GREATER CEDERBERG BIODIVERSITY CORRIDOR
DRAFT STRATEGY FOR ENGAGING COMMUNITIES
AND UNLOCKING SOCIO-ECONOMIC BENEFITS
THROUGH BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
Report 1403/R2
September 2004
GREATER CEDEBERG BIODIVERSITY CORRIDOR
DRAFT STRATEGY FOR THE ENGAGEMENT OF
COMMUNITIES AND UNLOCKING OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC
BENEFITS THROUGH BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
Prepared for:
Western Cape Nature Conservation Board
Prepared by:
Settlement Planning Services
Land Use & Environmental Planning and Management
in association with
Aksent
Rural Empowerment Initiative
and
Champions Co-operative
Community Facilitators
Report: 1403/R2
September 2004
CONTENTS
1.0
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1
2.0
POINTS OF DEPARTURE .............................................................................. 1
3.0
LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................... 2
4.0
CURRENT STATUS ........................................................................................ 4
4.1
4.2
Community Engagement ................................................................................. 4
Local Economic Development ......................................................................... 5
5.0
KEY STRATEGIC ISSUES ............................................................................. 7
5.1
5.2
Community Engagement Issues ...................................................................... 8
Local Economic Development Issues .............................................................. 9
6.0
PRINCIPLES OF INTERVENTION ................................................................. 9
7.
TACKLING THE CHALLENGE..................................................................... 12
8.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT STRATEGIES .............................................. 13
8.1
8.2
Biodiversity Awareness and Information Campaign ...................................... 13
Build a Corps of Biodiversity Change Agents ................................................ 14
9.
LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES ................................. 14
9.1
9.2
Implementation Assistance to Existing Projects ............................................ 14
Launch and Project Management of Community Based Public Works
Programme to Rehabilitate Protected Areas within GCBC ............................ 15
Developing and Piloting of Community Owned Eco-tourism Facilities in GCBC
Protected Areas ............................................................................................. 15
9.3
Greater Cederberg Biodiversity Corridor: Draft Socio-Economic Strategy: (Setplan – September 2004)
i
1.0
INTRODUCTION
Informed by the participatory process undertaken with leaders of previously
disadvantaged communities and statutory authorities within the Greater
Cederberg Biodiversity Corridor (GCBC) target area (see Record of
Consultation, Report 1403/R1), two strategies are presented in this report. In
support of the socio-economic goals of the GCBC, strategies are presented
for:
 engaging previously disadvantaged communities in the biodiversity
corridor initiative; and
 integrating
local economic development (LED) and biodiversity
conservation.
In the report that follows these concepts are explained, lessons are learnt
from good practice in other parts of the world, the current status in the GCBC
is explored, and key strategic issues that need to be addressed are outlined.
From this perspective principles of intervention are outlined, alternative
strategic approaches are considered, and a 5 year strategic plan of action is
presented for the GCBC’s engagement of communities and promotion of local
economic development.
2.0
POINTS OF DEPARTURE
In working out how to engage communities and realize biodiversity
conservation’s contribution to socio-economic development, it is useful at the
outset to ‘unpack’ the central concepts involved. These are:
i.
The Greater Cederberg Biodiversity Corridor refers to an inter-regional
system of natural and semi-natural landscapes, the conservation of which
is essential for the maintenance of ecological patterns and processes. The
area targeted as the biodiversity corridor transcends the regions of the
Sandveld, Cederberg, Tankwa-Karoo, Nieuwoudtville Plateau, and
Kouebokkeveld. Whilst protection of ecological patterns and processes
within the corridor is an overriding management objective, the community’s
sustainable use of the corridor’s assets is also an important consideration.
ii. The biodiversity corridor’s assets are wide ranging and include unique
biophysical, heritage and scenic resources, varied terrestrial and aquatic
habitats, as well as natural landscapes and seascapes.
iii. Socio-economic benefits are understood to have two dimensions. The
horizontal dimension refers to benefits associated with biodiversity
conservation’s contribution to meeting the basic needs of communities (i.e.
its role in poverty alleviation) and a healthy living environment for all (e.g.
clean water). The vertical dimension refers to biodiversity conservation
providing opportunities for people to improve their quality of life (e.g.
supporting sustainable livelihoods).
