADC FLEGT background paper.

Following this presentation, the space was provided for participants to makecomments and ask questions. This plenary discussion is provided in Table 6 below.

Table 6: Plenary Discussion on the FAO-ACP FLEGT Support Programme

Question/comment/observationNoted with interest that beneficiaries of the grantshave primarily been governments, NGOs, civilsociety and no example of support to the privatesector. In line with what the programme supports,there should be something that can help addressquality, understanding the market and improvingthe current process and not necessarily investmentinto equipment. The private sector could benefitmarkedly from this.

As the private sector, we get scared with the VPAas we have seen companies in Africa are excellingin ISO quality standards. I do not know much aboutthe VPA but do not believe it is daunting that theprivate sector and government cannot work with it.As part of your grant-making mechanism, if youcould view our requests favourably to specificallyhelp improve access to information, quality, marketrequirements and improvements of our currentprocesses as the private sector. This can be usedas a bridge to build private sector confidence as itapproaches VPAs.

Response from presenterIn response, I will not make any attempts toconvince you that the VPA is the best way to go. Alot of countries started off afraid of it. The first stepsin the VPA process include seeking moreinformation in which people sit down and haveconstructive dialogue. This first dialogue helpsbring a lot of the fears to the surface and allowspeople to decide on whether they want a VPA ornot.

The experience of Tanzania provided theopportunity for many of these issues to bediscussed. The fears of the private sector inTanzania included a hesitance based on a feelingof being excluded from markets whereas the VPAis an opportunity to include people in markets.Although there are many pros and cons to it, thebottom line of the discussion was that some of theindustry knew that if the government does notparticipate in the VPA process, there are risks thatcome with this. They would have to sell their timberto other markets and hope that this eventuallymakes its way into the wood that makes it into theEU rather than try to import directly to the EUthrough a license. It is important for people to keepan open mind as either way there are pros andcons.

The main criteria we will be looking for in aproposal to improve private sector access to

23

information is how pertinent the informationrequired is to the context, situation you are trying toresolve. A key consideration will also be the extentto which the strategy and the desire for thisinformation was accompanied by broadconsultation within a larger stakeholder group andis there consensus that this will move the sectorforward. This helps elevate things with the FAO-ACP priority list.

If a country conforms to the requirements of theWTO, which grew out of the General Agreement onTrade (GAP) which has some requirements forTHREAD, why should we have the CIVICAREagain? How compatible is it with the requirementsof the WTO?

In response to the compatibility with WTO: withinthe WTO set up system it is allowed. The WTOsystem allows this regional set up for suchorganizations as long as they are compatible withthe GAT principle.

Not speaking for the EU. The documentation that Ihave read, in which substantial research on thepros and cons have been examined suggestsconsistency with the WTO simply because it ispurely voluntary. However if the EU hassuspicion/concern that timber is not from a legalsource, it ensures that it is not contradicting WTOto say they do not want to import it until they candemonstrate that it is from a legal source.NB: (Not to be quoted given that I am not alawyer and the full results of the study not atfinger tips)

Currently there are debates around the issue - itspros and cons. Ultimately in order for an accurateruling on this, some country has to take it to thecomplaint system of WTO and there has to be aruling on it eventually at that point if a country doesnot agree with the process.

3.2.6. FLEGT Process in CameroonThis presentation which provided the insights on the approach and lessons learnedfrom the FLEGT process in Cameroon was given by Mr. Paul Cerutti of the Centrefor International Forestry Research (CIFOR). The presentation provided the researchframework of CIFOR, the national and international context, Cameroon’s approach tothe FLEGT VPA, the lessons learned for this approach specifically in the areas ofdata and information management, governance, trade, markets and incentives aswell as land-use dynamics.

The comments, questions and responses by the presenter follow in Table 7 below.

Table 7: Plenary Discussion on the FLEGT Process in Cameroon

Question/comment/observation Response from presenterInteresting, insightful presentation that brought in Logging is indeed big business involving the

24

the issues and perspectives from another regionmainly in the rain forest where the timber we sellhere are merely sticks compared to rain forest logs.Why should Cameroon want a VPA? In the past,the majority of logging companies were European,who harvested and took the resource home. Whyshould the EU put restrictions on them? If Europedoes not trust people from its own countries that dologging in Africa, what should we make of this?

Good, refreshing presentation that brings an issuethat has not surfaced in earlier ones but isimportant for our discussions going forward. Howare provisions for securing the means of productionfor businesses made? The example from Malawi isthat people will die for their forest but if there is noland tenure/security we will continue to experiencethese unacceptable behaviours in which businessutilizes as much as possible. In the absence of aguarantee that the means of production will beavailable going forward, we will continue toexperience challenges. If this issue can beaddressed it provides the space for re-investmentin these key issues.In approaching the VPA and the preliminaryassessments what really happened to have missedout on the significant chunk of chainsaw millers?Reference is made to the organized, big industrywhich is almost of the same magnitude as thechainsaw millers - how were the latter missed outinitially?

Looking at the Malawian scenario of local timberproduction, the SMEs that are organized and not sobig have realized that there is a lack of extensivedata on timber pricing and benchmarking. What

French, Lebanese and Italians. When peoplestarted talking about FLEGT and the VPA, privatecompanies did not view this as a positivedevelopment particularly with donors andconsultants engaging in the process. However,when the EC started discussing the requiredactions for Europe to decrease illegal imports, thesector started attending FLEGT meetings. Themain interest being a new point of viewing the VPAas an option to gain some markets for companieswithout international access to these, gaining theFLEGT license and FSC certification because thepublic markets in Europe were closing down.Companies want the VPA and in the politicalcorridors, their relationship with government ischaracterized by attempts on both sides to twist theVPA in a way that can be harmful to smallcompanies Although this is in some quartersdebatable, it sheds light on the dynamics within thesector in our region.

Negotiations of the VPA between Cameroon andthe ECA started informally and formally over aperiod of six years. At the outset, there was not alot of clarity but with time and greater clarity, it is upto the country to choose the domain of the VPA.Malaysia for example was from day one clear thatthe domestic timber market was a sovereign issuethat required no consideration in the agreementwith the EU. All the countries of the Congo Basinwith the exception of the Central African Republicincluded all the production in the country whichconstituted a promise in the agreement. The lessonlearned by the Central African Republic is thatwhile the challenges of this approach were beingexperienced in Ghana and Liberia, it left out thedomestic market in its VPA. The Central AfricanRepublic instead sought funding to address theproblems in its domestic logging concessions.As researchers we tend to write a lot and thepeople we target do not read. Publications exist onthe issues raised. People in the sector run on debtsand are in vicious cycle of indebtedness, including

25

affects timber markets and makes SMEsinterested in the VPA is that although milling isdone by hand, others in the business sell the samesize of timber at half price. This not only disturbsthe market but also erodes the profit base of SMEs

Concerned that the VPA can be viewed as a top-down approach and the experience of Cameroonshows the exclusion of chainsaw millers which isdisturbing. Is it conceivable that three years or sodown the line the VPA could stop working becausea key stakeholder category has been excluded?

In approaching the VPA, what happened to thechainsaw millers of Cameroon? In Malawi, small,medium enterprises (SMEs) are organized, smalland no extensive data on their situation isavailable. What is affecting timber traders is morethe lack of price regulation which erodes the profitbase of SME’s.In the experience of Cameroon, is the VPA not top-down? Is it a true and equal trade partnership?

The VPA brings a lot of skepticism. Whatconstitutes the Foreign Investment Policy ofCameroon? The international trade environment isfull of politics and some countries have experiencessigning trade agreements while at the same timeconcessions are being awarded to foreigners whoare dubbed foreign investors when in fact they areforeign harvesters.

How come the small chainsaw millers were leftout? This is possibly because the companiesexporting to Europe are European owned, haveaccess to foreign capital and even exploit thechainsaw millers through buying their timber at verylow prices. Thereafter it is stated that Cameroon

chainsaw millers. The impact of this is that peoplekeep harvesting more and more timber in order torepay debts and do not make profits. Although thisis not always the case as some people reap hugeprofits from the timber business, there exist certainpeculiarities in the timber sellers of Cameroon -those that make huge profits and those that do notbecause they also need to pay bribes if they getcaught by authorities.

