1250 24th St. NW

Washington, DC 20037 USA

Phone: 202-861-8347; Fax: 202-861-8324; E-mail: BSP@wwfus.org;
Web Site: www.BSPonline.org

Printed on recycled paper.

The Biodiversity Support Program (BSP) is a consortium of World Wildlife Fund, The Nature Conservancy, and World Resources Institute, funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). This publication was made possible through support provided to BSP by the Africa Bureau of USAID, under the terms of Cooperative Agreement Number AOT-A-00-99-00228-00. The opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID.

Purpose, Scope and Overview of This Publication

Background on the TBNRM Project

TBNRM Elements and Process

General Conclusions

Conclusions on the TBNRM Process

Conclusions on Social, Economic, Political and Institutional Aspects

1.2 TBNRM Definition and Continuum

1.3 Potential Transboundary Opportunities

2.2 Roles in the TBNRM Process

2.3 Levels in Transboundary Collaboration

2.4 Agreements

2.5 Organizational and Individual Capacity

2.6 Communication in the TBNRM Process

2.7 Constraints and Enabling Conditions for TBNRM

3.2 Making Choices and Determining the Relevant Issues for Transboundary Initiatives

3.3 Strategic Planning for TBNRM Initiatives

3.4 Monitoring, Evaluation and Adaptive Management

4.2 Gaps and Future Needs

4.3 Closing Remarks

In BSP many people were very supportive on various fronts, and special thanks go to Connie Carrol, Sheila Donoghue, Julia Ellis, Rose-Marie Gay, Susan Grevengoed, Cristin Haggard, Rebecca Ham, Stephanie Hando, Ida Jenkins, Julia Karki, Aline Martinez, Sheila McGroder, Angela Reading, Tracie Sam, Jamie Shambaugh, Laurent Somé, Josh Stevens and Theresa Woodard.

The authors would like to express gratitude to the many consultants for their valuable inputs, and for the dedication and long hours they gave to the project. In the first phase they were John Griffin (team leader), David Cumming, Simon Metcalfe, Mike t’ Sas-Rolfes, Jaidev “Jay” Singh, Ebenizário Chonguiça and Mary Rowen.

In the second phase consultants involved were as follows:

West Africa: Steven de Bie, Chris Geerling, Jean-Baptiste Kambou, Juliette Koudenoukpo, Rixta Lycklama à Nijeholt and Mohamadou
I. Magha

Central Africa: Stephen Asuma, Bryan Curran, Bernard Difara, Norbert Gami, Elie Hakizumwami, José Kalpers, Anecto Kayitare, Annette
Lanjouw, Helga Rainer, Eugène Rutagarama, Mbake Sivha,
Lisa Steel and David Wilkie

Eastern Africa: Katharine Frohardt, Christine Mathenge, John Mugabe, Philip Muruthi, Robert Nabanyumya, Alan Rodgers and John Salehe

Many thanks are due to all those who reviewed reports in both phases. The authors also would like to thank the many organizations affiliated with the study: African Centre for Technology Studies (ACTP), African Wildlife Foundation (AWF), GEF-UNDP Cross Borders Biodiversity Project, International Gorilla Conservation Programme (IGCP), IUCN—The World Conservation Union, UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre, Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), World Wildlife Fund and World Wide Fund for Nature (Southern Africa Regional Programme Office). Peace Parks Foundation (PPF) provided valuable support during the first phase in many forms, including consultations, information and development of databases and literature collection; special thanks go to John Hanks and Werner Myburgh. Madeleine Howard and Kuda Mhwandagara of WWF/SARPO provided effective and timely support in producing a wide range of maps; as did Tim Green, Jennifer D’Amico, Michele Thieme, Wesley Wettengel and David Olson of WWF-US, and Martin Sneary and Mark Balman of BirdLife International in the second phase.

Zimbabwe Trust provided valuable and efficient administrative, logistical and technical support to both phases of the study. In particular, the authors would like to thank Barry Fowlds for his help with the organization of the large workshop in the first phase, and Champion Chinhoyi, Emmanuel Koro, Petronella Pasipamire and Anne Gova for the excellent organization of the pan-African workshop in the second phase of the project, together with Angela Reading from BSP.

Many valuable discussions were held and comments provided during both workshops. The authors would like to thank all participants for taking time out of their busy schedules to participate in, and contribute to these workshops. The pan-African TBNRM workshop was held in April 2001 in Victoria Falls, Zimbabwe; discussions were guided by the skilled facilitation of Oliver Karkoschka and the discussions benefited significantly from the attendance of Jon Anderson, Richard K. Bagine, Champion Chinhoyi, Chieftainess Chinhoyi, Rod de Vletter, Mamadou Ilias Diallo, Amadou Matar Diouf, George Doerken, Jean-Baptiste Kambou, André Kamdem Toham, Anecto Kayitare, Almaz Tadesse Kebede, Mohamadou Issaka Magha, Samy Mankoto Ma Mbaelele, Joseph Matlhare, Lota Melamari, Simon Metcalfe (also for sharing his insights from a both a general and specific initiative perspective), Sedia Modise, Philip Muruthi, Bihini Won wa Musiti, Sophie Mutsekwa, Edith Muza, Henry Mwima, Robert Nabanyumya, Humphrey Nzima, Graeme Patterson, Thomas Price, Alan Rodgers, Mary Rowen, John Yonazi Salehe, Leonard Seelig, James Shambaugh, Laurent Somé and Anada Tiéga. We would like to thank the Honorable Edward Chindori-Chininga, Deputy Minister of Environment and Tourism in Zimbabwe for his inspiring address at the workshop, which echoed the urgency and concern we heard throughout the study in sub-Saharan Africa for the promotion of sustainable livelihoods through conservation and wise use of transboundary natural resources.