Socio-economic benefits are derived from either the direct or indirect use
of the corridor’s assets, as well as from the provision of ecosystem
Greater Cederberg Biodiversity Corridor: Draft Socio-Economic Strategy: (Setplan – September 2004)
1
services. Socio-economic benefits associated with
conservation cover a wide spectrum, including:
 Health improvements.
 Raising education and environmental awareness levels.
 Developing new skills and competencies.
 Providing additional sources of household income.
 Empowering individuals and communities.
 Job creation.
 Leisure and lifestyle enhancements.
biodiversity
iv. When overlaying these benefits with the biodiversity corridor, socioeconomic opportunities present themselves across different sectors of the
so-called biodiversity economy. As is evident from the outcomes of the
participatory workshops, opportunities are to be found within economic
sectors such as:
 Recreational use of natural assets.
 Nature based tourism (e.g. accommodation, guiding, catering and
transport services).
 Natural resource harvesting (e.g. buchu) and benefication (e.g. soap
making, crafts, etc).
 Biodiversity friendly agriculture.
 Research and education.
 Events and festivals.
 Land management (e.g. rehabilitation, alien clearing, fire management,
etc).
Whilst various kinds of socio-economic benefits can be derived from
biodiversity conservation in diverse sectors, there are substantial risks
involved in unlocking these benefits. In preparing intervention strategies,
opportunities need to be weighed up against threats to ensure that new
ventures are sustainable. Biodiversity and socio-economic targets need to be
set to inform where to channel investment to unlock this market.
3.0
LITERATURE REVIEW
A review of South African and international best practices provides lessons to
consider in evaluating and unlocking socio-economic opportunities within the
GCBC. What is clear from the literature review is that generating sustainable
social and economic benefits is dependent on the health and productivity of
the biodiversity network.1 In a similar vein, the Canadian geneticist and
environmentalist David Suzuki in his keynote presentation to the Convention
on Biological Diversity stated “if we don’t deal with hunger and poverty, we
can forget the environment; people have other priorities.”2
Two contrasting approaches to managing biodiversity and socio-economic
development are Conservation International’s enterprise development model
and the Ulugan Bay biosphere resource management framework.
1
http://sacoast.uwc.ac.za/education/resources/value1.htm.
2
http://www.icsf.net/jsp/publication/samudra/pdf/english/issue_37/edit.pdf.
Greater Cederberg Biodiversity Corridor: Draft Socio-Economic Strategy: (Setplan – September 2004)
2
Conservation International, a donor funded international non-profit
organization, has conservation related programmes across the globe. Its
enterprise development model is a partnership programme that provides
beneficiaries with the tools to set up and sustain businesses that generate
income for local communities and contribute to biodiversity conservation –
called conservation enterprises.3 The CI approach is to provide management
skills to local entrepreneurs, ensure access to capital via its own fund (Verde
Venture) or other sources of funding, assist in the marketing of the business,
business planning (strategy and financial management), advising the
business of deal brokering and product development that meets market
demand, providing market related information, as well as undertaking ongoing
monitoring and evaluation of the conservation enterprise’s contribution to
biodiversity conservation.
In the Philippines, the Ulugan Bay biosphere provides a useful comparative
reference for the formulation of a management strategy for socio-economic
opportunities in the GCBC. The Ulugan Bay biosphere includes numerous
economies, namely: sustainable tourism, community based fishing farms and
environmental education. There is also a biodiversity network management
strategy in place to balance the carrying capacity of the environment with the
need to maximize public benefits and enable income generating activities
among coastal communities. The integrated resource management strategy
of the Ulugan Bay biosphere includes: local community involvement in
decision-making; ensuring that baseline information (i.e. biophysical,
ecological, socio-cultural, economic, as well as institutional, organizational
and implementation data) exists or is collected and sector indicators are in
place to ensure development planning; and the implementation of strategy
and policy in partnership with the local communities. The aim of this approach
is to foster “a joint stewardship of the coastal resources within the community
and government services.”4
Lessons emerging from the literature review are that Government should
facilitate socio-economic development as an enabling agent and comanagement partner where the multi-use of biodiversity resources has a
public benefit. Co-management principles (or benefits sharing) ensure a
bottom-up approach to sustainable resource management, socio-economic
development and foster relationships between authorities and resource users.
In particular, mechanisms should be established to reward communities for
conservation activities.
Pro-poor strategies and interventions should not raise community
expectations above what can realistically be delivered as an opportunity to the
area – especially in regards to tourism development.
