namibia’s second national biodiversity strategy and action ... 2 namibia.pdf · further...
TRANSCRIPT
Namibia’s Second National Biodiversity
STRATEGY AND ACTION PLAN
2013 - 2022
REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIAMinistry of Environment and Tourism
© Ministry of Environment and Tourism, Government of the Republic of Namibia
All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy or transmission of this publication may be made without written permission. No paragraph of this publication may be reproduced, copied or transmitted save with written permission. Any person who does any unauthorized act in relation to this publication may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages.
Published 2014
Ministry of Environment and TourismDepartment of Environmental AffairsPrivate Bag 13346WindhoekNamibiaTel + 264 61 284 2701
“Biodiversity is not only about plants and animals, but it is something
fundamental to our survival and growth as a nation, that cuts across all sectors and
levels in this country”.
Honourable Uahekua Herunga,Minister of Environment and Tourism
Foreword By His Excellency Dr Hifikepunye PohambaPresident of the Republic of Namibia
For Namibia, the conservation of the natural envi-ronment and our ecosystems is a constitutional im-perative. In terms of Article 95(l) our national con-stitution implores the state to ensure sustainable management of biodiversity by taking measures to promote and maintain the welfare of the people including “the maintenance of ecosystems, essen-tial ecological processes and biological diversity of Namibia and utilization of living natural resources on a sustainable basis for the benefit of all Namib-ians, both present and future…”
Since Independence in 1990, Namibia has ratified several International Conventions, including the three United Nations Conventions, which emerged from the 1992 Rio Earth Summit on Biological Di-
versity; Combating Desertification; and Climate Change. These instruments have been instrumental in Na-mibia’s efforts to realign our policies and laws, incorporating international best practices in order to effectively deal with the challenges and constraints related to the proper management of the environment in our country.
The succesful compilation and launch of this National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (2013-2022) is further demonstration of our Government’s commitment to the sustainable management of unique biodiversity and ecosystems. It is a continuation of the good work done as part of the first National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, which was implemented from 2001 to 2010.
The healthy state of our biodiversity is a valuable comparative advantage for Namibia, with the potential to provide immeasurable economic benefits for our people and our country. At present, Namibia’s entire At-lantic coastline of 1500 kilometers is protected under our framework of proclaimed National Parks. Moreo-ver, Namibia is home to other environmental conservation initiatives, including four Ramsar Wetland Sites of international importance, a 12,000 square kilometer Marine Protected Area, and part of the world’s largest Trans-frontier Conservation Area (TFCA) – the Kavango Zambezi TFCA, which was proclaimed in 2012. Na-mibia also possesses the largest free-roaming population of black rhino as well as the largest population of cheetahs in the world. We are pleased that environmental conservation is now an established form of land use in Namibia. In addi-tion to our National Parks, 79 communal conservancies covering almost 19 per cent of the country’s total land surface area, have been registered. Forthermore, approximately 15 percent of freehold land is dedicated to wildlife management. Ongoing research indicates that the populations of different wildlife species in Namibia will continue to increase in the coming years.
Conscious of the critical importance of biodiversity to the socio-economic development of our country, the fo-cus of this Strategy goes beyond the conservation of protected areas and wildlife. Biodiversity and the benefits that can be derived from intact and healthy ecosystems such as clean air and water and productive soils, are the basis of all life. For this reason alone, the importance of biodiversity cannot be over-emphasised.
i ii
In Namibia, we have always considered the three objectives of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) as being mutually reinforcing. We recognize sustainable use of natural resources as the key factor linking con-servation to fair and equitable benefit-sharing. We will, therefore, continue to advance this approach through the implementation period of this Strategy so that biodiversity is placed at the centre of our development ef-forts to achieve sustainable economic growth and poverty alleviation in our country, especially in rural areas. Namibia’s recent ratification of the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit- Sharing signifies our desire to accelerate the fair and equitable distribution of benefits that can be derived from biodiversity, especially by our local communities.
This approach is in line with our drive to achieve our long-term national development strategy, Vision 2030. We are confident that the effective implementation of this National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (2013-2022) will contribute greatly towards the revitalisation of our biodiversity and the realisation of our Vision 2030.
Hifikepunye PohambaPRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA
i ii
Preface By Honourable Uahekua HerungaMinister of Environment and Tourism .
Our rangelands, marine and freshwater fisheries, forests, and protected areas are the basis of liveli-hood for most of the Namibian population. Maintain-ing and enhancing the health and viability of these assets is crucial for us to achieve our national devel-opment objectives of high and sustained economic growth, employment creation and increased income equality.
Our first National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan has given considerable impetus to sustain-able development in this country. Its implementation has led to the proclamation of four new state pro-tected areas, a first Marine Protected Area and the world’s largest Trans-frontier Conservation Area; an
increase in the number of conservancies from 15 to 79 and the proclamation of 32 community forests; and the continued recovery of wildlife and fishing stocks based on an innovative policy framework and system of quotas and permits. The beneficiation of our communities has been at the heart of this process.
It is the task of NBSAP2 to build on these achievements and tackle the threats and challenges we are facing. These have been well documented in the thorough review process undertaken on NBSAP1, and I am con-fident that NBSAP2 will lead to the continued and enhanced health of our ecosystems as well as improved living conditions among our rural populations. This is encapsulated in our vision for NBSAP2 for “Namibia’s biodiversity to be healthy and resilient to threats, with its conservation and sustainable use as key drivers of poverty alleviation and equitable economic growth, particularly in rural areas”.
The consultative process to develop NBSAP2 has been comprehensive and has guided the need to align NB-SAP2 closely with the CBD Strategic Plan and the associated Aichi Targets. Each of the five Strategic Goals of the CBD is of very high relevance to Namibia and we have refined the Aichi Targets based on our national priorities and threats into 17 targets which we consider to be specific, measurable and attainable. This ap-proach will also streamline our reporting the Convention and provide clear evidence of our national contribu-tion towards the achievement of the Aichi Targets.
NBSAP2 is thus our main vehicle to spearhead action on all matters of biodiversity from the management of all ecosystems and species, to biosystematics and biosafety, to access and benefit-sharing. With this in mind, implementation will be closely coordinated between all stakeholders and I look forward to us partnering together to achieve the important goal of NBSAP2.
Uahekua Herunga,Minister of Environment and Tourism, MP
iii iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThe Second National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan is an outcome of a cooperative effort. Many indi-viduals and organisations participated in various capacities. The 2nd NBSAP would not have been possible without numerous contributions from authors, reviewers, MET staff members, funding agencies and many who at one point or another contributed to the document. The compilation of this document brought together a wide range of stakeholders. The Ministry of Environment, as focal point to the Convention on Biological Diversity and coordinator of the document, is extremely grateful to all of them and would like to thank and acknowledge them here for their dedication and long hours.
NBSAP STEERING COMMITTEESpecial thanks are given to the members of the NBSAP2 Steering Committee for coordinating the review of NBSAP1, providing guidance and technical input into the development of the NBSAP2.
AUTHORSWe would like to thank all authors who contributed to this strategy: Samson Mulonga, John Mfune, Nico Wil-lemse, Michale Humavindu, Bryn Canniffe, and Jonas Nghishidi.
REVIEWERSThe Strategy and Action Plan benefited greatly from all of the feedback and comments provided by our re-viewers including NBSAP Steering Committee, Louisa Mupetami,Teofilus Nghitila, Petrus Muteyauli, Kauna Schroder, Nick de Voss, Eric Belvaux, Aina Kambala, Nadine Faschina, Konrad Uebelhoer, Emily Mutota, UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre NBSAP 2.0 Project
FUNDING BODIESThe Ministry of Environment and Tourism further thanks the Biodiversity Management and Climate Change Project (BMCC) implemented by the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH, commissioned by the German Federal Ministry of Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ), and the Global Environmental Facility through the United Nations Environment Programme for providing additional financial and technical support to the elaboration of this document.
LANGUAGE EDITOR: Nick De Voss
DESIGN AND LAYOUT: Consumer Graphics
iv
v vi
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Biodiversity and the natural environment are of critical importance to Namibia. Natural resource-based sec-tors including mining, fisheries, agriculture and tourism are the basis of the Namibian economy, and around 70 per cent of Namibia’s population is directly dependent on the natural resource base for income; food; medici-nal and health needs; fuel and shelter. This situation demands that biodiversity, and the ecosystem services it provides, are maintained and enhanced as far as possible for sustainable development. Namibia recognizes the essential role of National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) in this regard.
Namibia implemented its first NBSAP during the period 2001-2010. This was internationally recognised as being one of the best first generation NBSAPs, and it provided a strong foundation for the sustainable man-agement and use of biodiversity in the country. In 2012, Namibia set about the process to develop NBSAP2 to build upon this foundation and to directly tackle the threats and challenges it is facing in this area.
Namibia’s NBSAP2 will cover the period 2013-2022, and its vision is for “Namibia’s biodiversity to be healthy and resilient to threats, and for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity to be key drivers of pov-erty alleviation and equitable economic growth, particularly in rural areas.”
The Paper was developed in a highly participatory manner involving over 400 stakeholders from international experts to on-the-ground managers of natural resources. The consultative process included a detailed review of Namibia’s first NBSAP (2001-2010) which provided valuable lessons and guidance for the formulation of NBSAP2.
