GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY (GEF)
PROPOSAL FOR PDF BLOCK B GRANT
Country: Republic of Zambia
Title of Project: Securing the Environment for Economic Development (SEED)
Requesting Agency: World Bank
GEF Focal Area: Biodiversity
GEF Operational program: OP1 and OP3, Arid and Semi-Arid and Forest Ecosystems
Local Implementing Agency: Zambia Wildlife Authority (ZAWA) under the Ministry of Tourism
Project Duration: 5 Years
Estimated Total Cost: US$ 35 million (SEED-Tourism Program)
including
US$ 14 million (SEED-Biodiversity Component)
Financing Plan: IDA (SEED-Biodiversity) US$ 5 million
GEF (SEED-Biodiversity) US$ 6 million
Other US$ 2 million
GRZ US$ 1 million
PDF Block B Funds Requested: US$ 240,000
PDF Co-financing: US$ 200,000 from SEED-Tourism PPF
US$ 25,000 from GRZ/ZAWA
Country Endorsement: GEF Focal Point (Ministry of Environment & Natural Resources)
Block A Award: No
Table of Content
1. Background 3
1.1 Wildlife Management in Zambia 6
1.2 Threats 8
1.3 Project Origins 8
2. Project Objectives 9
3. Project Description 9
3.1 Project Design 9
3.1.1 Sub-Component 1: Development of the Mosi-oa-Tunya National Park as a model of intensive economic use and biodiversity conservation 10
3.1.2 Sub-Component 2; Development of the Kafue National Park as a model of extensive economic use and biodiversity conservation 12
3.1.3 Institutional Strengthening of ZAWA 12
3.1.4 Support for the GMA Directorate of ZAWA to establish Community Resource Boards in GMAs and communal areas around the Mosi-oa-Tunya and Kafue National Parks 13
3.2 Expected Outcomes 14
3.3 Indicative Project Costs (million US$) 14
4. Description of PDF Activities 15
5. PDF B Outputs 15
6. National Level Support 15
6.1 Other GEF Projects and Programs 15
6.2 Related Projects and Programs 16
6.3 Related National Policies 16
7. Justification for GEF Eligibility 17
7.1 Country Eligibility 17
7.2 Country Ownership 18
7.3 Sustainability 18
7.4 Replicability 18
7.5 Stakeholder Involvement 19
7.6 Monitoring and Evaluation 19
8. Institutional Framework 19
9. Expected Date of Project Preparation Completion 19
10. Project Preparation Financing Plan 20
11. Budget (US$) 20
12. References 21
1. Background
Zambia is a large country with a diversity of ecosystems represented amongst its forest, woodland, grassland, aquatic and anthropic biomes. These include afro-montane ecosystems in the Nyika Plateau to the east, tropical rainforest around the source of the Zambezi to the north-west, extensive wetlands, lacustrine and riverine systems throughout the country, and miombo woodlands covering some two-thirds of the country, jointly comprising some of the world’s most important and largely undisturbed ecosystems, freshwater sources and carbon sinks, with their accompanying biological diversity.
The importance of Zambia to regional perspectives of floristic biodiversity is eloquently captured by the following extract from Zambia’s BSAP (in prep.):
Floristically, Zambia lies within the Zambezian regional center of endemism which borders the Guineo-Congolian region to the north and the Karoo-Namib region to the south and southwest (White, 1983). Inter-regional transitions form broad ecotones that consist of a mix of flora from neighboring centers of endemism.
Whilst the endemicity of Zambia’s flora is not particularly exceptional (although undoubtedly much higher than currently known), it is estimated that 54% of the species in the regional Zambezian Phytochorion are endemic (White, 1983).
A similar picture is apparent regarding Zambia’s importance to regional faunal diversity as indicated by the following extract from WWF’s profile of Zambia’s natural resources (1996):
Zambia ranks third with Malawi only to the Republic of South Africa and Angola in the sub-region in terms of its vertebrate diversity, if marine fish are excluded from the ranking. The exceptional faunal diversity of Zambia is illustrated by the presence of mammals normally restricted to neighboring countries.
This diversity is most evident in Zambia’s wildlife resources, and may be illustrated by the diversity of the Genus Kobus in Zambia which includes 2 endemic subspecies (Kobus leche kafuensis and Kobus leche smithemani), 1 near-endemic but extinct subspecies (Kobus leche robertsi), as well as other Kobus species including leche leche, ellipsiprymnus, ellipsiprymnus crawshayi, and vardonii.
Zambia’s transitional position is thus clearly of enormous significance to the biodiversity of the entire sub-region.
Estimates of Zambia’s overall species diversity are patchy, and it is impossible to be definitive, particularly as there is still so much work remaining to update records. By combining various sources, minimum estimates appear to be as follows (BSAP, in prep.):
Flora (BSAP, in prep.)
