Innovative Biodiversity Financing - Swaziland

8/14/2019 Innovative Biodiversity Financing - Swaziland

1/32

INNOVATIVE FINANCING FOR BIODIVERSITY

CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE USE

Prepared by Sivumelwano Agreement Nyembe for Africa

Management Development Institute (AMADI) for the Swaziland

Environmental Authority (SEA)

Submitted to SEA on 19 June 2006

Amadi SwazilandGwamile Street, Embassy House 1st Floor

P. O. Box 6146, Mbabane H100 SwazilandTel: +268 4050748/5514128Fax: +268 4050748/5514128

Mobile: +268 6059249/6184712

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com
http://www.pdffactory.com/http://www.pdffactory.com/http://www.pdffactory.com/


2/32

InnovativeFinancingFor Biodiversity Conservation And Sustainable Use

AMADI Swaziland ii

Acronyms ............................................................................................................. iii1. Executive Summary......................................... ........................................ ........... 1

2. Introduction ........................................ ......................................... ............... 22.1. State of Swazilands Biodiversity ........................................ .................... 22.2. Ecosystems ............................................................................................. 22.3. Regulatory framework ........... .................................................. ............... 4

3. Background ............................... .................................................. ............... 54. Methodology ........... .................................................. ................................. 74.1. Literature Review .................................................. ................................. 7

4.1.1. An Internet Search ...................... ........................................ .................... 74.1.2. Structured Interviews ............................... ......................................... ...... 74.1.3. Semi structured Interviews ......................................... ............................. 8

4.2. Case Studies............................................................................................ 84.2.3. Case 3: Zimbabwes Efforts to involve the residents of Communalareas in conservation pay off ................................................................................ 104.3. Bio-piracy issues............................ ......................................... .................. 12

5. International Provisions on Biological Diversity ..................... .................. 136. International recognitions for need for innovative Biodiversity financing

mechanisms ...................................................................................................... 157. Regional and Continental Approaches........................ ............................... 16

8. Strategies for Innovative Financing for Biodiversity Conservation inSwaziland ............................................................................................................. 17

9. Institutional biodiversity funding study ............................... ...................... 179.2. Statistical analysis:......................................................... ........................... 19

10. Summary of Findings ........................................ .................................... 1910.1. Recommendations for Innovative Financing Strategy .................... .... 20

1) Polluter pays principle towards financing biodiversity conservation .......... .... 212) Funding from the Global Environmental Fund .......... .................................... 2111. Funding from Government Subvention ........................................ ............. 2511.1. National and macro-economic policy ..................... ............................... 25

12. Conclusion ........... ......................................... ........................................ 2713. Reference ............................... .................................................. ............. 29



3/32


AMADI Swaziland iii

Acronyms

AA: Appropriate AuthorityCAMPFIRE: Communal Areas Management Programme for Indigenous

Resources

CBD: Convention on Biological DiversityCBNRM: Community Based Natural Resources ManagementCBD: Convention on Biological DiversityCBT: Community Based TourismCITES: Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of

Flora and FaunaCOSPE: Italian donor agencyEMA: Environmental Management ActFAO: Food and Agriculture OrganisationGEF: Global Environmental FacilityIUCN: World Conservation UnionNBSAP: Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan

NEF: National Environment FundNEPAD: New Partnership for Africa DevelopmentPAs: Protect AreasSEA: Swaziland Environmental AuthoritySEAP: Swaziland Environment Action PlanSABSP: Southern Africa Biodiversity SupportProgrammeSCI: Safari Club InternationalSEF: Swaziland Environmental FundSTA: Swaziland Environment AuthorityTRAFFIC: Trade Related Records in Fauna and Flora in CommerceUNFCCC: United Nations Framework on Climate Change ConventionUSAID: United States Agency for International DevelopmentWWF: World Wide Fund for Nature



4/32


AMADI Swaziland 1

1. Executive Summary

The major objective of the study was to identify and quantify innovative biodiversityfinancing mechanisms that exist in Swaziland; its findings to be used to inform thedevelopment of innovative biodiversity financing mechanism.

The study was basically conducted by an intensive literature review coveringorganisational reports of government, non-governmental and private agencies. It alsoencompassed an internet search of Swaziland biodiversity conservation activities andsources of funding. It also focused on the bilateral, multilateral and philanthropicorganisations that can fund projects in Swaziland. The purpose of the research was tolook at their funding policies.

The study then looked at case studies that applicable lessons can be drawn. Fist the inSwaziland the Shewula Mountain Camp provided lessons on community basedbiodiversity conservation, second the exploitation of Swazi indigenous products for

commercial purposes was examined in the context of the marula project. The focuswas to look at how such a project could be made to fund biodiversity conservation.Thirdly the Zimbabwe experience in the form of the CAMFIRE project waspresented. This gives lessons on how communities leaving along nature reserves orinside biodiversity conservation areas can participate in conservation management andshare in the revenue generated. It also demonstrates the biodiversity conservation inprotected areas buffer zones.

The key findings of this study are that biodiversity conservation experts andparishioners concur that there is a need for sustainable funding for biodiversityconservation. There is an agreement that funding should be derived from the peoplethat are directly involved with the extraction of biodiversity resources, through the

application of several methodologies that includes a form of taxation, charging ofpenalties and acceptance of grants.

Swaziland needs to make the Swaziland Environmental fund operational so that it canstart to collect revenue from the varies ways suggested in this study. The fund willalso facilitate the distribution of the revenue to the agencies involved in biodiversityconservation.



5/32


AMADI Swaziland 2

2. Introduction

Swaziland is a land locked country with four ecological zones that have a wide varietyof biological species. Swaziland has recently embarked on scientific studies to recordits natural heritage. The University of Swaziland (UNISWA) is commissioning

several studies from its zoology, agriculture and botany departments. The SwazilandNational Trust Commission (SNTC) through its ecology department has developedknowledge about Swazilands biodiversity. The several environmental impactassessment reports are enriching our biodiversity knowledge.

2.1. State of Swazilands Biodiversity

Swaziland in spite of its small area is endowed with a range of biological biodiversity.Braun / Monadgem However, SEA (2003) reports that only 5% of the total area ofSwaziland is legally protected for biodiversity (4% in formally gazetted protected

areas; 1% informally protected) while almost 30% of land has been fully convertedeither to commercial agriculture, plantation forestry, or urban development. Most ofthe land is used for small scale subsistence agriculture and livestock grazing, withvarying degrees of loss and degradation of biodiversity. Invasive alien plant speciesare a major concern in disrupting indigenous species in many areas. Governmentpolicy has in the past focused on increasing investment in commercial agriculture andrelated agri-business while issues that pertain to the control of biodiversity destructionhave been overlooked.

2.2. Ecosystems

There are four biodiversity ecosytems recognised in Swaziland. These are Montane

grassland, Savanna-woodland mosaic, forests and aquatic ecosystems. The status ofeach ecosystem in terms of its species richness is outlined in Table 2.3 The grasslandand Savanna ecosystems comprise 94% of the country, while the forest and aquaticecosystems are highly restricted in distribution. The savanna ecosystem is currentlythe best conserved (5%) while the remaining ecosystems have only 2% of their areasformally protected. Approximately 25% of each of the terrestrial ecosystem has beenconverted to some form of other land use. (Table2.4)



6/32


AMADI Swaziland 3

Table 2.3 Status of biodiversity by ecosystem.