One of the key lessons learned was the need for NBSAP2 to be more focused, and this is reflected in a more concise structure. Based on national and regional prioritization exercises, the five strategic goals of the CBD Strategic Plan were considered highly relevant to Namibia, and these provide the overarching framework for NBSAP2. The 20 Aichi Targets were reduced to 17 national targets which are considered to be specific, measurable, attainable, relevant and are time-bound to Namibia. In this way, NBSAP2 is both closely aligned to the CBD Strategic Plan and Aichi Targets (2011-2020), and targeting Namibia’s unique priorities and circum-stances. The Strategic Goals and Targets of NBSAP2 are presented in the table below:
NBSAP2 Goals and Targets Lead GRN AgenciesStrategic Goal A: Address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss bymainstreaming biodiversity across government and society
1. By 2020, at least 75% of surveyed key target groups know the meaning of MET biodiversity and can identify important reasons for biodiversity conservation 2. By 2018, biodiversity values and prioritized ecosystem services are quantified, MET monitored and mainstreamed to support national and sectoral policy-making, planning, budgeting and decision-making frameworks3. By 2018, selected incentives for biodiversity conservation and sustainable use MET and MoF are in place and applied, and the most harmful subsidies are identified and their phase out is initiated
Strategic Goal B: Reduce direct pressures on biodiversity and promote thesustainable use of biological resources4. By 2022, the rate of loss and degradation of natural habitats outside protected MLR / MET areas serving as ecological corridors or containing key biodiversity areas or providing important ecosystem services is minimized through integrated land use planning
NBSAP2 Goals and Targets Lead GRN Agencies
5. By 2022, all living marine and aquatic resources are managed sustainably and MFMR guided by the ecosystem approach6. By 2022, principles of sound rangeland and sustainable forest management, and MAWF good environmental practices in agriculture are applied on at least 50 per cent of all relevant areas7. By 2022, pollution, including from excess nutrients, has been brought to levels MET/MAWF that are not detrimental to biodiversity and ecosystem health and functioning8. By 2015, national review of invasive alien species in Namibia from 2004 is MET updated (including identification of pathways), and by 2018, priority measures are in place to control and manage their impact9. By 2016, ecosystems most vulnerable to climate change and their anthropogenic MET/MAWF pressures are identified, and by 2018, appropriate adaptation measures are developed and implemented in priority areas
Strategic Goal C: Improve the status of biodiversity by safeguarding ecosystems, species and genetic diversity
10. By 2018, existing terrestrial protected areas (national parks) are conserved, MET / MFMR effectively and equitably managed, within an ecologically representative and well-connected system, and by 2020, coastal and marine areas, of particular importance to biodiversity and ecosystem services, are identified and measures for their protection initiated11. By 2016, threatened and vulnerable species lists are updated and measures MET implemented by 2019 to improve their conservation status 12. By 2020, genetic diversity of cultivated plants and farmed animals is maintained MAWF and enhanced
Strategic Goal D: Enhance the benefits to all from biodiversity and ecosystemservices
13. By 2022, ecosystems that provide essential services and contribute to health, MAWF / livelihoods and well-being are safeguarded, and restoration programmes have MME / been initiated for degraded ecosystems covering at least 15 per cent of the MET priority areas 14. By 2015, national legislation giving effect to the Nagoya Protocol is in force and MET by 2018 fully operational to ensure that benefits are fair and equitably shared from the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity
Strategic Goal E: Enhance implementation of NBSAP2 through participatoryplanning, knowledge management and capacity building
15. By 2020, traditional knowledge and the innovations and practices of indigenous MRLGHRD and local communities relevant to the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity are recognised, respected and promoted 16. By 2022, knowledge, science base and technologies relating to biodiversity and MET / ecosystem management are improved and made relevant to political MYNSSC / decision-makers MoE
vi
vii viii
NBSAP2 Goals and Targets Lead GRN Agencies
17. By 2022, mobilization of financial resources from all sources has been MET / increased compared to the period 2008-2012 to allow for the effective NPC/ implementation of this strategy and action plan MoF
Strategic initiatives were also formulated to guide actions that will ultimately lead Namibia on a path towards the achievement of its 17 targets. There are 38 such strategic initiatives, each with associated activities identified during the NBSAP2 consultative process. The activities also have designated lead agencies and indicators to allow for improved monitoring.
The implementation of NBSAP2 will be coordinated by the Multi-Lateral Environmental Agreements Divi-sion within the Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET) with the full participation and guidance of the cross-sectoral NBSAP2 steering committee. Independent mid-term and final evaluations of NBSAP2 will be undertaken to ensure that the status of biodiversity in Namibia is effectively tracked and so that Namibia’s contribution towards the achievement of the CBD Strategic Plan (2011-2020) and the Aichi Targets can be effectively measured.
ABS: Access and Benefit- Sharing
BCC: Benguela Current Commission
BCLME: Benguela Current Large Marine Ecosystem
BMCC: Biodiversity Management and Climate Change Project
BMU: German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature
Conservation and Nuclear Safety
BMZ: German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and
Development
CBD: Convention on Biological Diversity
CBNRM: Community-Based Natural Resource Management
CBO: Community-Based Organisation
CEPA: Communication, Education and Public Awareness
CI: Conservation International
CITES: Convention on Trade in Endangered Species
CoM: Chamber of Mines
CPP: Namibia’s Country Pilot Partnership Programme for
Integrated Sustainable Land Management
CRIAA: Centre for Research, Information, Action Africa
DART: Directorate of Agricultural Research and Training
DEA: Department of Environmental Affairs
DGIS: Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs
DRFN: Desert Research Foundation of Namibia
DWA: Department of Water Affairs
EAF: Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries
EAPAN: Environmental Assessment Professionals of Namibia
EBSA: Ecologically or Biologically Significant Area
EIA: Environmental Impact Assessment
EIF: Environmental Investment Fund of Namibia
EMP: Environmental Management Plan
GCNN: Global Compact Network Namibia
GDP: Gross Domestic Product
GEF: Global Environment Facility
GIS: Geographic Information Systems
GIZ: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale
Zusammenarbeit GmbH
GMOs: Genetically Modified Organisms
GTRC: Gobabeb Training and Research Centre
IBA: Important Bird Area
IBPC: Interim Bioprospecting Committee
Acronyms and Abbreviations
ICZM: Integrated Coastal Zone Management
IPA: Important Plant Area
IPTT: Indigenous Plant Task Team
IRDNC: Integrated Rural Development and Nature
Conservation
IRLUP: Integrated Regional Land-Use Plan
ISOER: Integrated State of the Environment Report
IUCN: International Union for the Conservation of Nature
IWRM: Integrated Water Resources Management
KAZA: Kavango Zambezi (TFCA)
KBA: Key Biodiversity Area
KfW: German Development Bank
KRA: Key Result Area
LAs: Local Authorities
MAWF: Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry
MCA: Millennium Challenge Account
MDGs: Millennium Development Goals
MET: Ministry of Environment and Tourism
MFMR: Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources
MHAI: Ministry of Home Affairs and Immigration
MLR: Ministry of Lands and Resettlement
MME: Ministry of Mines and Energy
MoE: Ministry of Education
MoF: Ministry of Finance
MOLSW: Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare
MPA: Marine Protected Area
MRLGHRD: Ministry of Regional and Local Government,
Housing and Rural Development
MTI: Ministry of Trade and Industry
MWT: Ministry of Works and Tranport
MYNSSC: Ministry of Youth, National Service, Sport and
Culture
NACOMA: Namibian Coast Management and Conservation
Project
NACSO: Namibian Association of CBNRM-Support
Organisations
NAFOLA: Sustainable Management of Namibia’s Forested
Lands
NAMETT: Namibia’s Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool
vii viii
NAMPLACE: Namibia Protected Areas Landscape Initiative
NAU: Namibia Agricultural Union
NBAC: National Biosafety Advisory Council
NBC: Namibian Broadcasting Corporation
NBRI: National Botanical Research Institute
NBSAP: National Biodviersity Strategy and Action Plan
NCCI: Namibian Chamber of Commerce and Industry
NCC-SAP: National Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan
NCEI: National Core Environmental Indicators
NCRST: National Commission on Research, Science and
Technology
NDF: Namibia Defence Force
NDP: National Development Plan
NEEN: Namibian Environmental Education Network
NERMU: Namib Ecological and Restoration Monitoring Unit
NGO: Non-Governmental Organisation
NIED: Namibia Institute for Education Development
NNF: Namibia Nature Foundation
NPC: National Planning Commisssion
NPGRC: National Plants Genetic Resources Centre
NSA: Namibia Stastics Agency
NSI: Namibia Standards Institution
OPM: Office of the Prime Minister
PASS: Strengthening the Capacity of the Protected Area
System to Address new Management Challenges (Project)
PLCAs: Protected Landscape Conservation Areas
PoN: Polytechnic of Namibia
PPF: Peace Parks Foundation
RC: Regional Council
REEEI: Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Institute
SADC: Southern African Development Community
SDAC: Sustainable Development Advisory Council
SDC: Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation
SEA: Strategic Environmental Assessment
SEMP: Strategic Environmental Management Plan
SGP: Small Grants Programme
SPAN: Strengthening the Protected Area Network Project
TAs: Traditional Authorities
TFCA: Trans-frontier Conservation Area
UNAM: University of Namibia
UNCCD: United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification
UNESCO: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organisation
UNFCCC: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change
WHC: World Heritage Convention
WWF: World Wide Fund for Nature
ix x
TABLE OF CONTENTS1. INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................................1
1.1 Background Information .............................................................................................................................1 1.2 Namibia’s Biological Diversity .............................................................................................................2 1.2.1 Diversity of Ecosystems .............................................................................................................3 1.2.2 Species Diversity .......................................................................................................................3 1.3 National and Global Biodiversity Perspective ...............................................................................4 1.4 Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use for Poverty Alleviation in Namibia .....................42. METHODOLOGY TO DEVELOP NBSAP 2 ...............................................................................................6 2.1 Institutional Framework .......................................................................................................................6 2.2 Promoting Participation and Consultation ...........................................................................................7 2.3 Aligning NBSAP 2 with the CBD Strategic Plan and Aichi Targets .....................................................93. OVERVIEW OF NBSAP2 ......................................................................................................................... 11 3.1 Structure ............................................................................................................................................ 11 3.2 Roles and Responsibilities ................................................................................................................ 11 3.3 Key Priorities of NBSAP2 .................................................................................................................. 11 3.3.1 Mainstreaming Biodiversity ...................................................................................................... 14 3.3.2 Improving Communication of Biodiversity-Related Issues ......................................................14 3.3.3 Addressing Critical Threats to Biodiversity ..............................................................................14 3.3.4 Contributing to National Development Objectives ...................................................................15 3.3.5 Strengthening the Policy-Making Framework for Biodiversity Management ...........................15 3.3.6 Generating Reliable Baseline Information ...............................................................................16 3.3.7 Capitalizing on Synergies with the Rio and other Biodiversity-Related Conventions ..............16 3.3.8 Enhancing Regional Cooperation ............................................................................................16 3.3.9 Mainstreaming Gender Considerations ................................................................................... 174. THE NATIONAL BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY ........................................................................................ 17 4.1 STRATEGIC GOAL 1: Address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss by mainstreaming biodiversity across government and society ...........................................................................................18 4.1.1 Target 1: By 2020, at least 75 per cent of surveyed key target groups know the meaning of biodiversity and can identify important reasons for biodiversity conservation .................................18 4.1.2 Target 2: By 2018, biodiversity values and prioritized ecosystem services are quantified, monitored and mainstreamed to support national and sectoral policy-making, planning, budgeting and decision-making frameworks ....................................................................................19 4.1.3 Target 3: By 2018, selected incentives for biodiversity conservation and sustainable use are in place and applied, and the most harmful subsidies are identified and their phase-out is initiated ..............................................................................................................................................20 4.2 STRATEGIC GOAL 2: Reduce the direct pressures on biodiversity and promote the sustainable use of biological resources ............................................................................................20 4.2.1 Target 4: By 2022, the rate of loss and degradation of natural habitats outside protected areas serving as ecological corridors or containing key biodiversity areas or providing important ecosystem services is minimized through integrated land use planning ..........................................21