Number of Species
Algae 147
Mosses 129
Ferns 142
Grasses 530
Other herbs 1130
Woody plants 1610
Crops/vegetables 86
Total 3774
Fauna
Number of Species
Invertebrates 2032 (BSAP, in prep.)
Fish 409 (BSAP, in prep.)
Amphibians 74 (Simbotwe, 1993)
Reptiles 141 (Simbotwe, 1993)
Birds 741 (ZOS, 2000)
Mammals 224 (BSAP, in prep.)
Domesticated animals 16 (BSAP, in prep.)
Total 3637
Thus it is estimated that there are 3,774 and 3,637 species of flora and fauna respectively, although these are certain to be significant under-estimates because little field work to update the inventory of Zambia’s natural resources has been conducted in recent years. Of Zambia’s known flora and fauna, 316 endemic, 174 rare, and 31 endangered or vulnerable species have been identified, many of which are of global significance (BSAP, in prep.).
Miombo woodland, which dominates Zambia’s landscape, is perhaps Zambia’s most important ecosystem for many reasons. Firstly, the sheer scale and size of the woodland biome has significant implications in terms of its ecological functions – Zambia contains some of the region’s largest carbon stocks (second only to Angola) predominantly within the miombo ecosystem. Zambia is the center of diversity of the Genera Brachystegia and Monotes that are the dominant trees of miombo woodland, and represented by 18 and 11 species respectively (in fact, localized hybridization is so extensive that it is often impossible to definitively allocate a sample to one species or another). Exceptional diversity of herbaceous species is associated with miombo woodland, particularly the orchids (Orchidaceae) and the milkweeds (Asclepiadaceae).
The majority of Zambia’s biodiversity is contained within Zambia’s extensive wildlife estate (National Parks and Game Management Areas) and forest estate, although there are some gaps in Protected Area coverage that exclude important areas of high biodiversity and local centers of endemism.
The Mosi-oa-Tunya and Kafue National Parks, and their surrounding communal lands, are the geographical foci for the project, chosen for the combination of their biodiversity and economic significance. They are listed as Critical Sites by IUCN (1990), which also lists most of the wildlife of both areas as Critical Species. Base-line information relating to both these National Parks is contained in their General Management Plans, although there are significant inadequacies in these documents.
The Mosi-oa-Tunya National Park (6,600 ha) around the Victoria Falls includes a mosaic of riparian (dominated by Diospyros mespiliformis and Syzigium spp.), mopane (dominated by Colophospermum mopane), miombo (dominated by Brachystegia and Julbernardia spp.), teak (dominated by Baikiaea plurijuga) and Kalahari woodlands, Combretum-Terminalia thickets, rain forest in the gorges that are kept permanently moist by spray from the falls, and grasslands. These are Critical Habitats, important for a variety of Critical Species of fauna, including the following that occur or have been recorded as transients in the National Park:
Species Status
Mammals
African elephant Endangered
Wild dog Endangered
Lion Vulnerable
Leopard Vulnerable
Aardwolf Vulnerable
Springhare Vulnerable
Sable antelope possibly Vulnerable
Birds
Taita falcon Vulnerable
Black eagle Vulnerable
Corncrake Vulnerable
Lesser kestrel Vulnerable
Black-cheeked lovebird Endangered (near endemic)
Two threatened species of fish, the ocellated spiny eel and broad-headed catfish, occur just upstream from the Victoria Falls in the Katima Mulilo locality, but it is uncertain whether or not they have been recorded in the waters of the Mosi-oa-Tunya National Park. Many of the fish that are found in the upper Zambezi River (that is, above the falls) also occur in the Kafue River system, such as the African pike.
The rain forest is not true rain forest, but rather riparian woodland (dominated by Diospyros and Syzigium spp.) which has adapted to the higher “rainfall” conditions of the falls. It does however include at least 9 rare plant species that are dependent on its high moisture levels.
The Mosi-oa-Tunya National Park and environs are also particularly rich in cultural resources. This combination of wildlife and cultural resources with its spectacular landscape justified the area’s designation as a World Heritage Site.