Grassland Savanna Forest Aquatic Total

Flora:1

Trees 78 (19%) 261 (63%) 115 (28%) 4 (1%) 412

Grasses 130 (60%) 103 (47%) 3 (1%) 4 (2%) 218

Plant resource species 158 (41%) 256 (66%) 55 (14%) 11 (3%) 387

Exotics 32 (44%) 30 (41%) 2 (3%) 9 (12%) 73

Total 1225 (51%) 1136 (47%) 238 (10%) 98 (4%) 2418

Fauna (vertebrates):2

Fish 0 0 0 51 (100%) 51

Amphibians 9 (21%) 10 (24%) 1 (2%) 37 (88%) 42

Reptiles 51 (46%) 76 (69%) 12 (11%) 7 (6%) 110

Birds 138 (28%) 290 (58%) 91 (18%) 97 (19%) 500

Mammals 49 (39%) 95 (75%) 13 (10%) 1(1%) 127

Total 247 (30%) 471 (57%) 117 (14%) 192 (23%) 821

Threatened:

Flora3 161 (70%) 71 (31%) 53 (23%) 6 (3%) 231

Fauna (vertebrates)4 44 (38%) 51 (44%) 15 (13%) 27 (23%) 116

Endemics:

Flora5 13 (72%) 2 (11%) 3 (17%) 0 18

Fauna (vertebrates)

4

1 (100%) 0 0 0 1

Southern African endemics

(birds)6

26 (50%) 13 (25%) 12 (23%) 1 (2%) 52

1 L. Dobson (in lit.)2 Monadjem (1997b)3 from Flora Protection Bill (2000)4

Monadjem & Boycott (in preparation)5 from SNTC website6 Clancey (1986)

Extracted from the State of the Environment of Swaziland March 2001



7/32


AMADI Swaziland 4

Lately there has been some interest in biodiversity initiatives especially for tourismpurposes through the establishment of Biodiversity and Tourism Corridors. TheBiodiversity Conservation and Participatory Development (BCPD) project hasexpanded the protected area network to include other areas with valuable diversity.The project promotes biodiversity conservation outside designated protection areas,

increases participation of rural communities in conservation activities thus gainingbenefits from biodiversity utilization, and integrates Swaziland intoregional/transfrontier initiatives that include the Malolotja/Songimvelo, Lubombo, theLubombo/Nsubane-Pongola and Lubombo/Goba Trans-Frontier Conservation Areas.SEA (2003) views the best prospect for significant, sustainable, biodiversity-friendlyeconomic growth in many of the remaining natural areas as likely to be throughnature-based tourism. Therefore, the need to establish how biodiversity use andconservation can be funded in a sustainable manner is unavoidable.

Swazilands biodiversity is seriously threatened by the following: -

Over harvesting of natural wood forests for both commercial and domesticuse

Extraction of both animal and plant species for medicinal purpose. Tonnes ofroots, bucks, stems, leaves and wildlife body parts are exported to SouthAfrica through the Lavumisa, Ngwenya and Matsamo border. The nationalmarket for traditional medicine has been growing over the years due to theimpact of HIV.

Swaziland development activities characterised by large construction ofbuildings, housing estates, roads and the expansion of agricultural lands hasresulted in the depletion of biodiversity resources.

Pollution of water, land and air is contributing to the decline of biodiversity

resources. The recent interest in the exploration of biological resources for commercial

exploitation will result in a rush for bio-prospecting in Swaziland.

Increasing interest on safari hunting

2.3. Regulatory framework

The Swaziland Environment Authority (SEA) with all the national partners in theenvironmental in pursuance of the detects of the Swaziland Environmental ActionPlan has facilitate in the enactment of laws, regulations and policies that have abearing in biodiversity conservation. The following is a list of some of countrys

environmental laws: -

The Water Act, 2003 (Act No. 5 of 2003)

The Environmental Management Act, 2002

The Swaziland Tourism Authority Act, 2001

The Flora Protection Act, 2000

The Environmental Audit, Assessment and Review Regulations, 2000

The Waste Regulations, 2000



8/32


AMADI Swaziland 5

The Water Pollution Control Regulations, 1999

The Air Pollution Control Regulations, 1999

The Swazi Administration Order, 1998

Swaziland Environment Authority Act, 1992

The Human Settlements Authority Act, 1988 as amended in 1992 (Act No. 13OF 1992)

The Game Act (Amended), 1991

The National Trust Commission Act, 1973

The Town Planning Act, 1961

The Protection of Fresh Water Fish Act, 1938

Natural Resources Act, 1951 (No. 71 of 1951

The Protection of Fresh Water Fish Act, 1938

The Wild Birds Protection Act, 1914

International agreements that regulate the use and management of biodiversity are

discussed above under the topic International provisions on biodiversityconservation.

The Swaziland National Trust Commission (SNTC) is a statutory body mandated forbiodiversity conservation. It is able to achieve this mandate by conducting research ofthe biodiversity that need protection and declaring those areas protected areas.According to the legislation the private sector and communities can also put areasaside for protection, there can achieve this by requesting the SNTC to declare themprotection areas.

Swaziland has just completed a study on the protection worthy areas. The fullimplementation of these areas will demand a lot financial resources from the

implementing agencies. Environmental economics approaches support thedevelopment of financing mechanism that based on the generation of revenue throughconservation issues.

The Africa Management Development Institute (AMADI) conducted a study on thepossible innovative biodiversity conservation financing mechanism. This is a reporton that study and also the description of AMADIs recommendations.

3. Background

Swaziland biodiversity conservation activities are primary the responsibility of theSwaziland National Trust Commission. This has a series of nature reserves

representing all the biological zones of the country. The private sector also has someareas set aside as biodiversity protection areas. Local communities are also starting tobe involved in the protection biodiversity resources, motivated by the boomingecotourism activities.

Name of protected area Type of ownershipMalolotja Nature Reserve Government

Mlawula Nature Reserve Government



9/32


AMADI Swaziland 6

Hawane Nature Reserve Government

Mantenga Nature Reserve Government

Mlilwane Nature Reserve Private

Phophonyane NatureReserve

Private

Hlane Nature Reserve Private

Mkhaya Nature Reserve PrivateMhlosinga Nature Reserve Private

Mbuluzi Nature Reserve Private

Shewula mountain Camp Community

The constitution of the Kingdom of Swaziland states in section 217 (3) thegovernment shall ensure a holistic and comprehensive approach to environmentalpreservation. In many government policies, strategies and actions plans theintentions and desires of the government are articulated clearly. The protection ofbiodiversity for the benefit of Swazilands current and future generations.

This study was conducted to achieve the following objectives

1. To collect and collate necessary data for the preparation of Swazilandsstrategy for new and innovative financing mechanism framework

2. To assess and document the extent to which innovative case studies onCommunity Based Natural Resources Management (CBNRM) has assisted inmobilizing financial resources for biodiversity in the country

3. To investigate the extent to which government ministries, NGOs, localauthorities and grassroots organizations and the private sector have and canmobilize funds and implement projects and activities related to the countrysNational Biodiversity Strategy and action plan (NBSAP)

4. To show the funding trends (in figures nominal and real) from each of the

four sources in (2) or over the last four years. Explain the reasons for anyvariance

5. To develop a financing strategy for biodiversity conservation and sustainableuse in the country based on the above

6. To prepare a terminal ReportIn order to meet the objectives of this study the following activities were conducted: -

A desk literature review was conducted. This included the reading of researchreports from the University of Swaziland, Swaziland National TrustCommission, policy documents, budgets, NGO reports, action plans andstrategies and EIA reports.