x
4.2.2 Target 5: By 2022, all living marine and aquatic resources are managed sustainably and guided by the ecosystem approach ..................................................................................................21 4.2.3 Target 6: By 2022, Principles of sound rangeland and sustainable forest management, and good environmental practices in agriculture are applied on at least 50 per cent of all relevant areas ....................................................................................................................................22 4.2.4 Target 7: By 2022, pollution, including from excess nutrients, has been brought to levels that are not detrimental to biodiversity and ecosystem health and functioning .......................................23 4.2.5 Target 8: By 2015, National review of invasive alien species in Namibia from 2004 is updated (including identification of pathways), and by 2018, priority measures are in place to control and manage their impact .......................................................................................................24 4.2.6 Target 9: By 2016, ecosystems most vulnerable to climate change and their anthropogenic pressures are identified, and by 2018, appropriate adaptation measures are developed and implemented in priority areas ...................................................................................24 4.3 STRATEGIC GOAL 3: Improve the status of biodiversity by safeguarding ecosystems, species and genetic diversity ..................................................................................................................25 4.3.1 Target 10: By 2018, existing terrestrial protected areas (national parks) are conserved, effectively and equitably managed, within an ecologically representative and well-connected system, and by 2020, coastal and marine areas, of particular importance to biodiversity and ecosystem services, are identified and measures for their protection initiated ................................25 4.3.2 Target 11: By 2016, threatened and vulnerable species lists are updated and measures implemented by 2019 to improve their conservation status ..............................................................26 4.3.3 Target 12: By 2020, Genetic diversity of cultivated plants and farmed animals is maintained and enhanced .................................................................................................................26 4.4 STRATEGIC GOAL 4: Enhance the benefits to all from biodiversity and ecosystem services ........27 4.4.1 Target 13: By 2022, ecosystems that provide essential services and contribute to health, livelihoods and well-being are safeguarded, and restoration programmes have been initiated for degraded ecosystems covering at least 15 per cent of the priority areas ..................................28 4.4.2 Target 14: By 2015, national legislation giving effect to the Nagoya Protocol is in force and by 2018 fully operational to ensure that benefits are fair and equitably shared from the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity .............................................................................29 4.5 STRATEGIC GOAL 5: Enhance implementation of NBSAP2 through participatory planning, knowledge management and capacity building .......................................................................29 4.5.1 Target 15: By 2020, Traditional knowledge and the innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities relevant to the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity are recognized, respected and promoted ...............................................................................................29 4.5.2 Target 16: By 2022, knowledge, science base and technologies relating to biodiversity and ecosystem management are improved and made relevant to political decision-makers ...........30 4.5.3 Target 17: By 2022, mobilization of financial resources from all sources has been increased compared to the period 2008-2012 to allow for the effective implementation of this strategy and action plan ....................................................................................................................305. MONITORING AND EVALUATION FRAMEWORK ................................................................................326. THE NATIONAL BIODIVERSITY ACTION PLAN ...................................................................................337. FUNDING PLAN AND STRATEGY .........................................................................................................528. REFERENCES .........................................................................................................................................52Annex 1: LIST OF INTERVIEWED STAKEHOLDERS ...............................................................................54Annex 2: ALIGNMENT OF NBSAP2 WITH THE CBD STRATEGY (2011-2020) ANDAICHI TARGETS ...........................................................................................................................................55Annex 3: ALIGNMENT OF NBSAP2 WITH THE SADC REGIONAL BIODIVERSITY STRATEGYAND ACTION PLAN (B-SAP) ......................................................................................................................58
xi 1
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background InformationNamibia is one of the few countries in the world that includes a clause in its constitution targeting the sustain-able management of biodiversity. Article 95(L) of the 1990 Constitution requires the State to take measures to promote and maintain the welfare of the people including “the maintenance of ecosystems, essential ecologi-cal processes and biological diversity of Namibia and utilization of living natural resources on a sustainable basis for the benefit of all Namibians, both present and future…”
The three objectives of the CBD, for which this document is the key national level implementing instrument, correspond closely with Article 95 (L), as they seek to promote: 1. The conservation of biological diversity; 2. The sustainable use of its components; and 3. The equitable sharing of benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources.
Recognizing the importance of these objectives to its national circumstances, Namibia signed the CBD in 1992 and ratified it in1997. Namibia developed a first NBSAP in 2001, which covered the period 2001-2010. This sought to implement the three objectives of the CBD in an integrated manner and was internationally recognized as one of the best first-generation NBSAPs.
In 2012, Namibia embarked on a process to review implementation of NBSAP1 and to develop a second generation NBSAP that is aligned with the latest national and global trends (in particular, the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 including the Aichi Targets; decision x/2) and good practices, and that can address critical challenges and capitalize on existing areas of comparative advantage in the areas of natural resource management and environmental protection.
1.2 Namibia’s Biological DiversityNamibia’s biodiversity is shaped by a diverse range of factors including climate, topography, geology and human influences. As the most arid country south of the Sahara, lack of rainfall and the high variability of rainfall are perhaps the leading influences on biodiversity. Namibia is characterized by a steep south-west to north-east rainfall gradient. Annual rainfall can be as low as 10mm in the south-west and west, while it aver-ages around 600mm in the north-eastern areas (Mendelsohn et al 2003). A reverse gradient exists in terms of seasonal and daily temperature variations, which are low in the north and north-east and high in the west and south-west.
xi 1
As a result, the greatest overall terrestrial species diversity is found in the more tropical areas of north-eastern Namibia, while areas of high endemism are mainly concentrated in the arid and semi-arid west, central and southern parts of the country.
1.2.1 Diversity of EcosystemsNamibia is classified into four terrestrial biomes (Desert; Nama and Succulent Karoo; Acacia Savanna; and Broad-leafed Savanna), and two aquatic biomes (Coastal Marine; and Wetlands). Each biome is affected to different extents by land uses such as rangeland farming, agriculture, wildlife production, tourism and recrea-tion, mining and urban development. Namibia’s variable environmental conditions have also shaped a large diversity of vegetation zones, which have been divided into 29 units. In general, palaeotropical floral elements are found in the north, cold-temperate elements in the south, and transitional elements between the two. The vegetation zones and biomes are shown in detail in Figure 1 below.
Figure 1: The division of Namibia into vegetation zones (l) and biomes (r) (Source: Mendelsohn et al 2003).
(i) Desert Biome• Low rainfall (less than 100mm annually), and lack of surface water• Sparse vegetation dominated by annual grasses and dwarf shrubs• Large habitat diversity including mountains, gravel plains, sandy seas and succulent steppe winter rainfall regions• Coastal fog plays a vital role in supporting many plants and animals• Ephemeral rivers cut across the biome providing linear oases where large trees and water sources support many of the larger mammals and animals • Systems within this biome are extremely sensitive and fragile and prone to long-term degradation with long recovery periods
(ii) Karoo Biome• Annual rainfall is 100-200mm• Vegetation dominated by dwarf shrubs or “Karoo bushes” and annual grass species• Harsh climate with large seasonal and daily temperature variations• The fauna in this biome is species poor but supported vast herds of springbok in the past, which were subsequently reduced by hunting and fencing• Sensitive to over-grazing and degradation which can lead to desertification
Terrestrial Biomes in Namibia
2 3
(iv) Broad-leafed Savanna• Annual rainfall of 450-700mm• High species diversity, especially at the inter face with the wetland biome• Deciduous tree species are characteristic including Zambezi teak, mopane and wild seringa• High numbers of large mammals are present including 70% of Namibia’s elephant population and the majority of the buffalo and hippopotamus populations• Important to transboundary cooperation as ecosystems are shared and species move across national boundaries• Forest fires are a common occurrence in this biome
(iii) Acacia Savanna• Annual rainfall of 250-400mm• Dominated and characterized by a wide variety of grass species and acacia species such as camelthorn and blackthorn• Supports a high concentration of various species which are endemic to the region, and supports large plains game including herd animals and predators• Contains the headwaters and catchments of most ephemeral rivers in Namibia• Vulnerable to inappropriate management and over-use resulting in desertification and bush encroachment
(v) Wetlands• Multiple habitats including perennial rivers, ephemeral rivers, floodplains, pans, sinkholes, estuaries, swamps, marshes, springs and dams• Typically highly productive systems which provide important sources of freshwater and vegetation• Interact with all other biomes• Important to the hydrology of areas through services such as the recharging of aquifers• Provide important sites for breeding and refuge• Vulnerable to over-abstraction of water, alien species and pollution
Aquatic Biomes in Namibia
(vi) Coastal/Marine• Characterized by the cold Benguela current which produces a nutrient-rich upwelling system• Highly productive system which supports some of the highest concentrations of marine life in the world• Multiple habitats including the littoral, shelf and abyssal zones, islands, lagoons and estuaries
Table 1: Brief description of Namibia’s biomes.
1.2.2 Species DiversityAs an arid country, Namibia has a relatively low number of species compared to countries with wetter climates. However, it possesses a high level of endemism, with approximately 20% of described species classified as endemic. Endemism is particularly high in plants, invertebrates, reptiles and frogs in Namibia while it is rela-tively low for mammals, birds and fish (see Table 2 below).
Taxonomic Group Number of described species in Namibia % of species endemic to Namibia Reptiles 254 28% Insects 6,421 24% Plants 4,334 17% Amphibians 50 12% Arachnids 618 11% Fish 114 8% Mammals 229 7% Birds 676 2%
Table 2: Number of described species in Namibia and levels of endemism (Compiled based on information from Simmons and Brown (in press), NNF (undated), and www.biodiversity.org.na ).
3
1.3 National and Global Biodiversity PerspectiveNamibia is one of the few dryland countries in the world with internationally recognized biodiversity hotspots. The most significant of these is the Tsau //Khaeb (Sperrgebiet) National Park, situated in the Succulent Karoo floral kingdom in Southern Namibia. The second hotspot is the rugged Namib Escarpment, which is part of Africa’s great western escarpment, and an area of particularly high endemism.
Vegetation types 56 different vegetation types Plants About 1,050 species representing 25% of the entire flora of Namibia on just 3% of the country’s land surface Frogs 16 species Reptiles 100 species Birds 35 coastal and marine species, 60 wetland species 120 terrestrial species Mammals 80 terrestrial species 38 marine species including an estimated 600,000 cape fur seals or 50% of the world’s population Insects and other Great number of insects and other invertebrates, of which probably 90% are not invertebrates described by science A Marine Protected Area covering 13 offshore islands and islets
Table 3: Biodiversity of selected taxonomic groups found in the Tsau //Khaeb National Park (MET 2010).
Some sites of national and global significance in Namibia include its: • Twenty Protected Areas, which cover hugely varied ecosystems and some 17% of the country’s land
mass including the entire 1500km coastline • Two Transfrontier Conservation Areas (TFCAs) – Ai-/Ais / Richtersveld TFCA, and the Kavango Zam-
bezi TFCA (the world’s largest TFCA) • Four Ramsar Wetland Sites of International Importance – Etosha Pan, Walvis Bay Lagoon, Sandwich
Harbour and the Orange River Mouth. All of these sites are located within protected areas. • Nineteen Important Bird Areas (IBAs), 12 of which are located in the coastal zone or on off-shore is-
lands • Forty Important Plant Areas (IPAs), spread across the country.
1.4 Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use for Poverty Alleviationin NamibiaBiodiversity and the natural environment are of critical importance to Namibia. Natural resource-based sec-tors including mining, fisheries, agriculture and tourism are the basis of the Namibian economy, and around 70% of Namibia’s population is directly dependent on the natural resource base for income; food; medicinal and health needs; fuel and shelter. This situation demands that biodiversity, and the ecosystem services it provides, are maintained and enhanced as far as possible for sustainable development.
