| v| �

About birdLife internAtionALBirdLife International is a global Partnership of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) that strives to conserve birds, their habitats and global biodiversity: working with people towards the sustainable use of natural resources. Currently, the Partnership works in more than 120 countries through 114 national grassroot conservation NGOs. In Africa, the BirdLife Africa Partnership is a growing network of 23 such organisations plus one Country Programme, covering 24 countries, with a combined total of more than 300 staff and 30,000 members. Partners are involved in research, conservation action, environmental education and sustainable development through a broad agenda focusing on birds, other fauna and flora, and socio-economic issues such as poverty alleviation.

BirdLife Africa Programme PrioritiesThe BirdLife Programme in Africa includes the conservation of wild birds as an integral part of nature, protection of Important Bird Areas (IBAs) as a network of sites that are of international importance for bird and biodiversity conservation, management and restoration of the diverse habitats that sustain vital ecological services, and the empowerment and expansion of an Africa-wide constituency of people who care for their natural environment.

Environment and Development: The BirdLife Africa Partnership Vision for the FutureThe BirdLife Africa Partnership envisions a future in which the value of goods and services from biodiversity are recognised by effective government policies and private sector investment, and where civil society is empowered to take locally appropriate action, helping to meet the Millennium Development Goals for Africa, especially Goal 1 – to halve poverty by 2015, and Goal 7 – to ensure environmental sustainability.

Flamingos – Photo credit © James Warwick

BirdLife strives to conserve birds, their habitatsand global biodiversity, working with people towards

sustainability in the use of natural resources.The BirdLife Mission.

| �

vi | � |

Acknowledgements ............................................................................. 4

Foreword ............................................................................................ 5

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Linking conservation and poverty reduction: Why is BirdLife engaging in this issue? ................................................................. 6

1.2 BirdLife Africa’s Improving Livelihoods Projects and the main goal of this publication ................................................................ 7

2.0 Case studies from different countries demonstrating the link between poverty reduction and biodiversity conservation

2.1 Case study 1 – Botswana: Improving livelihoods through promoting birding tourism ........................................................... 9

2.2 Case study 2 – Burkina Faso: Sustainable use of a non-timber forest product brings more income to rural women ....................... 10

2.3 Case study 3 – Kenya: Promoting wool-spinning and sheep rearing to save the Sharpe’s Longclaw on the Kinangop grasslands ................................................................................. 12

3.0 BirdLife Africa’s Improving Livelihoods Projects: Achievements, impacts and lessons learned

3.1 Livelihoods improvement ............................................................ 16

3.2 Institutional strengthening ........................................................... 17

3.3 Capacity building ...................................................................... 17

3.4 Policy influence and advocacy ..................................................... 18

3.5 Collaborative partnerships .......................................................... 19

4.0 Conclusions .................................................................................. 21

5.0 Recommended Reading ............................................................... 22

Acronyms and Abbreviations .............................................................. 23

Contents

8

12

13

18

21

| v| �

BirdLife International would like to thank the Swedish International Biodiversity Programme (SwedBio) and the Spanish Agency for International Development Cooperation (AECID) for supporting BirdLife’s work promoting the link between biodiversity conservation, sustainable livelihoods and poverty reduction. The projects they have funded have helped to generate many of the lessons that are reflected in this publication. Livelihoods improvement projects have been implemented at national and site level by the following BirdLife Partners: Nature Kenya, BirdLife Botswana, NATURAMA (Burkina Faso), BirdLife South Africa and the Ethiopian Wildlife, Natural History Society (EWNHS) and BirdLife in Ethiopia. Committed Site Support Group1 (SSG) members implemented the projects at the 12 sites, generating experience and lessons of wide relevance and value. Significant parts of this publication are based on the experiences described by participants at “lessons learnt” workshops, as well as the reflections of the staff of BirdLife Partners who managed the projects, and of external stakeholders. The input of all these contributors is gratefully acknowledged.1 section 1.1.

Compiled and authored by: Ms. Jane W. Gaithuma, BirdLife Africa Secretariat

Contributing Authors: Pete Hanncock, BirdLife Botswana; Idrissa Zeba, NATURAMA ; Serah Munguti, NatureKenya; BirdLife South Africa; Ethiopia Wildlife and Natural History Society (EWNHS); Dr. Muhtari Aminu-Kano and David Thomas, BirdLife Global Partnership Secretariat

Comments and Contributions by: Dr. Julius Arinaitwe, BirdLife Africa Partnership Secretariat; Paul Ndang’ang’a, BirdLife Africa Partnership Secretariat

Publication Funded by: Swedish International Biodiversity Programme (Swedbio) P.O. Box 7007, SE-750 07 Uppsala, Sweden | Backlosavagen 8 Tel:+46 (0)18 67 13 44 | Telefax: +46 (0) 18 30 02 46 | Website: www.swedbio.org

BirdLife acknowledges with gratitude the financial assistance from SwedBio for the publication of this document.

The designation of geographical entities in this booklet and presentation of the material do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of BirdLife Africa and globally concerning the legal status of any country, territory or area or of its authorities or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.

Published by: BirdLife International, BirdLife Africa Partnership, Nairobi, Kenya Copyright © 2010 BirdLife International

Reproduction of this publication for educational and any other non-commercial purposes is authorised without prior written permission from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of this publication for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written permission of the copyright holder.