However, if there was an organized, formalizedsector this would not happen. Government needsto take over the issues of the domestic timbermarket.Key to the VPA process is having an open mind. InCameroon, there is no discussion of FLEGT issueswithout making reference to the VPA and the EC.There is need to keep in mind the fact that the VPAis a tool and is still an agreement between twopartners. The EC is concerned about the timbercoming through its borders although 98% of thistimber does not go to Europe but to Chad, Algeriaand even Nigeria making the issue remain aregional problem. The VPA needs to be viewed asan engine that helps government and CSOs to getalerted on parallel issues that may not be related toFLEGT. There are useful spin-offs from the ECVPA at least in the context of central Africa. InCameroon, SMEs face indebtedness to the elite,money lenders or family members. Indebtedness isa vicious cycle which forces people toindiscriminately harvest more and more timber.There is need for the sector to be more formalizedto enable the creation of a regulatory framework.

There is need for open-mindedness in this areabeyond the FLEGT VPA and trade agreements.The VPA is one mechanism that can enablegovernment and civil society to get alerted on theparallel issues being discussed on the FLEGTplatformI am a Cameroonian and am not trying to sell theVPA or justify it. I am in fact skeptical of it but thegovernment of Cameroon as a representative of itspeople has signed the trade agreement, which is alegally binding document with the EU. TheChainsaw workers are nowhere to be found in thepractical implementation of the VPA. Thegovernment needed to have engaged allCameroonians in the VPA process. Signing anagreement that will only please the big loggingcompanies will cause problems for the chainsawmillers. The VPA is in some quarters viewed asdriven by neo-colonial rules. It is critical for theimpact of the VPAs on chainsaw millers to be fullyunderstood as there is need to ensure their

26

gets business from Europe.

In the process of negotiating the VPA, efforts aremade to present as many scenarios and ideas thatare taking place around the continent i.e. from theextremes of the VPA dealing with heavy exporttrade to dealing with simpler domestic timber trade.It is important to highlight the importance of issues tobe discussed locally and agreement reached interms of the direction the country should go forpositive, lasting impacts to occur.Has Cameroon stopped exporting round logsbecause this phenomenon is not only affectingZambia but other African countries on the marketwhich are not able to penetrate the Europeanmarket because they can only sell sown timber?Does Cameroon allow foreigners to ownconcessions?

Legal perspective on local versus foreigncompanies being awarded concessions: in theinternational trade arena, it is not possible todiscriminate between local and internationalcompanies. Discrimination only occurs when theindustry is considered to be in a sensitive area.The issue of discrimination in awardingconcessions poses massive challenges for localtimber traders. If a tree is given to me in Zambia, itis my tree and giving it to a Chinese company afterseventy long years of growing is harvesting.Understand non-discrimination to be only possibleduring the stage of value-addition and not on locallyowned resources.What are the prevailing, current prices for loggedand sown timber?

effective inclusion in the legal frameworks.Cameroon does not have a FLEGT license yet andwill only know over a certain time frame its impacton chainsaw millers. Ghana and Liberia arecurrently experiencing big problems in their efforts tomeasure the impact of the VPA on local people. TheVPA has its pros and cons and mypresentation represents a research perspective fromthe day the agreement is signed.

Cameroon currently has a partial ban on log exportssince 1999 and few species are allowed to beexported in log format.

Logging concessions are open to local and foreigncompanies and are awarded through an openbidding process. The process gives bidders threemonths in which they can carry out an inventory ofthe concession area and develop a technical bid.The awarding of the concession is based on thehighest bidder as well as the strength of thetechnical proposal which is scored. Some titles,2,500 acres are reserved for locals. There areperceptions that first two auctions were notcompletely transparent and based on merit. Thechallenge for local companies to be awarded suchconcessions is limited capacity.

In Cameroon Ministry of Finance and that ofForestry establish the price of each species butprices are from US$200 per cubic meter - averagebetween the lowest and highest.

27

3.2.7.Redefining the Frontiers of Good Forest Management inGhana - the Ghana-EU FLEGT VPA ExperienceThis presentation by Mr. Agyemang-Prempeh Koranteng of the Ghana ForestryCommission provided the lessons learned from the Ghana-EU-FLEGT VPAexperience. Specifically, the presentation shared how Ghana engaged in andmanaged the process. The rationale for engagement, the empirical case forengagement in the VPA, process management, stakeholder perceptions during theprocess, inroads and gains made in good forest governance, as well as somenotable occurrences and the stage which Ghana has reached in the FLEGT VPAprocess.

The discussion that followed this presentation is found in Table 8 below.

Table 8: Plenary Discussion on the Ghana EU-FLEGT VPA Experience

Question/comment/observationWhat has been Ghana’s experience with the VPA?

The Ghanaian VPA process appears to haveworked well. What challenges are beingexperienced for the agreement to have the desiredimpacts

What are the experiences of Ghana regardingpricing? How are wood prices determined?What lessons can SADC learn from yourexperience on regulating the domestic market?

Response from presenterThe investments made in community capacitybuilding have served to give communities a greatervoice. Initial perceptions during the pilot phase of theVPA were that the process was too technical. Thecommunities, however, questioned theirexclusion. Educating the community hascontributed to them challenging systems anddemanding their rights.The wood tracking system is being piloted andGhana is still to fully implement it. The industry isbeing restructured and efforts are being made toestablish a baseline from which we can measureefficiency and effectiveness.The prices of wood are reviewed based on severalfactors to include standard market pricesA major lesson learned is that if people do not haveaccess to the domestic market and measures tocontrol it are not in place, the trade will fall into thewrong hands. Part of the VPA process is for acountry entering the partnership with the EU todemonstrate legality and proper management ofthe trade. Discussions are ongoing on the issuespertaining to the domestic market and Ghana is yetto develop policy around the issue.

3.2.8. The Democratic Republic of Congo FLEGT VPA Experience

This presentation by Mr. Frederick Djengo, Directory of Forestry, provided theexperience of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) with the FLEGT VPAprocess.

28

Mr. Frederick Djengo, Democratic Republic of Congo Sharing his country’s experiences withFLEGT-VPA

Table 9 provides the discussion that followed this presentation.

Table 9: Plenary Discussion on the FLEGT-VPA Process in the DRC

Question/comment/observationWhat pushed the DRC in the direction of the VPA?

What has been the experience of the DRC in theimplementation of the FLEGT process?

Response from presenterIllegal and informal logging is a big problem thatcontributes to the destruction of forests in the DRC.The country had a Forestry Act which preceded theForestry Law. The DRC was keen to certify allforests and through engagement in the process,certification work has commenced.

The DRC was pushed by the need to legalize thetrade in wood products through engaging allrelevant sectors. The need to monitor the country’sforest product resources also provided the impetusfor us to enter into the VPA.The VPA has been particularly beneficial fortraceability, an area in which the DRC is workingwith the EU. All stakeholders were brought onboard to include government, NGOs and the

29

private sector. These stakeholder discussions alsoprovided opportunities for discussing cross-cuttingissues such as indigenous minorities and the use offorest resources.

On the border between the DRC and Tanzania, thereis significant battering in which timber is beingexchanged for goods such as matrasses without anyofficial documentation from the DRC. Can thepresenter elaborate on this

The DRC is a huge country and authorities are notalways aware of everything that takes place. Thereis need to increase awareness on the cross-bordertrade issues and ensure proper regulation andlegality.

3.3. Background Paper on FLEGT Issues in the SADC RegionA major output from the workshop was a thorough assessment of the issues andrecommendations emerging from the SADC study into “the Status of Forest LawEnforcement, Governance and Trade in the Sothern African DevelopmentCommunity (SADC)”. The findings and recommendations of the study carried out byDr. Phosiso Sola and Dr. Enos Shumba were thus presented in recognition of thesebeing critical to the process of identifying the elements of a SADC Regional FLEGTProgramme. The presentation covered the following: a contextual analysis; historicalperspective of the FLEGT process; FLEGT process achievements in SADCspecifically in the areas of regional co-operation and governance, the regionalframework to include the status of forests, land-use dynamics, forest policy andlegislation; enforcement and monitoring capacity; forestry governance; the forestindustry structure; forest products, marketing and trade; major trade problems;causes of illegal forest activities and concludes with some recommendations toaddress the issues identified.