The tourism industry, of which National Parks are considered the bedrock, is recognized as the fastest grow-ing sector of the Namibian economy. Travel and tourism was estimated to have accounted for 20.5% of GDP in 2011 (directly and indirectly) (WTTC 2012), and it is a key industry in Namibia linking economic development with poverty alleviation and biodiversity conservation with national parks promoted as engines of growth in the rural areas. This is facilitated by engaging local communities in the management of parks and the sustainable use of natural resources through the granting of tourism and hunting concessions to local communities, usu-ally in partnership with private sector investors.
Conservation has emerged as an increasingly viable land use in Namibia, particularly since rights to the con-ditional use of wildlife were devolved to local communities through conservancies in 1996. It was estimated in
4 5
2012 that conservancies employed around 900 people permanently and 3,500 on a temporary basis, with over N$50 million being generated by conservancies in 2011 (MET 2012b), mainly through trophy hunting, accom-modation establishments, and the harvesting and sale of natural resource products and crafts.
The CBNRM Programme is the only example in Namibia in which the linkages between biodiversity and pov-erty alleviation are systematically measured by collecting periodic data on returns and employment through tourism establishments and activities, trophy hunting, wildlife meat harvesting, medicinal plant collection, and non-timber forest products (NTFPs) amongst others. Although CBNRM covers only some 18 per cent of Na-mibia’s landmass, it gives a clear indication of the role biodiversity can play in poverty alleviation in the rural areas.
The CBNRM Programme has also highlighted the linkages between biodiversity management and gender. Women have been included in biodiversity governance structures and as the main day-to-day managers of biodiversity, women are most affected by biodiversity loss and degradation. For this reason they are a key target group of NBSAP2.
Overall, 42% of Namibia’s landmass was under some form of conservation management in 2012 including through private game parks and nature reserves, tourism concessions, conservancies and community for-ests. One of the main objectives for NBSAP2 is to ensure that the different conservation land uses are drivers of poverty alleviation and contribute to ecosystem resilience in rural areas.
Figure 2: Map showing the 42% of Namibia under conservation management.
5
2. METHODOLOGY TO DEVELOP NBSAP 2
2.1 Institutional FrameworkAs focal point to the CBD, the Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET), through the Department of Envi-ronmental Affairs (DEA), coordinated the elaboration of NBSAP2 during the period March 2012 to December 2013.
A National NBSAP2 Steering Committee was established and convened for the first time in May 2012. The first meeting of the NBSAP2 Steering Committee deliberated on the review process for NBSAP1 and on the best way to elaborate Namibia’s 2nd NBSAP. The Committee was originally established to oversee the formu-lation of NBSAP2 but its mandate has since been extended so that it also coordinates the implementation of NBSAP2, including its monitoring and evaluation.
Namibia’s NBSAP Steering CommitteeTerms of ReferenceCoordinate the review of NBSAP1, provide guidance and technical input into NBSAP2 and oversee the implementation, and monitoring and evaluation of NBSAP2
MembershipGovernment Ministries Ministry of Environment and Tourism (Chair and Secretariat); Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry; Ministry of Education; Ministry of Finance; Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources; Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Ministry of Gender Equality and Child Welfare; Ministry of Mines and Energy; Ministry of Regional and Local Government, Housing and Rural Development; Ministry of Youth, National Service, Sport and Culture; National Planning Commission
Academic Community Polytechnic of Namibia; University of Namibia
Indigenous and Local CommunitiesChief of the Aodaman Traditional Authority
Non-Governmental OrganizationsDesert Research Foundation of Namibia
Private SectorChamber of Mines
Implementing AgenciesUnited Nations Development Programme (UNDP); Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ)
Figure 3: Functions and Membership Structure of the NBSAP Steering Committee.
6
2.2 Promoting Participation and ConsultationIn line with the guidance of the CBD Conference of Parties decisions IX/8 and X/2, widespread participation has been promoted in the process to develop NBSAP21. Government ministries; local and regional govern-ment authorities; the scientific community; non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and community-based organisations (CBOs); indigenous and local communities; donor agencies; and the private sector were all closely involved in the NBSAP2 development process. In total, about 400 stakeholders were engaged in the national and regional level consultative process. Individual interviews were also undertaken with key relevant stakeholders2.
The roadmap towards developing NBSAP2, highlighting the major milestone events, is presented in the dia-gram below:
Figure 4: Roadmap followed to develop Namibia’s NBSAP2.
Two national level workshops were held in March and July 2012 to review implementation of NBSAP1 and to provide preliminary inputs to the content and formulation of NBSAP2. The workshops also introduced the Strategic Plan of the CBD (2011-2020) and the Aichi Targets to the participants who were asked to assess and prioritize these targets in terms of their relevance to Namibia’s national circumstances and to identify prelimi-nary activities per each target as considered appropriate.
Some Lessons Learned from NBSAP1Namibia’s first NBSAP1 was internationally recognised as being one of the best first generation NBSAPs. It covered 10 Strategic Themes which in turn encompassed 55 strategic aims and 242 activity-based targets. The review of NBSAP1 indicated that some 80 per cent of these targets were at least partially achieved. NBSAP2 sets about building on areas that were under-achieved but still considered priorities as well as identifying new priority areas for action. Some further key lessons to guide the formulation of NBSAP2 are highlighted below:
1CoP Decision IX/8 calls on Parties to “engage indigenous and local communities and all relevant sectors and stakehold-ers” in biodiversity planning and implementation. CoP Decision X/2 calls on Parties to “Enable participation at all levels to foster the full and effective contributions of women, indigenous and local communities, civic-society organizations, the private sector and stakeholders from all other sectors in the full implementation of the objectives of the Convention and the Strategic Plan”.2See list of interviewees in Annex 1.
6 7
• Mobilisation of Resources: The NBSAP was an important instrument for channelling resources into priority biodiversity areas with a number of donor-funded projects particularly targeting specific priority NBSAP areas such as coastal conservation, the CBNRM Programme and the management of protected areas.
• Coordinating framework for NBSAP1: The coordination framework for the implementation and monitoring and evaluation of NBSAP1, while initially strong and effective, fell away after the end of the donor-funded National Biodiversity Programme in 2005.
• Scope of NBSAP1: NBSAP1 was well-designed and very ambitious in scope, with equal considera-tion given to each of the 3 objectives of the Convention. However, it was arguably over-ambitious and NBSAP2 needs to be more focused and outcome-oriented.
• Capacity for effective implementation of NBSAP1: This was insufficient and is yet to be ad-equately addressed in a number of areas including biosystematics, biotechnology and environmental monitoring.
• Low awareness levels of NBSAP1: Awareness of NBSAP1 was low, including among key imple-menting partners; regional and local stakeholders; and the general public. NBSAP1 was not ac-companied by a Communication, Education and Public Awareness (CEPA) Strategy, which was an impediment to effective implementation.
• Working Groups: The voluntary working groups tasked to formulate and implement specific aspects of NBSAP1 had mixed success. Some such as the Namibia Biotechnology Alliance, the Wetlands Working Group and the Alien Invasive Species Working Group delivered substantive outputs, how-ever almost all failed to last for the duration of NBSAP1. The strong focus on individuals, high rates of staff turnover and their voluntary nature tended to reduce their long term effectiveness.
• Coordination and management of cross-cutting issues: The coordination of areas such as wet-lands, mountain ecosystems and biosystematics was a key challenge in NBSAP1 and needs to be targeted and improved through NBSAP2
. Figure 5: Summary of key lessons from the review of NBSAP1.
A regional consultation process was undertaken to raise awareness of NBSAPs in general at local level, to establish the status quo of existing biodiversity initiatives in the regions and to determine regional priorities and possible interventions in the development and implementation of the NBSAP2. The relevance of the Aichi targets to local circumstances was also assessed in each region. The regional consultative process, which comprised of 5 two-day workshops held to cover regional clusters, was undertaken during October and No-vember 2012.
Some Specific Priorities Identified from the Regions
Zambezi • Rigorous enforcement of inland fisheries legislationErongo • Limit the impact of mining and development on biodiversity-sensitive areasHardap • Preservation of biodiversity sensitive areas!Karas • Creation of livestock breeders associations to prevent genetic erosionKavango East • Strengthen the support of extension services to farmersand West Khomas • Strengthen capacity to control and handle genetically modified organisms • Establishment of green economy enterprises • Encourage harvesting of invasive species by exploring potential economic use • Ensure adherence to Environmental Impact Assessments and Management PlansKunene • Document local indigenous knowledge on conservation and sustainable use of natural resources • Strengthening of wildlife law enforcement capacity • Introduce rangeland management practices in conservancies
8
8 9
Ohangwena • Expansion of conservation agriculture • Integration of biodiversity issues into school curriculumOmaheke • Introduction of fire breaks and afforestation programme • Conduct research into the traditional uses of biodiversity for medicines • Expansion of nurseries and wildlife sanctuaries • Extend the use of organic fertilisers and pesticidesOmusati • Gazette more areas as conservancies and community forestsOshana • Promote renewable energy technologies • Implementation of the climate change adaptation toolkitsOshikoto • Monitor and assess carbon emissions • Reintroduction of species to their historical habitats • Identification of threatened speciesOtjozondjupa • Identify suitable areas for proclamation as conservancies, community forests and national parks • Promote use of environmentally friendly herbicides and pesticides
Table 4: Some identified NBSAP2 priority activities per region.
A final National Consultative Workshop was held from the 26-27th February 2013 to present the findings from the regional consultative process, and to secure final inputs from the participants into the content of NBSAP2. High level technical stakeholders, parliamentarians and traditional authorities were among the key groups targeted by this workshop. The workshop was quickly followed by a high level segment in which the draft NB-SAP2 was presented to the Permanent Secretaries of relevant ministries and the Chief Executive Officers of relevant parastatals and private sector institutions for their awareness and preliminary approval.
Lastly, a comprehensive internal and external peer review was undertaken on the document. The external peer review was conducted during a regional workshop organized by the NBSAP 2.0 Mainstreaming Biodiver-sity and Development Project from 8-12 July in Uganda.
2.3 Aligning NBSAP2 with the CBD Strategic Plan and Aichi TargetsBased on the results of the outcomes of the national and regional prioritization exercises, it was decided to closely align NBSAP2 with the CBD Strategic Plan and Aichi Targets (2011-2020). The national and regional workshops each revealed that the five strategic goals are of high importance to Namibia, while the twenty Aichi Targets were also considered relevant for Namibia, though some were refined to better suit Namibia’s circumstances. These alterations are presented in Annex 2.
Figure 6: Outcome of prioritization exercises undertaken on the 20 Aichi Targets in each of Namibia’s 13 regions
From the figure 6 it is clear that Strategic Goals A on mainstreaming (targets 1-4); D on benefits (targets 14-16); and E on participatory planning, knowledge management and capacity building were considered most important. Over 50 per cent of Namibia’s 13 regions prior to new demarcations considered all of the 20 Aichi Targets as being highly relevant to their region, with the exception of targets 5, 6 and 103. This is explained by the fact that these targets make specific reference to forests, fisheries and marine ecosystems, which do not feature in most of Namibia’s regions.
