the terrafrica vision for sustainable land management in sub-saharan africa (ssa)

OUR LAND – OUR WEALTH, OUR FUTURE, IN OUR HANDS

The TerrAfrica Vision for Sustainable Land Management

in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA)

Land and development in SSA

Land: where do we stand today?

• Land degradation: state, impact, pressure

• Response to LD in SSA

Need for change – TerrAfrica SLM added value

• Knowledge management• Institutional and governance• Economic and financial

TerrAfrica at country level

• Committed Partnership• Diagnostic• Investment

• M&E


1. LAND AND DEVELOPMENT IN SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA


Land a sacred and living body for farmers all over the world….

Attributes of the biosphere immediately above or below the surface:

– soil, water, plant and animal populations, human structures... AND

– the productive and synergistic interactions between these factors. ( ecosystems)

Why is land so importantin Sub-Saharan Africa?


• Food, water, wood, fibre

• Regulation of local/global climate, floods, water quality

• Social cohesion, aesthetic value

• Nutrient and carbon cycling • Long-term build-up of natural capital

• Conflict prevention• Income generation

• Prevention of natural disasters

• Sanitation, health

• Income generation • Food security• Conflict prevention

59 % of SSA population directly lives off the land (FAOSTAT, 2004)

The land provide key goods & services for development

Why is land so importantin Sub-Saharan Africa?


Development challengesof Sub-Saharan AfricaExtreme poverty• 46.4% population mostly in rural areas

below 1 $/day.

Food insecurity• 33% population under-nourished• 31% children underweight

Conflicts and degradation of NR

• Congo, Mono, Kagera ...basins

Natural disasters• Drought linked to poor soils in Niger• Floods in Mozambique


2. LAND : WHERE DO WE STAND TODAY IN SSA?


Land degradationState


Land degradation in SSA State

Soil erosion• Water: 46% land area• Wind: 38% land area (drylands) (Oldeman/GLASOD, 1990)

Declining soil fertilityNegative nutrient balance: • 8 million tons of NPK/year • up to 70-80 kg NPK/ha/year (IFDC, 2006)

Deforestation• 3.7 million ha/year (0.7%/year) (FAOSTAT, 2004)

• SSA: 50% of global deforestation for 16% of remaining forest areas (U. of E.Anglia, 06)

Salinization and water logging (irrigated areas)• Severe in Kenya (30%), Namibia (17%), Nigeria (34%), Sudan (27%), Tanzania

(27%), DR Congo (20%), Mauritania (50%) and Gambia (10%) (Oldeman/GLASOD, 1990)


Socio-economic Impacts

Stagnant yields

0

500

1000

1500

2000

1970 1974 1978 1982 1986 1990 1994 1998 2002

Rice, paddy Maize Millet Sorghum

Average crop yield in SS Africa (kg/ha)(FAOSTAT, 2004)

Economic losses• Productivity / agricultural worker: -16% (1989-2000) • Cereal availability/capita: -15%. (FAOSTAT, 2004)

• Agricultural GDP lost: US$ 9 billion/ year. (Dregne 1991, Dreschel 1999)

Abandonment and migration• 7.3% land area non-reclaimable (Oldeman/GLASOD, 1990)

• 60 million people may migrate by 2020 from degraded areas of SSA (UNCCD quoted by Kofi Annan on WDCD 2004)

Land degradation in SSA Impact


Environmental Impacts

Water resources• Increased peak flows; reduced dry season flows• Siltation in rivers and lakes (shrinking of Lake Chad)

Climate change• Carbon stocks: -5 billion tonnes from deforestation in SSA

alone (1990-2005) (ODC, U. of East Anglia, 2006)

Loss of biodiversity• Animal species: 126 extinct in the wild; 2,018 threatened. • Plant species: 125 extinct; 1,771 threatened (APEI, 2003)

Land degradation in SSA Impact


Natural pressure

• Vulnerable soils • Climate variability and global climate change• Fragile ecosystems (drylands and mountains)

Human pressure

Population growthPopulation growth

Unsustainable agricultural practicesUnsustainable agricultural practices• 65% growth of cropped areas in 30 years (FAOSTAT, 2004) with expansion in vulnerable lands