Following this presentation, participants were given the opportunity to ask questions ofclarity, make comments and observations. The outcome of this plenary discussion isdocumented in Table 10 below:

Table 10: Discussion on the Background Paper on the FLEGT Issues in theSADC Region

Question/comment/observationThe timber trade experiences a lot of politicalinterference. In my country jatropha is prioritizedand foresters are not given incentives to motivatethem to monitor forest resources.Forest crime is rampant and in some cases thetimber trade is used to transport illicit drugs, ivoryand copper. This effectively means that timber isused to facilitate criminal activities.There is need for the region to develop a centralmarket system for forest products and SADC is wellplaced to do this. Support for producers to accesstechnology and move away from rudimentaryharvesting practices is also an important priorityneed.

Response from presenterIncentives are indeed critical. Foresters need toderive benefits from forest resources that arecommensurate with the costs of conserving them.

30

It is important to recognize the importance ofcommunities that live in forests. They needincentives and the fact that they lack property rightscauses a lot of frustration.The lack of financial resources is a major constraintwhich prevents institutions in the forest sector fromeffectively carrying out their mandates. There isneed to engage think tanks to simplify some of theissues that manifest themselves as complexities inthe forest sector.There is need for a serious paradigm shift in orderfor forests and plantations to be viewed as viablebusinesses.REDD+ is characterized by a lot of complexities.The markets for carbon are not clear

The formulation and review of forest policies andlegislation need to engage the private sector as akey actor more effectively. With regards toenforcement, there is need to improve self-regulation of the private sector as this cannot beleft to the government alone.What is the envisaged time frame for theimplementation of the recommendations of theSADC FLEGT report?The challenges associated with the lack ofincentives receive prominence in the report andconsideration also has to be made for other civilservants outside forestry law enforcement.Part of the challenge in the harmonization of FLElies with leadership. SADC’s priority areas of co-operation in the broad area of environmentalsustainability do not sufficiently include forests.This needs to change.The main barrier to the harmonization and co-ordination of laws is that although the SADCProtocol on forests is clear, countries have theirown policies and laws. SADC lacks a harmonizedframework. There is need for leadership on this sothat member states have a useable framework.There is need for awareness-raising for membersof the judiciary through fora such as these. This isnecessary for better interpretation of the law asthey do not seem to fully comprehend andappreciate the inherent issues in forest lawenforcement.Regarding REDD+, we need to know how muchcarbon we have. The biggest problem in Africa isthe weaknesses in forest management. It is criticalthat we know what is in our forests and put themunder management. REDD+ requires us to knowmore about our forests and even CAZA 3 containselements of REDD+. There is need for a discussionof REDD+ as it is a blessing for forests and all that

Agree with the need for incentives for communities.

Although the issue of financial constraints is real,the sector also generates substantial resourceswhich can be ploughed back into forests but is not.In most cases the money goes into thegovernment’s treasury which does not as a matterof course prioritize forest departments.There is need for paradigm shifts in the sectorincluding for example, viewing the Chinese not as achallenge but as opportunities.The REDD+ mechanisms are not necessarilyrocket science. There is need to take initiative,acquire information and engage with thediscussions on REDD+.In agreement and there is a need to address howvarious sectors and levels of the sector can belinked together for greater efficiency andeffectiveness? An in-depth analysis of the marketis also needed before developing and facilitatingbusiness models.There is need to take the recommendations furtherand develop time-frames based on short, mediumand long term activities.This issue needs to be viewed within the context ofthe forest sector generating substantial revenue. If itdoes, it is only fair that forest law enforcers areproperly remunerated.

Is the SADC Protocol not sufficient to guidemember states?

31

pertains to them. Many countries in Africa arebenefiting financially from the REDD+ mechanism.China needs to be viewed differently as a readymarket that needs the resources we can supply.The question is how come markets supplying theChinese market do not do so in a professional way.Africa needs to market as trading blocks and in asustainable way.How bankable are SADC regional markets if theChinese market was removed from the picture?

Knowledge is needed on the forest products thatcan be exported. What happens when uncertifiedproducts are exported and is it possible for forestproducts in the region to be harmonized?

The regional wildlife sector has numerous trans-boundary initiatives that are having positive effectson law enforcement. The sector also hasfunctioning networks to make this possible. Is itpossible for the forest sector to borrow lawenforcement strategies that are used in wildlife-management?The Chinese are given concessions and export tothemselves. There is need to help the local privatesector through having clear regulations forinvestors who also cut prices and undermine localproducers.Africa needs to count on its own capacity beforebringing in the EU and others who makeimpositions.It is disturbing that in the forestry sector there is solittle information for us to work with. The oil ministerin Nigeria commands greater respect than thefinance one. Regarding foresters, however, there islittle respect as they are not seen as vital to theeconomy. Forests are a gold mine and publicawareness on this fact is needed to shift paradigmsbeginning with the foresters themselvesWe have plantation forests that are worth millionsand that employ a significant number of people -this illustrates the value of forests and theimportance of recognizing and according therespect due to the sector.There is need to establish prices for the sector lestour resources disappear. This is not only a regionalpriority but a global one

The business model shared in the presentation hasbeen tried in Malawi and value chain development istaking place with positive results.

Agree that professionalism needs to be broughtinto the forest sector in a way that ensuressustainability and profitability.

cosmetic oils in Africa are worth about US$4billion, honey being a good example of flyingproductsProduct diversity although important is difficult torestrict. Wildlife on the other hand can invest intrans-boundary eco-zones as they know the valueof wildlife species. Foresters do not know the valueof their forests.We need to know our products and how much theyare worth first.

The majority of questions posed and commentsmade have a lot to do with the marketing structure.The business model shared in the presentationrequires value chain development and we need todo this ourselves because China will not do it for usWe should not start a business because we haveraw materials but because there is a market forthem. Knowledge of what the markets want is

32

critical and market analyses have to be carried out.It is important to also learn how value chaindevelopment is set up globally. The chain isextensive and it is important to look at how regionaland global value chain development converge orconflict. There is need to understand what foreignmarkets demand because this has implications forforest management in the region.Politicians and the timber industry are one and theyoperate like the Colombian cartels.

4. Elements for a SADC Regional Programme

In this session participants worked in groups to discuss the key elements of the SADCFLEGT Programme based on the key lessons emerging from the workshoppresentations as well as the key issues and recommendations identified in the SADCFLEGT Background Document. The following questions were used to guide the smallgroup discussion:

To what extent are the issues identified valid and reflect the regional context of forestlaw enforcement, governance and trade?

What other key issues are at play and are not reflected in the key issues identified? What should therefore be the Strategic priorities of the regional FLEGT Programme?

33

Participants preparing to present their group discussions on elements of a SADC FLEGTProgramme

34

4.1. Validation and Additional Issues for the SADC FLEGTBackground PaperThere was general agreement on the issues identified in the SADC FLEGTbackground paper. The section that follows also provides additional issues whichparticipants felt needed to be included or highlighted that a SADC FLEGTprogramme would also need to address.

4.1.1. Forest Policies and Laws

Overlapping responsibilities and functions of officers in the sector Land policy in some countries missing (e.g. Swaziland) Outdated laws in some Member States Too many laws some of which are conflicting in some member states Ineffective enforcement of laws and policies Poor dissemination of the existing forest laws. Need to prioritize public

awareness building of law and policies Some Member States have adequate policies (governing forests and the

environment) National laws in some countries are adequate but there is need to harmonize

laws to ease trade between countries. National stakeholder meetings are held and comments from the public solicited.

