73027 Toward AFR I C A ’ S Green Future WORLD BANK SUPPORT IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION Acknowledgments This report was prepared by Julian Lee (Consultant, ENV), George Ledec (Lead Ecologist, AFTN3), and Claudia Sobrevila (Senior Environmental Specialist, AFTN3) under the guidance of Magda Lovei (Sector Manager, AFTN3). Jim Cantrell (Communications Analyst, ENV) prepared the graphic design. The authors gratefully acknowledge the generous contributions of Gayatri Kanungo (Environmental Specialist, AFTN3), Jane Kibbassa (Senior Environmental Specialist, AFTN3), Stephen Ling (Natural Resources Management Specialist, AFTN1), Carole Megevand (Senior Natural Resources Management Specialist, AFTN1), Jean-Michel Pavy (Senior Environmental Specialist, EASER), Christian Peter (Senior Natural Resources Management Specialist, LCSER), Paola Agostini (Senior Economist, AFTN3), Madjiguene Seck (Communications Associate, PRMK), and Liba Strengerowski- Feldblyum (Operations Analyst, AFTN3) from the World Bank and of Martin Sneary from Conservation International-BirdLife International-IUCN Species Survival Commission. Kirk Hamilton All images Shutterstock, LLC except where noted. F O R E W o R D F rom the world’s highest mountain ranges to the lowland plains, and from the great oceans and coastal wetlands to agricultural landscapes, nations and communities rely on the bounty and services of natural ecosystems. Biological resources and the goods and ecosystem services they provide underpin every aspect of human life and liveli- hoods, from food and water security to general well-being and spiritual fulfillment. Sub-Saharan Africa is particularly well endowed by rich biodiversity resources that represent tremendous wealth at the local, regional, and international levels. Yet these resources are increasingly under pressure and threat due to land use change, rapid urbanization, poorly planned infrastructure development and resource extraction, illegal logging, wildlife poaching and trade, and other factors. In Sub-Saharan Africa, the World Bank has been a major global funder and supporter of biodiversity conservation in the past decades. Projects and programs supported by the Bank— and often co-financed with the Global Environment Facility—span across 36 countries and more than 100 projects. They have helped establish and manage globally important protected areas, introduce policies and regulations for the sustainable management of resources, reform institutions, support communities’ conservation and sustainable management efforts, develop innovative financing mechanisms, and mainstream biodiversity conservation within the produc- tion landscape and in economic sectors (such as forestry, fisheries, and tourism). In addition to its efforts in supporting country programs, the Bank has supported successful partnerships with non-government organizations to promote global and regional biodiversity initiatives. This report reviews the World Bank support to biodiversity conservation in Sub-Saharan Africa over the past decade (2003-2012), and presents key lessons and directions for the Bank’s future biodiversity-related investments. The Africa region is presently undergoing a fundamental transformation. With a firm focus on biodiversity as a component of inclusive green growth, the World Bank is well positioned to continue and strengthen its role as a leading supporter of African countries’ conservation efforts. Jamal Saghir Director Sustainable Development Department Africa Region WORLD BANK INVESTMENT IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION   1 Executive Summary funds (CTFs), also have a role to play. Where CTFs are used, special attention needs to be paid to yield S ub-Saharan Africa’s rich biodiversity endow- projections and management costs. ment serves as the foundation for millions of „„ Biodiversity conservation needs to be further livelihoods and for many local and national integrated into regular development planning and economies. Yet the decimation of habitats, implementation. The scope for doing so remains plants and animals in the wild continues at an unprec- considerable. edented pace. Given the centrality of natural resources to sustainable economic development in Sub-Saharan Recognizing the importance of biodiversity and eco- Africa, conserving this irreplaceable stock of species and systems to economic growth and building on this past ecosystems is of fundamental importance. experience to support its African client countries, the World Bank, in its future programs, will make special Many countries in the region have recognized the efforts to: importance of turning the tide on habitats and species „„ Incorporate biodiversity considerations more fully loss. During the past decade, the World Bank has sup- within its lending portfolio, through the applica- ported their efforts through technical assistance and tion of good environmental management practices 124 biodiversity-related projects. It invested nearly $1 and policies in the planning and implementation of billion directly in biodiversity during this period, with a projects and programs. principal focus on protected areas and landscape man- „„ Place special emphasis on designing and monitor- agement. The scale of this investment makes the World ing of projects that demonstrate how biodiversity Bank the largest financier for biodiversity conservation can be an engine of inclusive green growth and in Africa. improved livelihoods, through greater economic valuation and payments of natural ecosystem Through these activities, the clients, partners and the services and enhanced opportunities for economic World Bank have learned a number of important les- benefit-sharing. sons. „„ Protected area management needs strengthening „„ Increase its focus on landscape approaches to so that parks can reach the full potential of their conservation that encompass biodiversity-friendly intended conservation purposes. production systems and buffer zones, along with intact natural habitats within protected areas. „„ Where political boundaries divide ecosystems, transboundary conservation areas enable compre- „„ Work with client countries and the private sector hensive conservation efforts that can create posi- to ensure that good environmental practices and tive externalities for neighboring countries. compensation schemes, such as conservation off- sets, are in place in extractive industries and other „„ Landscape-level planning and management ex- development projects. tends biodiversity conservation beyond protected areas—which can only cover a limited area— into „„ Promote public private sector partnerships and production systems. facilitate the use of private sector resources to con- tribute to conservation efforts, in particular through „„ Resource users need incentives to conserve the the use of innovative instruments like nationally ag- biodiversity on their lands. Where such incentives gregated biodiversity offset schemes, green bonds, are provided and communities are included in conservation banking, environmentally friendly decision-making, resource users can change behav- “green� infrastructure and nature-based tourism. ior and become powerful allies in conservation. „„ Assist client governments and international initia- „„ Conservation funding needs to be structured for tives that seek to support more-effective law the long term. Beyond government budgetary re- enforcement through partnerships and innovative sources, receipts from tourism can make an impor- approaches in order to address illegal taking of tant difference. Innovative financing mechanisms, wildlife, fish, and timber resources, which is reach- such as carbon finance and conservation trust ing crisis levels in some areas. 2   SUPPORTING AFRICA’S GREEN FUTURE Africa is home to nearly a quarter of the world’s mammal species (around 1,230), including this Chacma Baboon. Kirk Hamilton WORLD BANK INVESTMENT IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION   3 many animal and plant species found nowhere else. To T he B iodiversity date, Africa has lost less of its biodiversity in terms of species extinctions than other continents have. It is also unusual in that—unlike other continents—its large- C onser vation mammal fauna is still largely intact. Africa’s biodiversity wealth is not uniformly distributed. I mperative in For example, 62 percent of the terrestrial vertebrate and plant species can be found within key centers of diver- A frica sity that cover only 1 percent of the Sub-Saharan land surface (UNEP 2006). Among these centers of diversity are eight biodiversity hotspots (out of 34 in the world)1 (see Box 1). Sub-Saharan Africa also contains 42 of Jean-Michel Pavy WWF’s Global 200 Ecoregions that contain exceptional levels of biodiversity or feature unusual ecological or evolutionary phenomena (Olson and Dinerstein 1998; Africa’s Biodiversity Endowment Olson et al. 2001). Figure 2 shows the distribution and large extent of these centers of biodiversity. Figures 3 S ub-Saharan Africa is a uniquely important and 4 display the diversity of plant and mammal species region from a global biodiversity conservation across Africa. standpoint, with many unusual and distinctive land-based and aquatic ecosystems. This region There is considerable variation in biodiversity endow- is home to nearly a quarter of the world’s mammal spe- ments at the country level. The Democratic Republic of cies (1,230), more than a fifth of the world’s bird species Congo, Madagascar, and South Africa have each been (2,000), and around 950 amphibian species. The African classified as “megadiverse� countries—the world’s 17 continent has between 40,000 and 60,000 plant species, most biologically diverse countries that together ac- of which at least 35,000 are found nowhere else (one- count for nearly 70 percent of global species diversity. sixth of the world total in this category). Figure 1 shows the major natural vegetation zones of Sub-Saharan Table 1 ranks sub-Saharan African countries’ biodiver- Africa. sity according to the Benefits Index for Biodiversity of the Global Environment Facility (GEF). This index is a Conservative estimates put Africa’s freshwater fish spe- composite of the total number of known species in each cies at more than 2,000—the highest in the world. The country, their threat status, and the diversity of habitat African continent also has around 40,000 km of coast- types in each country. Countries with scores of 5 or line with high coastal and marine biodiversity (UNEP more are those with the highest amount of biodiversity. 2006). The continent is surrounded by large and small islands with extraordinary biodiversity wealth. Foremost Madagascar is in the top list of African countries when among these is Madagascar, the world’s fourth largest it comes to unique global biodiversity endowment, island, with more than 12,000 plant species—at least and the Bank and other donors have been supporting 81 percent of which occur nowhere else. Madagas- car harbors so much unique flora and fauna that it is often called the Eighth Continent. Other, smaller island 1. Biodiversity hotspots are defined as areas with at least 1,500 spe- nations—including São Tomé and Príncipe, Comoros, cies of vascular plants that have each lost at least 70 percent of their Seychelles, Mauritius, and Cape Verde—also contain original habitat (Mittermeier et al. 2005). 4   SUPPORTING AFRICA’S GREEN FUTURE Figure 1: Major Vegetation Zones of Sub-Saharan Africa Source: Sinclair and Ryan 2003; reproduced with permission from the publisher. WORLD BANK INVESTMENT IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION   5 Box 1: Biodiversity Hotspots in Sub-Saharan Africa CAPE FLORISTIC REGION (South Africa) These evergreen fire-dependent shrublands contain some 9,000 vascular plant species on 90,000 km2. COASTAL FORESTS OF EASTERN AFRICA (Kenya, Mozambique, Somalia, Tanzania) Though tiny and fragmented, the forest remnants that make up these forests contain remarkable levels of biodiver- sity. EASTERN AFROMONTANE (Burundi, Dem. Rep. Congo, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, Mozambique, Rwanda, South Sudan, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe) The mountains of the Eastern Afromontane hotspot are scattered along the eastern edge of Africa, from Eritrea in the north to Zimbabwe in the south. GUINEAN FORESTS OF WESTERN AFRICA (Benin, Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Equatorial Guinea, Ghana, Guinea, Liberia, Nigeria, São Tomé and Príncipe, Sierra Leone, Togo) The lowland forests of West Africa are home to more than a quarter of Africa’s mammals, including more than 20 species of primates. HORN OF AFRICA (Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia) The arid Horn of Africa has been a renowned source of biological resources for thousands of years. MADAGASCAR AND THE INDIAN OCEAN ISLANDS (Comoros, Madagascar, Mauritius, Seychelles) These islands have an astounding total of eight plant families, four bird families, and five primate families that live nowhere else on Earth. MAPUTALAND-PONDOLAND-ALBANY (Mozambique, South Africa, Swaziland) This hotspot, which stretches along the east coast of southern Africa below the Great Escarpment, is an important center of plant endemism. SUCCULENT KAROO (Namibia, South Africa) This region boasts the richest succulent flora on Earth, as well as remarkable endemism in plants. Source: Conservation International 2012a,b. conservation projects in this country for three decades islands of São Tomé and Príncipe have the world’s high- (see Box 2). est concentration of endemic birds (Melo and Ryan 2012). Many African countries harbor significant con- Another important measure for biodiversity conserva- centrations of unique and often threatened species and tion is endemism—species found in a particular country ecosystems; often, several countries share concentrated that occur nowhere else in the wild. For example, the areas of high biodiversity. The highly localized Kihansi Spray Toad lives only within a tiny portion of the Udzungwa Mountains of Tanzania, part of the Eastern Arc Mountains that have the highest diversity of endemic and threatened plants and animals in the region. 