3This issue of coral reefs was considered of releatively low importance to Namibia, however climate change is recognized as a key threat to biodiversity needing to be addressed.
10
3. OVERVIEW OF NBSAP2
3.1 StructureThe vision of NBSAP2 is for “Namibia’s biodiversity to be healthy and resilient to threats, and the con-servation and sustainable use are key drivers of poverty alleviation and equitable economic growth, particularly in rural areas”.
NBSAP2 has five key strategic objectives, each of which has a number of targets to be achieved by the end of the timeframe of the NBSAP2. There are a total of 17 targets, closely aligned to the Aichi Targets, and each with one or more key performance indicators.
In line with the CBD Strategic Plan (2011-2020), the strategic goals of NBSAP2 are to: 1. Address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss by mainstreaming biodiversity across government
and society 2. Reduce the direct pressures on biodiversity and promote the sustainable use of biological resources 3. Improve the status of biodiversity by safeguarding ecosystems, species and genetic diversity 4. Enhance the benefits to all from biodiversity and ecosystem services 5. Enhance implementation of NBSAP2 through participatory planning, knowledge management and
capacity building
Strategic initiatives are intended to guide actions that will ultimately lead Namibia on a path towards the achievement of these targets. There are 38 such strategic initiatives, each with associated activities identified during the NBSAP2 consultative process. These activities are described as indicative to allow for flexibility, and are not intended to be prescriptive. Other sectoral activities and initiatives contributing to the strategic initiatives and targets are also likely to be developed over the course of the lifespan of NBSAP2.
3.2 Roles and ResponsibilitiesAs the main custodians of Namibia’s land and marine resources, the four main natural resources manage-ment-related ministries – MET; Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry; Ministry of Lands and Resettle-ment; Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources – will be the lead implementers of NBSAP2.
10 11
The other main implementing Ministries include: • Ministry of Youth, National Service, Sport and Culture (MYNSSC) for biosystematics; environmental
education functions; for identifying and managing heritage sites; and for mobilising the youth into bio-diversity conservation.
• Ministry of Mines and Energy in the areas of mining regulation and sustainable energy. • Ministry of Regional and Local Government, Housing and Rural Development for coordinating rural
development. • Ministry of Education for integration of biodiversity issues within curricula and for biodiversity-related
research and science.
Namibia has been one of the most successful countries in Africa in attracting funding for biodiversity-related projects through the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and also benefits from excellent bilateral coopera-tion in the area of biodiversity management with a number of countries. These projects typically play an important role in providing catalytic funding for innovative interventions relating to biodiversity and will di-rectly contribute to the implementation of NBSAP2. A list of the most significant projects and their areas of intervention is below:Project Title Project Objective Action Plan AreaBCLME4 (2008-2015) Strengthen sustainable utilization of marine resources at 2.2; 5.2(GEF) transboundary level. KAZA Project (20085) To sustainably manage the Kavango Zambezi ecosystem, 3.1; 3.2; 4.1; 5.2 its heritage and cultural resources based on best conservation and tourism models for the socio-economic wellbeing of the communities and other stakeholdersAgriculture and Support to Protected Areas, Conservancies and Indigenous 2.3; 3.1; 4.1; Tourism Projects Plants Industry 4.2; 5.2of MCA (2009-2014)SAREP (2010-2015) Promote a transboundary approach to resource management 4.1 and climate resilience to preserve the Okavango basin and provide sustainable and equitable development opportunities for its inhabitantsTNC (2012-2015) To enhance Namibia’s capacity to better deal with climate 2.3; 2.4; 2.6; 3.3(GEF) change risks and create opportunities at individual, institutional and systemic levels.NBSAP2 Resource To improve resource mobilisation for biodiversity conservation 1.2; 5.2; 5.3Mobilisation Project sustainably on the basis of an economic valuation of(2013-2017) (BMU) ecosystem services and their mainstreaming into national governance processesNACOMA Phase II Strengthen conservation, sustainable use and 2.1; 2.2; 2.3; (2013-2018) (GEF) mainstreaming of biodiversity in coastal and marine 2.4; 2.6; 3.1; 5.2 ecosystems in Namibia Namibia National Enhance park management and infrastructure development 3.1Parks Programme in Namibia’s North-Eastern Parks in the KAZA TFCA andPhase III (2013-2016) the Tsau //Khaeb (Sperrgebiet) National Park(KfW) BMCC Project 1. MET increasingly fills new key functions and structures 1.2; 2.1; 2.6; (2013-2020 – in line with policies and legislation (especially EMA) 4.1; 5.2MET/GIZ) Capacity development for community-based natural 2. resource management in a changing climate in selected pilot regions 3. Cross-sectoral mainstreaming of biodiversity, adaptation to climate change and a green economy
12 13
PASS Project Strengthen the Protected Area system of Namibia and 3.1; 3.2; 5.2(2014-2019) (GEF) ensure sustainable finance through improving current systems for revenue generation, introduction of innovative revenue generation mechanisms; and cost effective enforcement through application of the Enforcement Economics ModelNAFOLA (2014-2019) To maintain current dry forests and the ecosystem goods 2.3; 5.2(GEF) and services they provide, in over 500,000 ha of forest lands, through wide-scale adoption of SLM, SFM and other improved technologiesConservation and To increase the capacities of the Benguela Current 2.2; 5.2Sustainable Use Commission and its member states for enhancedof the BCLME sustainable management of the BCLME’s marine(2014-2019) (BMU) biodiversity and natural resources, making use of EBSAs and Marine Spatial Planning toolsIntegrated National Support MET in the planning, development and 3.1Park Management management of an integrated coastal park from theProgramme (2014-) Orange River to the Kunene River(KfW)
Table 5: The crucial role of Namibia’s supporting projects.
Other important supporting agencies for mainstreaming and implementation of biodiversity-related initiatives include the tertiary institutions as the generators and purveyors of scientific knowledge; CSOs and donor agencies as on-the-ground implementers and often pilot practitioners of good practices; the Ministry of Infor-mation, Communication and Technology and the media for dissemination of information; and cross-sectoral bodies such as the NBSAP2 steering committee, the Indigenous Plants Taskforce Team, the Namibia Envi-ronmental Education Network (NEEN) and the Sustainable Development Advisory Council which can convey the importance of biodiversity to different sectors and facilitate improved coordination of activities.
The Role of CSOsA number of CSOs are highly active on-the-ground in Namibia, working closely with communities on a wide variety of environmental issues. CSOs thus have a very important role to play in the implementation of NBSAP2 in areas such as awareness raising; capacity building for good practices; support to participa-tory governance and decision-making; research and development; and value addition to natural resources. Among the most prominent CSOs for biodiversity management are the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), Desert Research Foundation of Namibia (DRFN), Namibia Nature Foundation (NNF), Integrated Rural De-velopment and Nature Conservation (IRDNC), Centre for Research, Information, Action Africa (CRIAA), and the umbrella body - Namibian Association of CBNRM Support Organizations (NACSO).
A key target group of NBSAP2 is those institutions and stakeholders which are not typically directly respon-sible for biodiversity management but which have important planning functions or undertake activities which impact heavily on the environment. In Namibia, of particular importance in this regard, are the:
Office of the Prime Minister (OPM): for integrating biodiversity into the strategic plans of all relevant line ministries.
Ministry of Finance (MoF): for allocating appropriate funds for biodiversity-related activities and for integrat-ing these activities in longer term financial planning and budgeting frameworks.
4All acronyms in this table are described in full on page IV5 KAZA is being supported by a range of partners including the BMZ through KfW; SDC; USAID; PPF; CI; WWF; and DGIS
13
National Planning Commission (NPC): for the integration of biodiversity-related activities into national plan-ning frameworks (also Namibia’s main instruments for poverty reduction) and donor-funded programmes.
Parliamentarians: for mobilizing political will and support towards implementation of NBSAP2. Parliamen-tarians can play a particularly strong role towards biodiversity management through supportive law-making, budgetary allocations, oversight, promoting international cooperation and awareness raising.
Traditional Authorities: for the promotion of biodiversity conservation on communal lands and for regulating access to traditional knowledge.
Regional Councils and Local Authorities: Regional councils for planning in Namibia’s political regions, and Local Authorities for environmentally-friendly approaches to critical urban functions impacting on biodiversity such as waste management, transport, housing, water and sanitation provision.
Private Sector: The private sector has an essential role to play, both in investing in biodiversity-related op-portunities and in promoting sustainable consumption and production. The Namibia Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Chamber of Mines and commercial banks are obvious targets as are companies promoting value addition to natural resources and Namibia’s various tourism associations. Namibia’s large number of private game reserves, as well as the investment by many private companies in low-impact, high quality eco-tourism, also represent key elements of biodiversity conservation and sustainable use in Namibia. It is estimated that almost four per cent of Namibia’s landmass is used as private game parks and nature reserves (MET 2013).
3.3 Key Priorities of NBSAP2NBSAP2 has been formulated to capitalize on its comparative advantage in terms of biodiversity status and potential and to channel efforts and resources into tackling the threats to biodiversity it is facing. The following key priorities for NBSAP2 are:
3.3.1 Mainstreaming Biodiversity The need to mainstream biodiversity at all levels of government and society is recognized as a cornerstone of NBSAP2 (see mainstreaming strategy in section 1 of Action Plan).
3.3.2 Improving Communication of Biodiversity-Related Issues Low levels of awareness of biodiversity were identified as a critical challenge during the NBSAP2 consultative process. A CEPA Strategy was thus developed to promote behavioural change and for mainstreaming the im-portance of biodiversity among the Namibian population, (see the summarised CEPA strategy under section 1.1 of Action Plan, full version is available on www.met.gov.na)
3.3.3 Addressing Critical Threats to Biodiversity NBSAP2 is geared towards tackling the critical threats to biodiversity that Namibia is facing. These threats can undermine the economic and social development of the country. It is a strategic priority of NBSAP2 to address these threats in a holistic manner through a range of measures and mechanisms. The most critical threats to biodiversity in Namibia are highlighted in Table 8 below6.
6 These threats are not listed in order of severity.
14
Unsustainable Water Uses Mainly through large scale irrigation (particularly in North-Eastern Regions), pollution (in and adjacent to urban areas), damming and over- abstraction of groundwaterExpansion of urban areas Leading to increasing demand for resources and services, and increasingand increasing types and volumes of waste and pollutionindustrialization Threats and impacts of Mainly through increased variability drought and flood events; shifts in Climate Change vegetation types and species distribution; and effects on vulnerable ecosystems such as the Benguela Current Large Marine EcosystemRapid expansion of Mining Expansion of mining and prospecting especially in ecologically sensitiveand Prospecting areas (including off-shore) and through habitat loss and destruction; infrastructural development; increased demand for water and electricity; and the long term impacts of contaminated wasteUnsustainable Land Leading to soil erosion, land degradation, deforestation and bushManagement Practices encroachmentUncontrolled bush fires In 2011, uncontrolled fires destroyed and damaged around 370,000 hectares of vegetation. Bush fires are also a major threat to national parks such as Etosha, Namib Naukluft and those in the north-east.Alien Invasive Species Lead to species loss and ecosystem simplification and breakdown Illegal harvesting and Leads to loss of biological diversity and loss of income arising fromtrade of wildlife and forest inequitable benefit sharing from wildlife, forest and plant resourcesand plant resources Human Wildlife Conflict Increases damages to community livelihoods in terms of crop destruction, water point damage and livestock mortalities and even threats to human life
Table 6: Critical threats to biodiversity in Namibia.