This promotes strong public and NGO participation in some Member States. There is a separation of powers between the judiciary and executive in some

countries. Harmonize to SADC protocol Modernisation and simplification of laws Lack of regulations to implement laws

4.1.2. Forest Governance Lack of accountability in reporting Lack of clarity on the involvement of institutions - is government the only driving

force? Lack of political will to ensure good governance People who are above the law resulting in weak governance. Adequate and legally empowered forest institutions in Mauritius for example. SFM tool is required to monitor and establish benchmarks for good practice Regional collaboration is required

35

Capacity building is required in the implementation of SFM Professionalism and ethics are present in countries such as Mauritius where

declaration of assets is mandatory Community involvement Property rights - ownership / tenure Multi sector involvement ( civil society, private sector &others) Self- centred political commitment/ self interest Lack of professionalism and ethics e.g. prevalent corruption and bribery ,

nepotism Lack of transparency: are processes in the public domain e.g. can information on

licenses be available to everybody? Weak forest institutions e.g. weak private sector participation

4.1.3. Forest Data and Information

No true and accurate valuation of trees No records exist for Non-timber forest products Delays in acquisition of information Standardization is an issue that needs to be addressed. Some of the data required is available from National Statistics Offices Inventories of the resources are unavailable True economic value of forests is required (tangible and intangible benefits) Centralize data base by country & region Integrate, analyze and use forest data and information Lack of aggregation, reliability and management of data No Proper utilization of available data Inadequate data sharing between users / bureaucratic inefficiency Lack of transparency/ information not placed in the public domain

4.1.4. Forest Trade and Markets There is need to capacitate port of entry authorities on forest products A standardized system for data reconciliation is required in the region. Chain of custody certification is an important need. Certification and licensing require strengthening Population growth management Climbing energy demand and lack of alternative energy sources Limited certification of timber production areas e.g. need to address

appropriateness of the systems, standards Business partnerships

36

4.1.5. Incentives for Sustainable Forestry Management Lack of diversified forest products

4.1.6. Land-use Dynamics and Sustainable Forestry Management

The issue of high competition for land use needs to be highlighted. This component needs to also emphasize the fact that if no incentives are

provided to communities, they will choose the most viable option which mayundermine sustainable forest management.

An issue for small islands in SADC is the development of dams, majordevelopment projects, urbanization and absence of incentives underminesthe need to preserve private forest lands.

Water is becoming a problem due to prolonged droughts Appropriate legislation is being formulated to protect ESA Population growth management Climbing energy demand and lack of alternative energy sources Land tenure issues need to be highlighted in the SADC FLEGT status

report.

The discussion in small groups and the reports presented on the key elements showed ageneral consensus on the components of the envisaged SADC FLEGT programme andencompassed:

Forest Policies and Laws Forest Governance Sustainable Forest Products Trade and monitoring Land-use Dynamics and Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) Research and Development Community Participation, and Incentives for SFM

The agreement reached on the key cross-cutting issues to be prioritized included:

Capacity building Trans-boundary issues Appropriate Technology Strategic Partnerships and collaborationGender Youth, and Stakeholder Participation

37

5. Input to the SADC Regional FLEGT Programme Document

In this session participants self-selected the group they would work with on the basis oftheir expertise and experience to develop the broad elements of the SADC FLEGTProgramme agreed upon in the preceding session. The following components wereprovided for the groups to discuss and develop further the preliminary programmematrix:

1. Strategic Priority/Programme Element

2. Objective(s)

3. Activities/Actions to be carried out

4. Synergy at regional level: What should Member States do together? What is SADC support to thecountries

5. National level: What should MS do individually or on our own

6. Internal Funding From Government

7. External Funding From ICP/Donors

8. Timing

9. Key Players

Although the groups did not all follow the above 9 aspects in the discussions and inpopulating the matrixes, the tables that follow provide the output of the groups. Thetables also incorporate the feedback received from colleagues during the presentations

38

Mrs. Pumeza Nkhwashu providing leadership to a small group discussion

5.1. Forest Policies and LawsOverall objective

Specific objective

1. Common/similaraspects in forestryand related Policiesand Laws (Acts,regulations and

Forest related Policies and Laws (Acts, regulations and guidelines) to guide thedevelopment, management and use of forests and trees improved

Actions Support from Key partners Level of(funding) intervention

1.1. To undertake a study SADC - Governmentof Policies and Laws Resourcesand related policies CSOs/NGOsand guidelines Member states

Private sectorNational and

Timeframe

Medium toguidelines) suggestingways to harmonize areidentified

2. Awareness on Policiesand Laws (Acts,regulations andguidelines) raised

1.2. To evaluate ways andmeasures toharmonize them

1.3. To prepare policyframework

2.1 To translate(popularize/simplify)policies and laws

2.2 To disseminate themthrough media (print,

Fundinginstitutions

DevelopmentPartners

SADC protocoland relatedinformation As above

Member states

Regional long term

As above Short term

39

electronic, social),workshops, brochure,drama…..

3. Gaps and weaknessesin forestry relatedPolicies and Laws(Acts, regulations andguidelines) in guidingforest developmentidentifies

4. Capacity of forestryservices and relatedagencies in theimplementation andlaw enforcementstrengthened

3.1. To undertake a study SADC toto identify the gaps mobilizeand weaknesses resources,

conduct the3.2. To identify ways and study and build

means of capacity ofstrengthening and countriesmaking them moreefficient

4.1 To assess the SADC tocapacity of forestry provideservices in resourcesformulating andimplementing policiesand enforcing laws

4.1 To identify trainingneeds

4.2 To conductappropriate training

MediumAs above As above

As above As above On going

5.2. Forest GovernanceOverall objective Strengthening institutions and governance structure in the region of forests and tree

resources

Specific objective

1. Increaseparticipation ofstakeholders inforest governance

2. Strengtheningcapacity ofinstitutions in thegovernance offorests and treeresources

Actions

1.1 Capacity building (training)

1.2 Create platforms fordiscussion (networks)

1.3 Dissemination ofinformation

1.4 Identify roles of differentstakeholders

2.1.1 To identifyweaknesses andother requirementsin the institutions forgood governance(standards/level ofgood governance)

Support from Key partners(funding)

SADC - GovernmentResources

CSOs/NGOsMember states

Private sector

Fundinginstitutions

DevelopmentPartners

Tertiaryinstitutions

SADC protocoland relatedinformation

As aboveMember states

Level of Timeintervention frame

National and Medium toRegional long term

As above

40

Formulate measuresto address them

Implementation

Monitoring

3. Enhancing 3.1.1 Undertake capacity SADC - Modelprofessionalism and building and training - code ofethics in the conductgovernance of 3.1.2 To strengthenforests and tree professionals/associ Informationresources ations, societies exchange and

experience in3.1.3 Develop code of other places

conduct/practice/ethics

3.1.4 Improve workingconditions andincentives

3.1.5 Awareness andvigilance

5.3. Law enforcementOverall objective Enhancing capacity, collaboration and coordination of law enforcement agencies

Specific objective Actions Support from Key partners Level of Time(funding) intervention frame

4. Capacity 4.1 Create platform for SADC - Governmentdiscussion and information Resources andsharing (harmonization of Technical CSOs/NGOspolicies and laws and supportincentives) Private sector

National and Medium to4.2 To capacitate law SADC - Funding Regional long term

enforcement agencies resources institutions(linkage withneighboring Development

countries/trans Partnersbordering issues)

Collaboration 4.3 Establish strategicpartnerships in lawenforcement - citesInterpol, etc.

Coordination 4.4 Communityparticipation

41

4.5 Identify roles ofdifferent actors in lawenforcement includingyouth and gender

5.4. Sustainable Forest Products Trade

Objectives

Outcomes

• Job creationoptimisation;

• Value addedproductsproduction;

• Niche marketsdevelopment;

• Revenueenhancement;

• Localenterpriseempowerment;

• Trade andinvestmentlegislationharmonisation;

• Monitoring andevaluationimprovement

Activities

• Undertakemarketassessment;

• Createawarenessfor paradigmshift;

• Capacitybuilding andskillsdevelopment;

• Promotevalue addedproducts;

• Invest oninfrastructuredevelopmentandappropriatetechnology;

• Mobilisefinancialresources;

• Monitor andevaluatetradeperformance;

• Strengthenprivate sectororganisationincludingformation ofSADC timberassociation;

• Harmonisetrade and

To maximise forest products’ beneficiation;

To ensure fair trade.