An internet search was also conducted

Structured questionnaires were developed and administered through telephoneand face to face interviews

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with biodiversity experts andstudents



10/32


AMADI Swaziland 7

4. Methodology

4.1. Literature Review

A reading of the research conducted about biodiversity conservation in Swazilandrevealed that in the beginning of the last century, around 1900 Swaziland started to set

aside areas for biodiversity conservation. At that time biodiversity conservation wasthought to be the protection of wildlife for the inclusive purpose of hunting. Many ofthose pioneer nature reserve were later broken up just before or immediately afterindependence. The Hlatikhulu and Mbabane Nature Reserve no longer exist but newnature reserves emerged just after independence on the strength of the SwazilandNational Trust Commission Act 1972 amended in 1973.

Swaziland has committed itself to biodiversity by signing the critical internationaldocuments and going further to ratify them and enact laws that operationalized them.The budgets of government organisations and departs reveal the commitment of thegovernment of Swaziland even in times of economic down turns.

Scientific research and biodiversity monitoring reports indicate that Swazilandbiodiversity has global importance. Several endemic, rare, threatened and endangeredbiodiversity resource are found in Swaziland. Collectively the researches that havebeen conducted have just starched the surface; there is still a need for elaborateresearch in all biodiversity aspects.

The review revealed clearly that there is no enough funding for research activities.Research has been tricking to Swaziland through the biodiversity Conservationstrategy and government subvention to the Swaziland National Trust Commission.The Big Game parks who have in several occasion received research funding fromPhilanthropic is of little consequence.

4.1.1. An Internet Search

The internet search revealed that many funding agencies in the world bothgovernmental and Philanthropic have funds available to Swaziland. The SwazilandNon-government Organisation community has not fully taken advantage of availablefunding. Institutions like the SNTC have also not used funds available to it frombilateral and multilateral organisations. Even funds available from the Southern AfricaDevelopment Community (SADC) were not fully utilised.

4.1.2. Structured Interviews

A questionnaire was developed that seek to extract understanding on how current andpast biodiversity activities were being funded. The questionnaire was sent to aselected group of people, who are: -

Directly working in biodiversity conservation or in activities that directly andindirectly support biodiversity conservation. (E.g. Park managers, Ecologists,etc)



11/32


AMADI Swaziland 8

Involved directly in the harvesting of biodiversity resources (Medicinalgatherers, wild fruit collectors, firewood collectors for commercial purposes,flower gatherers, bio-prospectors etc)

End users of biodiversity products (Herbalists, wood sculptures, etc)

In the administration of the questionnaire, AMADI field researchers visit the people

who were targeted in their own setting. Some that there were not able to visittelephone interviews were conducted.

4.1.3. Semi structured Interviews

A focused group interview was also conducted with a group of environmentaleducation students studying on the Swaziland Environmental Justice Agenda Coursein Environmental education at Big Bend. The questionnaire was used as a guide forthe interview.

The questionnaire was also sent by e-mail to list of environmentalist andconservationist in Swaziland, who may be interested in contributing to the study.

4.2. Case Studies

4.2.1. Case Study 1 LESSONS LEARNT FROM COMMUNITYINVOLVEMENT IN SUSTAINABLE EXPLOITATION

OF SWAZI INDIGENOUS PRODUCTS

The people of Swaziland use a variety of wildlife products both for commercial anddomestic purposes. The recent introduction of the Swazi Secrets project, which is toharvest in the wild Marula fruits for processing in a modern manufacturing factory toa variety of products is welcomed.

This project demonstrates how biodiversity conservation can be enhanced byeconomic activities. Since the community is deriving a direct economic benefit fromthe harvesting the marula fruits. The conservation of this species is of their great

concern.

In the project there are currently 14 producer communities (comprising 2 500individual suppliers) from the low veld who are currently selling marula kernels toSwazi Indigenous Products Pty Ltd. The vast majority of the communities are within a50 kilometres from the factory complex. Further communities transport their ownproduce to the factory. The project has a strong environmental education componentthat trains the harvesters on the appropriate skills of harvesting.



12/32


AMADI Swaziland 9

The revenue generated by this projected is expected to increase. If the project is ableto realised meaningful projects it may be charged a severance fees that will contributeto the Swaziland environmental Fund. The purpose of which is facilitate biodiversityconservation in general.

Lessons learnt from the Swazi Indigenous Products is that if you give biodiversity its

true value you will entice the beneficiaries (in this case rural communities) togetherwith big companies to conserve it. Also, the very use of biodiversity to sustain ourlivelihoods entails the need for sustainable exploitation of biodiversity, bringing anopportunity to attract donor funding or to plough back a certain percentage of businessprofits towards biodiversity conservation.

4.2.2. Case 2: COMMUNITY BASED TOURISM PROJECTS

The fact that the greatest percentage of the countrys biodiversity (over 70 %) isoutside protected areas largely in rural areas creates an opportunity for Swaziland toinvolve rural communities in conservation and development initiatives that attractfunding for biodiversity conservation.

This is the approach that the country should take when seeking long term, new,innovative and sustainable mechanism to finance the conservation of its richbiodiversity and to promote sustainable development. A good case in point of a ruraldevelopment initiative that directly or indirectly attracted development funding that inturn created an incentive to conserve biodiversity in rural Swaziland is the EuropeanUnion funded Community Tourism Project that was implemented through theSwaziland Environment Authority (STA).

The European Union recently bankrolled the establishment of seven CommunityBased Tourism projects in Swaziland to the tune of around E5 million. This initiativedemonstrates great potential that Swaziland has in linking development projects withconservation so that it can attract funds to finance biodiversity and most importantlyso that it can use the benefits from the developments to entice rural communities toconserve biodiversity. The innovation is therefore to mainstream biodiversityconservation into all development projects taking place in Swaziland. The benefitsthat we gain from unlocking the true value of biodiversity are enough to make anybusiness community in both urban and rural areas to realize that if they do notconserve biodiversity, their benefits they get from it will soon end if they do not useand manage it sustainably.

Throughout southern Africa and most recently, Swaziland, Community BasedTourism (CBT) evolved because of the need to help rural communities to lift

themselves out poverty through unlocking natural wealth. CBT is not only aboutunlocking natural wealth but it is also about making communities realize the need toconserve their natural wealth. Some of the revenue generated from tourism projectsshould be ploughed back into conservation. Linking conservation with developmentand giving the community a sense of ownership of their natural resources whosebenefits they should share equitable are some of the pillars of community tourism.One of the biggest lessons learnt from community tourist is that without theabovementioned pillars of strength, community tourism cannot succeed, with it thefailure to use benefits from tourism to entice communities to conserve biodiversity.



13/32


AMADI Swaziland 10

The recent introduction of eight community tourism projects in Swaziland through theassistance of donors, largely the European Union which funded seven of the eightCBT projects in the country, with one (the Shewula Mountain Camp) being funded byCOSPE, an Italian donor agency and other donors such as the Swaziland TourismAuthority and other donors is a welcome development.

The European Union Private Sector Support Programme financed the establishment ofthe following seven CBT projects in Swaziland, assisted by Swaziland TourismAuthority: Mahamba Gorge Lodge, Maguga Dam Community Panoramic ViewingPoint and Handicrafts Centre, Nsangwini Rock Paintings, Lonhlupheko Crafts Centreand Ngempisi Camp.

Shewula Camp was the first CBT tourism project established through funding from anItalian donor agency, COSPE. The Swaziland Tourism Authority later supported thedevelopments at Shewula by building a well-equipped conference hall with modernconference facilities. With the face of community tourism having changeddramatically in Swaziland, the biggest challenge is to further unlock the true value of

these tourism projects by marketing these new and exciting destinations to thetouring public locally, regionally and internationally.