Business opportunities need a business case that is backed-up by market
research, the appropriate business management skills are in place, there are
3
http://www.conservation.org/xp/CIWEB/programs/conservation_enterprises/cons_enterprise.xml.
4
See S. Fazi and P. Flewwelling, Project summary: Coastal Resources Management Ulugan Bay, Palawan
Island,
The
Philippines
Volume
I
ecology,
culture
and
socio-economics.
http://www.unesco.org/csi/act/ulugan/ulugan3.htm.
Greater Cederberg Biodiversity Corridor: Draft Socio-Economic Strategy: (Setplan – September 2004)
3
established financial controls, and that there is a demand for the product
and/or services offered.
Ownership needs to devolve to an initiative at the local level for economic
empowerment to take place and have any meaningful impact of the quality of
life of beneficiaries.
Institutional budget allocation and distribution is often focused towards capital
expenditure, particularly construction as this creates immediate short-term
jobs. To avoid the premature death of SMME development it is critical that the
development of such infrastructure is accompanied by an integrated roll-out of
local skills development with mechanisms for market access. Mentorships and
business partnerships that build community experience and trust with
appropriate businesses has been a successful mechanism. The key to
success is striking the balance of a fair business deal that benefits all
stakeholders. The creation of a “fair” deal will secure ongoing market access
that the emerging SMME can grow from.
4.0
CURRENT STATUS
4.1
Community Engagement
a) Community Structures
Community structures within the GCBC are wide ranging and include:
1. Occupation specific organizations (e.g. emerging farmers, tourism
operators, municipal workers unions, Masakane Small Farmers
Associations, Farm Workers Associations, etc).
2. Community/Civic groupings (e.g. Wupperthal, Algeria and Op-die-Berg
IDP Forums, IDP interest groups).
3. Interest Groups (e.g. Youth League, Women’s League, Sport clubs, etc).
4. Project/Programme specific organizations (e.g. Coastcare and LandCare).
5. Resource management groupings (e.g. conservation and water forums).
b) Municipal
Municipalities within the GCBC mainly use the IDP process to engage with
local communities. Consultative forums include:
i.
IDP Representative Forums within B municipalities and the Cederberg
Wilderness Tankwa Karoo District Management Areas (DMAs). The IDP
Representative Forum brings together both ward representation and the
involvement of sectoral focus groups (e.g. housing, environmental).
ii. Ad hoc consultative forums (e.g. between Berg River Municipality and
Farming Community.
iii. Ward forums and committees
Greater Cederberg Biodiversity Corridor: Draft Socio-Economic Strategy: (Setplan – September 2004)
4
c) Provincial and National Government
Community engagement structures used by provincial and national
government include:
i. WCNCB’s Task Teams (e.g. Sandveld) and GCBC’s Tourism Task Team
ii. DWAF’s Water Forums/Catchment Management Agencies
iii. Project committees established by Coastcare, LandCare, Area-wide
planning, Working for Water.
iv. Western Cape provincial government’s coastal committee.
v. PIMMS based in District Municipalities – this co-ordination group of
provincial
departments
may
evolve
into
a
“LOS”
(Land
Ontwikkelingsentrum – a “one stop shop” for integrated service provision.
viii. Department of Land Affairs evaluation committees.
d) NGO and CBO
The GCBC has an established network of NGOs and CBOs operating in the
area. Those active include Living Landscape ( environmental education),
Wethu Experience (education, nature based tours), CEROM (interschools
environmental club), Aksent Rural Empowerment Initiative (capacity building
and
facilitation),
Indigo
Development
and
Change
(capacity
building/community development), Heiveld Co-operative (tea marketing.and
Birdlife (conservation, research and eco-tourism development - especially
regarding bird habitats). SPP are managing a programme for organising
emerging farmers into local and regional associations (e.g. Hantam Streeks
Opkomende Boere Vereniging).
4.2
Local Economic Development
Reflecting on the sectors of the biodiversity economy in which there are socioeconomic development opportunities, the current status of community based
initiatives in the GCBC is as follows:
a) Recreational Use of Natural Areas
The GCBC is a region rich in nature based recreational opportunities, and
serves as an important weekend and holiday destination for the Cape Town
outdoor recreation market. Whilst a range of nature based recreational
products are available in the area, few of these are currently community
driven ventures. Fledging community based products in the area are the
Wupperthal 4X4 trail, Elands Bay coastal hiking trail, and the Algeria
interpretative walking trail. Communities report that these ventures are
constrained by inadequate business skills of the operators, poor marketing,
and insufficient investment in ongoing maintenance. Notwithstanding these
constraints, communities see scope for their greater involvement in this sector
of the economy.