Funding Sources Timing

• Private Sector Short term forinvestments; all

(implementatio• Funding n) ASAP

DevelopmentInstitutions;

• Donor FundingPartners;

• Public PrivatePartnership;

• Governments.

Partners

• Communities;

• Civil Societies;

• Government;

• InternationalCommunity;

• Funders;

• Academia;

• Private Sector;

• ProfessionalServiceProviders.

42

investmentpolicies;

• DevelopSADC tradestandards;

• Devisesupportmechanismsfor SMFEincludingorganisation.

5.5. Land use Dynamics

Objectives Outcomes Activities• To ensure long term forestry • Instil sense of security for • Facilitate engagement with

land-use; investment; stakeholders;• Harmonisation of investment

• To promote long term legislative provisions; • Undertake inventories;operational tenure. • Stability of business

environment; • Harmonise policy on licensing• Improved M&E systems. and/or concession tenure.

5.6. Sustainable Forest Management

Objectives Outcomes Activities• To develop a secure and • Continuous forest products • Develop and/or harmonise

sustainable forest supply base; SFM standards;resources; • Maximization of economic, • Identify strategies for

social and ecological benefits; addressing land-use conflicts• To ensure optimal • Off-set for climate change as at the SADC Protocol level;

exploitation of resources carbon sink, preventing • Invest on reforestation andand fair distribution of degradation and enhancing afforestation;benefits. environmental services; • Strengthen forest protection

• Advancement of operational including fire;codes of good practice; • Develop codes of good

• Facilitation of law enforcement; practices including harvesting;• Capacity building through • Advance tree genetic

knowledge and information performance through research;exchange. • Maximize utilisation of forest

products;• Raise awareness of protected

species;• Engage on R&D including

diversification products;• Optimise recovery rate in the

value chain.

43

5.7. Research and Development

Objectives: Coordinate management information activities;

rationalize and incorporate already existing systems;

Develop Regional Forestry Information Management System;

Establish Centralized Information Management System but easily accessible to users especiallymember states

build capacity of member states to monitor, evaluate and report; facilitate R&D to generateinformation for decision support system/ policy making

Results trained users, available information, improved information dissemination for Food security,vulnerability assessment, early warning information

Measurement remote sensing, forest cover, valid laws, institutional framework; economic data, concessions,plantations; natural forests; population dynamics ; source of data; production; species exported;biodiversity; forest resource drain and increment data

Responsibility Forestry personnel; local authorities and stakeholdersActivities Development of a research agenda

Determine indicators Assess Software/ hardware requirements Promote SFM Increase investment of processing of NR products Implement policy and legal framework to monitor and curtail

illegal harvesting and export of NR Submit data annually to SADC Secretariat Annually update database (regional level)

Funding Member states to invest in this programme to ensure sustainability;

Timing Short, medium and long termKey players Member States; development partners

5.8. Community Participation and Incentives for SFM

Objectives 1. Establish community based natural resourcemanagement policy.

2. Establish community natural resource managementgroups.

3. Develop strategies that provide incentives forsustainable forest management

4. Strengthen the human resource base for sustainableforest management

Regional Level ActivitiesRe-align our policies to facilitate community participation in forestmanagement and ensure they are community friendly

Policies should be built into the National Acts to promoteCommunity participation. Objective (2)

Identify the groups and facilitate establishment of theirmanagement structure, committees, By-laws and constitutions.

National Level Activities Objective (1)Governments should engage in consultative meetings withCustodians of the resources.

44

Objective (2)

Training of groups

Identify the anticipated benefits accruing to the Community from thesubject forest. (e.g. from hunting safaris)

Objective (3)

Establish a benefit sharing mechanism.

Organize awareness workshops so that every member of thecommunity understands how the benefit mechanism woks. Theidea is to create a sense of sense of ownership among members.

Objective (4)Capacity building and Training

Training of the custodians in the management of communityresources, finance, negotiation & bargaining skills, businessmanagement, governance and administration and conflictmanagement

Funding Sources Funding sourced from Government, Donors, e.g. internal and external donors otherwise

referred to as International Co-operation Partner (ICP). NGOs

Timing Next 12 monthsKey Players Funding sourced from Government,

Donors, e.g. internal and external donors otherwisereferred to as International Co-operation Partner (ICP).

NGOs

45

6. RecommendationsThis session aimed at providing participants with the opportunity to give their overallrecommendations going forward as well as ways in which the momentum gained from theprocess can be sustained. The outcome from the small group discussions onrecommendations were:

1. There is need to carry out a forestry information needs assessment to establish whogenerates what information and who requests which information.

2. Review and update SADC AIMS.3. Undertake industrial research needs assessments.4. There is need for a clearly defined legality framework.5. Establish a National Steering Committee that has a membership that reflects the

diversity of forest stakeholders to drive the SADC FLEGT process. Stakeholders shouldinclude the community, private sector, government, NGOs and InternationalCooperating Agencies.

6. Organize meetings/workshops to create basic awareness about the issues of FLEGTamong members at all levels to appreciate the key issues in the sector and the basicexpectations from each member state.

7. The SADC Secretariat to speed up the compilation of the FLEGT Programme Documentfor use in member country within the shortest period of time.

8. The harmonization of policies and legislation is urgent and the SADC programme needsto prioritize this.

9. Capacity building and training are key areas of need for forest stakeholders at theindividual, institutional and community levels.

10. Revive the SADC Timber Association which developed a regional strategic plan to guidedoing business in the SADC Forest sector. As a first step it is recommended that a TaskForce from the workshop consisting of Zimbabwe, Zambia, South Africa, SwazilandMalawi, Mozambique and Tanzania be established.

7. Closing Session

The closing remarks were made by Mr. Robert Simpson of the FAO and the ForestryAdviser at the SADC Secretariat Mr. Moses Chakanga. The remarks encapsulated thefollowing:

Recognition that great minds with the same interests can work together to produceamazing work.

Expressed gratitude to the organizers, the SADC Secretariat; the languageinterpreters; the facilitator and participants for their participation and inputs to theenvisaged SADC FLEGT programme;

46

The need to keep the momentum gained through the workshop process and keepingin touch, networking and keeping abreast of project developments.

The commitment of the FAO representative at the workshop to support foreststakeholders in their efforts to promote sustainable forest management.

Recognition of the fact that the workshop was highly productive and educative onFLEGT issues.

Acknowledgement of the sense of urgency required to address FLEGT issues andthe critical need for all sectors to work together towards the attainment of sustainableforest management.

Agreement that FLEGT challenges are known and what is needed now is effectiveimplementation.

Special gratitude was extended to the workshop hosts, South Africa which alsodelivered the official opening speech; the AFF for financing the Background Paper onFLEGT issues in SADC; the EU, FAO and GIZ for generously providing the requisitefunding for the workshop.

Expression of hope that funding will be secured to undertake similar and stakeholderconsultations for sustainable forest management in the future.

Special thanks to the experts who made the various, enlightening presentations onFLEGT issues.

47

Mr. Robert Simpson, ACP-FLEGT Support Programme delivering his closing remarks

48

8. Workshop Evaluation

Participants completed evaluation forms to provide feedback to the SADC Secretariat onwhat worked well and what could have been different to inform future workshops. Thetables that follow provide the quantitative and qualitative evaluation of the workshop byparticipants.

8.1 Quantitative Evaluation

This aspect of the evaluation required participants to score on a scale of 1 to 5,one being the lowest, negative impression while 5 was the highest positiveimpression. The analysis of the scores is provided in the table that follows.

Evaluation Statement RATINGStrongly Disagree/low Neither Agree nor Agree/lowest Stronglydisagree/low negative Disagree/An positive Agree/thenegative impression average impression highest positiveimpression impression impression

Workshop Logistics 0 2% 18% 34% 46%were very wellorganizedWorkshop 3% 0 14% 26% 57%venue/facilities wasideal and conduciveWorkshop objectives 0 0 5% 30% 65%were relevant andclearWorkshop enhanced 0 0 5% 36% 59%my understanding ofSADC FLEGT issuesWorkshop lived up to 0 2% 0 55% 43%my expectationsWorkshop content was 0 2% 7% 37% 54%relevant to my job roleWorkshop 0 3% 5% 27% 65%presentations wererelevant andenlighteningThe facilitation style 0 5% 27% 68%was effective andenabled participationWorkshop increased 0 0 5% 26% 69%my appreciation of theFLEGT programmeWorkshop provided 0 0 7% 33% 60%useful opportunities fornetworkingWorkshop activities 0 0 5% 40% 55%stimulated learningWorkshop motivated 0 0 12.5% 47.5% 40%me to think differentlyand to potentially actdifferently

49

8.2 Qualitative Evaluation

This aspect of the evaluation was qualitative and required participants to reflect on a number ofevaluation issues. The comments are provided in the table below.

Evaluation Issue

New knowledge, insights and lessons taken from the workshop

Overall Comments

The need to ensure the legality of the timber tradeso as to help fellow Africans

The VPA process and its implementation

The VPA in its entirety is not a solution to FLEGT.

The importance of forestry management and theneed for effective law enforcement.

Knew nothing about FLEGT programmes and now Ido.

Greater awareness regarding illegal trade of woodproducts taking place in Africa

The value in conservation of forests is of equalimportance to forest trade

PSO in the forestry sector, nurturing, strengtheningand stakeholder participation based processes arecritical and has to be facilitated technically and inresource wise ways.

The benefits of involving civil society organizationsin FLEGT

The power of networking

The need to use available, dormant data andinformation.

The exploitation of resources and lack of sufficientinformation capturing.

The loss of revenues in the sector is enormous andundetected. The need for regional collaboration andharmonization is critical.

An appreciation of the potential of SADC

The power of research and data

FLEGT VPA process

50

What participants intend doing differently following the learning fromthe workshop

The relationship between FLEGT and REDD+

The difference in approach to FLEGT design andimplementation between and among countries.

That the forestry sector has a long way to go for it tobe incorporated into the overall SADC objective as apriority.

Experience from other countries that have appliedand implemented the FLEGT VPA process.

The challenges of the forestry sector

Poor forest practices are almost the same acrossSADC

Status of forest industry sector in the region.

FEGT and REDD+ are all about sustainable forestmanagement.

Most cross-border timber traders are doing dubiousbusiness.

The importance of collaboration on cross-borderissues.

That our forests are our wealth that should not justbe given to anybody at a pittance. We need toenforce our laws more vigorously.

Keep an eye on the timber trade

Strengthen our Forest Regulation Department sothat it is more effective.

Promote initiatives that support FLEGT in myorganization.

Pursue information sharing amongst SADCmembers

More engagement in FLEGT forums and networks

Integrate FLEGT in strategic planning

Link with forest private sector more

Enhance awareness on FLEGT in my organization.

Training programme for law enforcement

51

particularly in prosecution on forest products illegaltrading.

Be very vigilant upon physical examination andwhile cross-checking hard copies of Bill of Entries.

As a customs official, I intend reviewing ourprocedures on the exportation of timber and to bemore vigilant.

Formation of a steering community andstrengthening of capacity building on FLEGTissues.

Network more and invest more time in learning,communicating and sharing with others to influencea change in mindsets amongst stakeholders in theforest sector.

Focus on home-grown solutions - small actionswith big impacts.

Focus energies where impacts on the sector will begreater and more visible.

Data capturing awareness creation for the forestsector.

Disseminate information on the lessons gleanedfrom the workshop.

Pursue FLEGT objective with other organizations inZimbabwe

Create MOUs with relevant stakeholders in thesector to promote collaboration.

Share workshop outcomes with my organizationand further discussions at the FGLG South Africa

Make sure that there is communication betweengovernment and the private sector in terms of tradeand information management.

Incorporating some of the principles of FLEGT intodraft Forest Bill currently being finalized in mycountry.

Intend managing the statistics on imports andexports better as the analysis will now be informed

52

by the enhanced understanding of the timber trade.

How some of the knowledge, insights and lessons learned in the workshopwill be integrated into work practiceand organizations

Help rectify the barriers to good forest governancein my country.

Play a greater role in influencing national policy toharmonize it with SADC ones.

More comparative analysis on FLEGT issuesacross Africa.

Sharing the knowledge acquired with customscolleagues and sensitizing them.

Strengthening the evidence building aspects of mywork and organization

Integrate FLEGT issues into the organization’sresearch agenda and community level activities

Liaise with the Zimbabwe Forestry Commission andensure customs officials are trained on identificationto enhance control.

.The National Forestry Industry Federation and thezonal ones have to undergo restructuring andcapacity strengthening to help them perform theirrole more efficiently and effectively.

Work on the formation of the Malawian TimberAssociation.

Organize stakeholder workshops to raiseawareness on FLEGT issues and developstrategies for addressing them.

Context for future initiatives in the region

Placing timber graders and arrange appropriatetraining for foresters at trans-border countries

Facilitate awareness of policies through capacitybuilding and involvement of stakeholders.

Integrate into strategic plan in relation to theimplementation of the SADC Protocol.

Share the workshop experience in terms ofapproach in FLEGT design and implementation.

Incorporating some of the knowledge, experiences

53

and lessons learned into my country’s forestrysector strategies and institutional structures.

The least valuable aspects of the workshop and improvements needed infuture workshops

More efficient monitoring of statistics ofimports/exports, requirements/licensing control oftimber.

Broaden reference and intellectual base as a pointof reference for planning.

Advocating for the best work practices and guardagainst being exploited by creed customers of ourtimber.

Mainstreaming FLEGT activities into organizationalannual plans

Do more in the areas of compliance monitoring,harmonization, capacity building and trans-boundary issues.

Personal reflection about how people show akeenness to contribute to positive change in thesector during the workshop but may not implementthe recommendations at country level.

The focus on the forest enterprises need to befurther improved. Industry development issuesneeded to have been articulated more clearly.

Multi-stakeholder involvement and less privatesector involvement.

Poor time-keeping on the part of delegates.

Low participation from delegates from somecountries. Some did not even contribute during thesmall group discussions and this limits knowledgesharing.

The time allocated for group work was too short.

Presentation on the situation analysis of FLEGT inSADC was too lengthy and difficult to appreciate asan outsider.

Delegates of the same countries tended to sit atone table preventing diversity and underminingcross-cultural networking.

The logistics need to be improved to include

54

reimbursement on costs incurred during travel.

Comments on facilitation style and approach

Technology - microphones did not always workproperly. Need to choose the venue more carefully.

Lack of access to internet facilities

Minimization of paper use

Venue has a “captive” notion in that there is notmuch to see around. Pretoria would have been abetter venue.

Documents were only in English! It would havebeen better if they were translated and sent toparticipants in advance of the workshop

Printing and circulation of group work instructions inadvance instead of projecting on screen.

Written material should be translated forparticipants

The facilitator was fantastic and sensitive toparticipants

All the resource persons lived up to myexpectations

Excellent. To keep up the good work. Workshopwas an eye opener as a law enforcement agent.

It was good, thank you

The programme should have included fieldstudy/market place/suppliers visits.

Keep up the good work, all was good.

Excellent, focused and strategic

Relaxed approach with experience to enhancemore contributions

Good, enjoyable facilitation.

Very stimulating

Excellent facilitation. The facilitator had a clearunderstanding of the objectives of the workshop.

Facilitate strived to accommodate everyone and I

55

personally learned a lot in terms of participatoryprocesses.

Facilitator to maintain the participatory approach infacilitating workshops.

Need to put more games in between sessions.

Wonderful facilitator.