4.2.3. Case 3: Zimbabwes Efforts to involve the residents ofCommunal areas in conservation pay off

Devolution of the responsibility to manage and benefit from wildlife from the State tocommunal areas has been through giving Appropriate Authority (AA) to the RDCthrough the Communal Areas Management Programme for Indigenous Resources(Campfire). The development allowed communities to: (i) have ownership overwildlife, (ii) have the power to make decisions on how to manage their wildlife, (iii)market their wildlife to best advantage and (iv) retain the benefits from marketingtheir wildlife. The user and management rights over biodiversity managementgranted under the CAMPFIRE programme through the blessings of the amendedParks and Wildlife Act brought a lot of benefits towards the promotion of biodiversityin rural Zimbabwe. A few years after the introduction of the CAMPFIRE programme,rural communities perception of wildlife as being a resource enjoyed by outsiderswhose benefits are enjoyed by the Central Government changed dramatically.

Communities ownership and management of wildlife meant that they were for thefirst time earning revenue from wildlife through sport hunting and the commercialexploitation of wild products such as mopane worm, masawi (an indigenous fruit thatis used for making jam), beekeeping, fishing and run community tourism projects that

involve photographic safaris. The involvement of communities in conservation alsoattracted donor funding from the United States Agency for International Development(USAID) which funded conservation and development initiatives under theCAMPFIRE programme for over 10 years from 1989 to August 2001.

Community benefits from sustainable use of biodiversity under the CAMPFIREprogramme created an incentive to conserve biodiversity, reducing poaching to lessthan 3% or even 0.5% in communities that were notorious for poaching of both bigand small game before the introduction of the CAMPFIRE programme. CAMPFIRE



14/32


15/32


AMADI Swaziland 12

delayed to implement. These projects include building roads, schools and clinics, lookafter local HIV/AIDS orphans and even buy community ambulances.

What this shows is that their standard of living is improving, while the naturalresources which they continue to benefit from, including wildlife are becoming betterconserved. The net effect of these conservation and development dynamics in rural

southern African countries implementing CBNRM is sustainable development. TheCAMPFIRE conservation and development model has often been described as AnAfrican solution to an African problem.

Swaziland can therefore learn a lot from the CAMPFIRE programme as it explores itsnew and innovative financing mechanism for biodiversity conservation.

4.3. Bio-piracy issues

Evidence points out that a lot of the plant species of medicinal, nutritional andcosmetic value are endangered because they are being pirated from our borders into

other countries, for example the African potato which is being smuggled intocountries such as South Africa and others. This is an area that requires biodiversityconservation funds to raise community awareness to flush out bio-pirates and alsorequires the use of enforceable legal instruments to prevent unsustainable commercialexploitation of biodiversity.

Swaziland apparently does not have provisions, regulations or laws that allow orenable companies interested in the importation of biodiversity to do so. The absenceof an enabling mechanism to import plants such as the African potato is making thecountry suffer a potential loss economically and environmentally as the productscontinue to be smuggled out of the country.

Pitted against the value of biodiversity medicinally, nutritionally and cosmetically,the need to prevent bio-piracy in order to conserve and protect biodiversity is an areathat can potentially attract donor funding. Again, this makes it clear that incentivisingthe conservation of biodiversity through community involvement and clearlyquantifying the potential losses (environmentally and socio-economically) constitutethe new and innovative conservation of biodiversity that Swaziland should considerseriously in the future.

The following are some of the socioeconomic activities that Swaziland needs to startplacing greater emphasis on because they constitute innovative approaches towards

financing the conservation of biodiversity: community tourism, characterized bylodge investment, establishment of privately run conservancies, investment intomarula and other veldt products of nutritional and medicinal value products, crafts,sport hunting and photographic tourism. The entry point of rural communities into thetourism sector represents an opportunity to give them incentives to conserve naturalresources on which the tourism industry depends. Accordingly, the SwaziGovernment should start promoting CBNRM and community private sectorpartnerships as a firm commitment towards promoting innovative financing forbiodiversity conservation and sustainable use.



16/32


AMADI Swaziland 13

While a lot of countries worldwide continue to lose their wealth through bio-piracy(the theft of biological resources) largely committed by high-flying scientists workingwith multinational pharmaceutical companies, Swaziland should introduce laws thatallow for bio-prospecting so that it can begin to share benefits from the scientificexploitation of its biodiversity. The CBD promotes benefit sharing mechanisms andrecommends that some of the revenue accrued from the commercial exploitation of

biodiversity should be ploughed back into biodiversity conservation, wherein lies theopportunity for Swaziland to use bio-prospecting an innovative financing mechanismfor biodiversity conservation.

Respondents to the AMADI survey agreed that the following taxes could be also beused as innovative financing mechanisms for biodiversity conservation: carbon tax tomitigate air pollution, water pollution tax, nitrogen fertilizer tax, vehicle emission taxfor tourists, taxation on sport hunted trophies, taxation on game sold at auctions, entryfees in tourism industry and taxation for tourism businesses.

As donor funds continue to shrink and while countries such as Swaziland are facingstiff competition to secure them, the future scenario of funding in Swaziland is

projected to largely depend on governments environmental budgets funded by taxpayers money.

The Swaziland Environmental Authority, through the Swaziland Environmental Fundshould solicit funding from philanthropist international organisations. There is a needfor a strategy that ensures that the country take full advantage of funding thatSwaziland has a right too from bilateral agreement and multinational organisations.

5. International Provisions on Biological Diversity

Goals and principles of the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity

(UNCBD) from the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED)held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 are an important aspect of analyzing biodiversity useand conservation in a sustainable manner.

Swaziland signed the Convention on Biological Diversity in 1992, and ratified theConvention in 1994. The CBD is the major global comprehensive agreement thataddresses every aspect of biodiversity. In particular the CBD provides a globalframework for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and the sharing ofbenefits from genetic resource utilization. Thus Swaziland is bound by theconventions obligations on biodiversity use and conservation which, implies thateven the access and benefit sharing obligations that have a bearing on the funding ofbiodiversity are a key reference for any funding strategy.

Swaziland is a developing country and as provided in Articles 20 and 21 of the CBDstands to benefit from funding (and technology transfer) provided by developedcountries through bilateral, regional and other multilateral channels to realize theNBSAP. The funding provision also states that parties to the CBD that would providefunding would have to take into account that economic and social development anderadication of poverty are the first and overriding priorities of the developing countryParties. This implies that funding from this source would not be entirely targetedtoward funding biodiversityper serbut would be committed to life issues for instance



17/32


AMADI Swaziland 14

in Swazilands case poverty, diseases, and illiteracy among other issues. Therefore theeffectiveness of the funding may not be sustainable in the long-term because povertyissues are increasing yet they are tied to adverse biodiversity utilization.

Poverty issues have been addressed through the establishment of the MillenniumDevelopment Goals (MDGs). These were a result of the World Summit on

Sustainable Development (WSSD) in 2002 held in Johannesburg, South Africa. TheMDGs include obligations related to biodiversity especially the control of speciesextinction, fisheries restoration, and access to environmentally-sound alternatives toozone depleting substances (ozone depletion results in climate change andconsequently biological species reduction).

The WSSD endorsed a part of the CBD strategic plan that was adopted by theConference of the Parties (COP) as a biodiversity commitment to achieve the CBDobjectives. The target is To achieve by 2010 a significant reduction of the currentrate of biodiversity loss at the global, regional and national level as a contribution topoverty alleviation and to the benefit of all life on earth. The 2010 biodiversity targetinvolves seven focal areas which include mobilizing financial and technical

resources, especially for developing countries, in particular least developed countriesand Small Island developing States among them, and countries with economies intransition, for implementing the Convention and the Strategic Plan. Therefore theGEF has been established as one of the global funding mechanisms that are availableas source of funding for biodiversity conservation and sustainable use.GEF, through World Bank (WB) implementation is a major source of internationalfunding available for the capitalization of environment trust funds. According toCrepin (2002) In Africa GEF had allocated a total of $25.6 million to trust fundcapital and additional $17.0 million was expected once trust funds that were underdevelopment had met agreed performance benchmarks. Swaziland can benefit fromthis source because as a signatory to the CBD it meets the criteria set for beneficiariessince the NBSAP conservation objectives are consistent with the GEF strategies toprotect globally significant biodiversity resources.

