Transcript National Rangeland Management

National Rangeland
Management
Strategy/Policy for Namibia
LPO Congress 2010
12th October 2010
(Mecki) S. Schneider
LONG TERM TREND IN MARKETING
700000
800
700
600000
HEAD (TOTAL)
500
400000
400
300000
300
200000
200
100000
100
0
0
Year
RAINFALL
TOTAL PRODUCTION
TOTAL SLAUGHTERING
Poly. (RAINFALL)
Linear (TOTAL PRODUCTION)
Linear (TOTAL SLAUGHTERING)
RAINFALL (NATIONAL AVERAGE)
600
500000
LPO-CONGRESS 2007
DISCUSSION POINT 2
Congress REQUESTED:
1. That government, specifically the Ministry of Agriculture,
Water & Forestry, is requested to draft a National
Rangeland Strategy. Such a rangeland strategy should
cover all aspects of rangelands and the management
thereof, with the aim that this resource can be
sustainably utilized for future generations.
2. The producers take co-responsibility for an awareness
campaign to be able to produce sustainably and
profitably in the long-term.
Working Group
1. L. Lubbe (Ministry of Agriculture, Water & Forestry)
Chairman
2. N. de Klerk (Part time consultant / part time farmer)
3. N. Neumann (Ministry of Agriculture, Water &
Forestry)
4. Colin Nott (Director: Integrated Rural Development &
Nature Conservation)
5. B. Kruger (National Co-ordinator: Emerging
Commercial Farmer Support Programme)
6. S. Schneider (Chairman)
• STRATEGY / POLICY FOR GOOD
RANGELAND MANAGEMENT
PRACTICES
-------------PRINCIPLES OF GOOD
RANGELAND MANAGEMENT
PRACTICES
The 8 Principles of Good
Rangeland Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Know your resource base
Manage for effective rest
Manage for effective utilization of plants (grasses and
shrubs)
a) Grazing to stimulate production
b) Overgrazing
c) Underutilization
d) Growing season
e) Non growing season
Enhancing soil condition -- Soil Surface
Addressing Bush Encroachment
Drought Planning
Monitoring of the resource base
a) Records of veld
b) Records of veld management
c) Records of water
Planning land use infrastructure
THE NATIONAL RANGELAND MANAGEMENT
POLICY AND STRATEGY (NRMPAS)
DRAFT DOCUMENT
September 2008
2008
28-Apr
First meeting of stakeholders, agree on framework for document & principles of good
rangeland management. To extend stakeholder partnership.
Form working group to draft first few chapters: Leon Lubbe; B Kruger, N Neumann, C
30-May Nott, N de Klerk & S. Schneider (Chairman)
11-Jul
Incorporate bush encroachment, climate change - discuss policy & legal framework of
NRMPAS, start putting together a budget / funding applications to UNDP-SGP /
Agribank. Publication of rangeland principles in Agriforum (two series), Republikein.
18-Aug
Discuss progress on draft proposal, monitoring progress on two funding proposals.
23-Sep
Discuss details on finalising draft document, extend funding proposal to Country Pilot
Programme.
21-Nov
Finalising the draft document with request that publications should adhere to spirit of the
document. Agribank donates N$100,000 to NRMPAS budget, MAWF foresees funding
parts of the NRMPAS budget (consultation phase). Next phase to present draft
document to Ministries (Agric, LR, MET) for sensitizing, support before start of
consultation phase.
25-Nov-08
Presentation to Mr. Hannu Shipena of the MLR, with recommendation to present to the
LRAC.
2009
2-Feb-09
Presentation to PS, Mr. Ndishishi of MAWF.
6-Feb-09
Ryno v.d. Merwe meets with Minister Mutorwa to discuss 6 main issues incl.
Rangeland management.
20-Feb-09
5-Mar-09
Presentation to Lands Resettlement Advisory Committee
MAWF approval of funds for meals, refreshments, venues for consultation phase.
17-Mar-09
Presentation to PS, Dr. Shangula of MET
26-May-09
United Nations prepared to fund NRMPAS, if supported by MAWF.
19-Jun-09
MLR gives letter of support to NRMPAS
24-Jun-09
Rangeland discussion: necessary info exchange - express need for 3 - 4 annual
meetings to exchange information.
3-Jul-09
22-Jul-09
Minister Mutorwa: Policy speech
Discussion with John Pallet re CPP Policy review
7 Sept - 10 Sept
09
Conference on sustainable land management in the Drylands of Southern Africa Namibia's - Country Pilot Partnership Programme for Integrated Sustainable Land
Management. One of the outcomes stipulated that impacts depend on the direct
involvement of decision makers, with enabling policies that are incentive based.