We would like to recognize the amazing support and inputs from numerous stakeholders and specialists from across sub-Saharan Africa. Many people provided their time, knowledge, opinions and insights into the current TBNRM situation in the four regions, as well as their views of opportunities and constraints. These individuals represented a broad range of stakeholders, including government, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), communities, and the private sector. Unfortunately, there is not enough space to recognize them all sufficiently here, but for the first phase we would like to mention in particular Sedia Modise, Steve Johnson and his SADC NRMP colleagues, Leon Viljoen, Simon Munthali, Bartolomeu Soto and Rod de Vletter. Many thanks to all those from the region who attended the consultative meeting in Harare, the transboundary session of the SASUSG members’ meeting in Gaborone and the workshop in Midrand. For the second phase we would like to mention in particular Seydina Issa Sylla, Ibrahim Thiaw, Abdoulaye Kane and René Bosman for their support during Harry’s visit to West Africa. Many thanks to Thomas Price, Anada Tiéga, David Wilkie and John Griffin for their ongoing support, input and contributions during the second phase.

The authors also would like to thank Jon Anderson, Simon Anstey, Edmund Barrow, Richard Margoluis, Thomas Price, Alan Rodgers, Mary Rowen, Leonard Seelig, Anada Tiéga, Rod de Vletter, David Wilkie and Dorothy Zbicz for reviewing a draft of this document. Their comments made a substantial contribution to the publication. The final opinions expressed in the publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the reviewers.

Finally, Judy and Trevor would like to thank the Oglethorpe and Sandwith families for their support, tolerance and forbearance while we were working long hours on this project.

Throughout the whole study, we were impressed by the enthusiasm for, ownership of, and healthy skepticism about transboundary natural resource management, across all stakeholder groups, and in all countries. We wish you all success in transboundary developments where appropriate in sub-Saharan Africa in future years!

Harry van der Linde

Judy Oglethorpe

Trevor Sandwith

Deborah Snelson

Yemeserach Tessema

Washington, D.C.

September 2001

This publication does not give all the answers (they are not all known yet!), but aims to help people to think through what best to do in a particular situation. It reflects the current state of TBNRM in sub-Saharan Africa, and we hope that it will encourage more TBNRM development where appropriate. It should also be seen as a step in a longer-term process of developing this approach and understanding both its potential and limitations. Our intent with this work is to contribute to stimulating discussions, practices and analyses to further the TBNRM process.

The main audiences are African practitioners and decision makers active in natural resource management and biodiversity conservation who have an interest in TBNRM. This includes:

There is currently great interest in TBNRM. As with any new process that has yet to be fully tried and tested, there is a high learning curve as successes and failures occur. TBNRM may not always be the most effective or appropriate approach. We hope that this publication will help to share lessons from the wealth of knowledge and experience that has accumulated so far, and assist those who are currently thinking about embarking on TBNRM to use approaches that have worked elsewhere, and avoid some of the pitfalls that others have encountered. For those already involved in TBNRM, the publication may provide new insights and ideas, help them to analyze their own situations holistically, and find some solutions to current problems.

Chapter 1 provides an overview of TBNRM. Chapter 2 outlines key elements of TBNRM. These elements are building blocks for the TBNRM process, which is described later. All these key elements are similar to those of natural resource management (NRM) within a country, but they are reviewed in a specific transboundary context. The chapter covers stakeholders and their interests, and the different roles people play in the TBNRM process. Levels in the TBNRM process are outlined, followed by a review of the need for and types of agreements in TBNRM. Capacity and communication needs are reviewed, and finally constraints and enabling conditions are listed.

Chapter 3 describes the process of scoping and analysis to help assess whether or not it makes sense to apply this approach in a particular situation. This also helps to distinguish objectives that can be achieved effectively by working collaboratively across borders and those where internal actions alone would suffice. The chapter then covers the need for the development of a joint vision, and planning and design of the initiative. The first part of Chapter 3 is most relevant to those considering whether to adopt a transboundary approach, and those in the early stages of planning and developing transboundary initiatives. The final section on monitoring, evaluation and adaptive management is relevant for people already working in TBNRM.

Finally Chapter 4 outlines major findings and conclusions from the project, and reviews gaps and future needs.