6   SUPPORTING AFRICA’S GREEN FUTURE Figure 2: Hot Spots and Global 200 Ecoregions in Sub-Saharan Africa Source: Conservation International 2012b and WWF 2012; reproduced by the World Bank. WORLD BANK INVESTMENT IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION   7 Table 1: GEF Biodiversity Index for Sub-Saharan African Countries GEF Biodiversity Index 5–30 GEF Biodiversity Index 1–5 GEF Biodiversity Index < 1 Madagascar 29.2 Zambia 3.8 Rwanda 0.9 South Africa 20.7 Rep. Congo 3.6 Niger 0.9 DR Congo 19.9 Seychelles 3.5 Eritrea 0.8 Tanzania 14.8 Côte d’Ivoire 3.4 Guinea-Bissau 0.6 Cameroon 12.5 Gabon 3.0 Burkina Faso 0.3 Kenya 8.8 Uganda 2.8 Togo 0.3 Ethiopia 8.4 São Tomé & Príncipe 2.7 Burundi 0.3 Angola 8.3 Liberia 2.6 Lesotho 0.3 Mozambique 7.2 Cape Verde 2.4 Benin 0.2 Somalia 6.1 Guinea 2.3 Swaziland 0.1 Nigeria 6.0 Chad 2.2 Gambia 0.1 Namibia 5.2 Zimbabwe 1.9 Sudan 5.1 Ghana 1.9 Equatorial Guinea 1.5 CAR 1.5 Mali 1.5 Botswana 1.4 Sierra Leone 1.3 Senegal 1.0 Note: The GEF Benefits Index for Biodiversity is a composite of (i) the total number of known species in each country, (ii) their threat status, and (iii) the diversity of habitat types in each country. Source: World Bank 2012a. Box 2: Madagascar: Biodiversity and Protected Areas Madagascar’s biodiversity is a unique, irreplaceable global public good representing 5 percent of the world’s biodiversity on just 0.4 percent of the global landmass. Its uniqueness is clear: 99 percent of amphibians, 92 percent of reptiles, 95 percent mammals, 83 percent of plant species, and 93 percent of freshwater fish species are found nowhere else. There are over 1,000 known terrestrial vertebrate species, 6,000 coral reef species, over 12,000 identified terrestrial plant species, and an unknown number of species not yet described. Fifty new species of lemurs have been discovered during the last 20 years, bringing the number of known lemur species to 100. The protection of Madagascar’s biodiversity is thus an international responsibility. Triggered by the 2003 Presidential Declaration, which undertook to triple the surface of Madagascar’s protected areas, the expansion of the network has been rapid and substantial. There are currently 144 protected areas covering 12 percent of the nation’s territory, an increase in coverage from 2.9 percent in 2003. The protected area network in Madagascar covers approximately 6.9 million hectares and is managed by Madagascar National Parks and by Conservation International, the Wildlife Conservation Society, and WWF on behalf of the Ministry of Environment and Forests. 8   SUPPORTING AFRICA’S GREEN FUTURE Glo b al B io d iv er s ity : Sp ec ies n u m b er s o f v as c u lar Figure 3. Species Numbers of Vascular Plants Diversity Zones (DZ): Number of species per 10,000 km DZ 1 < 20 spp. DZ 5 1000-1500 spp. DZ 8 4000-5000 spp. DZ 2 20-200 spp. DZ 6 1500-2000 spp. DZ 9 >5000 spp. DZ 3 200-500 spp. DZ 7 2000-3000 spp. DZ 4 500-1000 spp. Note: This map shows plant species diversity per unit area of 10,000 km2. Plant species are particularly numerous in the Cape Floristic Kingdom of southern South Africa but also in the montane rainforests of the Gulf of Guinea (West Africa), Albertine Rift (eastern Central Africa), Eastern Arc Mountains (East Africa), and Madagascar. Source: Barthlott et al. 2005 in UNEP 2006; reproduced with permission from the publisher. Nees Institute for Biodiversi University of Bonn Figure 4. Mammal Species W. Barthlott, G. Kier, H. Kreft, W. Küper, D. Rafiqpoor & J. Mutke 2005 © Barthlott 1996, 2005 Diversity Number of Mammal Species per 3113 Sq km Hexagonal Cell 0 - 30 Note: This map shows the number of wild mammal species per 3,113 31 - 51 km2 unit area. In general, the diversity of mammal species is greatest 52 - 74 near the equator, although important concentrations of large mam- 75 - 96 mal species are also found in Southern Africa. 97 - 117 118 - 134 Source: UNEP 2006; reproduced with permission from the publisher. 135 - 150 Data from IUCN Species Survival Commission; University of Virginia; Center for Applied Biodiversity and Science at Conserva- 151 - 168 tion International; Instituto di Ecologia Applicata, Rome; Zoological 169 - 194 Society of London; and the African Mammals Databank. 195 - 257 WORLD BANK INVESTMENT IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION   9 Many areas in Africa require integrated approaches to ensure that local communities benefit from biodiversity conservation. Claudia Sobrevila 10   SUPPORTING AFRICA’S GREEN FUTURE Why Biodiversity Matters Important Mega-Trends The sustainable use and conservation of biodiversity is Population Growth: Rapid population growth is inten- essential for poverty reduction and sustainable devel- sifying human pressures on land and water resources, opment. For example, some 10 million Africans earn including biodiversity. Africa has the world’s fastest- their livelihoods in the fisheries sector (World Bank growing population, increasing at an annual rate of 2009). Tourism—most of which is nature-based in Sub- 2.53 percent in 2011, with population growth especially Saharan Africa—accounts for an estimated 5.8 percent rapid in West and Central Africa. Population growth has of employment in this region (WTTC 2012). Genetic important impacts on biodiversity, since in the absence diversity provides the basis for new breeding programs, of significant productivity gains, more land needs to be improved crops, enhanced agricultural production, and put into agricultural production, while the demand for food security. Ecosystems provide a number of environ- resources such as timber, fuelwood, bushmeat, fisheries, mental services that are vital to human welfare. Many and freshwater also rises. rural communities depend on fish and other wild foods, timber, fuelwood, and medicinal plants from natural Urbanization: Urban areas in Africa are growing ecosystems for their food security and income. Biodiver- rapidly, with mixed implications for biodiversity. On sity conservation is a key component of environmental the one hand, urbanization reduces pressures to clear sustainability, which is both a Millennium Development land for subsistence agriculture by providing alternative Goal and a central pillar of World Bank assistance. livelihoods. It also helps accelerate the demographic transition, since desired family sizes tend to be smaller The recent report The Economics of Ecosystems and Bio- in urban areas. On the other hand, African urbanization diversity (TEEB 2010) evaluated the costs of biodiversity typically increases the demand for charcoal as a cooking loss and the associated decline in ecosystem services fuel, which often leads to extensive forest and wood- worldwide and compared them with the costs of ef- land degradation. fective conservation and sustainable use. The results indicated that human well-being is dependent upon Globalized Demand for Commodities: An estimated 51 ecosystem services provided by nature for free, such as million hectares in Africa were the subject of land sales the stability provided to the hydrological and climate to foreign investors between 2001 and 2011, mostly for systems, nutrient replenishment, water and air purifica- the commercial production of food and energy crops tion, pest control, and psychological and spiritual well- (The Economist 2011). Biodiversity can be lost when being. These services are needed for human well-being. natural habitats are converted to extensive monocul- They are predominantly public goods with no markets tures of commercial crops. Similarly, the global demand and no prices, so the current economic incentive sys- for wood products often leads to forest degradation tem often does not detect their loss, which therefore and deforestation in Africa, particularly in the absence continues unchecked. In order to better recognize and of adequate controls on logging, hunting, and road account for the value of these services, in 2011 the construction. In response to growing global demand World Bank launched the Global Partnership for Wealth for minerals, many African countries are experiencing a Accounting and the Valuation of Ecosystem Services, or mining boom, often in sites of high biodiversity impor- WAVES. This program will help client countries establish tance. a comprehensive wealth accounting system that focus- es on the value of natural capital and the integration of Threats to Africa’s Biodiversity “green accounting� in more conventional development planning analysis. Botswana, Madagascar, and Namibia Biodiversity the world over is in crisis, and Sub-Saharan have asked to be in the pilot phase. Africa is no exception. Globally, species are being lost WORLD BANK INVESTMENT IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION   11 at a pace as much as 1,000 times greater than in recent overharvesting of medicinal plants in the remnant for- geological time (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment ests of Burundi is but one of many examples of unsus- 2005). In the 2011 update of the IUCN Red List of Threat- tainable exploitation. ened Species, 1,377 fish, 729 mammal, 706 bird, 357 amphibian species, and 1,023 invertebrates are listed as Illegal Wildlife Hunting and Trade: Illegal hunting threatened in Sub-Saharan Africa (IUCN 2011). and poaching—frequently fueled by the international trade in wildlife products—have decimated numerous Habitat Loss and Degradation: Habitat loss and species. The results can be stark: both the White and degradation are the most important threats to biodiver- Black Rhinoceros populations had been recovering sity in Africa. They are driven largely by rapidly grow- from previous declines, only to be brought back to the ing human populations, coupled with inadequately brink by a surge in demand from East Asia, where rhino planned and implemented development activities. The horn trades at prices in the traditional medicine market continent’s deforestation rates have been increasing greater than gold. In South Africa alone, some 400 rhi- and are second only to those in Latin America and the nos were poached in 2011, with international criminal Caribbean (UNEP 2012; FAO 2011). Across the continent, networks engaged in the trade (Gwin 2012). A few game they average 0.49 percent per annum, but that average farmers in South Africa advocate making rhino farm- masks much higher rates in West and East Africa (1.12 ing legal as a strategy to control the poaching, but this percent and 1.01 percent, respectively). Not only forests approach is still debated by larger conservation con- are threatened, however: coastal ecosystems are in peril stituencies. Comparable fates have befallen tortoises in from development, urbanization, land conversion, and Madagascar, several of which are coveted by collectors. pollution, in particular in West and Southern Africa (Bry- The widespread hunting of wild animals for commercial ant et al. 1995; UNEP 2006). Rivers are undergoing major bushmeat markets also represents a significant threat alterations due to dam construction, water abstraction, to biodiversity, in particular in West Africa and the and pollution. The expansion of cropping is a significant Congo Basin. In the latter, an estimated 1 million tons threat to natural grasslands and shrublands, in particu- of elephants, great apes and other primates, duikers, lar the montane grasslands of Eastern and Southern Africa (Suttie, Reynolds, and Batello 2005). In addition, crocodiles, and many other species are consumed every many habitats face fragmentation due to settlements, year (Bushmeat Crisis Task Force 2009). In West Africa, land conversion, or infrastructure developments. several monkey species have already become globally extinct or nearly so due to hunting for bushmeat (Oates Overexploitation: Overexploitation occurs when the 2011). overall rate of removal of a species exceeds its reproduc- tion. Overfishing is a good example. It occurs frequently, Invasive Alien Species (IAS): IAS are harmful to bio- but not exclusively, by illegally operating foreign vessels diversity when they outcompete native species and and threatens several fisheries, in particular in West thereby alter the ecosystem. They affect virtually all Africa, where the livelihoods of more than 1.5 million of Africa’s countries and ecosystems. Africa is home to local fishers are in peril (Vidal 2012). While much over- hundreds of plant and animal IAS with varying impacts, exploitation is deliberate, it can also be incidental, such many of which are listed among the 100 worst globally. as the drowning of albatrosses and other rare seabirds, The Water Hyacinth, Nile Perch, and Cane Toad are but sea turtles, and marine mammals caught in commercial three of the best known examples (UNEP 2006). Some fishing gear (Oates 2011). In the plant realm, commer- invasives have been deliberately introduced—such as cial timber logging (much of it illegal) and harvesting of pine trees in the forestry sector—while others are the fuelwood for personal use have been the major factors result of unintended introductions. Small islands and in deforestation in African’s forested ecosystems. The freshwater ecosystems are especially vulnerable to IAS, 12   SUPPORTING AFRICA’S GREEN FUTURE which represent the primary cause of biodiversity loss in rainfall regimes, climate change can boost other envi- some of the latter (including in Lake Victoria). ronmental stresses such as land degradation, pollution, invasive species, and overexploitation to magnify the Climate Change: Intensifying climate change poses a impacts on biodiversity and livelihoods. Also related significant future threat to biodiversity in Africa, since to global carbon emissions, the acidification of ocean it can drastically affect available habitats, ecosystem waters—as they absorb increased quantities of carbon functions, and natural resource uses. It may become the dioxide—threatens many species of marine life. Al- most serious global threat to biodiversity and ecosys- though these complex interactions and effects are still tem integrity later in the twenty-first century, with po- poorly understood, the alteration of ecosystems is likely tentially enormous economic and social consequences. to reduce the services they deliver and to foreclose In addition to increasing temperatures and changing development options. Kirk Hamilton Springbok inhabit the dry inland areas of southern and southwestern Africa. WORLD BANK INVESTMENT IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION   13 World B ank Box 3: Biodiversity in the World Bank Group's S uppor t for Environment Strategy The World Bank Group’s new Environment Strategy, B iodiversity Toward a Green, Clean, and Resilient World for All: A World Bank Group Environment Strategy 2012–2022, explicitly includes biodiversity conservation as a key C onser vation part of its “green� pillar in the Bank’s quest to pur- sue a “green, clean, and resilient world for all.� The strategy considers both how growth can become more to D ate sustainable and how investing in the environment can stimulate growth. It commits the World Bank to: • Establishing the true value of biodiversity Kirk Hamilton through its Wealth Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services partnership • Expanding its lending program for biodiversity T he World Bank plays two distinct roles in and conservation in the pursuit of improved biodiversity conservation. First, it is among protected area and landscape management the world’s largest sources of financing for • Devoting more attention to funding partner- biodiversity conservation projects in de- ships, learning, improved data, and innovative veloping countries, due in no small part to its role as a finance for biodiversity major implementing agency for the Global Environment • Maintaining the conservation and sustainable use Facility. It plays a key role through lending and grant of forests, biodiversity, and other natural assets as support to developing countries, as well as through a a priority during development planning range of partnerships intended to support conservation • Providing technical and financial assistance to at the local, national, regional, and global levels. countries to become “ready for reducing emis- sions from deforestation and forest degradation Second, the Bank is a multilateral development agency (REDD+)� that faces the numerous and diverse challenges of ad- • Developing the “wildlife premium� (accounting dressing biodiversity issues within its broader agenda for biodiversity along with carbon storage ben- for international development and poverty reduction. efits) as part of its climate finance activities These challenges can involve win-wins but also trade- • Supporting governance and institutional reforms offs between biodiversity conservation and other for improved natural resource management and development objectives; these trade-offs are subject, biodiversity protection however, to certain minimum standards embedded • Addressing wildlife crime in within the Bank’s Safeguard Policies. The new World collaboration with partners Bank Group Environment Strategy 2012–2022 (World • Strengthening the planning, Bank Group 2012) recognizes the crucial role of biodi- monitoring, and evaluation versity conservation and traces a path forward (see of environmental progress Box 3). in client countries. 14   SUPPORTING AFRICA’S GREEN FUTURE Overview of World Bank initiatives to increase awareness and the capacity of Investments 2003–12 stakeholders to join forces in conserving natural re- sources. Furthermore, the Bank is integrating biodiver- This report includes a review of the 10-year period sity conservation into its investment projects in sectors covered by fiscal year (FY) 2003 through FY 2012 (July such as energy and infrastructure. 1, 2002, through June 30, 2012). All investment projects that were active during this time and that had a biodi- versity component were taken into account. Projects without a significant link to biodiversity, including those Figure 5: Top 10 African primarily geared to sustainable land or natural resource Countries Receiving World management or climate change were excluded. The An- Bank Biodiversity Support nex lists the World Bank–supported projects that were 2003-12 (million US$)* included. World Bank financing for biodiversity conservation in Sub-Saharan Africa includes loans, credits, and grants through the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD); the International Development Association (IDA), the World Bank’s concessional financ- ing facility for low-income countries; and the GEF. Some biodiversity-related funding is also provided through carbon finance mechanisms. The funds that the World Bank disburses frequently leverage co-financing from Note: *The large figure for Nigeria stems mainly from the Nigeria Erosion and Watershed project partners. These include client governments at Management Project, which alone accounted for $166 million. local, regional, and national levels; bilateral donors; regional development banks; United Nations organiza- tions; nongovernmental organizations (NGOs); and local The scale of this investment is testimony to the Bank’s communities. ongoing commitment to biodiversity conservation in Sub-Saharan Africa: the World Bank had a total ac- Over the 10 years considered, the World Bank support- tive biodiversity portfolio of $1.081 billion during this ed 124 projects involving biodiversity conservation in 10-year period. However, these funds leveraged an Sub-Saharan Africa. These projects benefited 36 of the additional $806 million, for a Bank-to-co-financing ratio region’s 48 countries; 15 of the projects were regional in of 1:0.75. In other words, for every dollar the Bank com- nature. Figure 5 shows the 10 largest recipients of World mitted to biodiversity, it was able to leverage another Bank biodiversity funding in Sub-Saharan Africa. 75 cents from other sources. Biodiversity commitments only formed part of total project commitments, as many The World Bank’s biodiversity investment portfolio in- projects also had other components. The total invest- cludes local-level activities, such as protecting strategi- ment for these projects was $4.53 billion, of which the cally important natural habitats with communities and Bank-funded portion was $2.76 billion, or 61 percent. indigenous peoples, programs to establish and manage This implies that the Bank raised more co-financing for national protected areas and national environmental the biodiversity portions of these projects than for the and protected areas trust funds, and regional and global projects’ overall budgets (see Figure 6). WORLD BANK INVESTMENT IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION   15 While the co-financing ratio fluctuates from year to year, Figure 6: Total WB and Co- no real upward or downward trend is discernible over Financing Investments in the time period under investigation (see Figure 7). Simi- Biodiversity Funding larly, World Bank funding commitments for biodiversity have shown no statistically significant trend over time. Among the 124 projects, the majority of project funding Total project investment: $4.527 bn (58 percent) went to non-biodiversity activities. Howev- er, this picture is somewhat skewed by the inclusion of two project commitments of $1.7 billion with relatively small biodiversity components. Without their inclusion, the biodiversity commitments constitute a majority Total biodiversity (55 percent). investment: $1.888 bn The World Bank’s funds came from a variety of sources (see Figure 8). In aggregate, the GEF represented the World Bank share of largest source for the 124 projects that are subject to biodiversity investment: $1.081 bn this review, followed by IDA. The IBRD (with market- based World Bank loans) and carbon finance mecha- nism played comparatively minor roles, with only one project receiving IBRD funding. This suggests that there is room for growth in mainstreaming biodiversity into IBRD-funded infrastructure projects and forest carbon projects. Figure 8: World Bank Figure 7: Trends in Africa Region Biodiversity Biodiversity Commitments Investments by Funding and Co-financing Ratio over Source, 2003-12 the Years (US$ million) 16   SUPPORTING AFRICA’S GREEN FUTURE The Biodiversity Significance of IDA: With respect to provided $367 million in direct funding for biodiversity- the World Bank’s role in financing biodiversity conser- focused projects and leveraged a much larger amount vation, GEF has appropriately received a large share of of co-financing. One particularly significant example of the attention. However, it is important not to overlook IDA funds (along with GEF’s) making a real difference on the role of funding from IDA, which supports projects the ground is in Mozambique (see Box 4). in most African countries. During 2003–2012, IDA Box 4: Example of IDA, GEF, and Trust Fund Support to Mozambique Transfrontier Conservation and Tourism Project The Mozambique Transfrontier Conservation Area and Tourism Development project (known as TFCA II) is the second phase of a three-phase program. The project aims to achieve growth in community and private sector–led environmentally and socially sustainable tourism in TFCAs as well as to increase the area, connectivity, and effective- ness of biodiversity conservation in selected areas. The Bank has contributed $20 million from IDA sources, $10 million from GEF, and $3.7 million from trust funds. The project is implemented by the Ministry of Tourism in close coordination with several partners, including the IFC and the Peace Park Foundation. TFCA II is transforming the policy, legal, and institutional landscape for conservation—testing new planning instru- ments such as “integrated district development planning� and improving the design, connectivity, and management of five conservation areas (Maputo Special Reserve; Limpopo, Banhine, and Zinave National Parks; and Chimanimani Reserve), as well as piloting a Community Equity Facility (CEF) that aims to stimulate community-private partner- ships between tourism investors and communities. The CEF funded a number of private-community joint ventures, two of which are operational: the Dzu Camp in Chimanimani and the Chemucane Camp in Limpopo National Park. Several other camps and lodges are approved, and construction will start soon. Finally, TFCAII helped several districts develop a Tourism Master Plan. The project has helped to create 1,300 new tourism-related jobs in communities around conservation areas, mobilized $1 million in private sector funds (includ- ing IFC) for community-private joint venture, doubled the revenues of the targeted conservation areas, and added 91,800 hectares under conservation area management. The country has adopted a new Conservation Policy and created a new institution, the Agencia Nacional de Areas de Conservacão, that is to manage all conservation areas. A Conservation Bill is ready to be submitted to parliament. All of these positive outcomes flow from a combination of Bank funding and strong supervision on the ground. More than 80 percent of Africa’s rhinos are in South Africa where they are increasingly being poached for their horn. WORLD BANK INVESTMENT IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION   17 Non-Lending Services: In addition to the portfolio of Achievements and Lessons projects described above, the World Bank has been able Learned to mobilize trust funds endowed by donor governments and partnerships with countries to support research The World Bank’s support for biodiversity in Africa and other non-lending services for biodiversity conser- has taken many forms but has focused particularly on vation in Africa. This has led to a number of pioneering strengthening national environmental policies, establish- reports on, for example, economic analysis of protected ing and strengthening protected areas, promoting bio- areas in Madagascar, economic and poverty alleviation diversity-friendly production systems, and improving the potential of wildlife and protected areas in Zambia, stra- use of conservation trust funds (CTFs). Efforts to achieve tegic environmental assessment of the mining sector in conservation success through participatory processes West Africa, landscape approaches to conserving bio- that reflect the needs and aspirations of local communi- diversity and promoting ecosystem resilience in South ties are a typical