Citation: BirdLife International, Africa Partnership (2010). Good for Nature, Good for People: Key Lessons Learnt from BirdLife International’s Improving Livelihoods Projects. BirdLife International Africa Partnership.

ISBN No: 9966-7191-5-6

Photo credits: NATURAMA, Charlie Moores, Pete Hancock.

Editing: John Mwazemba, Publishing Manager, Macmillan; Ade Long, BirdLife International and Nick Langley, Private editor

Design, layout and printing: Dezine Creationz Ltd., P.O. Box 14959-00800 Nairobi, Kenya; Tel: +254 020 2678052/3; Cell: +254 (0)721-344225

Available from: BirdLife Africa Secretariat, P.O. Box 3502, 00100 Nairobi, Kenya; Tel: +254 20 2473259; Fax: +254 20 8068315

ACknowLedgements

vi | � |

As the environment is getting higher on the agenda of economic priorities for Africa, the importance of biodiversity conservation is also being recognised more widely. The values and services provided by nature to people’s livelihoods are increasingly appreciated and it is crucial that sustainable management of Africa’s natural resources,

including biodiversity, is becoming a fundamental part of the strategy to eradicate poverty. Biodiversity underpins the ecosystem services that all people ultimately depend on at all levels, from the individual to the global, rich and poor alike. Ecosystem goods and services underpin agricultural resilience and food security, water quality and availability, medicine and health, and cultural values. If sensitively, creatively and sustainably harvested and shared, Africa’s resources could make a significant contribution towards meeting internationally agreed development targets such as the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) 2010 and post-2010 targets. Proceeds from nature-based tourism and the carbon sequestration value of tropical forests, for example, far exceed the level of international aid being provided to developing countries in Africa and elsewhere. It is,

foreword

therefore, important to invest in nature and people, by combining the fight against poverty with sustainable management of natural resources on the continent. Many countries in Africa are now mainstreaming environment into their Poverty Reduction Strategies, although at a limited scale. Partnerships between NGOs and governments to conserve and manage ecosystem services are indispensable. Some countries are turning to market instruments to balance economic concerns with environmental ones. Yet only a small part of Africa’s natural resources are currently being managed sustainably. While there is an urgent need for hard infrastructure, such as roads, railways, ports and airports, schools and hospitals in Africa, the continent equally needs investment in its soft infrastructure – in the ecosystem goods and services provided by nature. BirdLife, through the implementation of projects across Africa, is demonstrating that it is possible to support local development through the maintenance and management of biodiversity and natural resources. Scaling up such locally-led approaches has the potential to unleash the huge economic and development potential that biodiversity holds for poor people in Africa, both today and for generations to come. The projects described in this publication provide examples of the opportunities which can be created for people to move beyond mere subsistence, through entrepreneurship, investments and enabling policies at the national, regional and international levels.

Marco Lambertini

Director/Chief Executive, BirdLife International

| v| �

1.1 Linking conservation and poverty reduction: Why is BirdLife engaging in this issue?

BirdLife Partners, particularly in developing countries, recognise that poverty reduction and conservation are inextricably linked, and that working towards sustainable development must be a role for BirdLife at many Important Bird Areas2 (IBAs). For example:

The poor, especially in rural areas, depend on biodiversity for food, fuel, shelter, medicines, and their livelihoods.

Biodiversity provides the critical ‘ecosystem services’ on which development depends, including air and water purification, soil conservation, disease control, and reduced vulnerability to natural disasters such as floods, droughts, storms and landslides.

Biodiversity and healthy ecosystem services increase resilience to economic shocks and environmental change, including impacts of climate change.

Many ‘hotspots’ for biodiversity, including Important Bird Areas, are found in the poorest countries of the world.

Conservation that excludes people can lead to increased poverty, resentment and conflict, whilst working with people can build social capital, improve democracy and reduce poverty.

From BirdLife’s perspective, there are compelling strategic, ethical, moral and political reasons for integrating biodiversity conservation and livelihoods, and for addressing the challenges of poverty reduction and biodiversity conservation simultaneously and coherently. They include the following:

Poverty reduction is one of the key international imperatives as stressed by the United Nation’s

�IBAs are critical sites for the conservation of birds and biodiversity, selected according to internationally recognised criteria.

Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). MDG 1 sets time-bound and measurable targets for halving extreme poverty and hunger by 2015. Achieving this goal requires concerted action by all sectors of society. Given the role that biodiversity plays in supporting the livelihoods of millions of poor people, conservation NGOs have a particular potential to contribute positively to this key international agenda. – The BirdLife network has a substantial membership

from developing countries – with more than 50 Partnership countries in the OECD DAC list of aid recipients. It is in these developing countries, where day-to-day challenges of poverty and marginalisation are faced constantly, that

Site Support GroupSThrough its work with local communities and other stakeholders, BirdLife is mobilising and empowering a global network of volunteers, rooted locally, for the conservation and sustainable management of priority sites for bird and biodiversity conservation (Important Bird Areas (IBAs)). This growing network is currently present at over 2500 IBAs worldwide. In Africa, Site Support Groups (SSGs) members live in or adjacent to the sites they look after, and understand the interests and needs of their communities. As well as being an excellent means of engaging the local community in conservation, SSGs also provide a mechanism by which limited resources can be utilised efficiently and equitably, in a manner that suits the cultural, social, historic and economic circumstances of the community. Supported by the national BirdLife Partner, SSGs provide a link between local communities and national institutions, such as other NGOs, government agencies and researchers.

1.0 introduCtion

vi | � |

biodiversity, including most Globally Threatened Birds (GTB), is concentrated.

– Human despair caused by poverty is incompatible with BirdLife’s vision of a world rich in biodiversity, with people and nature living in harmony, equitably and sustainably. As a conservation network, BirdLife’s focus has been and will remain birds and biodiversity, but the Partnership recognises that poverty and conservation are inextricably linked, and that working towards sustainable development must be a role for BirdLife at many IBAs and in many countries3.

– Investing in conservation can contribute to poverty reduction. People living in and around IBAs often depend on natural resources for their livelihoods, and many pressures that threaten biodiversity have serious consequences for these people. Nature conservation is thus tightly bound up with understanding and addressing local needs. This means addressing issues such as sustainable use or appropriate alternative livelihoods.

People may change behaviour that damages the environment if they are enabled, or offered incentives, to meet their needs by other means, from alternative sources or more sustainable practices.

People are more likely to follow resource management agreements and rules if they have had input into these agreements. Participation in decision-making makes it more likely that the agreements will meet their needs and will reflect what is achievable.

People often have knowledge, skills and organisational capacities that are useful in resource management, and local knowledge is particularly valuable and relevant.

�This entire area of work has a focus in BirdLife’s strategic objective 4.4: “promote and foster the links between biodiversity conservation and sustaining people’s livelihoods”.

Garnering the political will to conserve biodiversity at IBAs in developing countries will clearly depend on demonstrating to the government and society at large the full contribution made by biodiversity to poverty reduction efforts. For BirdLife, addressing livelihoods issues in and around IBAs is, therefore, not about compromising biodiversity conservation goals in the name of poverty reduction, it is clearly about how we accomplish those goals.

Reflecting these issues, the BirdLife Partnership takes into account human needs in all its conservation work in order to help deliver effective long-term species, site and habitat conservation.

Association Les Amis Des Oiseaux

Ethiopia

Kenya

Tanzania

Zambia

Zimbabwe

Botswana

SouthAfrica

Cam

eroo

n

Nigeria

Gha

na

Tunisia

Egypt

SierraLeone

BurkinaFaso

Liberia

Uganda

Djibouti

Madagascar

RwandaBurundi

Malawi

ZAMBIAN

SOCIETYOrnithological

L IBERIA, W. A.

SOCI

ETY

FOR

THE CONSERVATION OF

NATUR

EOF

NatureUganda

BirdLifeZIMBABWE

MADAGASCARLigue Malagachepour la Protection des Oiseaux

WESMA.C.N.R.

ASSOC

IATI

ON

POUR

LA CONSERVATION DE LA NATUREAU

RWANDA

IBIDUKIKIJE

FORETS

Côted’Ivoire

NATURAMA

Partner

Countryprogramme

BirdLifeGiving Conservation Wings

The BirdLife Partnership in Africa, October 2010 © BirdLife Interntional

| v| �

1.2 BirdLife Africa’s Improving Livelihoods Projects and the main goal of this publication

This publication is a joint effort of the BirdLife Africa Partnership Secretariat and BirdLife Partners in Botswana, Burkina Faso, Kenya, Ethiopia and South Africa. Its main purpose is to share the good practice and lessons learnt through their collaborative work on improving the lives and livelihoods of local communities in Africa, through linking biodiversity conservation and poverty reduction. Drawing on the experiences of the BirdLife Partners from these five countries, it presents examples of opportunities that can be created for people to move beyond subsistence through entrepreneurship, investments and influencing policies at the national, regional and international levels. Community organisation and mobilisation is a critical first step in involving local communities in livelihoods and conservation initiatives, and the project builds on

BirdLife Africa’s Site Support Groups (SSG) approach. The projects focus on strengthening the capacities of SSGs to design and implement relevant interventions, and the capacity of the respective BirdLife Partners and the Africa Partnership Secretariat to support them. To support replication and scaling up, the projects have strong advocacy components at all geographic levels, and are also aimed at developing and strengthening collaborative partnerships. It is our hope that lessons from these experiences will not only inform subsequent practice in building capacity, influencing policy, collaboration and livelihoods promotion, but also encourage governments and other policy-makers to embrace the link between biodiversity conservation and poverty reduction as a matter of urgency, so as to allocate the necessary resources to ensure the two issues are tackled in an integrated way. This publication will also be relevant to partners and donors initiating biodiversity conservation activities that translate directly into wellbeing at community level, and policy influence at all levels.

Sheep grazing in the Kinangop Plateau – Photo credit © Charlie Moores/10000 birds

Community organisation and mobilisation –A critical first step in local people participation

vi | � |

Lake Ngami is one of the premier birding destinations in SouthernAfrica when it has water – Photo credit © Pete Hancock

CAse studies on the Link between povertyreduCtion And biodiversity ConservAtion

Bonang with colleagues at Lake Ngami – Photo credit © Pete Hancock

2.0Partners in each of the five participating countries worked with local communities at 12 IBAs, supporting the linking of biodiversity conservation with local development. The following case studies show how, at three of those sites, BirdLife’s Site Support Groups have used ecosystem services sustainably to improve their lives and those of their communities, while at the same time, supporting biodiversity conservation.

2.1 Case study 1: Botswana

Improving livelihoods through promoting birding tourism

Bonang France is a young man with a bright future, although this wasn’t always the case. A few years ago, he was among the unemployed youth of Sehithwa Village – a relatively small settlement at the western end of the Lake Ngami Important Bird Area in northern Botswana. Then a miracle happened – the long-dry bed of Lake Ngami began to fill with floodwaters from the nearby Okavango Delta. This attracted waterbirds from all over the world and revitalised the area, opening up new opportunities for the people of Sehithwa.

The first reaction of many Sehithwa residents was to start hunting waterfowl, but this proved to be unsustainable. Consequently, when BirdLife Botswana proposed developing the avi-tourism (birding tourism) potential of the area, this caught the immediate interest of local people who know that tourism is the main employer and revenue earner in this district. A bird guide training course was advertised, and the number of applicants was overwhelming. A rigorous selection interview finally narrowed the field down to 15 participants, all of whom successfully completed the training. Bonang France proved to be the star of the course, and after its completion, he motivated BirdLife Botswana to improve its marketing of Lake Ngami and local bird guides. “There has been a steady increase in the number of birdwatchers visiting Lake Ngami, and although I am not yet guiding full-time, the money I earn has made a significant improvement to my financial situation”, says Bonang, who is saving money to study at the University of Botswana. Bonang and the other bird guides charge BWP 150.00 (US$ 25.00) per person for a day’s birdwatching at the Lake, and apart from

| v| 10

Bonang with bird ringing instructor Peter D’Arcy(right) – hoto credit © Pete Hancock

their knowledge of birds and the area, they are able to enhance birders’ experience by taking them out in canoes and mekoro (traditional dug-out canoes). Since Bonang spends a significant amount of his time at the Lake, he has also made a valuable contribution to BirdLife Botswana’s Important Bird Area monitoring. He conducts the biannual water bird counts that form the basis for this monitoring (the data is also sent to Wetlands International). He was chosen to participate in a waterbird ringing course at the Lake, and has subsequently assisted researchers from the Percy Fitzpatrick Institute of African Ornithology with waterbird ringing and censusing at Lake Ngami. And what of the future? Bonang has a clear vision for securing the conservation status of the lake and, thereby, the basis for livelihoods – his own included – based on birding tourism. “As a member of the Bosele Lake Ngami Conservation Trust (the Site Support Group at Lake Ngami), I’d like to see the Land Board designating the area around the Lake as a community photographic area in accordance with the Community-based Natural Resources Management (CBNRM) policy, and allocating it to the Trust, which represents everyone living around

the Lake. In this way, we will be able to convince the wider community of the importance of birds as part of our heritage, and one of the most valuable resources benefiting everyone in the area”, he says. The Bosele Trust is, in fact, pursuing this same vision and Trust members have already approached the Land Board for user rights to the whole area. As a short-term measure, they have also applied for specific smaller areas to develop as community campsites, where tourists will be able to stay – this will create much-needed employment and revenue which will accrue to the Trust for further development. The Trust is still in its infancy, but there is unanimous support among members for the concept of conserving biodiversity and using it sustainably to improve livelihoods.

2.2. Case study 2 – Burkina Faso

Sustainable use of a non-timber forest product brings more income to rural women

If you have not been to the Sahel and Sudan savanna belts of West Africa and you are given a ball of soumbala and asked to say what you think it is, you will

Soumbala, a West African condiment – Photo credit © Marco Schmidt

vi | 11 |

Distribution of soumbala production equipment to 25 womenresiding close to PNKT – Photo credit © Naturama

be forgiven if you think that it is the droppings from a large wild mammal. It is roundish, coarse textured, dark coloured and has a very offensive smell. However, in fact, soumbala is a condiment used widely across the region to season sauces and soups. It is prepared by women over the course of several days from the seeds of the African locust bean, Parkia biglobosa. The otherwise toxic seeds are fermented to render them palatable to humans, hence the putrid odour. The making and selling of this condiment is one of the few income-generating activities available to women in the rural areas of Burkina Faso, where most activities are at a subsistence level. Therefore, scaling up its production is a good way to increase household incomes and empower women. However, this is not as easy as it sounds. The main problem is that Parkia seeds are in short supply because the trees have either been cleared for farming or chopped down for firewood across most of the open lands in the country. Then there is the problem of acquiring the basic kits, and the know-how to start or expand soumbala production. By their very nature, parks and reserves in Burkina Faso contain disproportionately higher densities of Parkia trees

than surrounding lands, and are, therefore, sources of the main raw material for soumbala. This is certainly true of Parc National Kabore Tambi (PNKT) which covers 169,000 ha in the south, near the border with Ghana. The Park, which is part of the Kaboré Tambi Nazinga Sissili Complex IBA, is characterised by a rich floristic diversity, with over 100 species of flora representing 28 plant families. The Park is renowned for hosting 32 species of large, wild mammals out of the 62 found in West Africa. With regard to avifauna, there are 204 species of birds from 42 families. Bird species that are increasingly rare in Burkina Faso are found at this site. They include the Secretary Bird (Sagittarius serpentarius), the Marabou Stork (Leptoptilos crumeniferus) and the Black Stork (Ciconia nigra). Established in 1976, PNKT has had a long history of opposition from surrounding communities, which culminated in the killing of a game ranger, Kabore Tambi, whose name it now bears. The park is currently leased to NATURAMA (BirdLife International Partner in Burkina Faso), which has adopted a participatory management approach by supporting local conservation groups to undertake sustainable use of non-timber forest products from the park. These activities include the promotion

A woman producing soumbala – Photo credit © Naturama

| v| 1�

of the sustainable harvest of Parkia seeds for the making and sale of soumbala. Naturama supported identification of 25 women residents in the proximity of the Park who were already producers of the condiment. Each received a pot, a bucket, a basin and (crucially) a small amount of working capital. This support has enabled women to double their weekly production during periods when the seeds are available (April–June). Before the support from the project, the production of soumbala resulted in a net average profit of 600 FCFA per woman producer per week.The project increased the income of each woman producer by 400 FCFA per week. Seed production is seasonal, and at present soumbala producers have neither the capital nor the facilities for storing seeds for periods when they are in short supply. The Project also has social and health advantages. Indeed, the equipment provided (buckets, pots, basins) is sought after during community activities (funerals, baptisms, weddings), thus, contributing to enhanced status and stronger social cohesion among women in the community. A soumbala producer said, “My profit from soumbala has allowed me to do two things: increase my production and sale of soumbala; and

Soumbala in baskets and Parkia seeds in thebackground – Photo credit © Naturama

to earn more money every month, which I use to take proper care of my children and to improve the quality of food by buying more ingredients like dried fish and rice.” These tangible socio-economic benefits have generated strong support for the Park from the soumbala producers and the community at large. They are already working to undertake reforestation of the African locust tree in community lands. To further increase their income, the women would like to have access to micro-credit facilities to enable them to build up adequate stocks to cover periods when the seeds are in short supply. Naturama has produced a micro-credit scheme booklet to train the women and other community members in readiness for when they will get funding to undertake some micro-credit activities. Lastly, they hope to expand the distribution and sale of their produce beyond the community level.

2.3 Case study 3: Kenya

Promoting wool spinning and sheep rearing to save the Sharpe’s Longclaw on the Kinangop grasslands

The Kinangop grasslands IBA lies in the Kinangop plateau, a wide stretch of land bounded by the forests of the Aberdare Mountains IBA and the Kikuyu Escarpment IBA. The Kinangop grasslands shelter Sharpe’s Longclaw (Macronyx sharpei), a globally threatened grassland-specialist bird, and numerous other animals and plants endemic to the mountain grasslands of Kenya and northern Tanzania. Sharpe’s Longclaw is listed as Endangered on the IUCN Red List of globally threatened species because of the very rapid and continuing reduction in the extent and quality of its habitat.

vi | 1� |

The Njabini Wool-spinning Workshop run by the Friends of Kinangop Plateau SSG with Nature Kenya: Members at work – Photo credit © Charlie Moores/10000 birds

The Friends of Kinangop Plateau (FoKP) SSG was founded in 1997, by a group of Kinangop residents concerned about their environment. FoKP’s aims are to conserve biodiversity and ensure wise use of the environment in Kinangop Plateau and its surroundings, especially the area’s unique highland grasslands. Membership has grown tremendously, spreading across the plateau to four sub-branches in Murungaru, Engineeer, Njabini and Magumu/Nyakio. The SSG currently has around 400 members. A visit to the Njabini wool-spinning workshop run by the Friends of the Kinangop Plateau with support from Nature Kenya (BirdLife in Kenya) will reveal the remarkable achievement of a small group of community-

based conservationists, who have come up with a far-sighted strategy to protect the grasslands whilst trying to ensure that the people who live in them also benefit. In developing a strategy for conservation of the grasslands, Nature Kenya and the Friends of Kinangop Plateau had to take two separate factors into consideration:1. Sharpe’s Longclaw is highly dependent for nesting

sites on the thick tussocks that grow in this particular type of grassland. Graze the land too heavily (with cattle) and the tussocks are lost. Cultivate crops and, again, the tussocks are lost. Put sheep on the land instead and they, like the antelopes that originally lived on the Plateau, tend to avoid the tussocks,

| v| 1�

FoKp Wool SpinninG proceSS

Friends of Kinangop (FoKP) –Value Chain Development for Yarn As narrated by Sammy Bakari, the supervisor of the Njabini wool spinning workshop

“We spin wool into yarn, which we sell as a raw material to Kenya Weaverbird Ltd., a company

based in Nairobi, which in turn weaves and sells different finished products including carpets

to end users. There is increasing realisation by us, as the SSG members, of the need to spin the

yarn and weave it into finished products like carpets, instead of selling yarn as a raw material.

However, it is not easy to profitably market nature-based products when one is based in the

rural areas. This is because better markets tend to be found in the major urban centres and

highways which tourists frequent. Although the demand for carpets is very high, the timeframe

given for more lucrative orders is normally very short. This requires high-efficiency weaving

by ourselves, which is still not possible with the equipment we use. We also have enabled

the community to realise that livestock-keeping is friendlier to biodiversity conservation than

agriculture-based activities. The challenge, therefore, is to ensure livestock-keeping continues

to be more profitable to farmers than other agricultural activities.