GEF funds can be used for capacity building and operationalising the countrysinstitutional, policy and regulatory framework for biodiversity management andconservation initiatives. The funds can also be used to finance recurrent costs of themanagement of protected areas (PAs) and to keep established conservation efforts andinitiatives running through the national environment fund. However, it should becarefully evaluated whether this type of a fund would be the most viable option tocontinue financing biodiversity initiatives, taking into consideration GEF prerequisitesformulated for successful trust fund operation. Therefore project proposals for GEFsupport in Swaziland must be relative to the amount of GEF funding required taking

into account prospects for leveraging co-funding and project impact for biodiversityconservation and sustainable use at regional level and on the ground.

The Environmental Management Act (EMA) 2002 of Swaziland establishes theSwaziland Environment Fund (SEF) in Article 20. This fund has three mainobjectives;

1) To aggregate funds from different sources (including GEF) to ensuresustainable funding for programmes, projects and activities that provide for



18/32


AMADI Swaziland 15

and promotes the protection, conservation, and enhancement of theenvironment and the sustainable management of natural resources.

2) To provide financial support for activities aimed at the enhancement,protection, conservation and enhancement of the environment and thesustainable management of natural resources and supporting community

participation in these activities; and

3) To enhance and restore the environment of Swaziland.

The objects of the fund are all encompassing and biodiversity activity funding is but apart of the overall environmental conservation and sustainability funding provided forat national level.

The SEF is an available source of funding biodiversity conservation and sustainableuse. EMA propounds that the fund shall source its fees from Swazilands nationalbudget; donations, grants, gifts, or subscriptions; international, regional, bilateral,multilateral or local funds; interest on loans and investments done by the fund, as well

as fines, penalties, or costs imposed by the EMA. These costs are further definedthrough regulations that prescribe what constitutes environmental offences and thetype of charges that should be borne by offenders. These charges include pollution,use, permit, and service fees. The Act, other Acts in other ministries, and theregulations all revolve around the polluter/user pays principle.

6. International recognitions for need for innovative Biodiversityfinancing mechanisms

There is a clear international recognition for the need for innovative biodiversity

financing mechanisms. The Convention on Biological Diversity which was signedratified by most countries in the world, including Swaziland which ratified it in 1994supports the need for innovative biodiversity financing mechanisms through amongother things, unlocking the true value of biodiversity and equitable distribution orsharing of those benefits. The CBD also supports mainstreaming biodiversityconservation in business activities which thrive on commercial exploitation ofbiodiversity in order to guarantee sustainable use and the continued existence ofbiological resources.Additionally, the Agenda 21 Agreement made by world governments at the RioSummit in 1992, recognizes the need for additional biodiversity funding throughinternational facilities such as the GEF, multilateral, bilateral donations and privatefunding and outlined an array of possible mechanisms involving innovative financing.

However, the Global Biodiversity Fund (GBF) noted in 1998 that GEF financing forbiodiversity is problematic because of the need to justify incremental costs and thefact that most biodiversity projects have local benefits and unquantifiable globalbenefits thus cannot meet GEF criteria. The locality of the benefits requires that localfinancing solutions be identified and designed to be sustainable. GBF (2006) statesthat developing countries require to move beyond traditional financing models andmechanisms as well as expand from protected areas to broader landscapes. Thereforeeconomic policy instruments or market-based measures that include taxes and other



19/32


AMADI Swaziland 16

fiscal policy at national level can contribute to innovative and sustainable financingfor biodiversity from local levels while improving national budgetary constraints.

7. Regional and Continental Approaches

The New Partnership for Africa Development (NEPAD) is aware of and recognizes

the need to mainstream biodiversity conservation. This was demonstrated by its jointinitiative with all World Conservation Union (IUCN) regional offices in Africa tohold consultative workshops on greening development. The last workshop to greenAfrican development initiatives was held at the 2002 Johannesburg World Summit onSustainable Develop when it held a workshop to come up with a document to promotesustainable utilization of biodiversity as Africa embarks on aggressive economicdevelopment initiatives.

Southern African countries have long decided to link conservation and developmentthrough an approach popularly referred to as Community Based Natural ResourcesManagement (CBNRM), in order to attract funds to conserve biodiversity as well asincentivising the conservation of biodiversity through benefits that communitiesderive from it.

Under this development and conservation concept, local communities are given userand management rights over natural resources that are found in their area. Thisconservation and development approach recently attracted the interest of the UnitedStates International Development Agency (USAID) to fund CBNRM initiatives inZimbabwe under the Communal Areas Management Programme for IndigenousResources (CAMPFIRE), in Botswana under the Botswana Natural ResourcesManagement Programme (BNRMP), in Zambia under the AdministrativeManagement Design (ADMADE) and in Namibia under the Living in a FiniteEnvironment Programme (LIFE). The conservation and development gains of these

initiatives are there for all to see.

In communities where timber and wildlife poachers used to enjoy cooperation fromthe villagers while national or game park managers battled to stamp out poaching, thesituation has changed.It is now the villagers and park managers working together to

flush out poachers. This has significantly reduced the rate of poaching andenvironmental degradation. Also, communities that once had unmet needs on theirdevelopment wish-list have now assumed some degree of self-determination. Theyare using money from CBNRM projects to implement projects that their governmentshad either failed or delayed to implement. These projects include building roads,schools and clinics, look after local HIV/AIDS orphans and even buy communityambulances.

What this shows is that their standard of living is improving, while the naturalresources which they continue to benefit from, including wildlife are becoming betterconserved. The net effect of these conservation and development dynamics in ruralsouthern African countries implementing CBNRM is sustainable development. This iswhat the SEA is seeking to achieve through innovative and sustainable funding

mechanisms for the conservation of biodiversity and promotion of sustainable

development across different sectors of the Swazi economy.



20/32


AMADI Swaziland 17

All it took for other southern African countries to attract USAID funding for over 10years from 1990-2000 was the political will at national level to either introduce apolicyor law that allows community involvement in the management of natural resourcesand also giving them benefits from the resources through running tourism projectssuch as tourism lodges, sport hunting and bird watching as well as harvesting natural

products such as marula, mopani worm, ilala for making crafts and other relatedtourism projects.

A thriving industry has been created out of this initiative, all that remains is to ensurethat as people continue to exploit the resources, the products are well marketed andthat biodiversity continues to pay its way through market-based taxes.

8. Strategies for Innovative Financing for Biodiversity Conservation in

Swaziland

Swaziland needs to fins ways of financing its biodiversity conservation activities, and

this activities have to bear in mind that donor funding will continue to dwindle andgovernment ability to subvert quasi government institution will diminish further withtime. Dependence on donor funding and governmental subvention has proven notsustainable in many countries and thus we can not strongly recommend it. Although itimportant that in the mean time the government of Swaziland will need to continuewith subvention especially to government agencies, until such time that revenuegeneration activities prove to be profitable.