feature of Bank-supported projects. Africa, lessons learned from projects that combine bio- diversity and ecosystem conservation, socioeconomic Strengthening National Environmental Policies: Dur- benefits and climate change adaptation outcomes in ing this last decade African countries have become African countries, and, more recently, the status and aware that natural resources and the environment are conservation opportunities for great apes in Africa. the basis for sustained green growth and that they need Box 5: The Namibian Coast Conservation and Management Project (NACOMA) Namibia’s coastline extends some 1,570 km. The ocean has one of the highest primary production rates in the world. Endemic dolphins, breeding Southern Right Whales, foraging sea turtles, and many globally threatened seabird spe- cies are common. Diverse, uniquely adapted plants and animals inhabit three globally significant terrestrial hyper-arid biomes along the coast. Rich estuarine fauna and a high diversity of migratory waterfowl and shorebirds use several internationally important coastal wetlands. Increasing economic development and human activities along the coast and in the marine environment could lead to unprecedented mining extraction and in-migration, bringing an increase in industrial coastal and marine pollution, unsustainable agricultural practices, a worsening of water regimes for coastal wetlands, and other land and water degradation. The lack of an adequate and functioning National Coastal Policy could lead to a development approach that threatens ecosystem integrity, biodiversity conservation, and functioning in the coastal ecosystems. Aware of the value of coastal natural resources for economic development, in 2005 the government of Namibia requested a $4.9 million grant from the GEF and the Bank to support NACOMA. The project has established a strong platform for governance of the broader coastal land- and seascape and for development of a National Policy on Coastal Management. The National Policy was approved by the Cabinet on September 13, 2012. 18   SUPPORTING AFRICA’S GREEN FUTURE Claudia Sobrevila The recently approved Namibia National Policy for Coastal Management will ensure that biodiversity and ecosystem values are mainstreamed within development planning. to be protected. In many countries, the Bank’s support and improved management of protected areas. More has included establishing stronger environmental insti- than half of the World Bank’s GEF investments have tutions, drafting and passing new environmental legis- gone toward protected area projects, including support lation, and increasing government capacity to enforce for activities in park buffer zones. Many of those parks environmental laws and regulations. Namibia presents protect important watersheds or provide other critical an excellent example of building the policy and institu- ecosystem services, such as coastal protection for flood tional framework to manage rich coastal resources (see control. To help ensure more sustainable funding, the Box 5). Bank has supported the establishment of conservation trust funds to underpin park operations and provide Establishing and Strengthening Protected Areas: livelihood opportunities for the communities that live Although they vary widely in terms of management and in and around those conservation areas. This invest- allowable human uses, protected areas are intended ment has made a substantial contribution toward one primarily to conserve key natural and cultural resources of the Convention on Biological Diversity’s targets: the for the long term. As such, protected areas—including worldwide increase of terrestrial protected areas to 17 national parks, forest reserves, wildlife refuges, and pro- percent of Earth’s land surface. tected landscapes—represent a major pillar of biodiver- sity conservation. In line with national priorities, many Within Sub-Saharan Africa, the coverage of protected World Bank–funded projects support the establishment areas does not yet encompass the estimated one-third WORLD BANK INVESTMENT IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION   19 of the continent’s total area that would be needed in or- ria, Madagascar, Namibia, Seychelles, South Africa, and der to protect the habitats of all the region’s vertebrate Uganda. One good example is from Namibia. In 2009 and plant species (UNEP 2006). While several countries the government there established the Namibian Islands have placed significant portions of their land area under Protected Area and in 2010, the Dorob National Park. legal protection (see Table 2), this is not uniformly the With these two areas, the government has been able to case: 20 countries have less than 10 percent of their set aside in protected areas a “mega park,� the Namib land within any type of protected area (World Bank Skeleton Coast National Park covering 10,754 million 2012a). hectares—the sixth largest terrestrial park in the world and the largest in Africa. The World Bank has supported efforts by African gov- ernment to establish new protected areas throughout In Guinea-Bissau, the Coastal & Biodiversity Manage- Sub-Saharan Africa, as well as to strengthen and expand ment Project helped strengthen the institutional frame- existing ones in countries such as Benin, Democratic work and management capacity for biodiversity and Republic of Congo, Gabon, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Libe- protected areas (see Box 6). Table 2: Percentage of Land Area Protected in African Countries Land Area Protected > 20% Land Area Protected 10–20% Land Area Protected < 10% Seychelles 42.0 Equatorial Guinea 19.2 Rep. Congo 9.4 Zambia 36.0 Ethiopia 18.4 Chad 9.4 Botswana 30.9 CAR 17.7 Cameroon 9.2 Zimbabwe 28.0 Guinea-Bissau 16.1 Niger 7.1 Tanzania 27.5 Mozambique 15.8 South Africa 6.9 Senegal 24.0 Gabon 15.1 Guinea 6.8 Côte d’Ivoire 22.6 Namibia 14.9 Eritrea 5.0 Ghana 14.7 Sierra Leone 4.9 Burkina Faso 14.2 Burundi 4.8 Nigeria 12.8 Sudan 4.2 Angola 12.4 Madagascar 3.1 Kenya 11.8 Swaziland 3.0 Togo 11.3 Cape Verde 2.5 Uganda 10.3 Mali 2.4 DR Congo 10.0 Liberia 1.8 Rwanda 10.0 Gambia 1.5 Benin 1.4 Somalia 0.6 Lesotho 0.5 São Tomé and Príncipe 0 Source: World Bank 2012a. 20   SUPPORTING AFRICA’S GREEN FUTURE Box 6: Strengthening the Institutional Framework for Protected Areas in Guinea-Bissau The Coastal & Biodiversity Management Project, which closed in March 2011, financed the strengthening of the institutional framework and management capacity for biodiversity and protected areas by establishing a financially and administratively semi-autonomous entity, the Institute for Biodiversity and Protected Areas (IBAP), to manage the country’s network of protected areas and endangered species. The project helped conserve 480,000 hectares of its coastal zone (13 percent of the territory), together with local communities. These protected areas are considered national assets and are intended to form the backbone of a future tourism industry. In four of the five protected areas established, the effectiveness of park management increased by at least 15 percent from 2005 to 2010, based on the GEF Protected Areas Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool. The project also financed the establishment and implementation of an environmental safeguards framework support- ing policies, procedures, and capacity building to ensure the incorporation of environmental and social concerns into development decision making. A new Unit for Environmental and Social Safeguards was created to build national capacity to evaluate and monitor the environmental and social implications of development proposals. To ensure that these protected areas are sustainably financed, partners and stakeholders are now supporting the creation of the private Bio-Guinea Foundation (FBG), a financing mechanism aiming to support the operational costs of IBAP managing the protected areas system. Through a second Bank-supported project (that became effective on 21 June 2011), the FBG was legally established, registered in the United Kingdom, and granted charity status in March 2012. A comprehensive capitalization strategy is being developed, but due to the attempted coup d’état in April 2012 it was not possible to move forward with the initial capitalization of the FBG. In addition to the creation of new protected areas, the World Bank is also focusing on the need to strengthen the management of existing protected areas, including so-called paper parks that have been legally established but still lack on-the-ground protection and manage- The Bank is working in the Congo Basin to address the high defor- ment. A case in point is Gabon’s protected areas system estation rates of African tropical forests and integrating biodiversity, forestry, and climate change. (see Box 7). Landscape-level Planning and Management: Effective ecosystem management considers the whole ecosystem, including its inhabitants. An “ecological cor- ridor� is defined as a space where various categories of protected areas and their complementary landscapes (private or community-based) are managed through strategic alliances to enhance ecological connectiv- ity, reduce threats more effectively, and contribute to climate change mitigation and adaptation. Ecological corridors build upon existing social and institutional WORLD BANK INVESTMENT IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION   21 Box 7: Consolidating the Protected Areas System of Gabon With forest covering 85 percent of its territory, Gabon accounts for approximately 15 percent of the Congo Basin rainforest. Gabon contains a unique combination of exceptionally abundant and diverse natural resources with a low population density—the perfect ingredients for reconciling economic development and environmental preservation in ways that will benefit local populations as well as the global community. Yale University’s 2012 Environmental Performance Index named Gabon the most environmentally sustainable nation in Africa, based on the relatively intact status of the country’s biodiversity, the proportion of its territory under environmental protection, and the resulting low risk of experiencing major environmental deterioration in the short and medium term. In 2002 the government created a network of 13 national parks covering 2.8 million hectares, some 10.6 percent of the country’s territory. An interministerial government committee was established to ensure effective management of the network, and the National Park Agency (ANPN) was created. The World Bank, through GEF financing, strengthened ANPN through the $10 million Strengthening Capacity for Managing National Parks and Biodiversity Project. After five years, ANPN had put in place a strong team and robust management systems. The PARCS Project also stimulated new forms of partnerships with NGOs, with a clearer distribution of roles and responsibilities. arrangements in order to ensure the fulfillment of con- velopment decisions are still frequently made without servation and local benefit objectives. Work within eco- sufficient reference to biodiversity or sustainable natural logical corridors emphasizes the need to complement resources management. Very often, this happens be- national parks with other management and conserva- cause development planners lack convenient access to tion strategies (regional and municipal protected areas) relevant and usable information on threatened species, while promoting the sustainable use of biodiversity and critical natural habitats, the value of ecosystem services, local development through benefit sharing and use or alternative development options. To help overcome agreements with local communities and private owners. this constraint within South Africa’s biologically unique Examples of this approach include the Ghana Northern Cape Floristic Region, a project helped ensure that bio- Savanna Biodiversity and the Burkina Faso Partnership diversity information was put to good use in develop- for Ecosystem Management projects, which have cre- ment planning and policy formulation (see Box 8). ated biological corridors to enable the free movement of wildlife between the two countries. Within these cor- Transboundary Conservation Areas: Transbound- ridors, the projects have expanded the use of biodiver- ary natural resource policies strengthen integrated sity-friendly production systems, including agroforestry, management of shared land and marine ecosystems, beekeeping, shea butter production, medicinal plant minimize biodiversity loss, and improve climate change cultivation, and ecotourism. mitigation and adaptation (UNEP 2012). Such policies generally produce positive externalities for neighboring A major challenge for integrating biodiversity conser- countries. As an example, the Liberia Protected Areas vation within economic development at a landscape Project is strengthening the management of two exist- level or within a corridor is to provide key biodiversity ing protected areas (Sapo National Park and Nimba For- information for planning and decision making. This est Reserve) and establishing three new ones, including includes the site selection and design of proposed new a cross-border Peace Park with Sierra Leone. The project infrastructure, as well as allocating land areas and fresh- helps ensure that biodiversity considerations are not water resources to particular uses. These types of de- overlooked as the country emerges from its protracted 22   SUPPORTING AFRICA’S GREEN FUTURE Box 8: The CAPE Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Development