“We buy wool from farmers at Kshs 70 per kilogram and spin it into yarn, and sell it at Kshs

200 for every one kg. This gives us a profit margin of Kshs 130. When the yarn is woven and

sold as a carpet, one kg of yarn is worth Kshs 1000, which increases our profit margin to Kshs

870 (75 Kshs = 1USD).

“Nature Kenya is helping us to market our products, the main strategy for improving our

incomes is through enhancing the value chain, not only encouraging the group to weave yarn

into carpets and other products at the farm level, but also marketing the group’s products beyond

the rural areas and even abroad. Nature Kenya has been training us on value chain and basic

entrepreneur/business management skills, which are proving useful to the members”.

which are very tough, and feed on the grass in between, creating fairly natural feeding conditions for the Longclaw.

2. Whilst sheep are probably the best domesticated animal to have on the land, rearing them has never been an especially profitable exercise and, therefore, not popular. The meat of course has value, but

wool is treated as a useless by-product of animal husbandry with no value whatsoever. It has no value because no one is willing to buy it, because no one locally knows what to do with it. In fact the farmers themselves have to pay to have it disposed of, which costs them a percentage of whatever profits they make from the meat.

vi | 1� |

The workshop has given local women a skill anda means to earn, and it is on the way to producing a cottage

industry that will attract visitors and ‘tourist dollars’

The challenge, therefore, was to add value to sheep and sheep products, so that the community members would switch to sheep-rearing. The solution FoKP came up with was to secure some suitable local premises, secure some spinning wheels, engage some enthusiastic volunteers, and then train them to spin wool into yarn and into woollen goods from scratch! The workshop that Nature Kenya and the SSG have established is an excellent example of wise use, creating incentives for farmers, who might otherwise cultivate and sub-divide the remaining grassland on Kinangop, to rear sheep instead. The workshop buys the wool

produced from the local farmers, and trains local women and young people in all aspects of preparing the wool fibres, from “carding” and grading them right through to spinning and weaving them into mats and other goods. These are now being sold to local people and tourists. The development gives local women (who have otherwise low rates of employment and virtually no incomes of their own) a skill and a means to earn a living, and it is on the way to producing a cottage industry that will attract visitors and ‘tourist dollars’. And while this is going on, the highly threatened habitat of the Endangered Sharpe’s Longclaw is being conserved.

Different colours of yarn – Photo credit © Charlie Moores/10000 birds

| v| 1�

3.0

Muzi, an indalo carver in South Africa, a beneficiary of thelivelihoods projects – Photo credit © BirdLife South Africa

one of the beneficiarieS of the livelihoodS project

Mrs. Adamu Dhaba, an SSG member at Berga wetlands4 in Ethiopia said: “I was given credit of 2000 birr last year (2008). I also had got an improved breed of cow two years before. I bought some bulls for fattening and sold them to get a profit. My cow gives me 14 litres of milk per day. I sell 10 litres and the rest I leave for my household consumption. Every month I get at least 1,100 birr from sale of milk. I also get about 2000 birr from bull fattening in a year. This has enabled me get life necessities and take my

children to school. I have also paid back all my loan to the SSG. Before I had nothing! My monthly income is now almost equivalent to what I used to get in a year in the past! ” – (US$ 258). I keep fewer cattle and in this way I have helped to reduce degradation of our wetland.

(1 US$ = 16.39 ETB)

4Berga Wetland: Berga Wetland is situated in Adaa Berga District of Oromia Regional State in Ethiopia. The seasonally flooded wetland is a vital source of water and other resources for sustaining the livelihoods of the local communities and guarantees food security in the area. This wetland is being intensively used by over �,�00 subsistence-farming households, as a source of water, dry season livestock grazing, sedge and hay for sale, and medicinal plants. The sedge beds are the habitat of several endemic birds and it is the only known breeding site for the globally endangered White-winged Flufftail (Sarothrura ayresi). The project was implemented through the SSG/Local Conservation Group, based at Berga wetland. The SSG/Local Conservation Group was established in �00� and has been active since then, having been engaged in natural resource conservation activities, including the conservation efforts to save the White-winged Flufftail. Besides conservation , the Berga SSG has been running a revolving fund scheme, providing credit to its own members and other members of the community to improve their livelihoods.

(Source: EWNHS AECID proposal, �008)

Mrs Adamu Dhaba –Photo credit © EWNHS

birdLife AfriCA’s improving LiveLihoods projeCts: AChievements, impACts And Lessons LeArned

active participation. Through these projects, and through skills training and provision of micro-credit schemes, the capacity of local communities to use natural resources more sustainably has been unlocked. The projects managed to reach over 70,000 beneficiaries both directly and indirectly within a span of five years. Most of these projects are still ongoing without further support from BirdLife.

To ensure sustainability biodiversity conservation should address livelihood issues in a focused and long-term manner, with the involvement of local

A fisherman and his wife drying fish for sale at Sourou valleyin Burkina Faso – Photo credit © Naturama

3.1 Livelihoods improvement

BirdLife partners have established livelihoods projects at twelve sites of international importance for birds and other biodiversity (IBAs), with local communities’

vi | 1� |

communities. Deliberate efforts should be made to ensure resources and proceeds of livelihood interventions reach the poorest sections of the community and that some of the proceeds are re-invested in biodiversity conservation. Benefits accruing or wealth created need not necessarily be in monetary terms – benefits could be dietary, medicinal, aesthetic or in any other material form. Additional benefits include an increased role in decision-making, improved governance, and conservation of cultural values.

3.2 Institutional strengthening

A wider objective of the projects is to generate evidence and experience that can support policy advocacy, at national and international levels, concerning the role of biodiversity in development and poverty reduction. Building policy advocacy capacity nationally and regionally has, therefore, been a key outcome. With support from these projects, BirdLife now has policy and advocacy personnel at the BirdLife Africa Secretariat level, and also in some of the countries that have implemented the projects, e.g. in Kenya and South Africa.

The project has also supported institutional growth through support with equipment and tools such as computers, desks, chairs and cameras, and has supported development of publications such as capacity assessment tools for use at the local level, socio-economic frameworks for measuring livelihoods work, and a gender policy for the Partnership.

3.3 Capacity building

Effective linking of livelihood promotion and biodiversity conservation efforts is dependent on the

School children (beneficiaries of the school in Ethiopia):They do not have to go too far now – Photo credit © Jane Gaithuma

| v| 1�

of indigenous knowledge. To facilitate continuous sharing, documentation and effective knowledge management there is need to develop simple, locally-owned indicators to measure progress, and a monitoring and evaluation system for data collection and management that is user-friendly. Visual and practical tools can be used to involve semi-illiterate and illiterate communities in data collection and management. Simple messages are needed which link people’s day-to-day activities and livelihoods to biodiversity and environmental conservation.

Building capacity for women’s participation supports their inclusion and voice in decision-making, and ensures that the important role of women in natural resource management is heard and acted on.

3.4 Policy influence and advocacy

Through capacity building of the Site Support Groups’ members, their voices have been heard at local, national and global levels, influencing policies and recommending policy decisions. Local SSG members were supported to participate in many global forums such as CBD COP 9 and UNFCCC

SSG members in South Africa – Photo credit © BirdLife South Africa

Having a computer and other equipment improves administrationand documentation – Photo credit © Pete Hancock

technical capacity of civil society organisations, particularly SSGs working at the local level, and this needs to be continually enhanced. Overall, SSGs need to access sufficient, long-term unrestricted funding to sustain their activities.

One of the main capacity gaps is value chain development. Local communities must be supported to move gradually from the lower to the upper part of the value chain development (VCD) ladder.

It is important to undertake surveys of ecological data together with the community, to ensure the capturing

Empowered community women members celebratingan event – Photo credit © Naturama

vi | 1� |

COP 15. Hence, facilitation of local groups to participate in such meetings is a key issue.

A key lesson from our livelihoods projects is that major policy obstacles to biodiversity conservation and poverty reduction are found at the national level, especially related to capacity. Changes at national levels both in policy and implementation can make the biggest difference to community action on biodiversity conservation. For example, the good relationship that exists between government and civil society actors in Kenya has enabled the policy

Kijabe Environment Volunteers (KENVO) SSG members with Dr. Achim Steiner, Executive Director of UNEP during a tree planting session to celebrate

International Day for Biological Diversity – Photo credit © Jane Gaithuma

Cape vulture in flight and flamingoes (threatened speciesin the region) – Photo credit © Pete Hancock

Members of Nature Uganda advocating for MabiraForest – Photo credit © Nature Uganda

debates to be pushed into policy documents and into action. Nature Kenya was involved in the development of the Forest Act 2005, and together with SSGs, they are working with government at various sites to implement the Act.

Policy development and programming are intimately linked and mutually reinforcing. Community interventions provide evidence for influencing national policy, and national experiences must more meaningfully shape a more global response to biodiversity conservation and poverty reduction.

BirdLife South Africa’s Policy and Advocacy Manager conducting apresentation to a keen audience – Photo credit © BirdLife South Africa

| v| �0

need for communities to partner and collaborate with government agencies in biodiversity conservation efforts.

As well as being actively involved in implementing biodiversity conservation programmes, civil society organisations can and do play a key role as government watchdogs. They monitor policy decisions, budget allocations and the wider implementation of conservation programmes and services, and thereby promote greater accountability at all levels. Civil society organisations should be supported to act as partners of governments in national responses to biodiversity conservations efforts. Only through these combined actions can the link between biodiversity conservation and livelihood promotion be established and strengthened.

Equally, global conservation policy development must be better understood by national governments and local communities for effective imple-mentation.

The critical role the media plays in advocacy cannot be overemphasised, and building good relations with media is important for linking biodiversity conservation and poverty reduction.

3.5 Collaborative partnerships

Communities are not homogeneous; they are very stratified, with different power struggles and group dynamics, which need to be taken into account in implementing biodiversity conservation and livelihoods improvement interventions.