29-Sep-09
Senior Management meeting of MAWF gives input to the NRMPAS document
(postpones consultation phase until changes have been incorporated):
Separate chapters on: Implementation of strategy - shortterm, medium term & long
term, Effect of climate change, Communal land management, Economics of
Natuaral Resources (what is economic effect of land degradation), Incentive
scheme (to be split 50:50 between the land owner and government). MAWF
favours incentive system instead of legislation to implement strategy document.
Policy and Strategy should be separated - this document should be Strategy
document.
Recommendation by the Permanent Secretary of
the Ministry of Agriculture, Water & Forestry July 2009
1. That the policy and the strategy part of the document should
be separated into two documents – completed;
2. That the rangeland policy should be part of the National
Agriculture Policy - finalized, to be approved by senior
management of the MAWF;
3. That the effect of climate change and options to manage this
is included in a separate chapter - completed;
4. Specific attention should be given to the management of
communal rangelands - completed ;
5. That a chapter on the economic implications of implementing
good rangeland management principles to be included –
economic valuation consultancy;
6. That a chapter on the short-, medium and long term
implementation plans is included (possible use of consultants)
– use of legislation not preferable rather through incentives –
economic valuation consultancy.
2009 / 2010
18-Nov-09
Various stakeholders – also NGOs - express wide-spread support for NRMPAS
19 –Feb-10
Address implementing changes into the NRMPAS document as proposed by
MAWF
4-March-10
Industry discussion evaluating importance of two proposed consultancies:
economic evaluation on good rangeland management practices & effect of bush
encroachment on underground water recharge (literature review with
recommendations)
29-July-10
Successful funding application (CPP) for the economic evaluation project
proposal, as well as the NAU receiving consultancy to explore possibility of
formalising a Rangeland and Bush Encroachment Forum for Namibia (client
being MAWF/DoF and NNF)
05-09-10
Successful funding application (GTZ) for the effect of bush encroachment on
underground water recharge
10-09-10
Hosting workshop to determine the formalising of a Rangeland and Bush
Encroachment Forum for Namibia
5-Oct-10
Allocating GTZ funded study on “Effect of bush encroachment on underground
water recharge “ to environmental consultant Colin Christian & Associates CC
BUSH ENCROACHMENT
Comparison of Abstraction Evapo-transpiration Losses
& Total Precipitation optimistic
Comparison of Abstraction Evapo-transpiration Losses
& Total Precipitation worst case
Conclusions
Bush encroachment has a severe, if not catastrophic influence on recharge to
groundwater
Declining water levels are approaching dangerously low levels
(before start of 2006 season)
In areas where de-bushing has taken place, groundwater evidently is recharged
relatively fast
Bush control on the long term will result in the recovery of groundwater resources
With water levels recovered to the state when fountains re-occur, groundwater will
be an asset which can be utilized more reliably:
•Food production
•Irrigation in general
•Industrial use
•Municipal supply
CLIMATE CHANGE
Africa temperature projections
2080-2099, Mean of 21 models, A1B scenario
+4ºC
+2 ºC
Source:IPCC AR4 WG1 ch 11
Rainfall projections 2090-99
Median of 21 models, A1 scenario
Models evenly
divided
All models agree
it will get drier
All models agree
it will get wetter
Economic impact of Climate Change
on Namibia
• Namibia one of driest countries in sub-Saharan Africa &
highly dependent on climate sensitive sectors.
• Natural resources as for agriculture and fisheries contribute
substantially to GDP.
• Namibian temperature forecast for 2100 ranges between 2 6°C rise in temperature.
• Precipitation changes (rainfall reductions expected to be the
greatest in northwest and central regions)
• Evaporation changes (approx. 5% increase per degree of
warming)
• Frequency & intensity of extreme events are likely to
increase.
Economic impact of Climate Change on
Namibia
• Consensus that impact on agriculture will be direct, with
indirect effects on other economic sectors.
• Namibian economy depend on extensive agricultural
activities (commercial & communal) = productivity of
grassland, savanna and shrub-dominated ecosystems
• Reductions in vegetation cover, increases in proportion of
bare ground, and overall reductions in net primary
productivity – this points to reduced potential of vegetation
to support rangeland activities. (Midgley et al. 2005)
• Greater aridity = shift to adaptable livestock
CLIMATE CHANGE
1. Unsustainable land use practices also have profound implications on the soil and thus
also on the health and well-being of local communities and the ecosystems in which
they exist. This is further amplified by increasing climate variability.