Project The Cape Floristic Region is a global biodiversity hotspot because of its exceptional flora and fauna (including more than 9,500 native plant species, many endemic) and the high degree of threat, especially to lowland ecosystems that are under pressure for conversion to agriculture and urban development. Using GEF resources, the project successfully promoted innovative approaches for conserving biodiversity both within protected areas and in broader production landscapes. The project also helped to incorporate biodiversity more fully within the government’s economic planning and poverty reduction programs. The project’s achievements included expanding the public and private land area under long-term conservation to more than 900,000 hectares; increasing by 282 percent the area of the most highly threatened lowland ecosystems under conservation; enabling the signature of 58 new conservation stewardship contracts with large private landowners; incorporating fine-scale biodiversity planning into municipal land use planning processes; integrating biodiversity- friendly practices (natural habitat corridors, sustainable harvesting, and non-persecution of wild predators) into the production of wine, potatoes, rooibos tea, native cut flowers, seafood, lamb, and honey; spurring job creation through the use of labor-intensive public works programs to remove invasive plant species and for fire management; and establishing a municipal fee rebate and a national tax deduction for qualifying landowners who practice biodiversity stewardship. A key lesson of this project is that improving a country’s economy and infrastructure and conserving its environmental assets do not have to be in conflict. The Cape Floristic Region in South Africa is renowned for its exceptional concentration of unique plant species. WORLD BANK INVESTMENT IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION   23 period of conflict. The World Bank has also applied five countries that are the watershed for Lake Victoria transboundary approaches in the Maloti-Drakensberg and elsewhere. A good example of transboundary con- ecosystem of Lesotho and South Africa as well as in the servation areas is the Ghana project (see Box 9). Box 9: Ghana: Northern Savanna Biodiversity Conservation Project The savannah woodlands in Ghana provide valuable environmental services, including a critical refuge for native biodiversity, protection of soil and water resources, and a natural barrier to the desiccating Saharan winds, thus helping to maintain a favorable micro-climate for agricultural production. With GEF resources, the World Bank implemented the Northern Savanna Biodiversity Conservation Project, which designed components addressing the issues of biodiversity conservation in protected areas, forest reserves, and biological corridors; sustainable agriculture activities in degraded land; and medicinal plant plots—making this a truly multidisciplinary project. This project led to the establishment of two biological corridors in Northern Ghana: a Western Corridor extending from the Nazinga Game Ranch and community-owned wildlife areas in Burkina Faso (totaling about 1,850 sq km) to the Mole National Park in Ghana (of about 4,800 sq km) and an Eastern Corridor running from the Kaboré Tambi National Park (1,550 sq km) in Burkina Faso extending down along the Red Volta River to the Gambaga escarpment situated about 58 km south into Ghana. Wildlife and water management are tightly linked in African savannahs due both to wildlife need for water and to historical development patterns that avoided riverine environments previously infested with onchocerciasis. Activities are now focusing on integrating community protection of riparian wildlife corridors with sustainable land management in the surrounding watersheds. Protection of natural riparian habitats will contribute greatly to watershed function, while investments in biodiversity corridors will be buffered by more sustainable management of surrounding lands. The Grey Crowned Crane lives in dry savannahs and open wetlands; it faces threats to its habitats due to drainage, overgrazing, and pesticide pollution. 24   SUPPORTING AFRICA’S GREEN FUTURE This meeting between local communities and park officials to decide jointly on priority actions to address livelihood and biodiversity issues is a typical activity in many World Bank–funded projects. Community-based Natural Resources Management: Many countries in Africa work effectively in communi- ty-based environmental and biodiversity management. Projects in Ghana, Burkina Faso, Namibia, Botswana, and South Africa, to name a few, have developed activi- ties within biodiversity projects that help poor rural communities generate revenues from activities such as payments for removing invasive alien species that decrease water availability in water-stressed areas, sup- port for livelihood activities such as craft and honeybee production, and the sustainable utilization of wildlife. The Namibia Integrated Community-Based Ecosystem Management project (ICEMA) and the Burkina Faso Sa- hel Integrated Lowland Ecosystem Management project (SILEM) are good examples of projects that supported biodiversity objectives and improved local community Claudia Sobrevila livelihoods (see Boxes 10 and 11). Box 10: Community-Based Ecosystem Management in Namibia Most of the rural population in Namibia lives on communal land formally owned by the government. Conservancies are established under the Nature Conservation Amendment Act and constitute a structure through which rural com- munities can maintain users’ rights for the ownership and use of game. At present, there are more than 50 registered conservancies in Namibia. Their formation has become a social development movement, as well as an accepted and holistic approach to conservation. Together with the U.S. Agency for International Development’s LIFE program, the Bank and GEF have provided support to conservancies for participatory land use planning, development, and extension of community wildlife management and monitoring. This support has facilitated the strategic introduc- tion of wildlife in conservancies with low game densities and diversified income generation opportunities to increase nonfinancial benefits and new income to households. Between 2005 and 2009, the total revenues for all the conservancies —including cash (salaries, jobs from the tourism sector, and various payments) and proceeds from other sources (such as meat sold and consumed, plants utilized and sold)—increased substantially from $1.4 million to $3.5 million (NACSO 2010). Also, the increase in the number of registered conservancies established since the start of ICEMA (from a baseline of 42 in 2005 to 59 in 2010) indicates that the community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) initiative has gained growing popularity over the years at both national and international levels. The CBNRM program in Namibia has already demonstrated the effectiveness of devolving management authority over wildlife to landholders as a conservation mechanism; the model could be replicated in neighboring countries such as Botswana. Local and regional forums to improve community coordination and management of conflicts between people and wildlife will further enhance conservation efforts. WORLD BANK INVESTMENT IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION   25 landscape, when the payments (in conjunction with Box 11: Burkina Faso: the landholders’ other revenue streams) are sufficient to cover the opportunity costs of not developing the Sahel Integrated Lowland resources more intensively, and when adequate funding Ecosystem Management can be secured to cover the recurrent costs of pay- Project ments. Located in the heart of West Africa, Burkina Faso is Market-based incentives can also conserve biodiversity. endowed with natural habitats such as gallery forest, Examples include the certification and niche marketing sacred forests, nature reserves, and wetlands. Par- of biodiversity-friendly products, such as shade-grown ticularly notable sites include the Pics de Sindou, the coffee, sustainably harvested seafood, and meat from Karfiguela Waterfall, the Sacred Dafra Pond, and the game ranching. Government policies—including tax Tengréla Lake. In addition, the Hippopotamus Pond breaks, technical assistance, and other incentives—can and the Oursi Pond have been established as Ramsar also promote biodiversity-friendly land management sites. Some of Burkina Faso’s threatened species in- practices by individual as well as community landhold- clude panthers, elephants, crocodiles, and pythons. ers (see Box 12). The Sahel Integrated Lowland Ecosystem Manage- ment project (SILEM) focused on lowland areas in se- Box 12: Conservation lected sub-watersheds in Burkina Faso to demonstrate Incentives Maintain Wildlife how communities can improve productive capacity of rural resources through sustainable conservation Populations around Nairobi of biological and agricultural diversity, as well as the National Park rehabilitation of soil and water resources in target watersheds. SILEM allowed the introduction of a The Kenya Wildlife Conservation Leasing Dem- landscape dimension and the concept of Integrated onstration Project has been successful in helping Ecosystem Management in Burkina Faso. The project to ensure the long-term ecological viability of pioneered the concept of biodiversity in production Nairobi National Park by allowing wildlife to landscape and has helped communities establish use areas adjacent to the park. A total of 388 important livelihood assets that also generated envi- households with some 22,000 hectares of land ronmental benefits, notably including 7,500 hectares have signed up to the project. These families of native forest designated for conservation. receive rent for not fencing off their land and allowing wildlife to roam it. Families use some 80 percent of the rental income for school fees, Incentives for Resource Users: Natural resource users with the balance invested in human health are most likely to conserve the ecosystems they rely and livestock production. The government is upon when they have specific incentives to do so. Pay- negotiating with the local Maasai community to ments for environmental services (PES) are one type of permanently designate for cattle and wildlife a incentive scheme; they provide recurrent payments to 1,200-hectare parcel of land adjacent to the park. qualifying landholders who maintain specified areas Wildlife numbers have increased significantly of natural vegetation or follow other approved envi- over the project’s four-year lifespan. The project ronmentally friendly practices. PES can be an effective demonstrates the value of economic incentives biodiversity conservation tool, particularly when the as a tool to promote biodiversity conservation, specific conservation objectives can be fully met while particularly in production landscapes. still maintaining farmers or other PES recipients on the 26   SUPPORTING AFRICA’S GREEN FUTURE Sustainable Funding Mechanisms: The World Bank sets, special care is needed to ensure that the conserva- has been instrumental in the growth of CTFs in Africa. It tion authority actually receives the promised income helped establish one of the first ones in 1995, Uganda’s streams derived from the operating revenues from Bwindi-Mgahinga Conservation Trust, and another three pipeline, hydroelectric, or other energy or infrastructure in the mid-2000s in Madagascar, Malawi, and Tanzania. projects. It has also introduced trust funds to support long-term conservation offset management under three large en- Among the key conditions for the success of CTFs are ergy projects: the Chad-Cameroon Oil Pipeline and the adequate capitalization to provide sufficient annual Bumbuna (Sierra Leone) and Lom Pangar (Cameroon) revenues for long-term operation; good governance of hydropower projects. More recently, the Bank has been the fund administration, including transparent manage- helping to address the legal challenges to establishing ment and secure safekeeping of the capital; and low- CTFs in francophone countries. Grants to establish CTFs cost fund management, so that sufficient resources are in the form of United Kingdom–registered charities are available for implementation. currently under preparation in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Guinea-Bissau; the Bank has also support- Conservation Partnerships: In 2000, the World Bank ed dialogues on CTFs in Burkina Faso and Côte d’Ivoire. facilitated the creation of the Critical Ecosystems Part- Overall, the Bank has directly contributed $34 million nership Fund (CEPF), a funding partnership between to CTF endowments, leveraging over $30 million in the Bank, Conservation International, GEF, the French co-financing. The GEF has been the largest single donor development agency, the John D. and Catherine T. Mac- to African CTFs; most of its funding for this purpose has Arthur Foundation, and the government of Japan. Since flowed through the World Bank. then the CEPF has provided nearly $221 million in grant funding and technical assistance to conservation efforts CTFs have provided more sustainable financial support in biodiversity hotspots.2 The fund’s grants are awarded for conservation than routine lending operations, and to civil society groups and have enabled a range of the earliest World Bank–supported CTFs in Africa are all important activities. Grants are awarded only after still functioning. GEF country