The Kafue National Park (2,240,000 ha) comprises a rich variety of Critical Habitats including riverine, mopane, miombo (the dominant habitat), and termitaria woodlands, teak woodlands/forests, dambos (headwater valley grasslands), wetlands such as the Busanga Swamps, and aquatic habitats in the Kafue River and its tributaries and Lake Itezhi-tezhi (a man-made hydro-electric storage dam), with an equally diverse fauna. The fauna of the National Park include the following Critical Species of special concern:
Species Status
Mammals
Black rhinoceros Critically endangered (probably extinct)
African elephant Endangered
Wild dog Endangered
Cheetah Vulnerable
Lion Vulnerable
Leopard Vulnerable
Springhare Vulnerable
Pitman’s shrew Vulnerable
Anchieta’s pipistrelle Vulnerable
Roan antelope possibly Vulnerable
Sable antelope possibly Vulnerable
Birds
Black-cheeked lovebird Endangered (near endemic)
Slaty egret Vulnerable
Lesser kestrel Vulnerable
Wattled crane Vulnerable
Corncrake Vulnerable
Cape vulture Vulnerable
Fish
African (Kafue) pike possibly Vulnerable
Melland’s spiny eel possibly Vulnerable
Blotched barbel possibly Vulnerable
Bottlenose possibly Vulnerable
Red-breasted bream possibly Vulnerable
Silver barbel possibly Vulnerable
It is important to appreciate that the above are extremely tentative lists and likely to be significant under-representations of the extent of these areas’ biodiversity significance, as there is considerable inventory work required to update Zambia’s records.
These are important considerations with respect to in situ biodiversity conservation programs, particularly when the relatively low population density of Zambia compared to its neighbors, and the largely in-tact nature of the environment in its protected areas are taken into account. In spite of its difficulties, it is the wildlife sector that is the most advanced of natural resources management sectors in terms of its institutional development, active policies and legislation, and coverage of important ecosystems and species of fauna and flora.
1.1 Wildlife Management in Zambia
Zambia has 19 National Parks (NPs) and 36 Game Management Areas (GMAs) that jointly cover some 23 million hectares or about 30% of the country (8% and 22% respectively). The network of National Parks and GMAs includes a variety of habitats and most “big game” species.
The National Parks (IUCN Protected Areas Category II) are vested in the President for the State on behalf of the public. They have been created to protect a full range of the country’s wildlife and natural resources (although there is in fact a shortfall in coverage at present), and provide for maintenance of vital ecological systems, recreational enjoyment, research, and sustainable non-consumptive use of these resources for economic purposes (tourism and related activities). The value of Zambia’s National Parks is immense, and their status as National assets that are protected by both National and International policy and legislation means that they can attract investments and management partnerships without the State ever losing its regulatory control or sovereignty over the land.
Hunting is normally prohibited in the National Parks, except for management purposes. However, the Parks function as resource reservoirs for surrounding areas through the natural movement of game from areas of high density into areas of lower density. Hunting of elephant is prohibited in Zambia (except in rare cases of problem animal control). Hunting of rhinoceroses is also prohibited, although black rhinos are probably extinct in the country anyway.
GMAs (IUCN Protected Area Category VI) generally lie in tribal or traditional (communal) lands that are contiguous with the National Parks. They are designed as buffer areas of ecosystem maintenance, but unlike the National Parks, GMAs provide for the sustainable consumptive exploitation of wildlife, mainly through commercial safari hunting.
Under the most recent and progressive wildlife policy and legislation now in place in Zambia, local communities are responsible for the management of the GMAs under the regulation and supervision of ZAWA. As such, the policy and legislation provide for the accrual of the economic benefits (and in fact costs) of managing GMAs to the resident communities under the oversight of Community Resource Boards and, in turn, ZAWA. The main economic benefit arising from wildlife management in the GMAs is from the fees paid for commercial safari hunting, although communities also derive economic benefits from employment (particularly by ZAWA and tourism and hunting enterprises), and subsistence economies such as agriculture and hunting.
The Government recently abolished the National Parks & Wildlife Service, the Civil Service Department under the Ministry of Tourism previously responsible for wildlife management, and replaced it with a “parastatal” called the Zambia Wildlife Authority (ZAWA). ZAWA is a statutory body with responsibility for wildlife management in the National Parks and in the GMAs. The Ministry of Tourism, assisted by local and international consultants, and working in close collaboration with other Government agencies, the private sector and a range of stakeholders, has developed the new structure of ZAWA, thoroughly revised the agency’s financial and administrative systems, and has appointed a Board and new staff (some of whom have been drawn selectively from the old agency where appropriately experienced and qualified).
The restructuring process is nearly complete and it is anticipated that the Director-General and senior management staff will be appointed early in 2001. The new agency should bring a significant improvement in wildlife management performance once it is in full operation during the coming year. ZAWA’s success will depend on the independence and quality of its management, its effectiveness in implementing policies and legislation, its capacity to incorporate local communities more fully into the conservation of wildlife in GMAs, and on Government’s commitment to respect and support the operational independence of this statutory body.
ZAWA expects to be a financially viable entity within a couple of years, although it is reasonable to assume that Government should continue to invest in the Authority as an interested party to sustainable natural resources management on behalf of the public. The expectation of long-term sustainability is however also quite reasonable given the large potential of the sector. The following comparisons of the returns to the wildlife agencies in South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe (calculated by SADC) indicate the profitability of wildlife management and the current gap between potential and actual revenues to ZAWA: