Biodiversity

Information and Discussions on General Conservation Issues
User avatar
Lisbeth
Site Admin
Posts: 67457
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:31 pm
Country: Switzerland
Location: Lugano
Contact:

Re: Biodiversity

Post by Lisbeth »

DFFE INDABA

Ramaphosa and Creecy defend controversial ‘biodiversity business’ plan

Image
Forestry Fisheries and Environment Minister Barbara Creecy (left) with President Cyril Ramaphosa at the biodiversity economy exhibition at the Biodiversity Economy and Investment Indaba, Boksburg, on 26 March 2024. (Photo: Julia Evans)

By Julia Evans | 27 Mar 2024

At the Biodiversity Economy and Investment Indaba in Johannesburg this week, Environment Minister Barbara Creecy and President Cyril Ramaphosa highlighted the benefits of their ambitious National Biodiversity Economy Strategy, which has drawn criticism.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
‘When one goes to rural areas, you just often get so sad to look at rural areas that you can see are just dormitories where people live, with hardly much economic activity that happens.

“And yet lying hidden, like Rembrandts lying in the attic, are the endowments our people should now utilise – the land, the plants, and everything else that is in our rural communities,” President Cyril Ramaphosa told the Biodiversity Economy and Investment Indaba at the Birchwood Hotel and Conference Centre in Boksburg on Tuesday.

“Those need to be brought to life. That is the residual capital that we have that needs to be utilised.”

Image
President Cyril Ramaphosa addresses the Biodiversity Economy and Investment Indaba at the Birchwood Hotel and Conference Centre in Boksburg. (Photo: Julia Evans)

The indaba, hosted by the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment (DFFE), brought together government officials, traditional leaders and healers, academia, business, communities and conservation management authorities to discuss the biodiversity sector’s contribution to the alleviation of poverty, unemployment and inequality, and to pitch biodiversity business concepts to potential investors.

“Over 100 proposals will be pitched to investors,” DFFE Minister Barbara Creecy said at the opening of the three-day indaba on Monday.

“I am hoping that many of these projects will be picked up and come to fruition. I can assure you that the government will support and facilitate their success.”

Central to discussions at the indaba was the controversial draft of the National Biodiversity Economy Strategy (NBES), published for public comment by Creecy earlier this month.

The strategy is aligned with the goals of the White Paper on Conservation and Sustainable Use of South Africa’s Biodiversity and aims to leverage the biodiversity economy to promote conservation, and species and ecosystems management.

Following the release, Don Pinnock wrote in Daily Maverick that while the strategy draft appears to favour the conservation of wildlife and massively extend areas of protection, by embracing consumptive use, the strategy cuts across the advances made by Creecy and her department regarding the welfare of wild animals, her stand against captive-bred lions, the progressive findings of the high-level panel on lions, elephants, rhinos and leopards, and the White Paper on Conservation and Sustainable Use.

Read more in Daily Maverick: Government trying to slam through plan that will result in massive exploitation of wildlife
You can read it in the article above this one

Pinnock also noted, “The redistribution and protection of reclaimed areas and redistributed land has not fared well in South Africa and often devolves into squabbles between claimants and rural groups. It tends to be insufficiently policed and is often plundered.”

Creecy told Daily Maverick at the indaba that this perspective was a “misreading” of the strategy.

“The problem is we’ve had two historically diverging schools of thought. The one school has said, ‘In order to have conservation, you look and you don’t touch,’ ” said Creecy. “And the other school of thought has said, ‘There’s biodiversity, let’s utilise it.’ ”

In her keynote address, Creecy noted that the white paper identified the challenge that “inappropriate and illegal practices have on South Africa’s reputation as a world leader in biodiversity conservation.

“As such, the white paper also emphasises the importance of the duty of care, and ensuring the wellbeing of animals and nature more broadly.”

Hunting

Pinnock noted that the plan would “make South Africa one of the world’s top destinations for trophy hunters at a time when that practice is coming under increasing disapproval internationally. This could have a negative impact on brand South Africa and international tourism.”

“Will there be consumptive use in certain situations? Yes,” Creecy told Daily Maverick.

“I mean, hunting is a big industry, and whatever everyone’s subjective views are about hunting, one cannot detract from the fact that hunting contributes an enormous amount of income [to] conservation.”

Creecy said all protected areas cull animals.

“Of course, these are not things that ecotourism ever shares… You don’t come to the Kruger Park to watch the culling of impala, but it happens.

“What we’re saying is, if you were to have extensive herds of game on areas that are currently marginal for conventional agriculture, this land would be compatible with conservation, with ecosystem restoration, and you would be finding a sustainable offtake,” said Creecy.

“So we’re not talking about putting impala in feedlots. We’re talking about extensive systems with commensurate offtake.”

Biotrade and bioprospecting

An exhibition at the indaba showcased market-ready biodiversity products and services from across the biodiversity economy value chains, such as biotrade and bioprospecting — which is the processing of indigenous plants into consumer products.

“The trade in indigenous medicine plants is a multimillion-rand industry that supports jobs and livelihoods across the value chain,” Ramaphosa said during his address.

“As a country, we have been firm that communities must benefit in a tangible manner when plant and animal species are harvested for commercial gain.”

He said that four years ago, the first industry-wide benefits-sharing agreement was launched between the South African rooibos industry and the Khoi and San councils.

Image
Water and Sanitation Minister Senzo Mchunu (left) with Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment Barbara Creecy hold the National Capital Accounting books for strategic water sources in SA, prepared by the Statistician General. (Photo: Julia Evans)

This agreement had to date distributed R28-million to the two councils in recognition of the communities’ indigenous knowledge of the rooibos species, Ramaphosa said.

Wolande le Roux, an exhibitor at the indaba selling Sceletia Honeybush Tea, said she was glad Ramaphosa mentioned rooibos in his speech, because in Eastern Cape there was almost no capacity for communities to enter the rooibos and honeybush processing value chain, unlike Western Cape where the provincial government offered support.

Le Roux, who works with communities in Tsitsikamma and Gqeberha and is passionate about indigenous knowledge (being a descendant of the Khoi people), said that in the honeybush market, most local people were harvesters. There were hardly any indigenous people processing the raw honeybush into a commercial product, where most of the money was.

“The support that indigenous communities need, especially Khoi and San people, from the government is to transform from being just a labourer or harvester into getting into the processing value chain,” Le Roux said.

“There are so many byproducts that can come from honeybush,” Le Roux said, from herbal remedies to skincare products.

“But you need to capitalise the local communities — create awareness of the opportunities, then train them and give them the necessary skills and then give them the financial or technical support.”

An indigenous company that has received harvesting training from the DFFE is Mazoyi Group, in Alice, Eastern Cape. It processes indigenous aloe and Pelargonium plants into a range of medicines.

Its CEO and founder, Lwazi Marawu, who commercialised the indigenous healing practice that his great-grandmother started in her community in 1906, acknowledged that while the DFFE’s training on harvesting was good, they needed more training on the business side.

Ramaphosa said in his address that approximately R2-million had been paid to traditional authorities in the Eastern Cape, Northern Cape, North West, KwaZulu-Natal and Limpopo in recognition of indigenous knowledge associated with plants like aloe, Sceletium, marula, Pelargonium and buchu.

“We know that compensation in recognition of indigenous knowledge held by communities is not enough,” said Ramaphosa. “We know that payment to communities for harvesting these species is also not enough.

“There must be tangible beneficiation in communities when indigenous plant species are harvested for commercial benefit.”

“It’s a very grand plan… I can see how it’s contributing to the economy and commercialisation, but I’m not seeing how it contributes toward conservation,” Le Roux said.

Land use in rural communities

“It cannot be business as usual,” said Creecy, speaking of the need to include rural communities and previously disadvantaged individuals in the biodiversity economy.

That would require investment into community-owned land for conservation-compatible land use with biodiversity enterprises.

Image
Forestry Fisheries and Environment Minister Barbara Creecy (left) and Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development Minister Thoko Didiza listen to a vendor at the biodiversity economy exhibition. (Photo: Julia Evans)

Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development Minister Thoko Didiza noted in her address at the indaba on Monday that land-use changes were not optimally managed in rural areas, and could create conflicts between the environment, culture and development.

“As the population grows, so does the need for alternative land use for housing, agriculture and other developments,” Didiza said. “This is the reality and the balancing act that we must always uphold.”

Assisting communities with land for development, in tandem with protecting nature and wildlife, would make communities value nature and actively engage in the protection of biodiversity, Didiza said.

International standards

South Africa adopted the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, at the last UN Biodiversity Conference in 2022.

The headline target is the “30×30”, which aims to effectively conserve at least 30% of the world’s land, freshwater and oceans by 2030, while also respecting the rights and contributions of indigenous peoples and local communities.

Creecy said SA needed to domesticate the global agreement, and the white paper was a mechanism for doing so, as was the revised National Biodiversity Economy Strategy. She said the strategy was in line with international policy and thought.

“If we’re going to get anywhere near 30% of the land target, we are going to have to deeply interrogate a question of sustainable use,” Creecy said.

“What we know is, that at the moment, conservation is either done by government or by private landowners, the majority of whom [are] historically privileged South Africans.

“We think that there is significant land in our country that belongs to traditional authority, and to community property associations that can enjoy some form of protection and ecosystem restoration, and still have a sustainable offtake that could benefit those communities.”

Creecy said that to achieve the 30×30 target, the state would need the help of the private sector. DM


"Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world." Nelson Mandela
The desire for equality must never exceed the demands of knowledge
User avatar
Lisbeth
Site Admin
Posts: 67457
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:31 pm
Country: Switzerland
Location: Lugano
Contact:

Re: Biodiversity

Post by Lisbeth »

Creecy said that to achieve the 30×30 target, the state would need the help of the private sector.
At least she knows the limits of this government O**

If the plan goes through it will mess up the country as nobody is able to organize, control and carry out and then there will be all the loopholes for the ones who always find a way to enrich themselves at the cost of others.


"Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world." Nelson Mandela
The desire for equality must never exceed the demands of knowledge
User avatar
Lisbeth
Site Admin
Posts: 67457
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:31 pm
Country: Switzerland
Location: Lugano
Contact:

Re: Biodiversity

Post by Lisbeth »

New National Biodiversity Economy Strategy is a curate’s egg — only good in parts

By Adam Cruise | 21 Apr 2024
Dr Adam Cruise is an investigative environmental journalist, travel writer and academic. He has contributed to a number of international publications, including National Geographic and The Guardian, covering diverse topics from the plight of elephants, rhinos and lions in Africa to coral reef rejuvenation in Indonesia. Cruise is a doctor of philosophy, specialising in animal and environmental ethics, and is the editor of the online Journal of African Elephants.

Will government’s new strategy really benefit people and nature, or simply lead to massive over-consumption of natural resources, creating unrealistic expectations in an attempt to win the rural vote?
_______________________________________________________________________________________-_________________________________
At the recent Biodiversity and Investment Indaba in Gauteng launched by government to showcase South Africa’s new biodiversity strategy, President Cyril Ramaphosa emphasised the need to bring local communities to the centre of the biodiversity economy, stating that rural communities “had always suffered” but the new strategy would focus on transformation to ensure that they benefited.

The National Biodiversity Economy Strategy (NBES) released by the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and Environment (DFFE) in mid-March for public consultation, aims to “optimise biodiversity-based business potentials across the terrestrial, freshwater, estuarine, marine and coastal systems, and to contribute to economic growth with local beneficiation, job creation, poverty alleviation, and food security”.

In parts, South Africa’s broad accordance with the treaty is creditable. The strategy aims to increase “conservation real estate” from 20 million hectares to 34 million by 2040, and the involvement of impoverished local communities is definitely a step in the right direction.

However, while the overall plan is well-founded, there remain major sections of the strategy that have less to do with securing biodiversity and the economic benefit for the poor, and more about exploiting the natural environment for commercial gain that will benefit a select few.

Challenges and empty promises
Since the 1970s, South Africa has adhered to a policy of sustainable utilisation of its natural resources, which is essentially the prolonged use of wildlife and natural resources for sustaining human economic wellbeing. The new strategy intends to expand on this. But it runs the risk of creating unrealistic expectations, as has occurred with the widely acknowledged failures in redistribution of land to emerging farmers.

Historically, the human economic benefit from wildlife excluded the majority of South Africans, especially those rural communities living alongside biodiverse hotspots, many of whom have no security of tenure due to inequitable land ownership policies.

One of the central pillars is that the process must be equitable. That the government strategy aims to address that problem is commendable. But therein lies the challenge. Promising biodiversity utilisation as a means for economic upliftment for millions of impoverished rural South Africans when biodiversity is under siege is, for the most part, unrealistic, and opens the door to rampant exploitation and corruption.

A report on The State of Provincial Reserves In South Africa presented to the Portfolio Committee for Forestry, Fisheries and Environment in February 2024 clearly indicated that numerous South African protected areas are unable to fulfil their conservation objectives due to poor provincial management and lack of funding, with many of these in a state of collapse.

Most reserves are unable to meet their conservation objectives, let alone deliver benefits to surrounding communities. Thus, for the NBES to work, government needs to first iron out these significant problems, failing which communities will simply appropriate the land.

There is frequent mention of the need for transformation in the NBES. However, it is questionable whether the strategy genuinely aims to transform the wildlife sector or has been turned into a ploy to garner the rural vote that the ANC so desperately needs. Sectors of the wildlife economy are largely untransformed, with, for example, only 101 (4%) of 2,786 registered professional hunters who may be categorised as previously disadvantaged individuals, according to an answer to a parliamentary question in 2022 by Minister Barbara Creecy.

Trophy hunting benefits questioned
Central to the success of the NBES is trophy hunting and game ranching for the meat industry. Currently, almost all trophy hunting and game ranching takes place on private land owned by wealthy landowners. Surrounding these farms, many communities live in abject poverty. A study has shown that in some cases, farm labourers who have traditionally lived on and worked the land, have been removed and are without access to meaningful employment.

Goal two of the NBES is “consumptive use of game from extensive wildlife systems at scale that drive transformation and expanded sustainable conservation compatible land-use” with the intention to “increase the GDP contribution for (sic) consumptive use of game from extensive wildlife systems from R4.6-billion (2020) to R27.6-billion by 2036”. There is, though, no clear explanation of how this will be achieved.

In 2022 (the latest year for which figures are available), around 6,000 international trophy hunters shot more than 36,500 wild animals (according to DFFE professional hunting statistics). By calculating the current annual increase in real terms, after removing inflation, this means a GDP increase from R5-billion (including a contribution of R1.8-billion from trophy hunting) in 2022 to more than R13-billion by 2036, which is an increase in real terms of 7.6% per annum.

Naturally, this will have to be underpinned by an increase in hunters and their prey, so by 2036, more than 16,500 international hunters will be required to shoot almost 100,000 animals annually. Therefore, a total of close to one million animals will have to be trophy hunted during this period, which includes more than 10,000 lions, 1,300 elephants, 3,000 white rhino and 30,000 buffalo. It does not appear plausible that these increased numbers of animals will suddenly materialise in “extensive wildlife systems”, nor that the international demand for these exists.

Image
(Source: National Biodiversity Economy Strategy)

The fixation with trophy hunting as a means to expand the economy also comes at a time when trophy hunting is in a state of decline and is no longer able to pay for its ecological footprint. Foreign hunters coming to South Africa have declined by 62.4% in 14 years, from 16,594 in 2008 to 6,242 in 2022.

The number of hunters in countries that provide trophy hunters to Africa has dropped significantly, with a decline in the US of 18.5% between 1991 and 2016, and in France a drop of 50% in 40 years. With a significant and sustained decline in trophy hunting, how then does the government intend to dramatically increase hunting in the next few years in the face of mounting international trophy import bans?

A confusing aspect of the NBES is its plan to “stimulate the domestic market in rhino horn and elephant ivory… For example, health clinics to administer traditional remedies using rhino horn for health tourists from the Far East or ivory carving done locally for sale and export for personal use”.

Most demand for rhino horn is now for use as status symbols rather than for use in traditional remedies (where all evidence discredits any health benefits) and ivory may not be exported, carved or otherwise.

The strategy makes mention of sellers benefiting “when international markets become favourable”. This indicates that the government is banking on a future international trade in rhino horn and ivory. That seems unlikely since trends at successive meetings of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) have shown trade bans being held firmly in place.

Creating expectations of trade is likely to open the door to an increase in poaching of both species, as well as the illicit trade in rhino horn and ivory.

Community leaders not convinced
At the Biodiversity and Investment Indaba, traditional leaders and community representatives took the opportunity to raise their concerns. Many said they had been made these promises before, but throughout successive ministers and departments, little has changed.

Jabu Nyami, a wildlife game farm operator from the Pilgrim’s Rest area in Mpumalanga, stated that community members, especially women, who are poorly represented in the wildlife economy, needed access to land, fencing, training, capacity, development, financial resources and markets.

“We ask the government to please stop talking,” she said to the assembled delegates. “We need funding because without funding we are not going anywhere.” Nyami also mentioned that her land, which she rents, is fenceless and is currently inundated with poachers. “We need security and wildlife monitors… because poaching is a problem,” she said.

A representative for People & Parks in the Western Cape criticised the strategy for being “Westernised and colonialised” where commercial interests would take precedence over smallholder businesses and individuals. He said there was no condition in the plan that would protect small-scale entrepreneurs from bigger commercial interests. “The commercial sector will get stronger, while smallholders will get weaker under these conditions,” he said.

Veteran conservationist Karen Trendler, who also attended the indaba, reiterated the general sentiment, saying that some communities were disillusioned and desperate, having heard promises before. “Whilst the NBES intentions are good — transformation, equity, poverty alleviation, recognition of indigenous knowledge — we need to be careful about creating unrealistic expectations. Genuine ongoing engagement with communities and traditional leaders is needed to ensure that what is offered is what is wanted and needed, and not presumed.”

Ultimately, the NBES has merit in expressing the need to expand the biodiversity footprint, and that impoverished communities must take a central role in the protection of and benefit from biodiversity is worthy of commendation. However, it is in the goals and the implementation where this strategy potentially fails.

The blind adherence to trophy hunting and game ranching as a means to achieve grand biodiversity objectives, and the promises of mass poverty alleviation, are unrealistic and dangerous. The NBES appears to be an over-ambitious plan, that unless amended, could fail the natural environment and those communities forced to rely on natural resources for their economic wellbeing. DM

This article is based on Dr Adam Cruise’s recent doctorate in philosophy at Stellenbosch University.


"Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world." Nelson Mandela
The desire for equality must never exceed the demands of knowledge
Post Reply

Return to “Other Conservation Issues”