Greater Cederberg Biodiversity Corridor: Draft Socio-Economic Strategy: (Setplan – September 2004)
5
b) Nature Based Tourism
The GCBC is one of South Africa’s premier eco-tourism destinations on
account of its unique natural, heritage and scenic resources. Whilst there is
considerable investment in eco-tourism facilities in the area, the industry is
constrained by poor mid-week patronage. Previously disadvantaged
communities are active in this sector of the economy, but there are limited
community owned and managed nature based tourism ventures. Innovative
community based products include the Heuningvlei guest house and donkey
cart route, and guided archaeological and rock art tours offered by Living
Landscape and Wethu Experience.
Operators of community based eco-tourism ventures are constrained by
limited access to funding for building up tourism assets, poor marketing,
inadequate business skills and limited access to land and natural resources.
c) Harvesting and Beneficiation of Natural Resources
Communities report that they are denied access to natural resources,
notwithstanding their intimate knowledge of the veld and their belief that they
can harvest on a sustainable basis. Whilst access to natural resources has
improved for coastal communities, communities are of the opinion that the
same has not taken place in the mountainous areas.
WCNCB are promoting cultivation of indigenous plants (e.g. buchu and
fynbos) on disturbed or marginal agricultural lands. Pilot projects have been
initiated in Elandskloof and Wupperthal. Communities expressed frustration
that the expansion of these projects is hampered by their lack of access to
private and state land, and the slow processing of veld clearing applications.
d) Agricultural Production
Communities perceive that the greatest socio-economic opportunities for them
lie in farming ventures. However biodiversity friendly farming practices are not
widespread in the GCBC, especially amongst emerging farmers. Notable
exceptions are organic rooibos tea cultivation at Waterkraal and honey
production at Algeria, both of which created marketing outlets for their
products.
Constraints to expanding the emergent farmer sector on a biodiversity friendly
basis include limited access to land, inadequate marketing information and
infrastructure, and poor environmental awareness amongst emerging farmers.
e) Research and Education
The workshops highlighted the need for environmental education to be
targeted at learners and school leavers. Whilst sterling work in the
environmental education field is being done by diverse roleplayers, a massive
expansion of this programme is needed in the GCBC. Successful current
environmental programmes include classes run by Living Landscape, Wethu
Greater Cederberg Biodiversity Corridor: Draft Socio-Economic Strategy: (Setplan – September 2004)
6
Experience’s school camps, CEROM’s school competitions, WCNCB’s ceder
tree awareness programme, and DWAF’s alien plant awareness programme.
f) Events and Festivals
Whilst events and festivals are an established activity in the GCBC, to date
environmentally themed events and festivals are in their infancy. In terms of
mainstreaming biodiversity as well as boosting the eco-tourism and nature
based recreation markets, there is considerable scope for growth in this
sector of the economy. Besides promoting biodiversity, events and festivals
are also an important means of galvanizing previously disparate communities
(e.g. Nieuwoudtville charette).
g) Land and Natural Resource Rehabilitation and Management
There are diverse state facilitated, community driven and partnership based
land and natural resource management programmes in the GCBC. State
facilitated programmes include:
 Alien clearing (i.e. Working for Water)
 Fire management
 LandCare
 Coastcare
 Working for Wetlands
 Water forums.
Community driven initiatives include clean-ups of natural habitats (e.g.
Elandskloof Youth League) and upgrading of public open space (e.g.
Droogvoet bridge and walkway at Op die Berg. Conservancies are a good
example of partnership based land programmes, involving land owners,
communities, and conservation bodies (e.g. Wupperthal Conservancy).
For the creation of sustainable livelihoods, the challenge is to train those
temporarily involved in state facilitated programmes into independent
entrepreneurs. Communities expressed concerns that with the demise of the
Coast Care programme at Elands Bay, many were left without alternative
work. Feedback from those involved in the Working for Water programme is
that entrepreneurial training was neglected in the past, but is now being
addressed.
Concerns expressed by communities over partnership based programmes
was that they generate interest and raise expectations, but do not deliver
tangible benefits to local communities.