There is increased ownership of conservation efforts by governments across the countries, hence, the

Children in a school perfoming a drama to celebrateWorld Environment Day – Photo credit © Nature Kenya

BirdLife delegation at UNFCCC COP-15 inCopenhagen – Photo credit © BirdLife

Women members managing a tree nursery – Photo credit © Nature Kenya

Children, youth, men and women are all important stakeholders in efforts to conserve biodiversity and reduce poverty

vi | �1 |

For BirdLife, the sustainability of the SSG approach is central to linking biodiversity conservation to livelihood promotion. Developing the capacity of local organisations is critical, and donors, governments and intermediary support organisations have a role in cultivating ownership and increased demand for strengthening the linkages between biodiversity conservation and poverty eradication, using the SSG and other local models.

The African continent remains very rich in biodiversity which provides the potential for improving the living conditions of people if used sustainably, and if checks and balances are put in place to reverse the trend in biodiversity loss. BirdLife hopes to carry on supporting this approach by continuing to build strong partnerships/collaborations with relevant stakeholders, working closely with partners and SSGs who are competent in this area, and continuously enhancing their capacity.

4.0ConCLusions

BirdLife Partner and secretariat staff attending a local SSG meeting and being welcomed with a local drink – Photo credit © Naturama

It is possible to reduce poverty while conservingbiodiversity – It is a win-win situation for all

| v| ��

5.0 reCommended reAding

Arend Jan Van Bodegom (2006). Evaluation of the Theme-based Co-financing (TMF) Programme –Biodiversity Conservation and Poverty Alleviation.

Barbara Blumenthal (2003). Investing in Capacity Building. The Foundation Center, New York.

BirdLife International (2004). Guidelines for Participatory Poverty Assessment at IBAs and the Identification of Poverty Reduction Indicators. BirdLife International, unpublished document.

BirdLife International (2006). Livelihoods and the Environment at Important Bird Areas: Listening to local voices. Cambridge, UK: BirdLife International. Compiled and written by David Thomas.

BirdLife International (2007). Conserving Biodiversity in Africa: Guidelines for Applying the Site support Group approach. ICIPE Science Press, Nairobi, Kenya. Compiled by Solomon Mwangi Ngari and edited by Julius Arinaitwe.

BirdLife International (2007). Monitoring Important Bird Areas in Africa: Biodiversity Status and Trends Report 2005. ICIPE Science Press, Nairobi, Kenya.

BirdLife International (2004 and 2008). State of the World’s Birds. BirdLife International.

BirdLife International (2009). Evaluation of the BirdLife Africa Project: Improving the Livelihoods of Local Communities in Africa by Promoting Sustainable Use of Renewable Natural Resources through Increased Participation in Biodiversity Policymaking and Implementation. Compiled by Göran Eklöf and Alex Muhweezi, unpublished document.

BirdLife International (2009). Improving Livelihoods and Policymaking through Sustainable Use of Natural resources. SwedBio funded project Final Report. Compiled by Jane Gaithuma, unpublished document.

Birdlife International (2009). Improving Livelihoods and Policy Making. Lessons Learnt Workshop Report (unpublished)

BirdLife Africa Partnership (2010). What is happening to Biodiversity in Africa’s Protected Areas compiled by Thandiwe Chikomo.

Convention on Biological Diversity (2010). Case Studies Illustrating the Socio-economic Benefits of Ecological Betworks. Compiled by Dr. Graham Bennett, Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal.

Gordon, I. (2003). Harnessing Butterfly Biodiversity for Improving Livelihoods and Forest Conservation: The Kipepeo Project. Journal of Environment and Development.

Thompson, H.S., et al. (2007). Enhanced Sustainability at Arabuko Sokoke Forest: Conservation Successes, Challenges and Lessons learnt. Nature Kenya, Nairobi, Kenya.

Kuria, D. and Githiru, M. 2007. Actualizing community-based conservation – KENVO: Evolution, initiatives, lessons, challenges and future. KENVO, Matathia, Kenya.

Nature Kenya (2007). Kenya’s Important Bird Areas. Status and Trends 2006. Nature Kenya, Nairobi, Kenya. Edited by Fleur Ng’weno and Paul Matiku.

vi | �� |Flamingos – Photo credit © James Warwick

AECID Spanish Agency for International Development Cooperation AEWA-AFRING African Eurasian Waterbird Agreement, African Bird Ringing Scheme CBD Convention on Biological Diversity CBNRM Community-based Natural Resource Management COP Conference of Parties EWNHS Ethiopian Wildlife and Natural History Society FoKP Friends of Kinangop IBAs Important Bird Areas MDGs Millennium Development Goals NATURAMA la foundation des amis de la nature (BirdLife in Burkina Faso) NGOs Non-Governmental Organisations OECD DAC Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, Development Assistance Committee PNKT Kabore Tambi National Park SSGs Site Support Groups SwedBio Swedish International Biodiversity Programme UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change VCD Value Chain Development

ACronyms And AbbreviAtions

�� |

ISBN No: 9966-7191-5-6

About swedbio

The Swedish International Biodiversity Programme (SwedBio) was initiated by the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA) and the Swedish Biodiversity Centre (CBM), to allow a pro-active and strategic approach to addressing biodiversity for local livelihoods within the Swedish International Development Cooperation. BirdLife acknowledges with gratitude the financial assistance from SwedBio for the publication of this document.A Sida-funded programme at

the Swedish Biodivesity Centre

SwedBio