usaid/nambia environmental threats and opportunities assessment

More documents

Recommendations

Info

C. METHODOLOGY This assessment was conducted by a team of environmental specialists led by Joe Krueger from the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), with assistance from the Southern Africa Institute for Environment Assessment (SAIEA). It incorporates information gleaned from meetings with 46 key individuals from government institutions, donor agencies, NGOs, the mining industry, conservancies, lodge owners, and tourism operators. The team took two field trips including site visits to mining operations and adjacent developing areas in the Erongo region as well as to protected areas and areas of high biodiversity in the Caprivi region. This Environmental Threats and Opportunities Assessment (ETOA) focuses on Namibia’s land and natural resource use and management, biodiversity, and conservation needs. It includes a review of important legislation, a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) analysis for each of the key natural resources sectors (water, wildlife, rangelands, forestry, and marine environment), and recommendations to USAID/Namibia on how to contribute to the conservation needs identified. The last ETOA of USAID Namibia was conducted in 2003 and the last update on the 118/119 analysis was done in 2005. In spite of the global economic recession, mining, construction, and infrastructure development continue to enjoy increased investment and a “Uranium Rush” is underway in the central Namib area. Most natural resource-based development initiatives in Namibia are vulnerable to high environmental variability and climate change. A growing population and the push for more rapid economic growth are placing increasing pressure on the environment and many components of the natural resource base are suffering from unsustainable use. D. THE SUSTAINABILITY OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM IN NAMIBIA Over the past 20 years, international donors have contributed significantly towards sustainable biodiversity conservation practices in Namibia. In 2008, the U.S. Government (USG) shifted their program emphasis away from support to the communal conservancies to implement the PEPFAR (President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief) program and assist the Government of the Republic of Namibia (GRN) address the AIDS epidemic. More recently the USG signed a compact with the GRN via the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) that will address necessary actions for sustainable biodiversity conservation. The USG has also recently initiated a program (Southern Africa Regional Environmental Program – SAREP) focused on improved management of shared river basins, strengthened systems to protect biodiversity and ecosystem services, increased access to safe drinking water and sanitation, and strengthened institutional capacity in the context of climate change. The sustainability of development programs has become a concern for Namibia. Based on the annual GDP per capita (approximately US$3,000), Namibia is classified by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund as “upper middle income” as opposed to “poor.” This classification hides the challenges the country continues to face (including high levels of unemployment, growing poverty, and large income inequality), which have not been adequately addressed during the past 20 years since Independence. It implies that the country no longer requires the same level of support that it did in decades past. Moreover, access to concessional loans of the World Bank’s International Development Agency (IDA) is now barred. 12 USAID/NAMIBIA ENVIRONMENTAL THREATS AND OPPORTUNITIES ASSESSMENT
2. SOCIO-ECONOMIC OVERVIEW OF NAMIBIA An overview of socio-economic trends in Namibia related to key economic constraints/drivers, population growth and distribution, poverty and employment, health, and education are presented in this section. A. KEY ECONOMIC DRIVERS AND CONSTRAINTS The Namibian economy, which grew by an average of 3.4 % per annum between 1994 and 2002, continues to depend on the exploitation of renewable and non-renewable natural resources. The economy relies heavily on international trade with imports and exports, each totalling more than half of GDP in value (IPPR 2010). The most important exports include: uranium, diamonds, beef, beer, meat, and fish products. Namibia is the world’s fifth largest producer of diamonds (by value) and a leader in the field of offshore diamond mining. The country’s wide-open spaces, attractive landscapes, and abundant wildlife provide the mainstay for a strong tourism industry. A budget review by Schade (2010) provides insight into the current economic state of the country and highlights the fact that domestic developments such as the initiation of production at the Ohorongo cement factory and the Trekkopje uranium mine are expected to buoy the economy in the short to medium term. Economic recovery in Namibia’s traditional export markets (particularly diamonds) remains uncertain. 