3.3.4 Contributing to National Development ObjectivesThe conservation of biodiversity is prominently addressed in Namibia’s long-term development strategy - Vi-sion 2030 - with a dedicated Chapter on the Sustainable Utilisation of Natural Resources and Environmental Sustainability.
A focused 4th National Development Plan (NDP4) is under implementation from 2012-2017. NDP4 has three main objectives, which include high and sustained economic growth; employment creation; and increased income equality. Biodiversity, through the nature-based tourism sector is already an important provider of em-ployment, while the potential for it to contribute further to employment creation and reduced income inequality through biodiversity-based enterprises is still largely untapped.
NDP4 further focuses on the following sectors for economic growth: agriculture, tourism and manufacturing. Biodiversity management has an important contribution to make towards these objectives and economic prior-ity areas. Strategic initiatives in NDP4 to promote conservation agriculture and implement a debushing pro-gramme are good examples of national commitment to sustainable agriculture and the restoration of degraded lands, while the maintenance and development of national parks and increased investment in communal areas are outlined as key strategies under the tourism development sector. Value addition, improved market access, the establishment of testing centres and beneficiation for local people are considered cornerstones to increase the contribution of manufacturing to the economy. Each of these areas is highly relevant also for the development of biotrade in Namibia.
3.3.5 Strengthening the Policy-Making Framework for Biodiversity ManagementNamibia has an excellent policy and legislative framework for biodiversity conservation and broader environ-mental management, however implementation and enforcement of this framework is a challenge. NBSAP2
14 15
will target the enhanced implementation of this framework, with particular emphasis on the: • Environmental Management Act of 2007 for the improved regulation of activities having a harmful im-
pact on the environment through EIAs and SEAs. • Access and Benefit Sharing Bill of 2012 which is expected to be gazetted in 2014. • Protected Areas and Wildlife Management Bill which will provide a legal framework for the mainte-
nance of ecosystems, essential ecological processes and the biological diversity of Namibia, and the utilization of living natural resources on a sustainable basis for the benefit of Namibians, and to pro-mote the mutually beneficial co-existence of humans with wildlife.
• National Rangeland Policy and Strategy of 2012 which seeks to enable rangeland managers to man-age their rangelands in such a way so that productivity and biodiversity are restored and maintained.
• National Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan of 2013 which aims to increase climate change resilience and optimize opportunities towards sustainable development.
• Third National Action Programme to Combat Desertification of 2014 which seeks to reverse and pre-vent desertification/ land degradation and to mitigate the effects of drought in affected areas to support poverty reduction and environmental sustainability.
3.3.6 Generating Reliable Baseline InformationBaseline information is lacking in a number of critical areas including awareness of biodiversity, the value of biodiversity and ecosystem services for the economy and society, as well as the extent of bio-physical factors such as land degradation and biodiversity loss. The establishment of such baseline information is a key NB-SAP2 priority, particularly during the first four years, so that the status quo on these issues can be established and subsequent trends can be monitored and positively influenced.
3.3.7 Capitalizing on Synergies with the Rio and other Biodiversity-Related ConventionsNamibia is a Party to the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International Importance, the Convention on Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), the International Treaty on Plant and Genetic Resources (ITPGR), the World Heritage Convention (WHC) as well as the two other Rio Conventions on Climate Change and Deser-tification. These Conventions are clearly closely linked and NBSAP2 seeks to integrate the objectives and actions of these Conventions under its umbrella.
The different national focal points to each Convention were closely engaged in the consultative process to formulate NBSAP2, which in turn has contributed towards the integration of Convention-specific targets, objectives and commitments into NBSAP2. This will further create synergies in the monitoring process and national reporting requirements to each Convention. Examples of thematic areas in which Convention-specific targets, objectives and commitments have been integrated into NBSAP2 are presented in the diagram below:
Figure 7: Thematic areas for synergies through NBSAP2.
16
3.3.8 Enhancing Regional CooperationNamibia recognizes the critical importance of the transboundary management of natural resources, which is guided by SADC protocols on energy, tourism, fisheries, watercourses, wildlife and law enforcement, and for-estry. This is further promoted in NBSAP2, particularly with regard to the improved management of Namibia’s two TFCAs (KAZA and the /Ai-/Ais Richtersveld TFCA); the Benguela Current Large Marine Ecosystem; and the transboundary river commissions such as OKACOM and the Orange-Senqhu Basin Commission. The NBSAP2 also seeks to identify new areas of cooperation at the regional level. Although the SADC Regional Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan is structured differently to the CBD Strategic Plan and Aichi Targets, Namibia has sought to align its NBSAP2 with this document and this alignment is represented in Annex 37.
3.3.9 Mainstreaming Gender ConsiderationsWomen are sometimes known as the “invisible” managers and users of natural resources in Namibia. Despite the fact that they are the main managers of these resources on a daily basis, they often play a limited role in decision-making processes and in the sharing of benefits from their efforts. Empowerment of women is however occurring in the natural resources management sector and is being actively promoted through the CBNRM Programme, and targeted support through funding mechanisms such as the Environmental Invest-ment Fund and the Small Grants Programme of UNDP.
NBSAP2 promotes the full participation of women in the planning and implementation of biodiversity-related initiatives as well as in the areas of capacity building; value addition and enterprise development; and benefit-sharing.
7 The alignment of Namibia’s NBSAP2 with the SADC Regional Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan is presented inAnnex 3.
16 17
4. THE NATIONAL BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY
4.1 STRATEGIC GOAL 1: Address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss by main-streaming biodiversity across government and society The need to integrate the conservation of biodiversity at all levels of government and society is a cornerstone of NBSAP2. After participation in the NBSAP 2.0 Project and consulting with the Good Practice Guides Series of the CBD, Namibia is pursuing a two-phase approach to achieve its mainstreaming vision for a “society in which biodiversity issues and concerns are the responsibility of all citizens and are recognized by all sectors of government, private sector and civil society”.
The mainstreaming approach emphasizes : • Making and communicating the business case for biodiversity with focus on poverty alleviation, with
the aim to improve understanding among decision and policy-makers and the private sector of the linkages between biodiversity, poverty and economic development
• Integrating biodiversity considerations into national, regional, local and sectoral policies, plans, strate-gies and budgets
In order to effectively mainstream biodiversity across government and society and to address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss, the following elements are considered critical: • Improved communication, education and public awareness on issues relating to biodiversity • Valuations of ecosystem services to inform decision-making about the values of nature and the in-
tegration of biodiversity into national and sectoral policy-making, planning, budgeting and decision-making frameworks
• Development of a wide range of economic incentives to promote biodiversity conservation and sus-tainable use of natural resources
4.1.1 Target 1: By 2020, at least 75% of surveyed key target groups know the meaning of biodiversity and can identify important reasons for biodiversity conservation
Key Performance Indicator: Results of surveys for pre-defined target groups using the Biodiversity Barometer Tool
Strategic Initiative: 1.1.1 Raise public awareness of the meaning and value of conservation of biodiversity and wise use of biodiversity by target groups
18
1.1.2 Promote understanding and clarify values of biodiversity and development of positive attitude towards conservation and use of biodiversity
1.1.3 Raise adequate funding to facilitate communication and dissemination of NBSAP2
1.1.4 Foster international cooperation and networking to enhance communication of the values of biodiversity conservation and sustainable use
With awareness raising being a strong tool for behavioural change and for mainstreaming the importance of biodiversity among the Namibian population, it was considered an important priority to develop a Com-munication, Education and Public Awareness (CEPA) strategy for NBSAP28.
The ultimate goal of the CEPA Strategy is “to achieve a positive change in the behaviour of stakehold-ers towards biodiversity, based on effectively demonstrating its value and importance to Namibian society”. It is further expected that the CEPA Strategy will offer a more structured and integrated approach to implementation of environment-related awareness raising in Namibia.
Of key importance is that identified priority target groups and sectors are reached by the strategic stake-holders so that they can implement activities towards the conservation and sustainable utilisation of biodi-versity. Priority target groups include technical experts and decision-makers in respective line ministries, regional councils, local authorities and traditional authorities; politicians and high level stakeholders; private sector players; resource managers on-the-ground; and the youth and women’s groups. This will require the use of an array of different media and resource material.
The Division of Environmental Information and Natural Resource Economics within the MET will be the lead agency to coordinate implementation of the CEPA Strategy. As Secretariat to the multi-stakeholder Namibia Environmental Education Network (NEEN), it is well positioned to fulfil this function.
The CEPA strategy focuses on five key strategic themes, each with corresponding strategic aims: (i) Awareness(ii) Education(iii) Participation and Implementation(iv) Funding(v) International Cooperation and Networking
4.1.2 Target 2: By 2018, biodiversity values and prioritized ecosystem services are quantified, monitored and mainstreamed to support national and sectoral policy-making, planning, budgeting and decision-making frameworks
Key Performance Indicators: • SEA regulations gazetted• Integration of biodiversity issues within NDP5 • Integration of biodiversity into sectoral, regional and local plans and respective budgetary allocations
8 The CEPA Strategy is summarized in section 1.1 of the action plan and the full CEPA Strategy may be downloaded from www.met.gov.na.
18 19
Strategic Initiatives:1.2.1 Contextualize and apply biodiversity and ecosystem services valuation tools to quantify and monitor the environmental, economic and social value of biodiversity
1.2.2 Integrate biodiversity and ecosystem services valuations into decision-making and to de-velop a business case for biodiversity
Biodiversity is often only associated with conservation through national parks and rare and endangered spe-cies. This understanding fails to cover the deeper concept that biodiversity underpins our survival and well-being, especially when around 70% of Namibia’s population is dependent on the natural resource base for their livelihood needs in terms of income, food, fuel, medicine and shelter.
The valuation of biodiversity and the critical ecosystem services it provides is thus an important priority for NBSAP2 as a mainstreaming tool to create awareness and to influence policy makers and planners. Natural resource accounts have been completed for wildlife, forestry, tourism and water use, and these have shed light on the economic importance of these assets. These will be built on and absorbed in a new approach dedicated to the valuation of biodiversity as a whole and its variety of ecosystem services, the results of which will be disseminated and integrated into national, sectoral and local planning frameworks and budgets.