5.0
KEY STRATEGIC ISSUES
The participatory workshops held with representatives of target beneficiaries
and statutory authorities raised various issues regarding the engagement of
previously disadvantaged communities in the GCBC initiative, and the
integration of local economic development with biodiversity conservation
efforts (see Record of Consultation Report 1403/R1 for details).
Greater Cederberg Biodiversity Corridor: Draft Socio-Economic Strategy: (Setplan – September 2004)
7
5.1
Community Engagement Issues
Strategies for engaging poorer communities in the GCBC initiative need to
address the following key issues:
i.
Communities are suspicious about the motives of the GCBC, given a
history of their exclusion from conservation programmes. To win over their
trust the GCBC needs to demonstrate that it is an effective agent of
change and community capacity builder.
ii. Communities have been exposed to many campaigns and programmes in
the past that talk about improving community living standards, but they
have seen little action that gives effect to these undertakings. They are
thus skeptical about new initiatives. The GCBC needs to be careful about
raising community expectations and then under-delivering on its promises.
It is a preferable strategy for the GCBC to be modest in its undertakings to
communities, and exceed expectations in its delivery. If follow through on
GCBC publicity campaigns is not guaranteed, it is advisable to hold back
on the publicity.
iii. Communities grapple understanding the concept of a biodiversity corridor,
and the use of environmental jargon to explain what it means does not
make it any easier to understand. The GCBC needs to give careful
consideration to the wording and communication of its publicity material,
and ensure that it is available in Xhosa, Afrikaans and English.
iv. The distinction between the GCBC and other regional initiatives (e.g.
Biosphere Reserves) is not apparent to most communities, and many
perceive it as duplicating current programmes. GCBC publicity material
needs to clearly explain how the corridor relates to other current regional
initiatives.
v. Communities are concerned that the GCBC initiative may slow down the
roll-out of programmes and projects they are currently involved in, by
introducing a new biodiversity focus. Whilst the GCBC unashamedly
introduces a biodiversity focus in support of sustainable development,
community acceptance of the programme is dependent on it facilitating
and not retarding development.
vi. Some community leaders belief the GCBC will make it more difficult for
communities to access land and natural resources. They also question the
commitment of the commercial farming sector to biodiversity conservation.
vii. The boundaries of GCBC are perceived to divide communities between
those that are in and out. Those falling outside the target area fear they
will not benefit from the corridor.
viii. Existing conflicts in some communities preclude their effective involvement
in the GCBC at this stage.
Greater Cederberg Biodiversity Corridor: Draft Socio-Economic Strategy: (Setplan – September 2004)
8
5.2
Local Economic Development Issues
Strategies for using biodiversity conservation to unlock economic benefits to
poorer communities living within the GCBC need to address the following key
issues:
i.
Poor communities see themselves as disadvantaged due to the legacy of
them being denied access to land and natural resources. Some are
suspicious that the new GCBC initiative is another form of restriction on
the community’s access rights. To overcome this perception and redress
past injustices the GCBC needs to be proactive in helping poor
communities gain new forms of access to land (both public and privately
owned) and natural resources. Not only does the GCBC need to facilitate
new and enhanced access rights, they also need to give attention to
assisting poor communities use this land and natural resources on a
sustainable basis.
ii. Poor communities are aware that nature based recreation and eco-tourism
in the GCBC has significant economic growth prospects. They recognize
that some will benefit from new jobs created, but are frustrated as their
perception is that the current procurement process severely restricts their
ability to enter this market.
iii. Communities feel that their lack of biodiversity training restricts them
participating in new opportunities that may arise.
iv. Communities limited access to capital to start up new business ventures is
seen as a fundamental constraint to the growth of the biodiversity
economy.
v. Isolated existing initiatives with no linkages and economies of scale
between different projects is perceived to retard the growth prospects of
the biodiversity economy.
vi. Difficulties in accessing markets to sell goods and services and no
management support to guide new ventures are seen as contributing to
the failure of many new businesses (e.g. Heuningvlei vs Wupperthal).
6.0
PRINCIPLES OF INTERVENTION
Drawing on lessons learnt from community based natural resource
management throughout Southern Africa (as published in Rights, Resources
& Rural Development, 2004, edited by Christo Fabricius and Eddie Koch),
Box 1 sets out principles for improving the chances of success of these
ventures, and criteria for evaluating them. These principles of intervention
may be summarized as follows:
i. A diverse and flexible range of livelihood options should be promoted.
ii. At minimum the production potential of the resource base should be
maintained, ideally it should be improved.