The National Environment Fund will be the agency that will receive any revenuederived from the various strategies for financing biodiversity conservation. Theagency will also need to be responsible for the disbursement of the funds to thegovernmental, Non-governmental and private agencies that are involved withbiodiversity conservation

9. Institutional biodiversity funding study

Data on institutions biodiversity activity funding mobilisation approaches and theirability to mobilise funds was collected using a structured questionnaire that wasadministered as part of interviews by the consultants to private sector, non-governmental, governmental, and local government/grassroots organisationstakeholders. The institutions were sampled and data Analysis was done using theStatistical Package for Social Scientists (SPSS). In addition to the questionnaire

instrument summary monthly and yearly records of finances for the past four yearswere acquired from studied institutions to test biodiversity funding trends.

The June 2006 survey conducted by the African Management Development Institutethrough interviews and questionnaires circulated to NGOs, local authorities andgrassroots organizations as well as the Swazi Governments Ministry of EconomicPlanning and Development showed that these agencies have and can mobilize fundsand implement projects related to Swazilands Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan(NBSAP). These institutions sources of funding included donors, grants and national



21/32


AMADI Swaziland 18

budget. Historical financial records at the Ministry of Economic Planning andDevelopment shows that the Ministry has been able to raise funds for theEnvironment Fund from 1998 onwards, while funds for biodiversity conservationwere issued annually from 2003 up to the present day. The biodiversity grant wasinitially funded by the World Bank but is now being funded locally through taxpayers revenue. The biodiversity fund is use to finance biodiversity hot spots from

the eastern to the southern part of Swaziland. Our research established that theEnvironment Fund (a quasi environmental disaster management fund) budget iscurrently not being utilized exhaustively. The Environment Fund allows it to conserveits biodiversity by responding to pollution-related situations that companies might beignoring or are failing to correct on time and later charge them exactly the sameamount that the Swaziland Environment Authority would have spent to remedy apollution problem on their behalf. The in exhaustive expenditure of the EnvironmentFund could be due to the fact that Swazi companies are not delaying in takingcorrective environmental measures. This scenario would mean that there is no need tospend much money from the Environment Fund Budget. The fund has a projectedannual cost of E4.5 million but only E500 000 is being spent annually and in somecases the E500 000 can go without being spent for the whole year. The Ministry of

Economic Planning and Development said that it would be in a position to allocatemore funds towards biodiversity conservation is current allocated budgets were beingexhausted and if the implementing Ministry or agency for biodiversity conservationcontinued to request for more funds. Currently, there have not been any requests formore funds to finance biodiversity conservation by the implementing agencies. Thechallenge to win more resources for biodiversity conservation is to exhaust currentbudgets and ask for more to do more biodiversity conservation.

In terms of the need to use company funds to fund biodiversity conservation, oneinstitution involved in the commercial exploitation of biodiversity said that in thefuture they would like to consider using profits from their own budget to financebiodiversity.

The institution also said that it would continue working towards benefit sharingarrangements of wealth created from biodiversity as donors were attracted towardsfinancing biodiversity conservation initiatives that were linked to communitydevelopment. Other donors such as the International Monetary Fund which financesthe conservation of biodiversity through the Global Environmental Facility (GEF)would only commit their funds (US$5 million) if the beneficiary country also chippedin with US$6.5 million to finance its own biodiversity. After having qualified for GEFfunding in 2004/2005, Swaziland as a beneficiary country for GEF funding failed toraise the US$6.5 million and GEF would not fund biodiversity conservation inSwaziland. These are some of the challenges that Swaziland is facing towards raising

funding for biodiversity.

The opportunity to source funds from GEF will last for as long as Swaziland iswilling to resubmit its proposal and also able to raise the US$6.5 million so that GEFcan chip in with the US$5 million to co-finance biodiversity conservation.

This leaves the country with an option of raising its biodiversity conservation fundsfrom the tax payers money. About E1 million raised from the Swazi citizens tax is



22/32


AMADI Swaziland 19

currently being used to conserve biodiversity annually. This money is spent by theSwaziland Environmental Authority on the Biodiversity Participatory Project.

9.1. Use of tax to finance biodiversity conservation

Respondents to the AMADI survey agreed that the following market-based options

could be charged to fund the implementation of project and activities that relate toSwazilands Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan that include carbon tax to mitigateair pollution, water pollution tax, nitrogen fertilizer tax, vehicle emission tax fortourists, taxation on sport hunted trophies, taxation on game sold at auctions, entryfees in tourism industry and taxation for tourism businesses. However, somerespondents found it difficult to give the percentages for the abovementioned taxes asthey really did not have the rationale to come up with a figure for each one of thetaxes.

In face to face interviews conducted with respondents from the Ministry of EconomicPlanning and Development, it was said that the Swaziland Environmental Authorityand the Ministry of Finance which is responsible for revenue collection could be

better positioned to advise on how taxes would be charged on ecosystem goods andservices. It was stressed that when taxes eventually get charged on these goods andservice, there was need to ensure that the money was used for its intended purpose. Inorder for agencies such as the Swaziland Environmental Authority to have full controlof such resources, the Ministry of Finance would need to create a fund or account wassuch funds would be deposited as soon as they were collected.

9.2. Statistical analysis:

The funding trends from donors, organization budget, grants, national budget showthat international donors and the government of Swaziland are the major financiers ofbiodiversity. While businesses that are directly benefiting from the commercialexploitation of biodiversity in the manufacturing and tourism industry are currentlynot directly financing biodiversity conservation, the benefits that they share frombiodiversity use are helping to cultivate and maintain a community-wide incentive toconserve biodiversity. Also, these businesses plan to use revenue generated fromfuture profits to fund research that is aimed at further promoting natural resourcesinventory, monitoring and conservation.

Currently, the Government of Swaziland is the major financier of major biodiversity

conservation projects nationally.

10. Summary of Findings

In pursuance of the above stated objective the study revealed the following: -

1. There is very little evidence of the existence of meaningful community basedResource management projects. That can be looked at as communityparticipation in biodiversity conservation. The Shewula Mountain Camp



23/32


AMADI Swaziland 20

project is the only example that exists in earnest so far, but the financial andtechnical support given by the Swaziland Tourism Authority for theestablishment of community tourism projects is good start.

2. There are private conservancies in Swaziland that are not adequatelysupervised by a government agency. At the moment there is contributing to

biodiversity conservation, but this may not be for ever. Most of theseconservancies are not declared protected areas as per the SNTC Act thatmeans there conversion to other use can be done quickly. The funding of theseconservancies in depended on the goodwill of the owners of the land, which inthe majority of cases are the large sugar can plantations.

3. Outside formally protected areas there are no controls of bio piracy activitiesthat are seriously threatening specific biodiversity resources. This is due to theabsences of both legislative and institutional responsibility to monitor andprevent these activities from accruing.

4. Swaziland has no clear policy on accessing funding for biodiversity

conservation from international organisations. In spite of the existence ofseveral national strategy documents. The SEA has been successful in gettingfunding to pursue its direct mandate while the other parties in biodiversityconservation, particularly the SNTC has made efforts to access funds.

5. The people of Swaziland are willing to contribute to biodiversity conservationthrough their tax or in any way suggested. All our respondents concur thatthere is a need to set up mechanism for the contribution to biodiversityconservation.

10.1. Recommendations for Innovative Financing Strategy

A strategy for sustainable financing of biodiversity conservation and its sustainableuse was developed after pooling the results of the above analyses. The NBSAP ofSwaziland highlights three main sources of funding that are adopted from the SEAPof 1997. The sources are as follows;

a) External sources and most notably the Global Environment Facility (GEF) as

well as bilateral grants and loansb) Internal sources being mainly government and other sectors (Non-government

organizations and private sector)c) Swaziland Environment Fund (NEF) with initial investment by government

then the donor community. These sources are all dependent on money injectedexternally which then causes the planned biodiversity funding to be lesssustainable as there is no guarantee for a continue flow of these funds toSwaziland.