4.1.3 Target 3: By 2018, selected incentives for biodiversity conservation and sustain-able use are in place and applied, and the most harmful subsidies are identified and their phase out is initiated
Key Performance Indicators: • List of assessed subsidies and measurement of magnitude of negative impact on biodiversity • List of analysed incentives and measurement of their potential positive impact on biodiversity• Environmental fiscal policy framework
Strategic Initiatives:1.3.1 Analyze existing and identify potential incentives to encourage biodiversity conservation and sustainable use and discourage activities that impact negatively on biodiversity
1.3.2 Introduce environmental taxes and levies and market-based instruments as part of an Environmental Fiscal Reform Framework
A diverse range of subsidies and incentives are in place in Namibia to address sectoral problems and to pro-mote economic growth and self-sufficiency. An assessment of the impacts of these different subsidies on the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity has not been undertaken, and should be an important step towards removing or reforming harmful subsidies and for the development and application of positive incen-tives.
The process to develop an Environmental Fiscal Reform Framework is also underway in Namibia, part of which is aiming at the introduction of environmental taxes and levies for environmentally harmful activities and the generation of market-based revenue streams as a source of long-term and sustainable funding for positive environmental investments. This will form a key part of the process to develop positive biodiversity incentives.
4.2 STRATEGIC GOAL 2: Reduce the direct pressures on biodiversity and promote the sustainable use of biological resources
Given Namibia’s fragile and extremely variable environment, adaptive management of all natural resources based on sound scientific data and integrated decision-making needs to be promoted. This will help to reduce the pressures of development from agriculture and industrialization on biodiversity and guide the sustainable
20
utilisation of all natural resources. The critical elements considered necessary to achieve this strategic objec-tive are: • The use of integrated decision-making platforms and science-based decision-support tools to guide
all critical aspects of development • Strengthened application of the ecosystem approach to fisheries management • Increased adoption of sustainable land and forest management approaches • Measures and mechanisms to reduce the impact from pollution and waste on biodiversity.
4.2.1 Target 4: By 2022, the rate of loss and degradation of natural habitats outside protected areas serving as ecological corridors or containing key biodiversity areas or providing important ecosystem services is minimized through integrated land use planning
Key Performance Indicators: • Participatory Integrated Regional Land Use Plans with SEA approved by Cabinet for all Regions• Delineation of ecological corridors • Criteria for key biodiversity areas
Strategic Initiatives:2.1.1: Strengthen the application of decision-support tools for environmental management and protection through improved land and resource use decisions and land use planning
2.1.2: Strengthen institutional capacity at all levels to promote informed and integrated decision-making, harmonised policy frameworks and coordinated action on issues relating to land use planning
Namibia is home to a relatively large number of pristine natural habitats, many of which are home to high lev-els of species endemism and species richness, as well as being providers of essential ecosystem services. These areas are threatened to differing extents by various economic, demographic and social pressures. For example, land and sea-based mining activities threaten habitats (often in protected areas) in the Namib escarpment and marine ecosystems; forests in the north and north-eastern areas are vulnerable to illegal log-ging, population pressure and land-use change; and wetlands, including perennial and ephemeral rivers, are vulnerable to the over-abstraction of water from farming as well as pollution.
Preventing the loss of these sensitive habitats requires that the underlying causes are addressed through an integrated approach to development. Emphasis needs to be based on the following tools to prevent the loss of high biodiversity value habitats: • Integrated Land Use Planning • Mapping and protection of key biodiversity areas (KBAs) • The use of EIAs and SEAs to guide development decision-making, as well as the wider enforcement
of the Environmental Management Act of 2007 • Integrated mechanisms for natural resource governance at different levels including Integrated Coast-
al Zone Management (ICZM) as well as Communal Land Boards and expert working groups on biodi-versity sensitive areas
4.2.2 Target 5: By 2022, all living marine and aquatic resources are managed sustain-ably and guided by the ecosystem approach
Key Performance Indicators: • Stocks of commercial fisheries resources at sustainable levels as proven by scientific data
20 21
• Marine Spatial Planning for the greater Benguela Current Large Marine Ecosystem• Ecologically and Biodiversity Significant Areas identified as well as protection measures• Effective Monitoring, Control and Surveillance System in place for inland aquatic resources• Income generated from aquaculture and mariculture industries
Strategic Initiatives: 2.2.1: Ensure that all living marine resources are conserved and utilized sustainably based on ecosystem approach to fisheries (EAF) principles
2.2.2: Ensure optimal utilization and conservation of inland aquatic resources
2.2.3: Promote the sustainable management of the aquaculture and mariculture industries as vehicles for socio-economic development
The fishing sector has accounted for just over six per cent of GDP since 1994 and employs approximately 13,000 people directly (MET 2012a). Namibia’s 1500km coastline falls within the nutrient rich Benguela Cur-rent System, in which nutrient upwelling allows for huge shoals of pelagic and demersal fish, the bulk of which are exported. Overfishing was rampant in Namibia in the colonial era, particularly in the 1960s and 1970s. This led to the collapse of populations of several economically important fish species. The post-independent Namibian government has put in place a number of measures to reverse this trend and to ensure the long-term conservation, management and sustainable use of marine resources and coastal habitats. Nevertheless, fish and aquatic invertebrate stocks as well as aquatic plants are threatened by habitat loss and alteration due to off-shore mining and exploration; land-based pollution; invasive species; and climate change impacts.
An important part of NBSAP2 will be to build on the positive measures that have been undertaken by the Min-istry of Fisheries and Marine Resources since Independence. Of particular relevance are the increased use of the ecosystem approach; the elimination of destructive fishing practices; the establishment of representative networks of marine protected areas; the transboundary management of marine resources through the Ben-guela Current Commission; the use of closed seasons and minimum mesh sizes; strict by-catch regulations; and improved capacity to monitor, control and survey these measures. While many of these approaches are well-established in marine ecosystems, the need for them to be extended to inland fisheries was recom-mended during the national NBSAP1 review workshop in July 2012.
The sustainable development of the aquaculture industry, guided by the Aquaculture Act of 2002, was identi-fied in Vision 2030 as a priority area to enhance food security, generate employment and improve livelihoods in rural areas. The Aquaculture Act contains strong measures to ensure that this industry grows in a respon-sible manner, which will also be promoted through NBSAP2.
4.2.3 Target 6: By 2022, Principles of sound rangeland and sustainable forest man-agement, and good environmental practices in agriculture are applied on at least 50 per cent of all relevant areas
Key Performance Indicators: • Status of agriculture and rangeland report• Implemented Management Plans for Community Forests• Environmental Impact Assessments and Environmental Management Plans for large scale agricultural developments• Changes in vegetative / land use cover
Strategic Initiatives:2.3.1: Strengthen sound agricultural and rangeland management practices which minimize the
22 23
negative impacts of agricultural / livestock production on biodiversity and ecosystem functioning
2.3.2: Implement sustainable forest management practices in existing and new community forests to enhance conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity
2.3.3: Increase community support to enhance livelihood options through biodiversity-based enterprises
Agriculture and forestry are critical sectors for sustainable resource use and poverty reduction in the rural areas. An estimated 71 per cent of Namibia’s land area is used as rangeland for cattle ranching and small-stock farming (Mendelsohn 2006), much of which is recognized as heavily degraded (MAWF 2012). Crop cultivation is vital to subsistence farmers in the northern regions and is being promoted on a commercial scale through the Green Scheme Programme. Forest resources are an asset for communities, mainly in the north and north-eastern regions, and forests are the source of many of Namibia’s increasingly important indigenous plant products.
Desertification and drought are key drivers of biodiversity loss in Namibia and with climate change set to lead to increased rainfall variability and instances of extreme events, the threat to ecosystems and species diver-sity is increasing and requires coordinated action. Unsustainable land management practices compound this threat leading to problems such as bush encroachment by invader species; the disappearance of perennial grasses; and the prevalence of bare soils which inhibit nutrient cycling, water infiltration, seedling development and other essential ecological processes.
These practices need to be changed so that land and ecosystems maintain their productivity and integrity and species loss is avoided over the long-term. Identified good management practices compatible with the ecosystem approach such as rotational grazing, conservation agriculture, and community forestry will be pro-moted, strengthened and expanded under this target. This is also an area of synergy with Namibia’s National Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan (NCC-SAP) and the Third National Action Programme (NAP3) to the UNCCD.
4.2.4 Target 7: By 2022, pollution, including from excess nutrients, has been brought to levels that are not detrimental to biodiversity and ecosystem health and function-ing
Key Performance Indicators: • Compliance with Environmental Management Plans (mining companies)• Trends in water quality in aquatic ecosystems (dams, rivers and Ramsar Sites)• Presence / absence of key indicator species• Pollution standards in place, respected and enforced
Strategic Initiatives:2.4.1: Monitor and manage levels of pollution through a range of effective measures
2.4.2: Manage all forms of waste in an effective and efficient manner to reduce its negative impact on the environment
Although Namibia is not heavily industrialised, pollution was considered extremely relevant to Namibia during the NBSAP1 review workshop in July 2012. Pollution of water, the expanding number of intensive irrigation schemes, and the use and disposal of chemicals were considered as major concerns as well as the rapid and uncontrolled urbanization that is taking place.
23
The legislative framework and development of standards for the management of waste and for the control of pollution is inadequate in Namibia, and this needs to be the starting point for tackling this issue. Institutional capacity and cooperation to address this issue is another critical constraint that needs to be addressed, as is the upgrading of infrastructure to store, handle and dispose of waste satisfactorily.
4.2.5 Target 8: By 2015, National review of invasive alien species in Namibia from 2004 is updated (including identification of pathways), and by 2018, priority measures are in place to control and manage their impact
Key Performance Indicators: • Updated National Review• Management Plans implemented to control most threatening alien invasive species
Strategic Initiative:2.5.1: Develop mechanisms and measures to prevent the establishment and introduction of alien invasive species and to control or eradicate existing alien invasive species
A variety of sectors deals with alien invasive species in Namibia, and these different sectors need to be coordinated to tackle this problem, which has been identified as a significant threat to biodiversity. A 2004 report identified and described Namibia’s 15 most important invasive alien plant species as well as 11 alien animal species, which have the potential to become extremely invasive in Namibia. This report will be updated through NBSAP2.
There is also a lack of experts in this area and inadequate research and understanding of the issue among the general public. Under NBSAP2, a working group of existing experts and key stakeholders will be established to coordinate action on this issue.
4.2.6 Target 9: By 2016, ecosystems most vulnerable to climate change and their an-thropogenic pressures are identified, and by 2018 appropriate adaptation measures are developed and implemented in priority areas
Key Performance Indicators: • Report on the vulnerability of Namibian ecosystems to climate change and associated anthropogenic pressures• Evaluation of implementation of appropriate measures
Strategic Initiative:2.6.1: Undertake vulnerability assessment and develop relevant adaptation measures to enhance climate change resilience of priority ecosystems
Namibia’s ecosystems and biodiversity are particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Climate change has the potential to reverse the country’s development goals and is likely to have severe effects on agricultural production, food security, fisheries and tourism (MET 2013). The effects of increased rainfall vari-ability and an increase in the number of extreme events will place further stress on ecosystems, and these effects will also impact on species distribution, composition and migration. Human population pressure will further exacerbate this stress, particularly in peri-urban areas and in northern Namibia.