Enabling and conducive facilitation approach

Very good, with no pressure but getting everythingdone in a pleasant way

56

Annex 1: Workshop Programme

Day 1 - Wednesday, 26 October 2011

Time Item Presenter / Responsible

Session 1: Opening and Introductions

08.00-08.30 Registration All Participants

08.30-08.45 Introductory Remarks by SADC Chair Angola

08:45-09:00 Objectives of the workshop and overview of the SADC Secretariatprogramme

09.00-09.15 Remarks by FAO Representative from FAO

09.15-09.30 Remarks by EU Representative from EU

09.30-09.50 Official opening remarks by host Country South Africa

09.50-10.00 Photo Session

10.00-10.30 TEA

Session 2: Stakeholder collaboration in enhancing the FLEGT Process in the SADC Region

10.00-10.40 Lessons Learned from the TRAFFIC East/SouthernAfrica Forest Governance Report from Tanzania:Relevance to SADC (25 min presentation, 15 mindiscussion)

10.40-11.10 FLEGT perspective and initiatives in an Africancontext (including AFLEG) (20 min presentation,10 min Discussion)

11.10-12:00 Civil society involvement in Monitoring andLegality Assurance Systems (30 minpresentation, 15 min discussion)

12:00-1:00 Regional collaboration on FLEGT: history of theprocess (30 min presentation, 30 min discussion)

Mr. Jumapili Chenga, TRAFFIC,Tanzania

African Forest Forum, Prof. GodwinKowero

Mr. Cassian Sianga (TanzanianNatural Resources Forum andCoordinator of the Tanzanian ForestGovernance Learning Group)

Mr. Nyambe Nyambe, SeniorProgramme Officer FANR

57

13.00-14.00 LUNCH

14.00-14.30 What is FLEGT and the Voluntary PartnershipAgreement (VPA) - with a view on the benefitsfor importing countries of a regional FLEGTapproach in the SADC countries (20 minpresentation, 10 min Discussion)

14.30-15.00 FAO - ACP FLEGT Support Programme - (20min presentation, 20 min Discussion)

15.00-15.30 FLEGT process in Cameroon - approach andlessons learnt (15 min presentation, 15 mindiscussion)

15.30-16.00 TEA BREAK

16.00-16.30 Redefining the frontiers of good forestgovernance in Ghana-The Ghana-EU FLEGTVPA Experience (15 min presentation, 15 mindiscussion)

FAO representative. Mr RobertSimpson

FAO representative. Mr RobertSimpson

CIFOR Cameroon, Mr. Paulo Cerutti

Mr. Agyemang-Prempeh Koranteng,Ghana Forestry Commission

Session 3: Background paper on FLEGT issues in the SADC Region

16.30-17.00 Background paper on FLEGT issues in SADC Dr Enos Shumba and Dr PhosisoSola

17.00-17.30 Joint Discussion (on both presentations by Dr. All participantsShumba and Dr. Sola): Including benefits andrisks of a regional FLEGT approach

17.30 Closure Facilitator

End of Day 1

Day 2 - Thursday, 27 October 2011

Time Presenter / Responsible

Session 4: Group work on elements for a SADC Regional FLEGT Programme

08.30-09.00 Recap of Day 1: Formation and tasks of working Facilitatorgroups

58

Group work continued

09.00-10.00 Group work Working Groups /Facilitator

10.00-10.30 TEA BRAK

10.15-13.00 Plenary/Report back on Group work Working Groups / Facilitator

13.00-14.00 LUNCH

14.00-15.30 Group work Working groups / Facilitator

15.30-16.00 TEA BREAK

16.00-17.30 Group work Working groups/ Facilitator

17.30 Closure SADC Chair, Namibia

End of Day 2

59

Day 3 - Friday, 28 October 2011

Time Presenter / Responsible

08.30-08.45 Recap of Day 2 Facilitator

Session 5: Working Group Presentations to plenary

08.45 -10.00 Presentations by working groups Working Groups/ Facilitator

10.00-10.30 TEA BRAK

10.30-12.00 Recommendations on the elements for a SADC Working groupsFLEGT Programme

12.00-12.30 Way forward: General recommendations on how All participantsto move the SADC FLEGT Agenda Forward

12.30-13.00 Closure

13.00-14.00 LUNCH

Departure of participants

End of Day 3

60

Annex 2: List of Participants

Country Name Designation/Organization/ Telephone Fax Email address

Address

ANGOLA 1. Mr. Ricardo Aguiar Technical Department +244 924617094 RAguiar@alfandega.gv.aoManager

Angola Customs

BOTSWANA 2. Mr Jeremiah Chief Forestry & Range +267 3954050 +267 3954051 jramontsho@gov.bwFreeman Ramontsho Resources Officer

Ministry of EnvironmentWildlife & Tourism

Department of Forestry andRange Resources

P/Bag 00424, Gaborone

3. Mr. Onkemetse Environment & Agriculture +267 3915140 +267 3915191Joseph Sector Coordination

Secretariat

Tshole Trust

P O Box AE 230 AEH,Gaborone

DRC 4. Mr. Frédéric Director of Forestry +243 998368091Djengo Bosulu

Ministry of Environment

15AV Papa Ileo,

Joseph72636109@yahoo.com

tshole@info.bw

djengofrederic@yahoo.fr

61

Country Name Designation/Organization/ Telephone Fax Email address

Address

Kinshasa/Gombe

5. Mr. Christophe Directeur á la Cellule +243 15163505 mkmasudi@yahoo.frd’Etudes prés de la D.G

Massudi +243 813507557Mayan’kenda Coordonateur de la Cellule

Technique del’Environnement

Point Focal du ProjetOBIT/CITES

Résidence: 4/C, AvenueKajiba

Q. Ngomba Kinkusa

C/Ngaliema

MALAWI 6. Dr. Zolomphi Chief State Advocate +265 884050018/ +265 1788209 zolomphi@yahoo.co.ukNkowani

Ministry of Justice +265 1788400

Private Bag , 333

Lilongwe 3

7. Mr. Teddie Hafiz Assistant Director of +265 999943635 +265 1751280Abdullar Kamoto Forestry

Department of Forestry

8. Mr. Paul Makolosi Chairman +265 999197344 +265 1925252

Timber Millers Cooperative

teddiekamoto@yahoo.co.uk

pamak_89@yahoo.co.uk

62

Country Name Designation/Organization/ Telephone Fax Email address

Address

Society Union

P O Box 30602, Lilongwe

MAURITIUS 9. Mr. Poojanraj Deputy Conservator of +230 6707255 +230 6743449 pkhurun@mail.gov.muKHURUN Forests, Ministry of Agro-

Industry and Food Security

Botanical Gardens StreetCurepipe

10. Mr. Chandra Customs Officer II +230 2020500 csramchoreeter@gmail.comShekarRAMCHOREETER Mauritius Revenue customs@intent.gov.mu

Authority (MRA)

New Customs House, PortLouis

MOZAMBIQUE 11. Mr. Juliao Technician +258 823905430 +258 juchacua@yahoo.com.brChamuce Cuambe 21321804

Law Enforcement DPDNTF - MINAG

Josina Machel Ave 537

12. Mr. Pedro Alfredo General Secretary +258 820324704 makota_wate1@yahoo.comWate

Mozambican Association of +258 843247040Timber Operators(AMOMA),

Av Zedequias Mauganhela

63

Country Name Designation/Organization/ Telephone Fax Email address

Address

520, 9th Floor - E

13. Mr. Bartolomeu Alfandegas de +258 82806840 bartolomeubachita@yaho.comBachita Mozambique

Autoridade Tributaria

Rua Timor Leste no 95

14. Ms. Maria Da Legal Adviser +258 82306670 mcpfaria@yahoo.com.brConceiçáo Faria

Mozambican Association ofTimber Operators(AMOMA),

NAMIBIA 15. Mr. Jonas Chief Forestry Technician +264 66253143 +264 jmwiikinghi@yahoo.co.ukMwiikinghi 66253322

Directorate of Forestry

P O Box 1971, Ngweze

16. Mr. Boniface Senior Customs Official +264 612092060 +264 boniface.tjirongo@gov.mof.naTjirongo 61254510

Ministry of Finance

P O Box 40158

Ausspann Platz

17. Mr. Willem Namibia Agricultural Union +264 67312081 +264 pvr@mweb.com.naJohannes 67312081Groenewald P O Box 155 Outjo

64

Country Name Designation/Organization/ Telephone Fax Email address

Address

Namibia 9000

SEYCHELLES 18. Mr. Jason Olaf Director - Forestry +248 722320 jason.jacqueline@scmrt-mpa.scJacqueline Seychelles National Parks