1. NAMIBIA’S DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES Namibia’s development policy decisions are guided largely by the Vision 2030 document (launched in 2003) and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which are implemented through five-year National Development Plans and specific sector plans. The Namibian Constitution, Vision 2030, and NDP3 (for the period 2007-2011) are committed, on paper, to maintaining environmental integrity in Namibia. For example, one of the main goals of NDP3 is “… to ensure environmental sustainability by strengthening the management of natural resources and biodiversity.” It further acknowledges that “…the activities in all sub-sectors affect …environmental sustainability.” In reality, however, it has been very difficult to achieve most of the sustainable development and environmental goals as laid down in this and other guiding documents. (Discussed in Section 3) 2. NAMIBIA’S ECONOMIC CONSTRAINTS The main challenges to Namibia’s developmental objectives include: Namibia’s low and variable rainfall Limited water resources Low land capability with soils that are easily degraded Poverty USAID/NAMIBIA ENVIRONMENTAL THREATS AND OPPORTUNITIES ASSESSMENT 13
Page 1 and 2: USAID/NAMBIA ENVIRONMENTAL THREATS
Page 3: USAID/NAMIBIA ENVIRONMENTAL THREATS
Page 7 and 8: TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Page 9 and 10: ACRONYMS AALS ART BCLME BMC CBM CBN
Page 11 and 12: NCA NDP NGO NNF NNFU NPC NPP NSF NW
Page 13: ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS A group of resourc
Page 16 and 17: PURPOSE OF THIS ASSESSMENT This doc
Page 18 and 19: TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY AND TROPIC
Page 20 and 21: Another potential impact is the CO
Page 22 and 23: In addition to the overexploitation
Page 24 and 25: understanding the perspectives of c
Page 28 and 29: The HIV/AIDS epidemic Natural disas
Page 30 and 31: TOURISM AND WILDLIFE Tourism in Nam
Page 32 and 33: An underlying cause of increasing H
Page 34 and 35: Infant mortality as well as under-f
Page 36 and 37: Figure 3: Levelsels of school enrol
Page 38 and 39: 3. THE LEGISLATIVE AND INSTITUTIONA
Page 40 and 41: land that was previously used only
Page 42 and 43: Overall, land productivity, particu
Page 44 and 45: Marine fisheries are regulated by t
Page 46 and 47: Figure 5: Namibia’s major biomes
Page 48 and 49: espectively of their areas protecte
Page 50 and 51: development of business skills and
Page 52 and 53: Increasing aridification and a grad
Page 54 and 55: THREAT: POORLY PLANNED RESETTLEMENT
Page 56 and 57: Nine of the 15 southern African bre
Page 58 and 59: Figure 8: Main fishinging areas and
Page 60 and 61: MAJOR THREAT 2. ONSHORE AND OFFSHOR
Page 62 and 63: Deep-sea mining and diamond dredgin
Page 64 and 65: Increases in frequency and intensit
Page 66 and 67: Catchment issues (mainly pollution
Page 68 and 69: Figure 11. Surface and groundwater
Page 70 and 71: small irrigation projects. Wetlands
Page 72 and 73: Local Authorities (also in MRLGHRD)
Page 74 and 75: MAJOR THREAT 6. CLIMATE CHANGE Base
Page 76 and 77:
fenced off informally and illegally
Page 78 and 79:
Figure15: Average carrying capacity
Page 80 and 81:
VALUE OF RANGELAND PRODUCTS Livesto
Page 82 and 83:
MAJOR THREAT 5. BUSH ENCROACHMENT I
Page 84 and 85:
Figure 17. Distribution of forests
Page 86 and 87:
inadequate. About 50 species of pla
Page 88 and 89:
Threats Population growth and pover
Page 90 and 91:
5. CONCLUSIONS Despite some shortfa
Page 92 and 93:
Focus in the northwest should be on
Page 94 and 95:
RECOMMENDATION: LAND-USE ZONATION E
Page 96 and 97:
RECOMMENDATION: DEVELOP SUSTAINABLE
Page 98 and 99:
Water and Forestry Debra Mosel Assi
Page 100 and 101:
actions meet those needs. By mandat
Page 102 and 103:
training led to an 8 percent averag
Page 104 and 105:
pollution) to which they and humans
Page 106 and 107:
Illustrative Outline: a) Introducti
Page 108 and 109:
9. SELECTED REFERENCE DOCUMENTS
Page 110 and 111:
AR4 spatial pattern that suggests m
Page 112 and 113:
The findings by Turpie et al 2010 c
Page 114 and 115:
Increasing human-wildlife conflict.
Page 116 and 117:
Batty M, Tjipute M, Sowman M, Cardo
Page 118 and 119:
Cury, P., & Roy, C. 1989. Optimal e
Page 120 and 121:
Hulme, M. (Ed.). 1996. Climate chan
Page 122 and 123:
Namibian National Biodiversity Prog
Page 124 and 125:
Resources in Southern Africa: Studi
Page 128:
U.S. Agency for International Devel
show all

usaid/nambia environmental threats and opportunities assessment

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?