• Nutrient mining, soil compaction and erosion Burning crop residues, little fertilizers, reduction fallow period, improper crop rotation, no erosion control

• Poor drainage in irrigated areas

Land degradation in SSA Pressure


Human pressure (continued)

Overgrazing of rangelandOvergrazing of rangeland

• 1.5 - 2.0% per year growth in animal numbers (FAOSTAT, 2004)

• Inadequate regulation and control of pastoral resources and transhumance

• Encroachment by settled farmers

Deforestation and forest degradationDeforestation and forest degradation

• Deforestation: 0.7% per year (FAOSTAT, 2004) converted into pasture, croplands, plantations, urbanization, refugee camps development

• Poor forest management and aforestation practices• Over exploitation of fuelwood, fruits, undergrowth

Land degradation in SSA Pressure


Land degradation in SSA Response: Field-level practices

• Crop, livestock, forest sustainable management: water harvesting, erosion control, livestock quality and rangeland control, aforestation, agro-forestry

• Conservation Agriculture: • (i) reduced tillage; (ii) soil cover (residues or cover crops); (iii) crop rotation; (iv) minimal

traffic.• 90 million ha of lands worldwide, expanding in South Africa, Lesotho, Zambia, Uganda,

Tanzania, Kenya, piloted in Burkina Faso, Ghana, Niger and Mali.

• Integrated Plant and Nutrient Management (IPNM) • Rehabilitate soils of low fertility: rock phosphate, manure, crop residues, leguminous

plants, agroforestry, etc.• Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Ethiopia, Kenya, Mali, Niger, Senegal, Tanzania, Togo,

Zambia and Zimbabwe.

• Integrated crop-livestock, agro-sylvo-pastoral farming systems: Most developed in the Sahel.


• Participatory R&D and extension:

Shift from top-down commodity-driven to bottom-up demand-driven approach. Results in Uganda and Tanzania; countries moving rapidly (Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Zambia).

• Farmer Field Schools (FFS) for SLM• Test field is the learning venue, trained facilitator plan training with

the farmers, demand driven. • Tested and implemented in a large number of countries. Recent

developments in Eastern Africa.

• Contracting extension services to NGOs and other third partiesFew examples in SSA, promising in Madagascar and Mali.

Land degradation in SSA Response: Support services and extension


• Participatory Catchments Approaches to Soil and Water Conservation and Community-based resource management (“gestion des terroirs” )land user driven territorial planning and management of resources,Burkina Faso, Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, Niger, Tanzania , Ghana and Zambia….

• Community Investment FundsTrust fund financing. Funds replenished: includes income generating activities and improved livelihoods.

• Payment for Ecosystem Services-PESPayment to rural communities or individuals for preserving environmental functions for downstream or global stakeholders.Successful examples in forestry (carbon sequestration), wildlife management (ecotourism) and water conservation: Uganda, Kenya, Ghana,

Land degradation in SSA Response: : local communities/ Incentive approaches


UN Convention to Combat Desertification• 30 out of 49 SSA countries have National Action Plans

NEPAD: CAADP and Environmental Action Plan• Adopted by large majority of SSA countries• Pillars 1, 3 and 4 of CAADP, Program areas 1 and 6 of EAP

Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)• MDG 1 – Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger• MDG 7 – Ensure environmental sustainability

Soil Fertility Initiative• 20 SFI National Action Plans developed

Abuja Declaration on the African Green Revolution• Declare Fertilisers (organic and inorganic ) strategic commodities• Set up a Financial Mechanism to promote access and use of fertilisers

Land degradation in SSA Response: National, regional and global programs


Land degradation in SSA still continues..

because efforts and responses:

•are not addressing systematically major LD root causes and SLM bottlenecks

•are not being well supported across the board by adequate policies , institutional reforms and donors’ attention in a way commensurate with the dimension of the problem.

•have been essentially fragmented and at a much too limited scale



3. THE NEED FOR CHANGE IN SSA – TERRAFRICA VALUE-ADDED


SLM can be defined as the use of land resources, including soils, water, animals, plants and climate, for the production of

goods and services to meet changing and increasing human needs, while

simultaneously ensuring the long-term productive potential of these resources and

the maintenance of their ecosystem functions.

What is Sustainable Land Management (SLM)?


REMOVING BARRIERS AND BOTTLENECKS to SLM SCALE UP

• KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT BARRIERS

•INSTITUTIONAL AND GOVERNANCE BARRIERS

• ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL BARRIERS


enabling environment for scaling up and mainstreaming SLM in an optimized manner .

OUR LAND – OUR WEALTH, OUR FUTURE, IN OUR HANDSOUR LAND – OUR WEALTH, OUR FUTURE, IN OUR HANDS

FROM: (bottlenecks)

• A traditional land management approach– Sectoral (crop, livestock,

forest, water)– Commodity driven– Focusing on land degradation

symptoms– Reactive to environmental

change and new technologies

• Top-down and expert-driven approaches

Addressing Barriers and Bottlenecks

Knowledge Management

TO: (TA vision)

• A holistic ecosystem approachA holistic ecosystem approach– Integrated cross sectoral

management practices (responses)– Ecosystem landscape approach – Focusing on land degradation root

causes and key SLM bottlenecks – Proactive (climate change, bioenergy)

• People-centered approachPeople-centered approach– Community-based participative

approaches to land use planning and capacity-building

– Build on land users’ knowledge and ability to experiment


FROM:

• Knowledge gaps

• Poor knowledge management



TO:TO:

• Expand the knowledge baseExpand the knowledge base– New approaches, opportunities (e.g.

conservation agriculture, agro-tourism, bio-energy, multilevel/sector land use planning)

– Cost-benefit analysis of LD and SLM– Ecosystems functions and livelihoods– Understand and monitor root causes and

bottlenecks– Land use, land degradation, landscape

maps, data bases

• Organization and connectivity of Organization and connectivity of knowledgeknowledge – Tailored information to partners &

channeled it to decision-makers– Recognize the digital divide and

communication technologies


FROM:

• Inadequate M&E of land degradation and its impact



TO:TO:

• Transparent, participatory M&E Transparent, participatory M&E systemssystems – Scale-sensitive (local to regional) – Action-oriented (diagnostic for

investment)– Tracking of SLM expenditure


FROM:

• Diverging views and approaches by concerned stakeholders

• Lack of cooperation between stakeholders


Institutional and Governance

TO:TO:

• Alignment along a shared visionAlignment along a shared vision – Multi-level and cross-sectoral

– Multi-stakeholder: private, public, civil society, development partners

• Efficient and effective Efficient and effective coordinationcoordination– Cross-sectoral, multi-level and multi-

stakeholder mechanisms at country level

– Donor alignment and coordination

– Negotiation as the basis for partnerships based on responsibilities and benefits


FROM:

• Ad hoc or project approach to Land Management

• SLM not identified as key issue in strategies, national priorities, PRSPs, sectoral policies and public expenditure



TO:TO:

• Programmatic approach to SLM Programmatic approach to SLM at national, sub-national and at national, sub-national and regional levelsregional levels ((including including transboundary watersheds and transboundary watersheds and basins)basins)

• SLM recognized as a priority:SLM recognized as a priority:• Harmonization and Harmonization and

mainstreaming of SLM into mainstreaming of SLM into existing programmatic existing programmatic instrumentsinstruments


FROM:

• Lack of capacities and resources in local actors

( public,private,NGOs)

• Insecurity of tenure due to conflicting statutory and customary rules or existence of “open-access” regimes



TO:TO:

• Foster and support the Foster and support the decentralization processesdecentralization processes

• Improving local governance for Improving local governance for SLMSLM

• Strengthening capacities local Strengthening capacities local services providers services providers (inputs,market,finance,training)(inputs,market,finance,training)

• Tenure systems and regulations Tenure systems and regulations are negotiated between are negotiated between population and decision-makers population and decision-makers to facilitate SLMto facilitate SLM

• Access to land for vulnerable Access to land for vulnerable groupsgroups


FROM:

• inadequate regulation for combating land degradation

• Inadequate rural infrastructures



TO:TO:

• Coordinated capacities to enforce Coordinated capacities to enforce laws and regulations laws and regulations

• Strategic physical ( roads, Strategic physical ( roads, communication) and social communication) and social ( health education centres) ( health education centres) infrastructures to help land users infrastructures to help land users implementing SLMimplementing SLM


FROM:

• Inadequate economic and pricing policies


Economic and financial

TO:TO:

• Policy development, to support:Policy development, to support:– Regulation of markets related to

land products : higher agriculture prices, more fair trade barriers and price subsidies between countries

– Food chain organization allowing land users to capture value-added for SLM investment

– Specific SLM incentives on the environmental dimension (e.g. compensation for non-use, investment support, PES)


FROM:

• Lack of financial resources at country level

• Lack of credit facilities at the sub-national and local levels

( where most funding should go..)