AuthorityKings Gate House, VictoriaMahe, Seychelles

19. Mrs. Julia Chetty Senior Customs Officer +248 2578707 julia.chetty@src.gov.sc(Nee Naya)

Seychelles RevenueCommission

Orion Mall, Victoria, Mahe,Seychelles

SOUTH AFRICA 20. Ms. Mmakwena Acting Deputy Director: +27 123095749 MmakwenaM@daff.gov.zaMaleka Commercial Forestry

Ministry of Agriculture,Forestry & Fisheries

110 Hamilton Street,Arcadia, Pretoria

21. Ms. Pumeza Director: Commercial +27 123095706 +27 DFR@nda.agric.zaNkhwashu Forestry 865993149

Department of Agriculture,Forestry & Fisheries

110 Hamilton Street,

65

Country Name Designation/Organization/ Telephone Fax Email address

Address

Arcadia,Pretoria

22. Mr. Steven Z Business Development +27 333460344 +27 steven@forestrysouthafrica.co.zaNgubane Director 333460399

+27 828807165Forestry South Africa

P O Box 13735, Cascades3202

23. Mr. Mooketsa Director - Inspection +27 123098701 ramasodi@hotmail.comRamasodi Services (at points of entry

to SA) - DAFF +27 832303326 ramasodim@daff.gov.za

24. Ms. Lee-Ann Assistant Director: Land +27 123098736 +27 Lee-AnnM@nda.agric.zaMoodley Borders (BCOCC) 865404459

Department of Agriculture, +27 842886666Forestry & Fisheries140 Hamilton Street,Arcadia,Pretoria

SWAZILAND 25. Mr Sifiso SRA - Customs Operational +268 76063156 +268 4040774 snkambule@sra.org.szNkambule Manager

+268 24049375P O box 5628 Mbabane

26. Mr Solomon Senior Forestry Officer +268 24049481 +268 gamedzeso@gov.sz

66

Country Name Designation/Organization/ Telephone Fax Email address

Address

Gamedze Ministry of Tourism & +268 24046420 24049240/Environmental Affairs

+268P O Box 2652 Mbabane 24046438

27. Ms Thembie Liaison Manager +268 22078619/ +268 thembie@realnet.co.szNdlovu +268 76133858 22077824

Montigny Group ofCompanies

P O Box 1324, Nhlangano,Swaziland

TANZANIA 28. Mr. Valentine Asst. Director Forest +255 784597895/ msusavalentine@yahoo.comBakanilwa Msusa Utilization

+255 767597895Ministry of NaturalResources & Tourism

P O Box 9372

DAR ES SALAAM

29. Mr Ben Elias Tanzania Forest Industries +255 788291261/ bensulus@gmail.comMfungo Sulus Federation (SHIVIMITA)

+255 655291261 shimvita@gmail.comP O Box 78959

DAR ES SALAAM

30. Mr. John Kanjeli Custom Officer +255 784306402 jkanjeli@gmail.com,

Tanzania RevenueAuthority P.O. Box 9053,

67

Country Name Designation/Organization/ Telephone Fax Email address

Address

DAR ES SALAAM

ZAMBIA 31. Ms. Lily Collector of Customs +260 966628734 Siakabel@zra.org.zmSiakabeya

Zambia Revenue Authority lsiakabeya@yahoo.co.uk- Chirundu Customs

P O Box 360277, Kafue

32. Mr Charles Vice President +260 977655095 chmasange@yahoo.comMasange

Timber ProducersAssociation of Zambia

P O Box 36337 Lusaka

14. ZIMBABWE 33. Mr Abedinigo Deputy General Manager +263 4498436-9 +263 4497066 abedinigo.marufu@gmail.comMarufu

Forestry Commission +263 772367602

Ministry of Environment & +263 712372288Natural ResourcesManagement

P O Box HG139, HighlandsHarare

34. Mr Malcolm Chief Executive Officer +263 2060959/ tpf@zol.co.zwErnest Smith

Timber Producers +263 2067482 smith@zol.co.zwFederation (TPF)

1 Alberdeen Road,

68

Country Name Designation/Organization/ Telephone Fax Email address

Address

Nyakamete

Mutare

35. Mrs Juliet Manager International +263 4703154 +263 4798878 JMatare@zimra.co.zwMatare Authority +263 772403730 julietmatare@gmail.com

Zimbabwe RevenueAuthority

(ZIMRA) Finance

P O Box 4360 Harare

SPEAKERSFAO, Italy 36. Mr Robert

Simpson

CENTRE FOR 37. Mr Cerutti, PaoloINTERNATIONALFORESTRYRESEARCH(CIFOR)CAMEROON

SAFIRE 38. Dr Phosiso SolaZimbabwe

FOREST 39. Mr CassianGOVERNANCE SiangaLEARNINGGROUP,ARUSHA

ACP FLEGT +39 3495648649Programme ManagerForestry DepartmentForester +237 22227451B.P. 2008 (MESSA)YaoundéCameroon

Programme Director +263 479433310 ….Ave, Milton Park +263 772297531Harare

Coordinator +255 756960496

P O Box 10011

Arusha

Robert.simpson@fao.org

P.CERUTTI@CGIAR.ORG

sola@safire.co.zwpsola2007.n@gmail.com

c.sianga@tnrf.org

69

Country Name Designation/Organization/ Telephone Fax Email address

Address

TANZANIA

TRAFFIC 40. Mr Jumapili Programme Officer +255 222701676 +255 jumapili.chenga@traffic.orgChenga 222701676

P O Box 105985 +255 754604896

Dar Es Salaam

FORESTRY 41. Mr Koranteng VPA M-SIC Secretary +233 27 7725318 agyemanprempeh@yahoo.comCOMMISSION Agyemang-Prempeh

P O Box 434 +233 289115493GHANA

Accra +233 21 401210

African Forest 42. Prof. Godwin Executive Secretary +254 207224203 +254 g.kowero@cgiar.orgForum (AFF) Kowero 207224001 godwinkowero@yahoo.co.uk

43. Dr. Larwanou Senior Programme Officer +254 207224624 m.larwanou@cgiar.orgMahamane

P O Box 30677 +254 207224001

Nairobi Kenya

FAO Sub 44. Mr Edward Forestry Officer +251 116478888 +251 Edward.Kilawe@fao.orgregional Office Kilawe 116478800for Eastern Food & Agriculture ext 116Africa (SFE) Organization of the UN

(FAO) +251 911512335

Sub Regional Office -Eastern Africa, CMC Rd,

70

Country Name Designation/Organization/ Telephone Fax Email address

Address

Addis Ababa - Ethiopia

SADC 45. Mr Moses Forestry Advisor +267 3951863 +267 3972823 mchakanga@sadc.intSECRETARIAT Chakanga

46. Ms. Thapelo Secretary +267 3951863 +267 3972823 tmodise@sadc.intRamokhua

47. Mr Matenge Finance Officer +267 3951863 +267 3972823 mmatenge@sadc.intMatenge

French 48. Dr Cecile 63 Newlands - Cape Town +27 827240733 cs@metaset.comInterpreter Spottiwoode

49. Mr Yohane University of Malawi +265 888339507 +265 1524046 ychivwara@yahoo.co.ukChivwara

French Department

P O Box 280, Zomba,Malawi

Portuguese 50. Ms. Marinela Do +27 836570206 +27 mwnela@mweb.co.zaCarmo 866048484

Interpreter51. Ms. Isabel P O Box 25059 +27 829202327 +27 icc@iafrica.comCatalano 123474646

Monument Park, Pretoria

FACILITATORS 52. Ms. Ketsile Process Facilitators (Pty) +267 3937203 +267 3937203 kmolokomme@botsnet.bwMolokomme Ltd P O Box 301664

53. Ms. Nomsa Rapporteur +27 116483036 mrsyours@gmail.comMhlanga

Process Facilitators (Pty)

71

Country Name Designation/Organization/ Telephone Fax Email address

Address

Ltd

155 North AvenueBezvalley 2094

GIZ 54. Ms. Leah L Administrator +267 3951863 +267 3972823 lesego.molopo@giz.deMolopo

55. Mr John Ofentse Driver +267 3951863 +267 3972823