Greater Cederberg Biodiversity Corridor: Draft Socio-Economic Strategy: (Setplan – September 2004)
9
Greater Cederberg Biodiversity Corridor: Draft Socio-Economic Strategy: (Setplan – September 2004)
10
Source: Rights, Resources and Rural Development;
Edited by Christo Fabricius and Eddie Koch
with Hector Magome and Stephen Turner
Greater Cederberg Biodiversity Corridor: Draft Socio-Economic Strategy: (Setplan – September 2004)
11
iii. Effective local government and natural resource management institutions
need to be in place.
iii. There must be economic and other benefits to incentive the community’s
adoption of sustainable land and resource use practices.
iv. Policies and legislation needs to be applied and authority delegated to the
lowest level where there is capacity.
v. There should be sensible and responsible community facilitation from
outside.
vi. Local relationships need to be understood, and local level power relations
should favour direct community involvement in the biodiversity economy.
7.
TACKLING THE CHALLENGE
How then should the GCBC tackle the challenge of engaging communities in
a campaign to promote sustainable land and natural resource use? What can
the GCBC initiative do to promote local economic development through
biodiversity conservation efforts?
Decisions on the correct approach to take should be informed by the GCBC’s
core mandate and institutional arrangements. Whilst the mandate and
institutional arrangements are currently being worked out by the GCBC coordinator and his strategic partners, the implementation framework is likely to
display the following characteristics:

The institutional framework of the GCBC should complement and optimise
the strengths, activities and initiatives of existing institutions, private
landowners, individuals, community groups or statutory organisations
already operational within the target area. Duplication of existing structures
should be avoided at all costs.

The institutional framework should provide for the integration and
coordination of biodiversity conservation initiatives and activities within the
environmental, institutional and socio-economic context of the region
without creating jurisdictional overlaps and conflicts.

Whatever institutional framework and staffing complement is adopted, it
must be sufficiently fluid to ensure that it can respond to challenges of
conserving biodiversity in a changing political, social, economic and
biophysical environment.

The GCBC should be able to maintain the focus of the institution on its
priority objectives and ensure that it leverages support for those objectives
through effective partnerships with other government agencies, the private
sector, and civil society.

The institutional framework should be able to support flexible management
programs that encourage innovation and a wide range of government and
non-government sector involvement.
Greater Cederberg Biodiversity Corridor: Draft Socio-Economic Strategy: (Setplan – September 2004)
12
8.

The institutional framework will need to provide for iterative strategic
thinking and the consequent constant refocusing, restructuring and
repositioning of the institution.

The institutional framework of the GCBC should be able to support a
diversity of options in the implementation of the biodiversity conservation
mandate of the corridor. These should include, but not be limited to,
devolution to NGO’s, community based natural resource management
options, collaborative management, participatory management, joint
ventures, outsourcing, management agreements and resource use
concessions.

The institutional framework should provide for the auditing and review of
the corridor’s mandate by all the stakeholders in the GCBC.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT STRATEGIES
Aligned with the institutional framework outlined above, a dual strategy for
engaging previously disadvantaged communities in the corridor biodiversity
programme is recommended.
8.1 Biodiversity Awareness and Information Campaign
This campaign should be targeted at all communities living within the corridor.
The purpose of the campaign is to raise awareness of biodiversity as well as
empower communities to get involved in the biodiversity economy. The
campaign should use different media (e.g. brochures, posters, pamphlets,
presentations, etc) and be conveyed in English, Afrikaans and Xhosa using
easy to understand terminology and graphics. Existing community structures
are the audience of the campaign, with a primary focus on the youth, school
leavers and those unemployed.
The campaign needs to cover the following topics:
 The necessity and benefits of biodiversity conservation in terms of meeting
basic human needs and improving standards of living.
 What the GCBC initiative is all about and how it fits into existing
institutional arrangements at community and municipal levels.
 Opportunities for communities to become involved in programmes or
projects that are biodiversity conservation orientated.
 The different kinds of financial and technical assistance available to
communities, the type of community based projects for which assistance
can be sought, how communities can prepare a project proposal, and the
criteria used to evaluate requests for assistance.
The roll-out of this strategy involves the following activities:
 Research and commission production of campaign material.