TO:TO:

• Mobilization of capital for Mobilization of capital for productive investmentsproductive investments– Re-establish the level of external

assistance to the agricultural sector (was reduced by 35%)

– Increase public expenditure for SLM– Development of innovative financing

mechanisms (e.g. PES, carbon fund, GEF, bioenergy grants)

• Facilitation of access to capital Facilitation of access to capital and risk-hedging mechanismsand risk-hedging mechanisms– Micro-grants and micro-credit– Incentive risk-sharing mechanisms– Development of markets, commercial

and support services (inputs, advisory, research)


FROM:

• Lack of coordination and harmonization of delivery mechanisms for external assistance



TO:TO:

• Cost-effective harmonization Cost-effective harmonization and/or alignment of delivery and/or alignment of delivery mechanisms ( e.g. through the mechanisms ( e.g. through the CSIF)CSIF)


6. SLM PROGRAMS AT COUNTRY LEVEL: STEP BY STEP


Step 1 – Commitment and partnership

• Political will to make SLM a top national priority

• Commitment and alignment of development partners

• Broad-based coalition-building• National Task Force with leadership of “SLM champions”

• Sub-national fora and groups

•Multi-level and cross-sectoral

•Multi-stakeholder: private, public, civil society, development partners

• SLM sensitization and awareness-raising at all levels

• Regional partners (NEPAD and RECs) support the process

on a demand-driven basis


• Stocktaking on related SLM issues• Strategies, institutions, policies, public expenditures

• Best practices, lessons learnt

• Existing projects and programs

• Ecosystems and landscapes: spatial characterization, spatial analysis of LD (state, root causes), potential for SLM, stakeholder needs

• Analysis • Barriers and bottlenecks for SLM ( main drivers-relationships )

• Threats and opportunities for land development (e.g. climate change, bioenergy,agro-tourism,diversification)

• Potential synergies and trade-offs between multiple objectives ( food security, eco, socio, envirt, energy, rural poverty ..)

• Multimedia georeferenced info system ( + poster?)

Step 2 – Stocktaking andanalysis ( check list to fill the gaps..)


• Country investment framework• Based on national priorities (PRSPs); SLM diagnostic (step

2); expectations of stakeholders.

• Participatory identification and prioritization of investments including national land planning

• Harmonized, coherent, cost-effective, long term

• 4 strategic lines of investment at country level (CSIF)• Up-scaling through on-the-ground investment

• Create an enabling environment

• Strengthen commercial and support services

• Knowledge management and M&E

Step 3 – Investmentdesign and programming


• Up-scaling through on-the-ground investment•Pilot demonstration with embedded scale up strategies

•Capacity building land users, strengthening land users organizations

•Incentives for SLM adoption ( micro-financing..)

• Create an enabling environment•SLM into national and sectoral frameworks

•SLM into institutional and legal reforms processes

•Cross sectoral spatial land planning and EWS at various levels

• review country investment programs and public expenditures

• Strengthen commercial and support services•Strengthening input suppliers ( seeds, tools, seedlings)

•Marketing support (info, infrastructures, certification, eco-label, fair trade)

•Strengthening of providers of financial services

• Knowledge management and M&E•Strengthening land users driven research , extension services

•Support SLM knowledge bases and communication tools

•Develop M&E and MIS for the CSIF

Step 3 – Investment


Step 4 – Implementation,monitoring and evaluation

• Participatory implementation of investment projects• Participative local land planning

• contractual agreements, including outputs, activities, budget, time frame, stakeholders benefits ( rights, funding,

empowerment, access to services ) & responsibilities, funding, delivery mechanisms;

• Rapid momentum interventions • Low costs, quick results, perverse measures removal..

• M&E transparent, georeferenced, and participatory to feed into CSIF update

the terrafrica vision for sustainable land management in sub-saharan africa (ssa)

Documents