Reports upon which this publication is based are listed before the reference section, and more detailed information on individual regions or areas can be found in those reports. They are also posted on our Web site, at www.BSPonline.org. Some of these publications are available in more than one language (English, French and one in Portuguese). They include the following:

The focus of the analysis was mainly on wildlife, forestry and protected areas. Time and financial constraints meant that not all transboundary natural resources could be given equal coverage. Water, aquatic and marine resources, and rangeland for livestock are not covered in depth although we recognize that they are extremely important transboundary resources in many African regions.

The Biodiversity Support Program’s transboundary project aimed to review current TBNRM developments in sub-Saharan Africa; analyze the process involved; and identify opportunities, constraints and enabling conditions to see how effective the TBNRM approach is. The analysis was based on reviews of TBNRM development in Southern, Eastern, Central and West Africa; a series of case studies with a wildlife, forestry and protected areas focus; and results from workshops and consultations over the past
three years.

TBNRM is defined in this publication as any process of collaboration across boundaries that increases the effectiveness of attaining natural resource management or biodiversity conservation goal(s). (Note that the countries sharing resources that are candidates for transboundary management do not have to be neighbors.) The approach covers a wide continuum of TBNRM initiatives and activities ranging from transboundary community-based natural resource management and transboundary protected areas (TBPAs) management to large-scale natural resource management integrated in regional economic development.

Ecological opportunities include maintaining or restoring linkages in ecological landscapes that cross borders, and reducing transboundary threats to promote sustainable use of natural resources. Social and cultural opportunities include renewal of cooperation and cultural ties among communities severed by borders, and increased welfare and development opportunities for populations. Economic opportunities include the development of regional economic opportunities such as tourism, and economies of working on a larger scale. Political opportunities include improved security in border areas and enhanced transparency and accountability in the use of natural resources. There are also many constraints to TBNRM. These are documented in the publication and many are outlined in the conclusions below.

Scoping and analysis tools are presented, to help decide whether or not to embark on transboundary management in a particular situation. These tools also help to distinguish those objectives within an initiative that can be achieved more effectively by working collaboratively across borders from those where internal actions alone would suffice. The process continues with the development of a joint vision, and the planning and design of
a TBNRM initiative. The importance of monitoring and evaluation is outlined to enable learning from successes and failures and adaptive management. The whole process is
illustrated in a TBNRM cycle.

TBNRM should not replace NRM within each country involved, but should be an extension of it. TBNRM will not succeed if internal NRM does not work. Many of the requirements for collaboration called for by TBNRM are similar to those for internal NRM. Since each TBNRM situation has its own unique set of circumstances, there is no blueprint for the approach; it needs to be planned, implemented, evaluated and adapted around the specific circumstances of each situation.

The few existing formal TBNRM agreements among countries have only recently been negotiated and as yet are not yet broadly tested and proven. The formal approach appears to take considerable time and larger amounts of funding before showing any results in terms of improved resource management or better conservation on the ground.

TBNRM must be built on trust and partnerships. Trust takes time and patience to establish and cannot be rushed. TBNRM should be a flexible process evolving on the basis of real need. It is important to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of this collaboration frequently, and adapt as appropriate. Learning should be done both internally and jointly across the border, which requires transparent sharing of information. Learning is also important across different TBNRM areas.

TBNRM must increase the efficiency of natural resource management in order to
be worthwhile. Synergism is essential for successful TBNRM: the whole must be greater than the sum of the parts, otherwise individual countries are better off managing their resources independently. In the right situations TBNRM can increase the efficiency of managing and monitoring natural resources through avoiding or reducing duplication of effort, creating economies of scale, and enhancing economic opportunities such as increased tourism. However, TBNRM requires additional investments of money and time. Funding for TBNRM should be incremental, and not at the cost of internal NRM.

Political will and long-term commitment are essential for successful TBNRM. Good international political relations can facilitate TBNRM; sovereignty and security issues can constrain it. Collaboration can resolve local-level cross-border conflict by finding common ground and shared objectives. It can help to increase security and control over resources in border areas. Its potential role in larger-scale peace processes among countries, how-
ever, was less clear from this study.

TBNRM at a formal scale tends to increase the involvement of upper government
levels, with a risk that these levels will exert influence and control that is not in the best interests of local levels. Good governance within a country is therefore essential for
successful TBNRM, including subsidiarity and two-way transparency and accountability between higher and lower levels in control of land and resources.

Harmonization of relevant policies and legislation across boundaries can be an important enabling condition for TBNRM. Despite their good potential to facilitate TBNRM, some of the international environmental conventions are not currently playing a strong role. Certain regional economic agreements (e.g., SADC) seem to be playing a larger facilitating role.

TBNRM should work through existing organizations where possible. Capacity is frequently a constraint, and weak national structures cannot create strong TBNRM. Outside facilitators may be able to help build capacity. TBNRM is sometimes constrained by governments’ narrow NRM approach—i.e., through isolated treatment of single resources/
land uses—which does not facilitate multiple resource use.

As new experiences are gained, they need to be analyzed and the existing understanding of TBNRM expanded. Further studies are recommended on how TBNRM is influenced by political relations, and more specifically on the potential role of TBNRM in peace building between nations. The role environmental conventions can play in promoting TBNRM merits further investigation. New techniques for economic valuation of TBNRM are urgently required, with cost/benefit analysis tools for practitioners.