24/32


AMADI Swaziland 21

Following are the recommendations that are developed with compliance to the SEAPrecommendations.

1) Polluter pays principle towards financing biodiversity conservation

Pollution is one factor that may cause the degradation of biodiversity resources. The

companies that are responsible for problems for biodiversity will be charged a formof penalty that were be credit to the Swaziland Environmental fund, so that it canfinance corrective measures. This is based on the polluter pays principle.

The overriding principle is that pollutions of any nature should be eradicated; thereality is that it is not possible in many situations. The legislation of Swazilandmandates the SEA to take up the cleaning process if the responsible company fails.The charging of charges will give the SEA the financial capacity to comply with itsmandate. SEA can be able to achieve this by instructing other agencies to take up thetask on its behalf and providing the financial and technical support.

This approach towards protecting biodiversity and human health is important.

Through this process the Swaziland Environmental Authority is proactively helpinglocal companies to install waste management technologies at their industrialcomplexes, in order to mitigate air and water pollution or other environmentallydegrading processes or activities. The fact that affected companies are later invoicedto pay for corrections done on their behalf by the Swaziland Environmental Authoritywill in the long-term force these companies to have waste management budgets sothat they can begin to manage waste as and when it is necessary.

Study extent of contribution of the user/polluter pays principle in financingbiodiversity conservation: this principle has a major contribution to a countrysenvironmental management costs by providing for the remedy of pollution,

degradation and productive/profitable use of environmental resources. Thus its role aspart of and its future contribution to a national financing plan was examined.

2) Funding from the Global Environmental Fund

After having qualified for GEF funding recently, Swaziland as a beneficiary countryfor GEF funding failed to raise the US$6 million and GEF would not fundbiodiversity conservation in Swaziland. These are some of the challenges thatSwaziland is facing towards raising funding for biodiversity. The SEF will need toactively find means to qualify for the GEF funding or lobby for better conditions forSwaziland and other countries in the similar context.

Below is a matrix of our recommendations for methods to raise funds for biodiversityconservation. The recommendations are based on the reality that several and uniqueconditions may exist and that each may need a method that fits its circumstances. Thefundamental principle is that the methods should not make economic activities basedon the extraction of biodiversity resources is not over burden financially.



25/32


AMADI Swaziland 22

10.1.1.The Matrix of Strategies

Method Receipt Advantage Disadvantaged

Royalties The government of Swazilandshould establish a system whereby

individuals and corporations thatextract biodiversity resources foreconomic gain are issued a permitand charged ad valorem royalty

This proposal will createsynergies with other departments

that issue permits for theextraction of natural resources.

It may give room for thegovernment to permit over

exploitation biodiversityresources.

Severance Fees Small companies that areharvesting biodiversity products ata large scale will need to chargethem severance fees. This is alevy based on the unit ofextraction of the particularbiodiversity resource. E.g. If amuti-manufacturing company willharvest the African potato toproduce a commercial product.

This will establish marketmechanism to control theharvesting of biodiversityresources used for medicinal, wildfoods, hand crafts and otherapplications.

This will put an operational stresson the implementing agency(SEF). It is also possible that thiswill create tension as organizedinstitutions like the TraditionalHealers Organisation (THO) maytry to resist the proposal.

Profit Related Tax A large corporation that extracts a

great scale of biodiversityresources will be taxed. The taxwill be based on profit level thatwill be calculated as per theindustry. E.g. The Swazi Secretproject, if it is able to make aprofit of about E200 000 it shouldbe tax, but less than that there is

This proposal will assist in find a

practical balance betweenharvesting of biodiversityresources and conservation,between the need for short-termeconomic and the need for long-term sustainable development.

The likely problem is that it may

increase the financial expectationsof the various actors in theconservation of biodiversity inSwaziland. This if not managedby clear policies may result inpolitical tensions betweengovernmental, quasi governmentaland the NGO community.

DF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com


26/32


AMADI Swaziland 23

no tax

Sales Tax Consumer products that are madefrom the extraction of naturalresource will be tax. This isproducts like handicraft, which in

essence are luxury goods.

The cost of biodiversityconservation needs to be sharedbetween the people extracting theresource of the end users. This

Tax is to ensure that consumersshare the cost.

There may be legislative problemsin the collection of the tax. Thismay need legislative reformwhich takes a long time. Also on

how the revenue will eventuallyget to the SEF

Services Related Tariffs In business where by there is aneed to completely or temporalitydestroy biodiversity resources.The government through the NEF(SEA) will charge service relatedtariffs, this are to compensate forthe introduction and maintenanceof such a resource in anotherlocation.

In recognition of the reality thatproject proponents care moreabout their projects thanmitigating biodiversity loss. Thisput the responsibility on thosecare, but fully financed by thosewho cause the damage.

The SEF activities may beoverwhelmed by administration ofprojects supported by this fund.That is supervising the NGOs ordepartments responsible for themitigation process.

Lease bonuses In a situation where thegovernment agency is not able todetermine the value of abiodiversity resource and there

several contenders for thatresource. It must auction theresource in order to determine themarket value of the resource.

It will assist in the establishmentof the economic value of theresource

There may be no more than onecorporation interested in aresource.

Fines, penalties, guarantees A regime of fines, penalties andguarantees must be established todeal with performance bonds.This is to ensure that the

Swaziland needs to developacceptable biodiversityconservation behaviour. Whichmust be expressed in the

The administration of this will becumbersome



27/32


AMADI Swaziland 24

biodiversity user comply withacceptable behaviour.

conditions attached to the variouspermits issued for biodiversityharvesting

Grants The NEF will have to mobilize forthe international donor funds. Itmust ensure that Swaziland takes

full advantage of all grants,sponsorship available to it fromthe international community.

There will be an institution that isdedicated in putting forwardfunding request to all the

organisations that fundbiodiversity conservation.

This may cause tension among theorganisations that will be

Foreign Debt credit Swaziland has foreign debt withcountries that may be willing totrade some of the debt forbiodiversity conservation credits.

We need to find banks andcountries that will be willing swapour debt for conservation credits.The SEF will the idealorganisation to follow thisthrough

The process may be to long andpolitical. It may involveinstitutions outside thebiodiversity fraternity

Government subventions The government of Swazilandwill need to continue to fund theactivities of governmentalorganizations that are directlyinvolved with biodiversityconservation. That is the

Swaziland National Trustcommission (SNTC), Big GameParks

The commitment of thegovernment will continue to beexpressed in its budgetaryallocation for biodiversityconservation to the SNTC, SEFetc

It will increase dependency on thegovernment.



28/32


AMADI Swaziland 25

11.Funding from Government Subvention

11.1. National and macro-economic policy

Gripped by the HIV/AIDS pandemic, Swazilands budget allocations are largelygoing towards health, next on the priority list of expenditure are budgets for

socioeconomic activities such as education, economic development and biodiversityconservation has a tiny budget. This trend presents a great challenge to agenciesinvolved in biodiversity conservation. However, agencies such as the SwazilandEnvironment Authority and Swaziland National Trust Commission should in the long-term be able to create opportunities for raising funds for biodiversity conservation.This agencies needs to continually lobby and advocate that biodiversity conservationis at the centre of governments economic development strategies. This agencies willneed to clarify the role biodiversity conservation have in the achievement UNMillennium Development Goals basically the environmental sustainability, provisionof clean drinking water and alleviation of poverty goals.