allocations typically limit stakeholders and specialists have written and discussed initial CTF contributions from projects to a few million an ecosystem profile. These profiles frequently serve as dollars—too little to provide sufficient economy of scale strategy documents for wider conservation efforts. In for efficient trust fund management. Hence, CTFs have Sub-Saharan Africa, they have been prepared for the usually been established with an explicit objective of eight biodiversity hotspots. raising additional funds. Achievements in this regard have been substantial, but they are also dependent Biodiversity and Nature-based Tourism: Africa’s tour- on the vagaries of donor preferences and the level of ism potential will continue to grow through attracting fundraising effort. Where CTFs are used to manage off- new markets and developing new products. Safari tour- ism, nature tourism, and cultural tourism are all boom- Forest-dwelling people in Africa are some of the poorest and more ing and are generating employment and significant marginalized people who require particular attention and support. revenues. The Bank has many successful stories engag- ing with the tourism sector in Uganda, South Africa, Mozambique, Zambia, Namibia, and Botswana. (Boxes 13, 14, and 15 provide examples.) In most of these 2. CEPF grants have not been included in this portfolio analysis. Kyle O’Donoghue WORLD BANK INVESTMENT IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION   27 Kirk Hamilton Box 13: The Greater Addo Elephant National Park Project The Greater Addo Elephant National Park Project proved that conservation can be an engine of local economic growth. The $5.5 million project supported the expansion, improved management, and ecological rehabilitation of the Addo Elephant National Park (AENP) and leveraged $14.5 million in private sector investment. The AENP is one of the most ecologically diverse conservation areas in Southern Africa, with five different terrestrial biomes as well as rich marine ecosystems. The project expanded the Greater AENP from about 140,000 hectares to over 170,115 hect- ares on land, along with a new Marine Protected Area of 7,414 hectares. Through a locally run composting business, it has removed non-native vegetation from The highest elephant losses in a decade occurred in 2011 with 10,000 75,000 hectares, enabling native species to return and animals poached and their ivory smuggled out of Africa. improving local water availability. The AENP’s most threatened large mammal species, the Black Rhinoc- advice, and development projects in productive sectors, eros, increased in number from 41 in 2004 to 67 in such as agriculture, forestry, fisheries, energy develop- 2010. Last, improvements in park infrastructure and ment, transport infrastructure, and extractive industries. associated private ecotourism facilities resulted in Box 16 provides one example of integrating biodiversity substantially increased tourist numbers (from 94,700 with fisheries management and Box 17, an example of per year to 135,100) and employment (from 1,228 integrating biodiversity with forest management. to 1,842 jobs). With climate change already well underway, and further projects, evidence shows that by improving protected change unavoidable, adaptation is gaining significantly areas management, economic benefits can result from more focus in Africa. The Bank is engaged in many ac- nature-based tourism activities that take place in the tivities to mitigate carbon emissions through deforesta- better-managed parks. tion (REDD), promote energy efficiency, pilot renewable energy resources, and adapt to climate change. Thus Mainstreaming Biodiversity within Sustainable far, only a few operations have harnessed the synergies Economic Development: In addition to supporting between climate change and biodiversity since REDD+ dedicated biodiversity conservation projects, the World became a major component of international climate Bank is incorporating biodiversity conservation within change negotiations in 2009. A project in Madagascar its broader development agenda. This includes main- is a good example of how climate change funding to streaming biodiversity considerations within climate reduce deforestation has also supported biodiversity change mitigation and adaptation, development policy conservation (see Box 18). 28   SUPPORTING AFRICA’S GREEN FUTURE Box 14: Transforming a Biodiversity Asset into a Tourism Asset: Zambia's Kafue National Park Zambia’s Kafue National Park (KNP) is one of the largest national parks in the world; it encompasses some 2.3 million hectares, with another 4.2 million hectares in surrounding Game Management Areas (GMAs). Its proximity to Victoria Falls allows it to tap into a strong tourism market. By the late 1990s, however, wildlife had severely declined and infrastructure had deteriorated. Zambian Wildlife Authority (ZAWA) staff were insufficiently trained and had poor working conditions and inadequate transportation and equipment. Aware of the relationship between nature-based tourism and development, Zambia’s government requested assistance from the Bank, the GEF, and Norway to reverse biodiversity erosion in KNP and its surrounding areas and help diversify Zambia’s sources of growth. Between 2004 and 2011, the Support for Economic Expansion and Diversifica- tion project increased or stabilized the number of large mammals. Staff are now properly housed, most of the park is accessible year-round, and most of it is regularly patrolled. Investors responded to improved park management by increasing accommodations by a factor of 3.5 and increasing visits from 4,600 in 2004 to 7,300 in 2010. Park revenues rose tenfold during this period, and safari hunting proceeds in adjacent GMAs, which are split 50:50 with surrounding communities, increased from $756,000 to $1.3 million. Overall, ZAWA retained $1.5 million in revenues from the greater KNP in 2011. The project highlighted the importance of helping the commercial success of existing safari operators as drivers of tourism growth and financial sustainability. It also underscored the importance of attracting new investors by address- ing the investment climate, the attractiveness of the park, market research, marketing, and contract management. Nevertheless, challenges remain: the park is still far from financially self-sustaining, park management can still be improved, and the threats of poaching and encroachment by surrounding populations persist. Jean-Michel Pavy Existing protected areas frequently need support to reach their full economic potential. WORLD BANK INVESTMENT IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION   29 Effective enforcement has led to the resurgence of Mountain Gorilla populations in Uganda, Rwanda, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Box 15: Protecting the Mountain Gorilla Since the mid-1990s, wildlife conservation projects in the mountainous regions of Uganda have played a pivotal role in protecting the Mountain (Eastern) Gorilla and its habitat, creating thousands of new conservation and tourism jobs. Prior to that time, poaching was rampant and institutional capacity was weak. Beginning in 1995 with the Bwindi Impenetrable National Park and Mgahinga National Park Conservation project, and continuing in 1999 with the $35-million Protected Areas Management and Sustainable Use (PAMSU) Project, the Bank and GEF provided the financial foundation for a long-term program of sustainable biodiversity conservation. The Bwindi Trust is now considered a model of innovative conservation finance and management; its original endow- ment of $4 million has generated income that assisted communities with alternative livelihoods and has underwritten core operating expenses of the gorilla protected areas. Thanks in large part to the Bwindi and PAMSU projects, poach- ing has been all but eliminated in Bwindi. Gorilla populations, tourist visits, and revenues have all climbed steadily. Across Uganda, the 1,300-member staff of the Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA) is well trained and equipped for the first time in living memory. PAMSU has delineated park boundaries in all 23 of Uganda’s protected areas. It has also provided critical infrastructure such as roads and staff housing to the priority areas. PAMSU has been instrumental in helping communities form co-management partnerships with UWA that promote conservation and provide alterna- tive livelihoods and social services such as education and health clinics. The PAMSU project left a legacy of successful partnerships among World Bank, GEF, and Ugandan stakeholders. A new project in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has just begun to support management in the neighboring Mikeno sector of the Virunga National Park, an important habitat for Mountain Gorillas. Since some of the gorilla groups cross back and forth from DRC to Uganda and Rwanda, protecting this charismatic species in each of the three countries has positive externalities for the other countries, driving economic growth in otherwise remote areas. 30   SUPPORTING AFRICA’S GREEN FUTURE Box 16: Integrating Biodiversity Management with Fisheries Management in Tanzania's Coastal Waters Since environmental challenges are frequently intrinsically interconnected, there often is an opportunity to address several with a single initiative. The Marine and Coastal Environment Project in Tanzania is an effort toward synergy and interdependence between two thematic areas: biodiversity and fisheries management. The biodiversity element of this project aims to develop an ecologically representative and institutionally and financially sustainable network of marine protected areas. The fisheries element aims to build the government’s capacity to monitor and manage transboundary fish stocks with the aim of reversing the unsustainable depletion patterns of commercial fisheries. With GEF financing, the World Bank is contributing investment, policy assistance, and partnership building. This project’s cross-sectoral, multi-dimensional approach is an effective response to the breadth of problems that Tanzania’s coastal ecosystem faces. Marine protected areas serve as a nursery for fish stocks that are essential to the fishing industry. Box 17: Liberia — Consolidation of Protected Area Network Projects Liberia is endowed with the major share (43 percent) of the remaining Upper Guinean Tropical Rainforest, a recog- nized hotspot for biodiversity that is considered a global priority for conservation. Liberia’s forests house a range of important biodiversity, including some 240 tree species, 2,000 flowering plants, 125 mammal and 590 bird species, 74 reptiles and amphibians, and over 1,000 insect species. In May 2003, sanctions imposed on Liberia by the UN Security Council in 2001 were extended to include a ban on timber production and export based on evidence that suggested that the country’s forestry stocks were being vastly overexploited and used primarily to finance the civil conflict. To spur the lifting of the sanctions, an ambitious forests sector reform process was launched in 2004, led by the establishment of the Liberia Forests Initiative (LFI). The process of defining the LFI resulted in a more balanced and integrated development of Liberia’s forests for com- mercial, community, and conservation uses—the 3 Cs approach. These 3Cs became the key driving principles for the new forest policy. The World Bank, through a GEF grant, has recently financed the establishment of an effective park management process in the Sapo National Park, recognized as the most pristine tract of forest in West Africa and home to the endangered Pygmy Hippopotamus. It also financed the expansion of a protected areas network that will encompass five protected areas in the country’s western region, including a transfrontier Peace Park with Sierra Leone, and sustainable community livelihoods activities around Liberia’s protected areas. Environmental Performance Standards: The World closely related OP 4.36 on Forests preclude World Bank Bank’s Environmental and Social Safeguard Policies support for projects that would lead to the significant often provide a useful entry point for addressing biodi- loss or degradation of any critical natural habitats, versity considerations while planning infrastructure and which are defined to include legally protected areas, other development projects. In particular, the Bank’s those officially proposed for protection, or areas that Operational Policy (OP) 4.04 on Natural Habitats and the are unprotected but of known high conservation value. WORLD BANK INVESTMENT IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION   31 Box 18: REDD+ Payments to Conserve Biodiversity: A Biodiversity Corridor in Madagascar The Ankeniheny-Zahamena Biodiversity Corridor (CAZ) Conservation Project aims to reduce deforestation and for- est degradation of primary Malagasy forests through the creation of a 386,000-hectare protected area in the eastern humid rainforest of the country. This area, the core of the remaining fragments of the Malagasy rainforest, has long been regarded as one of Madagascar’s top conservation priorities due to its extreme biodiversity wealth: it includes over 2,000 plant species (85 percent of which are endemic), 15 species of lemurs, and 30 other mammal species, as well as 129 species of amphibians and 89 bird species. However, much of the area is already severely deforested. CAZ is being managed by the government of Madagascar in partnership with Conservation