The Mount Elgon ecosystem

Mt Elgon, an extinct volcano, is one ofAfrica’s few single peaks rising 2000 mabove the surrounding ground, reaching aheight of 4321 m asl (Figure 1). The MtElgon ecosystem houses a rich and uniquefauna and flora. There are 37 globallythreatened faunal species (22 mammal, 2insect, and 13 bird species, of which 9species are endemic), making the area apriority for species conservation.

The Mt Elgon ecosystem comprises 4broad classes: a community of mixed mon-tane forest; a broad belt of bamboo andlow canopy montane forest; a zone of highmontane heath; and a high moorlandcommunity. Most of the plant species inthe forest zone above 2000 m have beenshown to be endemic to the Afro-montaneRegion, and a number of species in thiszone are endemic to Mt Elgon. Therenowned dominant tree species includeElgon teak, cedar, Podocarpus spp., rose-wood, and others. Intriguing and uniqueplants include giant groundsel, giantlobelia, and giant heather.

Additionally, the Mt Elgon ecosystemconstitutes a major catchment with manytributaries draining into the major riversthat lead to large bodies of water—lakesVictoria, Turkana, and Kyoga—and finallyjoining the Nile River system. The MtElgon core ecosystem consists of 5 protect-

Introducing a Transboundary EcosystemManagement Approach in the Mount Elgon RegionThe Need for Strengthened Institutional Collaboration

Alex B. MuhweeziGeorge M. SikoyoMathias Chemonges

215

Mountain Research and Development Vol 27 No 3 Aug 2007: 215–219 doi:1659/mrd.0924

The Mt Elgon ecosystem straddles the inter-national boundary between Kenya and Ugan-da and is a watershed of internationalimportance, feeding the waters of Lake Vic-toria, the Nile River system, and LakeTurkana. The core ecosystem in the MtElgon area is characterized by large mon-tane forest landscapes; it comprises sever-al protected areas. Adjacent is a vast, heavi-ly populated agricultural landscape support-ing up to 2 million people, whose livelihoodsand economic activities are largely depend-ent on the ecosystem goods and services ofthe highlands. The mountain ecosystem ofMt Elgon is thus vital to the social and eco-nomic functioning of the surrounding areas,both in the highlands and in the lowlands.To manage this important ecosystem and

sustain the multiple functions and servicesit offers local people and visitors, there is aneed for a regional transboundary ecosys-tem management approach and strength-ened institutional collaboration between allstakeholders concerned at different levels.The Mt Elgon Regional Ecosystem Conserva-tion Programme (MERECP) aims to securethe multifunctionality of the Mt Elgonecosystem and enhance sustainable devel-opment in the long term, in order to securelivelihoods and alleviate poverty, both ofwhich are priorities of the governments ofUganda and Kenya. The present article pro-vides insights from experience and lessonslearned to date regarding the planning andimplementation of such a transboundaryregional ecosystem approach.

35°00’E35°00’E

35°00’E35°00’E

34°30’E34°30’E

34°30’E34°30’E

1°00’N1°00’N1°00’N1°00’N

1°30’N1°30’N1°30’N1°30’N

BUKWOBUKWO

KAPCHORWAKAPCHORWA

Kapchorwa

SIRONKOSIRONKOSironko

MBALEMBALE

Mbale

Kitale

Bungoma

Tororo

BUDUDABUDUDA

Bududa

Luwakhakha

Chwele

Kimlili

Kapsokwony

Kiminini

Endebess

Suam

Bukwo

MANAFWAMANAFWA

MT ELGONMT ELGON

TRANS NZOIATRANS NZOIA

U G A N D A

K E N Y A

Wagagai4321 m

00 20 km20 km1010

N

Mt Elgon National Park (Uganda)

Namatale Central Forest Reserve

Mt Elgon National Park (Kenya)

Mt Elgon Forest Reserve

Chepkitale National Reserve

International boundary

District boundary

Catchment boundary

Drainage network

UGANDA

KENYA

SUDAN

SOM

ALI

A

IndianOcean

UNITED REP OFTANZANIA

R

B

D R

OF

THE

C ON

GO

Nairobi

Kampala

FIGURE 1 The Mount Elgon region. (Map by Andreas Brodbeck, based on maps by authors)

Alex B. Muhweezi, George M. Sikoyo, and Mathias Chemonges

Mountain Research and Development Vol 27 No 3 Aug 2007

216

ed areas (Mt Elgon National Park and theNamatala Central Forest Reserve in Ugan-da; Mt Elgon National Park, the Trans-Nzoia Forest Reserve, the Mt Elgon ForestReserve, and Chepkitale National Reservein Kenya), open areas, and other cate-gories of land use without conservationstatus. The key values of Mt Elgon are pre-sented in the form of natural heritage,biodiversity, water catchments, agricultur-al base, and tourism. Because of its valueand uniqueness, Uganda and Kenya are inthe process of nominating Mt Elgon as aTransboundary Biosphere for recognitionas a UNESCO World Heritage Site.

Threats to the multifunctionality of theecosystemThe total population of all the districtsaround the Mt Elgon ecosystem is approx-imately 2 million people, with differentethnic backgrounds. The growth rate ofthe population is high (2.3–4.3%). Percapita landholdings are small—approxi-mately 0.8 ha on average—and mosthouseholds are poor. People in the MtElgon area are predominantly peasantfarmers involved in crop production andanimal rearing. This takes the form ofboth small-scale commercial and subsis-tence farming. Other economic activitiesinclude beekeeping, lumbering, and poul-try keeping.

Pressure on the Mt Elgon ecosystem isthus very high (Figure 2). This leads toencroachment on protected areas and for-est reserves on the mountain, as well ascultivation of ecologically fragile areassuch as steep slopes, swamps, and river-

banks, as well as cases of conflict over landand other natural resources. In the longterm, this jeopardizes the multifunctional-ity of the Mt Elgon ecosystem.

A regional ecosystem conservationprogramThe Mount Elgon Regional EcosystemConservation Programme (MERECP) is afour-year (2005–2009) transboundary natu-ral resource management program of theEast African Community (EAC). The EACis a regional intergovernmental organiza-tion of the republics of Kenya, Uganda,and the United Republic of Tanzania, withBurundi and Rwanda expected to join inJune 2007. MERECP is funded by the King-dom of Norway. IUCN (The World Conser-vation Union) is providing the technicaland managerial support to the program,while 19 institutions from both Kenya andUganda are implementing the program.The key challenge of MERECP is to man-age and develop the natural resources ofthe Mt Elgon ecosystem base in order tomeet the increasing demand for liveli-hoods while ensuring that development issustainable.

Participatory planning approachIn a Memorandum of Understanding(MoU) on Cooperation on EnvironmentalManagement between Kenya, Tanzania,and Uganda (upgraded to the Protocol onEnvironment and Natural Resources, andawaiting approval by the Heads of StateSummit) signed in 1998, the PartnerStates have committed themselves to pro-moting public awareness programs andaccess to information, as well as measuresto enhance public participation in envi-ronmental and natural resource manage-ment issues. Based on this MoU and othernational policies and laws, MERECP wasdesigned between 2001 and 2005. Theparticipation of beneficiary communitiesand institutions active in the Mt Elgonecosystem from the earliest planningstages was therefore perceived as the beststrategy to ensure the long-term success ofMERECP and its smooth integration intonational and local government develop-ment plans, work plans, and budgets inboth Kenya and Uganda (Figure 3). Com-

FIGURE 2 Mount Elgon National Parkboundary in Uganda and neighboringagricultural area with high populationgrowth that exerts pressure on parkresources. (Photo by Agni KlintuniBoedhihartono)

Development

217

munities and district-level stakeholderswere involved in the situation analysis andprioritization of issues that MERECPwould focus on. Views generated fromthese consultations fed into technical dis-cussion involving districts and central gov-ernment agencies managing the protectedarea components of Mt Elgon.

The goal of this lengthy and carefulplanning process was to generate informa-tion from diverse stakeholders and tosolicit priority areas for consideration forMERECP. Specific objectives for stake-holder involvement in the design ofMERECP included the following:

• Demonstrate openness and accounta-bility in the design of the program;

• Identify priority areas for considerationin the design of the program;

• Tease out cross-border issues on whichto hinge the proposed program;

• Pilot a range of activities, particularlythose of a regional character;

• Define the institutional and decision-making structures for the coordinationof MERECP implementation.

Strengthening institutional collaborationThe innovations, drivers and factors thathave steered the planning and implemen-tation of the MERECP program include:

1. Planning for regional level actions thatwould integrate management of the MtElgon ecosystem into broader national andregional development frameworks.MERECP objectives were integratedinto various development plans, suchas the Poverty Reduction StrategyPapers for Kenya and Uganda, man-agement plans for the protected areas(Mt Elgon national parks and forestreserves), and many other regionaland national strategies.

2. Informed planning, including implement-ing small-scale pilot activities that aimedat testing the regional approach and gener-ating baseline information. The plan-ning design involved two phases:

• The pre-inception phase, which aimedto establish baseline information in con-sultation with local government authori-ties, technical departments, community-

based organizations (CBOs) and NGOs,on issues and priorities in conserva-tion and development of the Mt Elgonecosystem. These consultations wereextended to cover national andregional levels with the intention ofsecuring commitment to one regionalprogram for the ecosystem.

• The inception phase, during whichadditional baseline studies were con-ducted to update the information baseand to inform planning for implemen-tation. The complex nature of the pro-gram was tested in order to assess itsapplicability in the face of the trans-boundary nature of the program. Thishelped define an implementationframework that includes a 3-tier deci-sion-making process, with specific termsof reference. It entailed decision-mak-ing at the bilateral level between theEAC and the Kingdom of Norway, theProgram Policy Steering Committee,and the Coordination Committee, con-sisting of representatives from all imple-menting institutions.

3. Brokering and convening governmental,non-governmental, private sector, and aca-demic/research institutions, regional bod-ies, and local people into one action plan.One of the conspicuous innovations ofthis program design and implementa-tion was the development and imple-mentation of an intergovernmentalprogram by an NGO. IUCN conceivedand led the development and negotia-

FIGURE 3 Discussion with local people inTuikat village, Mount Elgon, Uganda. (Photoby Agni Klintuni Boedhihartono)

Alex B. Muhweezi, George M. Sikoyo, and Mathias Chemonges

Mountain Research and Development Vol 27 No 3 Aug 2007

218

tion of the program, secured owner-ship by the governments of Kenya andUganda, and concluded the programdesign with a regional economicblock, the EAC. Consequently,MERECP is a joint and collaborativeaction, involving all stakeholders with-out diplomatic, political, or nationalsovereign limitation to its objectivesand implementation (Figure 4).

4. Developing a regional implementation mod-el and tools that ensure common proceduresfor implementation across all implementinginstitutions and at different levels.Because of the uniqueness and com-plexity of involvement of many stake-holders in MERECP, tools and proce-dures were developed to enhance itsimplementation. The tools and proce-dures are a hybrid of governmental,non-governmental, and intergovern-mental processes and procedures,applicable to all implementing institu-tions across the board.

Initial achievements of MERECPThough MERECP implementation onlybegan in October 2005, significantchanges have become manifest. Theseinclude the following:• Collaboration between and among the imple-

menting institutions: collaboration hasbeen enhanced through informationsharing, joint planning, and activityimplementation. This includes jointpatrols of protected areas by the pro-tected area institution (Figure 5),preparation of work plans and budg-ets—which brings together all theimplementing institutions—and engag-ing in political processes, bringing

together local councilors and Membersof Parliament from in and around theecosystem through joint tours, thusenabling them to interact with man-agers of protected area authorities andother stakeholders. This collaborationhas benefited from, and continues togalvanize, political support at local andnational levels.

• Uniform program and activity implementa-tion procedures and systems: all institutionsapply similar implementation systemsand procedures. A program implementa-tion manual that was developed and test-ed during the inception phase has beenintegrated and applied in all institutions.The manual provides objective andtransparent decision-making procedureson MERECP work plans, budgets, andreports; detailed systems and proceduresfor personnel, financial procurement,asset management, and coordination;definition and delineation of responsibil-ities between the various implementingagencies; and mechanisms for informa-tion flows and accountability.

• Adoption of land management and naturalresources production technologies: the pro-gram has fostered land managementtechnologies that provide multiple val-ues and benefits and thus foster adop-tion by beneficiaries outside protectedareas. For example, zero-grazing is pro-moted as an income-generating activityand at the same time conserves soil andwater; or cow waste is used to producebiogas for domestic use and the slur-ry—a by-product—is used as an organicfertilizer to improve crop yields.

Approximately 1.5 years into theimplementation of the program, the out-comes, in the particular institutional suc-cesses described above, are becoming man-ifest. Additionally, activities such as illegalharvesting of forest produce and poachinghave been drastically reduced and previ-ously degraded sites within the protectedareas have started to regenerate. However,the program has not yet assessed theimpact of these successes on the ecosystemand its multiple functions and services. Asystemic analysis of the impact of MERECPon the multifunctionality of the mountainecosystem is urgently needed.