There is a need to better position the SNTC so that it can have the capacity to play a

major role on biodiversity conservation and thus increase budgetary allocation fromthe government. The annual E4.5 million funding for the Swaziland EnvironmentFund should be increased as per the value of activities under taken by theimplementing agencies.

Also, the Government of Swaziland will have to mainstream biodiversity conservationinto development projects. Most development projects in the pharmaceutical,cosmetic, tourism and agricultural industries thrive on commercial exploitation ofbiodiversity. These businesses whether they are at community level or being run bymultinational companies know that their continued existence in business is guaranteedby sustainable exploitation of biodiversity and they need to conserve it. However, theGovernment cannot leave these companies to raise biodiversity conservation funds ontheir own, police and regulate themselves.

It is therefore strategic for the Government of Swaziland to charge levies or taxes thatare aimed at ensuring sustainable exploitation of its ecosystem goods and services.The proposed market-based taxes to finance the implementation of projects oractivities that relate to Swazilands Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan will onlywork if the taxes are determined through a very broad consultative process thatgenuinely allows for adequate stakeholder in-put and buy-in.

The above constitute a bundle of innovative financing mechanisms that theGovernment of Swaziland urgently needs to implement concurrently in order to

guarantee the conservation of its biodiversity and the welfare of its people. Anenvironmentally bankrupt country is also financially bankrupt, unleashing social andeconomic ills which are out of step with the need for sustainable development.

Another suggested strategy to raise funds for the conservation of biodiversity is toinnovatively, advertise a few trophies the sport hunters could come and hunt alongside with King Mswati III during the Butimba (Royal sanctioned national wild lifeculling) and use the revenue for the trophies to finance the conservation ofbiodiversity. Quite a number of hunters internationally would be attracted to pay



29/32


AMADI Swaziland 26

trophy fees so that they have the owner to relive the experience of traditional huntingin Swaziland along side His Majesty, King Mswati III.

Swaziland is still in a good position to attract international donor funds in the future,especially for projects that involve community tourism and community involvementand benefit sharing from the commercial exploitation of biodiversity. Accordingly,

the Swaziland Environment Authority should form strategic alliances withCommunity Based Tourism projects and Community Based businesses that areexploiting biodiversity, in order to come up with joint project proposals.

The Swaziland Environmental Authority should also come up with a strategy thatattracts the setting up of offices in Swaziland by international conservation agenciessuch as the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), Safari Club International (SCI),Trade Related Records in Fauna and Flora in Commerce (TRAFFIC) and others. Theexistence of these conservation agencies in Swaziland will create an opportunity forthe Swaziland Environment Authority to work on joint biodiversity funding proposalswith these agencies. Alternatively, these agencies can source their own biodiversityconservation funds to fund projects that are of national conservation interests. This

approach should be seriously considered in Swaziland as part of its new andinnovative initiatives towards raising funds for conservation of biodiversity. As thingsstand, Swaziland does not have an international conservation agency office operatingwithin its borders. This is a missed opportunity.

Swazilands botanical gardens, museums and herbaria can be promoted as touristattractions as they have rich biodiversity. Researchers, television news crews andtourists can be made to pay in order to do research, film and recreate in these places,respectively. The money paid by researchers, television news crews who shootdocumentaries on Swazi botanical gardens, museums and herbaria and that paid bytourists to see the botanical gardens and herbaria should be ploughed back into theconservation of biodiversity. The fact that botanical gardens, museums and herbariaare rich sources of Swazi biodiversity and their international attraction, should becontinue to attract tourists, researchers and foreign TV news crews to continue payingto use the Swazi botanical gardens for research and filming, wherein lies the potentialof herbaria, botanical gardens and museums to be used as innovative financingmechanisms for biodiversity conservation. In terms of museums, Swazi plant andanimal species of international interest could also from time to time be sold to foreigncountry museum, creating the opportunity for Swaziland to raise more funds forbiodiversity conservation through the sale of its plant and animal species to museumsin foreign countries. A good example is the Namibian Elephant, which was recentlysold to Washington Natural Museum.

The future of biodiversity conservation could also be brighten is the SwazilandEnvironment Authority in its capacity as the lead agency that promotes conservationof biodiversity embarks of a public relations campaign that is aimed at making localbanks consider funding biodiversity conservation initiatives. As long as the banks areconvinced that an environmentally bankrupt nation is a financially bankrupt one andalso given a clear opportunity to get mileage from financing biodiversity conservationinitiatives, they will be attracted to come on board. The above scenarios of fundingbiodiversity in Swaziland are quite viable but should be presented for stakeholderinput, before being finalised into a national report.



30/32


AMADI Swaziland 27

12. Conclusion

The bundle of viable options for new and innovative financing mechanism forbiodiversity conservation presented in this report still need the buy-in and collective

input of different stakeholders in Swaziland before a national strategy can beproduced and implemented.

The experts and non-experts that were consulted in this study concur that Swazilandneeds to implement creative methods to raise funds for biodiversity conservation. Thecore values of which is to ensure that the parties in society that are involved in thedegradation and extraction of biodiversity of resources are contributing to correctiveand compensation activities. It also becomes clear that the people do desire that thegovernment of Swaziland through budgetary allocation to lead agencies like the SEAand SNTC continue funding biodiversity conservation. Swaziland needs to improveits capacity to solicit international grants from bilateral, multilateral and Philatrophicorganisations.

The Swaziland Environmental Fund operating under the auspices of SEA will be theinstitution responsible for receiving and disbursing of biodiversity finances. Therecommendations which includes the introduction of : -

Royalties

Severance Fees

Profit Related Tax

Sales Tax

Services Related Tariffs

Lease bonuses

Fines, penalties, guarantees Grants

Foreign Debt credit

Government subventions



31/32


AMADI Swaziland 28

Elephant and Rhino Conservation Project, Hlane National Park and Mkhaya Game

Reserve-Swaziland. In partnership with The Kingdom of Swazilands Big Game Parks,Swaziland. FWS: $57,444. Leveraged funds: $123,424. Protection and monitoring

activities for the populations of elephants in the Big Game Parks of the Kingdom ofSwaziland, including procurement and operation of two four-wheel drive vehicles for useby rangers in management operations.

DIVISION OF INTERNATIONAL CONSERVATION

AFRICAN ELEPHANT CONSERVATION FUND

SUMMARY OF GRANTS 2001



32/32


13. Reference

1. Crepin, C. (2002). The Role of the Global Environment Facility (GEF) infunding conservation trust funds and perspectives for the future. A paperpresented at the Conference on Sustainable Finance for Conservation in Africa:

Arusha, Tanzania.2. (CAMPFIRE) (2004): Communal Areas Management Programme for

Indigenous Resources CAMPFIRE Annual Report3. (CITES) (2006): Convention on International Trade In Endangered Species

CITES research reports published on CITES website4. Hanson C. and Sandalow D. (2006). Greening the Tax Code. Tax reform, energy

and the environment policy brief series. The Brookings Institution and WorldResources Institute: Washington DC

5. Miles, K. (2005):Innovative Financing: Filling in the Gaps on the Road toSustainable Environmental Funding, RECIEL 14.202-211

6. SEA (2003): Project Information document for the Biodiversity Conservation andParticipatory Development Project 19pp

7. STA (2006) Booklet on Community Tourism Grants8. Swazi Indigenous Products (2006) Project Brochure on Community

Involvement in sustainable use of veldt products9. Swaziland Ministry of Economic Planning and Development Financial Records

(1998-2005)10.UN Convention on Biological Diversity (2006) CBD research reports published

on CBD website

Date post:	30-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	vuminyembe
View:	217 times
Download:	0 times

Innovative Biodiversity Financing - Swaziland

Documents