2. Land is the key asset of the rural poor (FAO, 2009). “Whether the problem is expressed
as soil or forest loss, reduced water availability, or poor yields on tired soil, such
impoverishment of the land is being driven by inefficient or unsustainable land
management practices and inappropriate or competing land uses”.
3. The livestock sector has deep and wide-ranging environmental impacts. Therefore, it
should be ranked as one of the leading foci in mitigating climate change, as efforts here
will have large and multiple pay-offs (Steinfeld et al, 2006).
4. Improved rangeland management has been identified (along with dietary
supplementation) as the most effective way to improve efficiency and reduce emissions
from this sector (contributing directly to mitigation) because they improve animal
nutrition and reproductive efficiency.
THE ECONOMICS OF
GOOD RANGELAND
MANAGEMENT
PRACTICES
Economics of Rangeland Management
Most people think that natural resources is only about ecology and raising
cattle, game, whereas economics is about profits, budgets and accounts and
that the two have nothing in common. However, a key component of environment
management is sustainable use of natural resources, while economics is about
making good use of resources – so the two are closely linked.
One of the key environmental problems identified in Namibia is the unsustainable
use of rangeland and arable land and declining productivity. From an economic
point of view, some of the causes can be seen as follows:
 that the value of resources is not known. This is usually because the
resources are unpriced and the benefits are intangible, little understood and are
often shared across many people. Similarly the costs of resource use and
degradation are not realized.
 that often the costs of using resources are not paid by the resource user,
as a result the costs are ignored and use increases.
 that resources are inefficiently used, and undervalued. The benefit gained
from resources is low and users do not know how to increase their benefits, and
resources will be under-valued. This can lead to their under-investment.
Economics of Rangeland Management
Rangeland economics may not be about maximizing profit, but it is
about making good use of natural resources: efficiently, sustainably
and equitably, taking into account the many different ways in which
resources contribute to human welfare, such as through cash, subsistence
production, ecological health, etc. It is also said by Jones et al. 1997 that
resource economics is a tool and not an end in itself but a means to
improved natural resource management.
Success may possibly lie in the quantification of the problems.
However for the application of resource economics to be successful, i.e.
the implementation of good rangeland principles, incentives may need
to be examined that co-insides with resource manager’s priorities,
which will need to accept its value.
The long term goal of the NRMPS should be to empower rangeland
managers and users to use their rangeland resources in such a way that
“animal production per hectare is sustainably improved, and that
vulnerability of users to a highly variable resource base is
decreased”.
Financing
1. Agribank of Namibia – N$100,000 (NRMPAS
document)
2. GTZ – N$266,050 (Consultancy: Effect of bush
encroachment on underground water
recharge)
3. CPP – N$190,000 (Consultancy: Economic
valuation of good rangeland management)
4. Formalisation of Rangeland & Bush
Encroachment Form of Namibia – N$21,400
FAO
NNF
MAWF
DoF
NFP
Establishment of Rangeland and
Bush Encroachment Forum of
Namibia
10 Sept 2010 Workshop
CHALLENGES
Agribank submission to combat bush encroachment
National Policy on Climate Change
Study of arboricides on environment - Meat Board
Bush encroachment and employment creation
Wood utilization (charcoal production) vs rangeland
management
CBEND – Bush to Energy conversion - viability
CONCLUSION
The demand for food, and therefore for agricultural land, will also rise sharply as the world’s
population rises and people’s diets contain more protein. Fertile soil is the basis for agricultural
production. In the last 50 years 25% of all fertile soils have been lost and/or degraded, and intensive
efforts will be needed to prevent this process speeding up (Pinstrup-Andersen 1999). Soils recover
naturally and at an extremely slow rate and the costs of restoration are so high they are, in effect,
unaffordable. Our rangeland, land and water are not limitless.
More sustainable and efficient use of Namibia's natural resources is in the national interest, but
is often not in the individual's private financial interest. This difference between what is best for
society and best for the individual often occurs because the free market system generally
undervalues environmental goods and services -- unless, that is, government implement
frameworks (legal and/or incentives) for sustainable use of natural resources.
The importance of agriculture for many developing countries cannot be overemphasized.
However it can only secure the economic basis for a growing population if landscapes /
rangelands are sustainably managed.
The future of Namibia’s rangelands depends not so much on technical knowledge or financial
investment (although both are important), but on their good governance – based on mutual
respect and agreement between different stakeholders on the way forward.