FIGURE 4 Collaboration between programpartners (here: representatives of IUCN,MERECP, CIFOR, Ecoagriculture Partners,and local Ugandan Wildlife Authorityinstitutions meet in the field) is successfulin the Mount Elgon area. (Photo by AgniKlintuni Boedhihartono)

Development

219

Lessons learned

Sustaining the multifunctionality of moun-tain ecosystems within national jurisdic-tions is complex. However, it is even morecomplex in ecosystems such as Mt Elgon,which transcend national boundariesbecause of the involvement of many stake-holders with diverse interests. It may seemearly to share lessons learned since theimplementation of MERECP, but the fol-lowing lessons regarding the strengthen-ing of institutional collaboration toadvance the sustainable management ofmountain ecosystems and their multiplefunctions are worth noting:

• Political support at all levels is criticalto the success of transboundaryapproaches to ecosystem management.

• Program ownership is best achieved if itis responsive to local, national, andregional conservation and developmentpriorities. Ownership enhances accept-ance of the program processes and out-comes. In addition, ownership of such aprogram buys into institutional workplans, budgets, and management plans,because it adds value to ongoing activi-ties rather than being seen as imposedfrom outside.

• Credible institutional partners are criti-cal to the success of programs such asMERECP. IUCN has for the last 15 yearsbeen active on both the Uganda andKenya sides of the Mt Elgon ecosystem.This long-term visibility creates credi-bility because people see the continuityof the organization and are able to linkit with previous outcomes and impacts.In addition, credibility also arises fromtested methodologies and approaches,some of which include the involvementof the beneficiaries in program designand implementation.

• Credible management and coordina-tion tools and procedures are essentialfor the success of complex programssuch as MERECP. In particular, mecha-nisms for decision-making, coordina-tion, and policy direction of the pro-gram are critical. The MERECP Coordi-nation Committee brings together allthe focal persons from the implement-ing institutions, coordinates the imple-mentation, and undertakes monitoringand evaluation of program implementa-tion. The Policy Steering Committeeconstituted at the ministerial level over-sees MERECP implementation, pro-vides strategic direction and policyguidance, and links the program togovernment ministries and agencies inUganda and Kenya.

• Strengthened institutional capacitiesand policy and legal frameworks enableconservation and sustainable develop-ment of the transboundary ecosystemby adding value to natural resourcesand by providing new livelihoodoptions to the people living in and out-side the Mt Elgon region.

FIGURE 5 Discussing theimplementation of activitiesalong park boundaries withUgandan Wildlife Authorityrangers. (Photo by MathiasChemonges)

FURTHER READING

Davenport T, Howard P, Dickinson C. 1996. Mount ElgonNational Park. Biodiversity Report. Kampala, Uganda: For-est Department.EAC [East African Community]. 1998. The Memorandum ofUnderstanding on Cooperation on Environmental Manage-ment. 22 October 1998. Arusha, Tanzania: EAC Secretariat.IUCN [The World Conservation Union], EAC [East African

Community]. 2005. Mount Elgon Regional EcosystemConservation Programme (MERECP). Programme Docu-ment. http://www.iucn.org/places/earo/prog_links/projects/merecp/pub/merecp_programme_document.pdf; accessed on 5 June 2007.Reev Consult International. 2005. Baseline Survey of theSocio-economics of the People Living in the Mount ElgonEcosystem. Kampala, Uganda: MERECP [Mount ElgonRegional Ecosystem Conservation Programme].

AUTHORS

Alex B. Muhweezi, George M. Sikoyo,Mathias ChemongesIUCN Uganda Country Office, Plot 39Babiha Avenue, Kololo, PO Box 10950,Kampala, Uganda.Alex.Muhweezi@iucn.co.ug;Alex.Muhweezi@iucn.org;Mathias.Chemonges@iucn.org;George.Sikoyo@iucn.org

Alex B. Muhweezi is an ecologistinterested in sustainable development,environmental policy, natural resourcemanagement (forests and wetlands),and protected area planning and man-agement. He is Country Director at theIUCN Uganda Country Office. He hasspent 18 years developing and manag-ing natural resources, and working inenvironmental projects in the fields offorestry, wetlands, and environmentalpolicy.

George M. Sikoyo is a resourceeconomist interested in transboundarynatural resource management, sustain-able livelihoods, and management forsustainable development. He is theChief Technical Advisor for MERECP.

Mathias Chemonges is a foresterinterested in collaborative naturalresource management, farm forestry,monitoring and evaluation, protection,and law enforcement. He is the Institu-tional Advisor for MERECP.