 Appoint and train community facilitators
 Pilot campaign and amend where necessary.
It is envisaged that the campaign would need to run for between 2 and 3
years.
Greater Cederberg Biodiversity Corridor: Draft Socio-Economic Strategy: (Setplan – September 2004)
13
8.2
Build a Corps of Biodiversity Change Agents
This strategy of ‘training the trainers’ is aimed at building up a core team of
influential people who can function as biodiversity change agents in the
corridor area. Prospective agents of change are identified as:
 conveners of water forums and other resource management structures
 LRAD and Agricultural Extension officers
 municipal IDP and LED officers
 Councilors
 CBO and NGO facilitators
 school teachers, and
 leaders of emerging farmer and farm worker structures.
The topics to be covered on this training programme are the same as for the
community awareness campaign, but they would need to be covered in
greater detail. The roll-out of this strategy involves: preparing training material;
appointment of a trainer/s; and piloting the training programme and amending
where necessary. It is envisaged that a corps of biodiversity ‘change agents’
could be developed over a 2 year period.
9.
LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
Aligned with the institutional framework and community engagement
strategies outlined above, three short to medium term strategies are
recommended for promoting local economic development through biodiversity
conservation.
9.1
Implementation Assistance to Existing Projects
As opposed to starting new projects, the preferred strategy is for the GCBC
initiative to provide assistance to existing community based initiatives that are
closely aligned with biodiversity conservation objectives. Assistance to the
following three kinds of projects is proposed, each which has an important
demonstration role:
i.
assisting the roll-out of the transformation of rural land programme,
ii.
supporting a natural resource harvesting and beneficiation venture,
and
iii.
supporting a nature based tourism and/or recreation venture.
Actions necessary for the roll-out of this strategy are:
 Developing evaluation criteria and using these to appraise existing
community based ventures that are aligned with GCBC objectives
 Assessment of implementation stumbling blocks
 Appointment of technical support team
It is envisaged that the demonstration projects will need to be supported over
a three year period. Once project have been selected a support programme
should be developed that specifies timelines and milestones to be reached at
key stages. Where milestones are not reached consideration should be given
Greater Cederberg Biodiversity Corridor: Draft Socio-Economic Strategy: (Setplan – September 2004)
14
to re-allocating technical support to other projects that require implementation
assistance.
9.2
Launch and Project Management of Community Based Public Works
Programme to Rehabilitate Protected Areas within GCBC
In terms of employment generation the GCBC should play a leading role in
the setting up and management of a community based public works
programme that is targetted at the environmental rehabilitation of protected
areas within the corridor. The programme would integrate and consolidate
current natural resource programmes (e.g. working for water, working for
wetlands, working with fire, Land Care, Coast Care, etc).
The programme needs to give attention to entrepreneurial development and
rural livelihood skills training, so that at the end of the programme participants
are better equipped to pursue new income earning opportunities (e.g.
contractors for rehabilitation work on private land).
A professional project management team needs to be contracted to set-up
and manage the programme. This unit can also serve as implementation
agent for other statutory authorities, especially municipalities. Whilst the
project management team would focus on the corridor area, the programme
would in all likelihood extend beyond these borders.
It is envisaged that this programme would run for at least 5 years.
9.3
Developing and Piloting of Community Owned Eco-tourism Facilities in
GCBC Protected Areas
In demonstrating the socio-economic benefits of the so-called biodiversity
economy, it is of strategic importance that the GCBC shows that community
economic empowerment can even extend to the ownership of assets.
WCNCB are currently exploring applying the community ownership model of
eco-tourism facilities. It is recommended that the GCBC takes the initiative in
piloting this model in the corridor area.
Developing and piloting such a model involves a range of specialist
investigations including: assessment of suitable sites for eco-tourism facilities;
understanding community structures and dynamics; exploring institutional
arrangements and sources of grant and loan finance; interactions with
established operators in the industry, and establishing acceptable and
transparent procurement procedures.
It is recommended that the GCBC seek the support of the WCNCB to secure
the services of specialist facilitators and transaction advisors for the setting up
and roll-out of community owned eco-tourism assets. Within a 5 year time
horizon the GCBC could have a community owned eco-tourism lodge fully
operational within the GCBC.
Greater Cederberg Biodiversity Corridor: Draft Socio-Economic Strategy: (Setplan – September 2004)
15