International. The project is innovative in demonstrating how carbon finance can be used as a source of funding to support long-term protected area management and provide direct incentives and alternative livelihood opportunities for communities living around the forest corridor. The protected area has been developed based on an entirely new model for Madagascar, with strong co-management with local communities. Some of the activities implemented on the ground include community natural resource management (including establishment or renewal of management contracts, securing land tenure, and building capac- ity), a PES scheme that compensates local communities for avoiding slash-and-burn agriculture and stopping illegal wood harvesting, and a small grants program for NGOs to administer at a local scale. The program has also supported aquaculture for fish production, small-scale reforestation using native species, and forest patrols. The project is already generating important lessons for REDD+, including for benefit-sharing arrangements and for national policy for REDD+ transactions in the country. The project is expected to issue carbon credits under Verified Carbon Standard certification in 2013. Moreover, Bank-supported projects that would cause compensatory protected areas (World Bank 2012b). An significant loss or degradation of other—non-critical— interesting case of a conservation offset for large-scale natural habitats require acceptable mitigation mea- infrastructure is Cameroon’s Lom Pangar Hydroelectric sures, typically including conservation offsets such as Project (see Box 19). Box 19: More Infrastructure, More Conservation — Cameroon's Lom Pangar Hydroelectric Project A complex project from an environmental as well as social standpoint, the Lom Pangar Hydroelectric Project enables increased power generation through the construction of a large regulating dam in an ecologically sensitive area of Cameroon’s eastern woodlands and forests. The project involves flooding wooded lands, relocating communities, and disrupting natural habitats. The Bank advised the government of Cameroon on ways to adhere to Bank standards during project planning, construction, and operation. Assured that environmental and social safeguards were being applied, the Bank agreed in March 2012 to help finance the project. To offset the inevitable damage to natural habitats from the project, the Bank helped the government establish the 58,000-hectare Deng Deng National Park, providing unprecedented protection for numerous local wildlife species, including a population of Western Lowland Gorillas and other primates. The recurrent costs for managing the new park are expected to be covered through a water tariff derived from the sale of hydroelectric power. 32   SUPPORTING AFRICA’S GREEN FUTURE ticularly by mainstreaming conservation within projects T he Way such as tourism, infrastructure, agriculture, and disaster risk management when there are clear linkages, such as maintaining ecosystem services or using conservation For ward offsets; and integrate biodiversity considerations within climate change–related activities, including REDD. Sev- eral recently established multidonor climate investment funds provide exciting new opportunities to further protect biodiversity while addressing climate change mitigation and adaptation. Scaling up Landscape Approach: Even though pro- tected areas are a key pillar of biodiversity conservation, they are not sufficient to provide the minimum needed Claudia Sobrevila habitat for many species. Recognizing this, a landscape (and seascape) approach to biodiversity conservation encompasses biodiversity-friendly production systems as well as intact natural habitats within protected areas B iodiversity as an Engine of Green Growth: across terrestrial, freshwater, and coastal and marine Biodiversity conservation in Africa will need systems. The World Bank will increase its focus on to take place in the context of rapid human landscape approaches to conservation that encompass population growth, increased local and inter- biodiversity-friendly production systems and buffer national demand for natural resources, and new large- zones, along with intact natural habitats within pro- scale infrastructure projects. The World Bank Group’s tected areas. new Environment Strategy emphasizes the concept of “green growth,� in which renewable natural resources Leveraging Public-Private Partnerships: Successful are sustainably managed and conserved to improve biodiversity conservation stems from the efforts of a livelihoods and ensure food security and in which biodi- wide range of institutions, including local communities, versity is protected as an economically critical resource. national and local governments, civil society, national Going forward, it will be particularly important to dem- and international NGOs, private firms, academia and onstrate to the governments and people of Africa how scientific institutions, and bilateral and multilateral biodiversity can be an engine of inclusive green growth development organizations. To maximize its future and improved livelihoods, through greater appreciation effectiveness at promoting biodiversity conservation of natural ecosystem services and enhanced opportuni- in Africa, the World Bank will concentrate its efforts ties for economic benefit-sharing. in areas where it has a comparative advantage. These include, among other areas, mobilizing the financing Enhanced and Diversified Funding: In light of ongo- of large biodiversity initiatives, providing policy advice ing natural resource degradation, sustaining Africa’s to member governments, and exercising its convening unique biodiversity over time will require even greater power to bring together a broad range of stakeholders financial resources than have been mobilized to date. To to address specific problems. continue making an important difference for biodiver- sity conservation in the region, the World Bank will seek The Bank’s leadership and coordinating role within to optimize the use of available GEF resources; enhance the donor community, complemented by access to the use of IDA and IBRD funding for biodiversity, par- trust funds and lending resources, can help introduce WORLD BANK INVESTMENT IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION   33 biodiversity within national agendas as a critical part of not be overlooked. Effective law enforcement is a key sustainable development. It can also facilitate dialogue enabling condition for sustaining the public and private between client countries and other stakeholders on investments made in conservation, as well as reducing matters such as loss of ecosystem resilience, forest the elite capture of biodiversity-related benefits. law enforcement and governance, wildlife trade, and overharvesting of natural resources. At the same time, As an example, many African coastal nations do not it is important to engage the private sector directly in have the resources to properly patrol their territorial conservation activities, particularly in tourism-related waters or exclusive economic zones. Law enforcement activities. The World Bank can facilitate the use of to counter poaching and trafficking in wildlife products private sector resources to contribute to conservation similarly suffers from weak governance structures. Even efforts, in particular through private investments in where the legal tools are in place, effective enforcement nature-based tourism. relies on human resources and technologies that are frequently absent. For these reasons, the World Bank Strengthening Environmental Performance Stan- has focused increased attention in recent years on the dards: Due to the increased local and international complex problems of environmental law enforcement demand for natural resources and the wealth of natu- and combating wildlife crime and illegal trade in threat- ral resources in Africa, it will be imperative to ensure ened species. The Bank assists member governments that extractive industries contracts follow the highest and international initiatives that seek to support more- international standard. The Bank is committed to work- effective law enforcement through partnerships and ing with client countries to strengthen their capacity innovative approaches in order to address illegal taking to apply good environmental and social practices in of wildlife, fish, and timber resources, which is reaching extractive industries and other development projects. crisis levels in some areas. As part of this process, one particularly important area for increased collaboration is to work with private in- Future Prospects: Notwithstanding the rapid changes dustries in mobilizing the additional resources needed that will take place in Africa, there are still major op- for biodiversity conservation. For example, there is portunities to “get development right�—protecting and now considerable interest in the private sector (includ- sustainably managing biodiversity and ecosystem ser- ing large, well-capitalized international firms) in more vices. Sizable tracts of natural habitats remain in Africa. systematic use of large-scale conservation offsets to Moreover, much of the continent’s basic infrastructure address the cumulative ecological impacts of multiple is not yet in place; the potential still exists for it to be new investments in infrastructure, extractive industries, developed with due concern for biodiversity, thereby and commercial agriculture. avoiding some of the environmental mistakes that have frequently been made elsewhere. While burgeoning Strengthening Enforcement Capacity to Combat economic and population pressures threaten Sub-Saha- Wildlife Crime: Although effective biodiversity conser- ran Africa’s biodiversity, its value—and the importance vation largely involves collaboration and compromise of the ecosystem services it supports—is increasingly between stakeholders, the importance of environmen- being realized. tal law enforcement and improved governance should 34   SUPPORTING AFRICA’S GREEN FUTURE A nnex : A ctive World B ank – S uppor ted B iodiversity P rojects , 2003–12 Total Total BD WB BD Source (USD (USD (USD Country Project Name FY of Funds million) million) million) Benin National Parks Conservation and Management 00 GEF 24.2 24.2 6.8 Project Benin Forests and Adjacent Lands Management 06 GEF 27.0 27.0 6.0 Project Benin Community-Based Coastal and Marine 08 GEF 11.6 11.6 4.3 Biodiversity Management Project Benin Support to Protected Areas Management 11 GEF 7.3 7.3 7.3 Benin Support to Protected Areas Management 11 IDA 5.0 5.0 5.0 Botswana Northern Botswana Human Wildlife 10 GEF 20.5 20.5 5.5 Coexistence Project Burkina Faso Partnership for Natural Ecosystem Management 02 GEF 13.6 13.6 7.5 Burkina Faso Sahel Integrated Lowland Ecosystem 04 GEF 4.9 1.4 1.3 Management Cameroon Cameroon Petroleum Environment Capacity 00 IDA 5.8 0.6 0.6 Enhancement Cameroon Cameroon Forest & Environment Sector 06 GEF 10.0 10.0 10.0 Program Cameroon Forest and Environment Development Program 06 IDA 41.8 12.4 5.0 Cameroon Lom Pangar Hydropower Project 12 IDA 494.0 8.0 0.7 Cameroon Ngoyla Mintom Project 12 GEF 3.5 3.5 3.5 Cameroon Biodiversity Conservation and Management 95 GEF 16.0 16.0 6.0 Project Chad Community-Based Ecosystem Management 05 GEF 94.5 45.8 45.8 Project Côte d’Ivoire Ivory Coast Protected Area Management 09 GEF 2.5 2.5 2.5 Project DRC Forest and Nature Conservation Project 09 IDA 81.0 20.0 10.0 DRC Rehabilitation and Participatory Management 09 GEF 70.0 70.0 70.0 of Key Protected Areas in the DRC DRC Support to the ICCN’s Program for the 09 GEF 55.6 55.6 7.0 Rehabilitation of the National Parks Network WORLD BANK INVESTMENT IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION   35 Total Total BD WB BD Source (USD (USD (USD Country Project Name FY of Funds million) million) million) DRC Environmental and Social Portfolio Review 10 TA 0.1 0.0 0.0 DRC Support to Implementation of Forestry Code 11 TA 0.0 0.0 0.0 and Mainstreaming with I-PRSP priorities Eritrea Assessment of Capacity Building Needs for Biodiversity, Participation in Clearing House 02 REA 0.2 0.2 0.2 Mechanism & Preparation of 2nd National Rep. Ethiopia Conservation and Sustainable Use of Medicinal 01 GEF 1.8 1.8 1.8 Plants Project Ethiopia Conservation and Sustainable Use of Medicinal 01 IDA 3.4 3.4 0.8 Plants Project Ethiopia Humbo and Soddo Community-Based Natural 08 CO 1.3 0.0 0.0 Regeneration Project Gabon Natural Resources Management Development 06 IDA 31.5 7.9 7.9 Policy Loan Gabon Strengthening Capacity for Managing National 06 GEF 40.7 40.7 10.0 Parks and Biodiversity Gambia Gateway Project 02 IDA 18.1 0.4 0.3 Gambia Integrated Coastal and Marine Biodiversity 04 GEF MSP 1.0 1.0 1.0 Management Project Gambia Strengthening Integrated Biodiversity 11 GEF MSP 2.2 2.2 0.9 Management Ghana Northern Savanna Biodiversity Conservation 02 GEF 28.1 28.1 7.7 Project Ghana Community-Based Integrated Natural Resource 04 GEF MSP 1.5 1.5 0.8 Management Ghana Natural Resource and Environmental 09 IDA 40.0 7.2 1.8 Governance DPO Ghana Natural Resource and Environmental 10 IDA 40.0 7.2 0.2 Governance DPO Ghana Sustainable Land and Water Management 11 GEF 16.0 16.0 8.2 Ghana Forest Biodiversity SIL 98 GEF 8.9 8.9 8.9 Ghana Natural Resource Management Project 98 IDA 53.5 53.5 20.0 Guinea Coastal Marine and Biodiversity Management 06 GEF 23.5 16.7 16.7 Guinea Community-Based Land Management Project 06 GEF 7.0 2.5 2.5 Guinea-Bissau Coastal and Biodiversity Management Project 05 IDA 4.4 4.4 1.5 Guinea-Bissau Coastal and Biodiversity Management Project 05 GEF 7.3 4.8 4.8 Guinea-Bissau Biodiversity Conservation Project 11 IDA 2.0 2.0 2.0 Guinea-Bissau Biodiversity Conservation Trust Fund Project 11 GEF MSP 5.6 3.8 2.9 Kenya Lewa Wildlife Conservation Project 00 GEF MSP 0.8 0.8 0.8 Kenya Western Kenya Integrated Ecosystem 05 GEF 7.7 7.7 4.1 Management Project 36   SUPPORTING AFRICA’S GREEN FUTURE Total Total BD WB BD Source (USD (USD (USD Country Project Name FY of Funds million) million) million) Kenya Greenbelt Movement 07 CO 2.2 2.2 2.2 Kenya Nairobi National Park Ecosystem Wildlife 09 GEF MSP 1.2 1.2 0.7 Conservation Lease Project Kenya Coastal Development Project 11 GEF 40.0 35.0 5.0 Kenya Coastal Development Project 11 IDA 41.5 41.5 17.9 Kenya Lake Victoria Environment Project 97 IDA 12.9 3.4 2.0 Kenya Lake Victoria Environment Project 97 GEF 9.8 9.8 9.8 Kenya Tana River Primate National Reserve 97 GEF 6.2 6.2 6.2 Conservation Project Lesotho Maloti-Drakensberg Transfrontier Conservation 02 GEF 8.5 8.5 7.4 and Development Project Liberia Sapo National Park 06 GEF MSP 2.4 2.4 1.0 Liberia Development Forestry Sector Management 07 SF 2.0 1.1 1.1 Project Liberia Establishment of Protected Areas 08 GEF MSP 7.4 7.4 7.4 Liberia Expansion of Protected Areas Network - II 11 GEF MSP 2.0 1.0 1.0 Madagascar Third Environment Program Support Project 04 GEF 9.0 9.0 9.0 Madagascar Third Environment Program Support Project 04 IDA 148.9 71.5 31.5 Madagascar Andasibe-Mantadia Biodiversity Corridor 07 CO 11.5 11.5 7.5 Madagascar Support to Madagascar’s Foundation for 11 GEF 57.5 57.5 34.5 Protected Areas and Biodiversity Madagascar Second Environment Program Support Project 97 GEF 8.1 8.1 8.1 Madagascar Second Environment Program Support Project 97 IDA 134.2 56.0 12.5 Malawi Mulanje Mt. Biodiversity Conservation Project 01 GEF 8.0 8.0 6.8 Malawi Participatory Development and Management of 12 GEF MSP 2.4 2.4 1.0 the Nkhotakota Wildlife Reserve Malawi Shire River Basin Management Program 12 IDA 145.6 58.2 50.0 Malawi Shire River Basin Management Program 12 GEF 131.6 13.2 13.2 Malawi Environmental Management Project 97 IDA 13.7 2.6 2.3 Mali Mopti Area Biodiversity 04 TA 0.0 0.0 0.0 Mali Gourma Biodiversity Conservation Project 05 GEF 9.1 9.1 5.5 Mauritius Round Island Project 01 GEF MSP 1.4 1.4 0.8 Mauritius Biodiversity Restoration Project 96 GEF 1.2 1.2 1.2 Mozambique Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Management 00 GEF 4.1 4.1 4.1 Project Mozambique Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Management 00 IDA 6.4 6.4 5.6 Project Mozambique Transfrontier Conservation Areas and Tourism 06 GEF 10.0 10.0 10.0 Development Project WORLD BANK INVESTMENT IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION   37 Total Total BD WB BD Source (USD (USD (USD Country Project Name FY of Funds million) million) million) Mozambique Transfrontier Conservation Areas and Tourism 06 IDA 23.7 21.4 15.0 Development Project Mozambique Transfrontier Conservation Areas Pilot and 97 GEF 8.1 8.1 5.0 Institutional Strengthening Project Namibia Integrated Community-Based Ecosystem 04 GEF 32.4 11.3 7.1 Management Namibia Namibian Coast Conservation and Management 06 GEF 29.1 29.1 4.9 Project Niger Community-based Integrated Ecosystem 03 GEF 43.8 6.0 2.5 Management Nigeria Local Empowerment and Environmental 04 GEF 91.3 9.8 8.0 Management Project Nigeria Second National Fadama Development Critical 06 GEF 11.5 5.0 5.0 Ecosystem Management Project Nigeria Nigeria Erosion and Watershed Management 12 GEF 291.8 116.7 116.7 Project Nigeria Nigeria Erosion and Watershed Management 12 IDA 650.0 65.0 50.0 Project Regional Indian Ocean Coral reef Monitoring project 01 GEF MSP 1.0 1.0 1.0 Regional Africa Medicinal Plants 03 TA 0.1 0.1 0.1 Regional Building Local Capacity for Natural Resource 07 TA 0.3 0.1 0.1 Management at Ecosystem Level Regional South West Indian Ocean Fisheries Project 07 GEF 22.7 8.5 7.4 Regional Open Africa North-South Tourism Corridor 08 GEF MSP 1.2 0.6 0.6 Project Regional Lake Victoria Environmental Management 09 GEF 97.0 57.3 20.0 Project II Regional Lake Victoria Environmental Management 09 IDA 114.8 7.0 7.0 Project II Regional Lake Victoria Environmental Management 11 IDA 31.5 31.5 30.0 Project II APL 2 Regional Nyika Transfrontier Conservation Area Project 11 GEF 11.1 11.1 4.8 Regional SPWA - Scaling Up The Impacts of Good Practices in Linking Poverty Alleviation and 11 GEF MSP 0.9 0.9 0.9 Biodiversity Conservation Regional WAPP: The First Phase of the Inter-Zonal 11 IDA 111.0 2.0 0.8 Transmission Hub Project of the WAPP Regional Capacity Building for Regional Coordination of Sustainable Forest Management in the Congo 12 GEF MSP 1.9 0.2 0.1 Basin under the GEF Program for the Congo Regional Enhancing Institutional Capacities on REDD issues for Sustainable Forest Management in 12 GEF 16.0 3.2 2.6 the Congo Basin 38   SUPPORTING AFRICA’S GREEN FUTURE Total Total BD WB BD Source (USD (USD (USD Country Project Name FY of Funds million) million) million) Regional West Africa Pilot Community-Based Natural 96 GEF 13.2 4.0 2.1 Resources & Wildlife Management Project Regional REIMP 98 GEF 16.7 2.2 0.5 Republic of Forestry and Economic Diversification Project 12 IDA 32.6 6.5 2.0 Congo Rwanda Integrated Management of Critical Ecosystems 05 GEF 5.3 2.7 2.2 Project Senegal Integrated Marine and Coastal Resources 05 GEF 5.0 5.0 5.0 Management Project Senegal Integrated Marine and Coastal Resources 05 IDA 11.5 11.5 2.5 Management Project Senegal Sustainable Management of Fish Resources 09 GEF 25.5 5.0 2.4 Seychelles Marine Ecosystem Management Project 00 GEF MSP 1.0 0.3 0.3 Seychelles Improving Sustainability of Private and NGO- 04 GEF MSP 0.8 0.8 0.8 Managed Nature Reserves Seychelles Environment and Fisheries Dialogue 07 TA 0.0 0.0 0.0 Sierra Leone Bumbuna Hydroelectric Environmental and 05 IDA 91.8 3.7 0.5 Social Management Project Sierra Leone Biodiversity Conservation Project 10 GEF 23.8 23.8 7.0 Sierra Leone Wetlands Conservation Project 11 GEF 5.2 5.2 2.8 South Africa Conservation Planning for Biodiversity Project 00 GEF MSP 0.7 0.7 0.7 South Africa Namaqualand Project 01 GEF MSP 0.8 0.8 0.8 South Africa Maloti-Drakensberg Transfrontier Conservation 02 GEF 7.9 1.6 1.6 and Development Project South Africa C.A.P.E.: Biodiversity Conservation and 04 GEF 55.1 55.1 9.0 Sustainable Development Project South Africa Greater Addo National Park 04 GEF 39.9 39.9 5.5 South Africa Richtersveld Community Biodiversity 04 GEF MSP 2.5 2.5 0.9 Conservation Project South Africa Environment Policy Review & Dialogue 07 TA 0.0 0.0 0.0 South Africa Development, Empowerment and Conservation in the Greater St Lucia Wetland Park and 10 GEF 21.7 21.7 9.0 Surrounding Region South Africa Cape Peninsula Biodiversity 98 GEF 91.2 91.2 12.3 South Africa Conservation Farming Project 99 GEF MSP 0.8 0.2 0.2 Tanzania Lower Kihansi Environmental Management 01 IDA 6.4 6.4 6.3 Project Tanzania Forest Conservation and Management Project 02 IDA 40.0 9.3 9.0 Tanzania Lake Victoria Environmental Management 02 IDA 5.1 0.3 0.3 Project - Supplemental Credit WORLD BANK INVESTMENT IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION   39 Total Total BD WB BD Source (USD (USD (USD Country Project Name FY of Funds million) million) million) Tanzania Eastern Arc Forests Conservation and 04 GEF 38.7 38.7 31.1 Management Project Tanzania Lake Victoria Environmental Management 05 IDA 3.6 0.8 0.8 Project Second Supplemental Credit Tanzania Wildlife and Livestock Utilization 05 GEF MSP 0.9 0.9 0.9 Tanzania Marine and Coastal Environment Management 06 IDA 52.8 25.5 20.0 Tanzania Marine and Coastal Environmental 06 GEF 10.0 5.7 4.9 Management Project Tanzania Lower Kihansi Environmental Management 08 IDA 3.5 1.8 1.8 Project 2 Tanzania Lake Victoria Environment Project 97 IDA 12.9 3.0 1.8 Tanzania Lake Victoria Environment Project 97 GEF 10.3 3.0 3.0 Togo Biodiversity Strategy Project 00 REA 0.2 0.2 0.2 Togo National Environmental Action Plan Support 04 TA 0.1 0.1 0.1 Uganda Lake Victoria Environmental Management 03 IDA 4.6 2.7 2.6 Project - Supplemental Credit Uganda Protected Areas Management and Sustainable 03 GEF 8.0 8.0 8.0 Use GEF Uganda Protected Areas Management and Sustainable 03 IDA 30.0 30.0 23.4 Use Project Uganda Lake Victoria Environment Project 97 IDA 12.9 3.8 2.4 Uganda Lake Victoria Environment Project 97 GEF 12.9 3.8 3.8 Uganda Institutional Capacity Building for Protected 99 GEF 2.0 2.0 2.0 Areas Management and Sustainable Use Project Uganda Institutional Capacity Building for Protected 99 IDA 18.3 18.3 12.4 Areas Management and Sustainable Use Project Zambia Management of Miombo Woodland Ecosystem 02 GEF MSP 1.4 0.3 0.3 Zambia Support for Economic Expansion and 05 GEF 4.0 4.0 4.0 Diversification (SEED) Zambia Support for Economic Expansion and 05 IDA 28.2 10.2 8.0 Diversification (SEED) Zambia Kasanka and Lavushi Manda National Parks 10 GEF MSP 1.9 1.9 0.8 Sustainability Enhancement Project GEF = Global Environment Facility IBRD = International Bank for Reconstruction and Development IDA = International Development Association (a World Bank concessional financing window) MSP = Mid-sized GEF project TA = Technical Assistance SF = Special Financing 40   SUPPORTING AFRICA’S GREEN FUTURE Bibliography Barthlott, W., J. Mutke, M. D. Rafiqpoor, G. Kier, and H. Kreft. Olson, David M., and Eric Dinerstein. 1998. “The Global 200: 2005. “Global Centres of Vascular Plant Diversity.� Nova A Representation Approach to Conserving the Earth’s Acta Leopoldina 92 (342): 61–83. Most Biologically Valuable Ecoregions.� Conservation Biology 12 (3): 502–15. Bryant, Dirk, Eric Rodenburg, Tara Cox, and Daniel Nielsen. 1995. “Coastlines at Risk: An Index of Potential Develop- Olson, David M., Eric Dinerstein, Eric D. Wikramanayake, Neil ment-related Threats to Coastal Ecosystems.� Washing- D. Burgess, George V. N. Powell, Emma C. Underwood, ton, DC: World Resources Institute. http://www.grid. Jennifer A. D’amico et al. 2001. “Terrestrial Ecoregions unep.ch/geo1/fig/fig2_5.htm. of the World: A New Map of Life on Earth.� BioScience 51 (11): 933. Bushmeat Crisis Task Force. 2009. “Bushmeat: A Wildlife Crisis in Western and Central Africa and Around the World.� Sinclair, Ian, and Peter Ryan. 2003. Birds of Africa South of the Washington, DC: Bushmeat Crisis Task Force. Sahara. Johannesburg: Random House Struik. Conservation International. 2012a. “The Biodiversity Suttie, J. M., S. G. Reynolds, and C. Batello, eds. 2005. Grass- Hotspots—Africa.� http://www.conservation.org/where/ lands of the World. Rome: FAO. priority_areas/hotspots/africa/Pages/africa.aspx. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity. 2010. Main- ———. 2012b. “The Biodiversity Hotspots.� www.conservation. streaming the Economics of Nature: A Synthesis of the org/where/priority_areas/hotspots/Pages/hotspots_ Approach, Conclusions and Recommendations of TEEB. main.aspx. Nairobi: UNEP. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization). 2011. State of the The Economist. 2011. “The Surge in Land Deals: When Others World’s Forests 2011. Rome: FAO. Are Grabbing Their Land.� May 5. ———. 2012. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme). 2006. Africa 2012. Rome: FAO. Environment Outlook 2: Our Environment Our Wealth. Nairobi: UNEP. Gwin, Peter. 2012. “Rhino Wars.� National Geographic, March. ———. 2012. Global Environment Outlook 5: Environment for IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature). 2011. the Future We Want. Nairobi: UNEP. “2011 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.� www. iucnredlist.org. Vidal, John. 2012. “Is the EU Taking Its Over-fishing Habits to West African Waters?� The Guardian. April 2. Melo, M., and P. G. Ryan. 2012. “Endemism Gone Wild: The Forgotten Bird Islands of São Tomé and Príncipe, Gulf of World Bank. 2009. Environment Matters: Valuing Coastal and Guinea.� Africa Birds & Birding 17 (2): 32–41. Marine Ecosystems. Washington, DC: World Bank. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Ecosystems and Hu- ———. 2012a. The Little Green Data Book 2012. Washington, man Well-being: Biodiversity Synthesis. Washington, DC: DC: World Bank. World Resources Institute. ———. 2012b. “Safeguard Policies—Natural Habitats.� web. Mittermeier, Russell A., Patricio Robles Gil, Michael Hoffman, worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/PROJECTS/EXTPOLI- John Pilgrim, Thomas Brooks, Cristina Goettsch Mit- CIES/EXTSAFEPOL/0,,contentMDK:20543920~menuPK: termeier, John Lamoreux, and Gustavo A. B. da Fonseca. 1286576~pagePK:64168445~piPK:64168309~theSiteP 2005. Hotspots Revisited: Earth’s Biologically Richest and K:584435,00.html. Most Endangered Terrestrial Ecoregions. Washington, DC: Conservation International. World Bank Group. 2012. Toward a Green, Clean, and Resilient World for All: A World Bank Group Environment Strategy NACSO (Namibia Association of CBNRM Support Organiza- 2012–2022. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. tions). 2010. Namibia’s Communal Conservancies—A Review of Progress and Challenges in 2009. Windhoek, WTTC (World Travel & Tourism Council). 2012. Travel & Tourism: Namibia: NACSO. Economic Impact 2012 Africa. London: WTTC. Oates, John F. 2011. Primates of West Africa: A Field Guide and WWF. 2012. “WWF’s Global 200.� www.worldwildlife.org/sci- Natural History. Arlington, VA: Conservation Interna- ence/ecoregions/global200.html. tional. WORLD BANK INVESTMENT IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION   41 THE WORLD BANK 1818 H Street, NW Washington, DC 20433 October 2012