In line with Namibia’s NCC-SAP, the main thrust of this target is to identify the ecosystems most vulnerable to climate change and to identify and implement appropriate measures to make these ecosystems less vulner-able to the impacts of climate change over the short to medium-term. These assessments will also serve to pinpoint adaptation measures based on nature itself, i.e. ecosystem-based adaptation.
24
4.3 STRATEGIC GOAL 3: Improve the status of biodiversity by safeguarding ecosys-tems, species and genetic diversity
This Strategic Goal deals with the conservation of the three main elements of biodiversity – ecosystems, species diversity and genetic diversity. Namibia’s protected area network and well-conserved species form the backbone of the fast-growing tourism industry, while genetic diversity, particularly in terms of crops and livestock, offers opportunities for more climate resilient agriculture and improved food security. Thus each ele-ment of biodiversity will be promoted to improve the socio-economic situation of Namibian society.
4.3.1 Target 10: By 2018, existing terrestrial protected areas (national parks) are con-served, effectively and equitably managed, within an ecologically representative and well-connected system, and by 2020 coastal and marine areas9, of particular impor-tance to biodiversity and ecosystem services, are identified and measures for their protection initiated
Key Performance Indicators: • Approved management plans for all national parks• Management Effectiveness of Namibia’s terrestrial protected areas (national parks)• Sustainable Financing Plans for Protected Area System• Number of protected areas with connectivity corridors and managed buffer zones• Trends in revenue and employment generated through the protected area network
Strategic Initiatives:3.1.1: Ensure that all protected areas are managed using participatory and science-based site planning processes that incorporate clear biodiversity objectives, targets, management strategies and monitoring programmes
3.1.2: Enhance the infrastructure and natural resource base of all protected areas to make them attractive destinations for tourists and tourism investors and to improve the working environment for staff
3.1.3: Consolidate integrated park management to enable it to generate economic benefits, tackle human wildlife conflicts and contribute to biodiversity protection integrated into the wider landscape
Protected areas are a proven method for safeguarding habitats and species and important ecosystem ser-vices. Namibia is home to a diverse range of protected areas including national parks; transfrontier conser-vation areas; conservancies; freehold management units; private game reserves; tourism concessions; and marine protected areas10. Many of these land uses also border each other, which offers good opportunities for improved connectivity and integrated park management approaches.
National Parks cover approximately 18 per cent of the country’s landmass, while other forms of protected areas together bring some 43 per cent of Namibia under some form of conservation. Thus, the main focus for Namibia under NBSAP2 is to strengthen and consolidate the management of existing protected areas. Specific
9 The coastal and marine element of the target is dealt with in section 2.2 of the Action Plan10This section focuses mainly on national parks and TFCAs.
24 25
emphasis will be placed on improving ecological connectivity; engaging and benefiting local communities; upgrading infrastructure; monitoring and evaluation of management effectiveness; eco-tourism approaches; and building the capacity of protected area staff.
4.3.2 Target 11: By 2016, threatened and vulnerable species lists are updated and measures implemented by 2019 to improve their conservation status
Key Performance Indicators: • Number of Species Management Plans under implementation • Conservation status of threatened and vulnerable species
Strategic Initiatives:3.2.1 Enhance the management of threatened and vulnerable species, and improve their conservation status
3.2.2: Strengthen the framework for law enforcement and implementation with regard to the illegal trade in fauna and flora and derived products
Threatened and vulnerable plant and animal species are the main focus of this target. Namibia has performed quite well in terms of the in-situ and ex-situ conservation of wildlife and plants. Management and recovery plans have been initiated for a number of species and taxa. Research programmes of the MET’s Directorate of Natural Resources Management have driven the in-situ conservation of wildlife while ex-situ conservation of plants has been greatly improved with targeted programmes through the National Plant Genetic Resources Centre (NPGRC).
However, there is a critical need to strengthen human and infrastructural capacity of institutions such as the NPGRC and the National Museum so that the ecological and management needs and conservation status of threatened and endemic species are better known. Research and knowledge of micro-organisms, many marine organisms and endophytes and extremophytes is also lacking.
The illegal trade of wildlife products and unregulated harvesting of plant and plant products are further major concerns for which improved law enforcement is necessary. The MET-PASS project is promoting a more ho-listic approach to law enforcement of wildlife crime, looking specifically at improving aspects of intelligence, interception and prosecution. There may be useful lessons from this project for similar approaches to reduce illegal trade in plant and animal resources.
4.3.3 Target 12: By 2020, Genetic diversity of cultivated plants and farmed animals is maintained and enhanced
Key Performance Indicators: • Strategy to develop and promote indigenous livestock breeds and crop varieties for adoption by local farmers • Operational institutional framework in place to implement and enforce Biosafety Act of 2006
Strategic Initiatives:3.3.1: Maintain and enhance the genetic diversity of livestock and crop species through effective in-situ and ex-situ conservation measures and the safe use of biotechnology to improve food security and climate resilience of agriculture
3.3.2: Strengthen capacity and institutional frameworks so that they are equipped to implement and enforce the provisions of the Biosafety Act of 2006
26
Namibia’s plant and animal genetic resources are particularly important for the sustainable development of Namibia’s agriculture industry and to improve food security, especially given the predicted impacts of climate change on the agriculture sector. Indigenous breeds of livestock and crops have been replaced to a large ex-tent by exotic breeds and crops which are often poorly adapted to Namibia’s harsh farming environment. The MAWF has sought to address this situation, however this process is at a relatively early stage, especially in terms of livestock breeds. Particular emphasis needs to be placed on characterizing and conserving livestock and crop breeds; breeds inventories and monitoring; and developing and promoting indigenous breeds for adoption by local farmers.
Namibia has developed a legislative framework to promote the safe use of biotechnology and the manage-ment of living modified organisms through the Biosafety Act in 2006. The legal and administrative basis to implement this Act has been identified as a challenge as well as human resources and infrastructural capacity, and insufficient awareness of the issue among the wider population. These challenges will be targeted directly through NBSAP2.
4.4 STRATEGIC GOAL 4: Enhance the benefits to all from biodiversity and ecosystem servicesNamibia has consistently linked the need for conservation with the generation of benefits for its people through the sustainable use of biodiversity. The devolution of rights and management over resources such as water, wildlife and forests to the community level has been an important step in this process. Conservancies are proving that wildlife will be well conserved once benefits from this conservation reach the local community. This section focuses on increased beneficiation to local communities from biodiversity and ecosystem ser-vices with particular focus on the CBNRM Programme, the management of wetlands, restoration of degraded ecosystems, and capitalising on the opportunities from biotrade and bioprospecting.
4.4.1 Target 13: By 2022, ecosystems that provide essential services and contribute to health, livelihoods and well-being are safeguarded, and restoration programmes have been initiated for degraded ecosystems covering at least 15 per cent of the pri-ority areas
Key Performance Indicators: • Area under sustainable CBNRM and benefits to involved communities• Enforcement of agreements reached under the different transboundary water commissions• Implementation of Integrated Water Resources Management Plan• Area of degraded ecosystems and identified priority areas for action• Number of rehabilitation and restoration programmes and area covered
Strategic Initiatives:4.1.1: Consolidate and further strengthen the implementation of the CBNRM Policy and Programmes
4.1.2: Foster the implementation of integrated water management plans, including restoration and protection of critical wetlands systems, and taking into account transboundary issues
4.1.3: Undertake the rehabilitation and restoration of land degraded through unsustainable land management practices and establish biodiversity offsets
Namibia’s CBNRM Programme has led to the establishment of 79 conservancies on 18 per cent of the coun-try’s landmass. Conservancies are delivering substantial benefits to communities in the form of income gen-eration from tourism and biotrade as well as employment, while also improving wildlife populations across the
26 27
country. An estimated 23 of these conservancies were financially self-sufficient in 2011 and the Programme will be further strengthened during the lifespan of NBSAP2 to ensure its viability over the long term.
Due to Namibia’s high level of aridity, wetlands are a critical refuge for biodiversity and provider of essential ecosystem services. Wetland systems in Namibia include marine, estuarine, riverine, lacustrine and palus-trine systems. Each of these is affected by a range of stakeholders and require an integrated approach to management. This process is underway in Namibia with the establishment of basin management committees and transboundary river commissions. NBSAP2 will seek to strengthen this more holistic approach to tackle threats such as pollution; alien invasive species; over-abstraction of water and groundwater depletion.
This target also covers the restoration of degraded lands, which offers linkages with Namibia’s contribution to a land degradation neutral world and its NAP3 to the UNCCD. The most serious type of degradation requir-ing rehabilitation and restoration in Namibia is bush-encroached land. An estimated 26 million hectares of land is bush-encroached and the rehabilitation of this land has considerable economic, social and ecological potential.
Many areas home to rich biodiversity and rare and endemic species, including the Namib escarpment and Tsau //Khaeb (Sperrgebiet) area, are also characterized by the presence of minerals. The negative impacts from exploration and mining activities can be severe on these areas. Landscape alteration; soil and water con-tamination; and the loss of critical habitats can compromise ecosystems and reduce tourism potential in these areas. A national policy on mining in protected areas is currently under development to reduce this threat and to promote the restoration of degraded areas. Some good practice examples of restoration have been under-taken in the Tsau //Khaeb (Sperrgebiet) Park through Namdeb. It is suggested that standards and guidelines are put in place to promote a standardised approach to rehabilitation, while instruments such as biodiversity offsets should also be explored during NBSAP2.
4.4.2 Target 14: By 2015, national legislation giving effect to the Nagoya Protocol is in force and by 2018 fully operational to ensure that benefits are fair and equitably shared from the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity
Key Performance Indicators: • Accession to the Nagoya Protocol• Gazetting of ABS national legislation and regulation• Institutional arrangements in place including the Competent National Authority and National Focal Point (Genetic Resources and Traditional Knowledge Unit within MET), and national bioprospecting account within EIF• Number of ABS agreements
Strategic Initiatives:4.2.1: Finalize and implement the processes of acceding to the Nagoya Protocol as well as the Access to Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge Bill
Namibia’s domestic legislation on ABS has been under development since 1998. The draft ABS bill was put on hold in 2006, until international legislation on ABS was finalized so that the bill could be harmonized with the provisions of this legislation. With the agreement of the Nagoya Protocol in late 2010, work resumed on Namibia’s domestic ABS bill in 2011 and the regional and national consultative process was finalized in late 2011. It is expected that the bill will be enacted by 2014. Draft regulations are already formulated.
Thus implementation of the Bill will be a key focus area of NBSAP2, given the potential of ABS to unlock the
28 29
opportunities from biotrade and bioprospecting for local communities. The establishment and operationaliza-tion of a permanent Competent National Authority on ABS to replace the Interim Bioprospecting Committee will be a key step towards promoting and regulating biotrade linked to traditional knowledge, bioprospecting and the negotiation of ABS agreements.
4.5 STRATEGIC GOAL 5: Enhance implementation of NBSAP2 through participatory planning, knowledge management and capacity building
NBSAP2 has been developed in a highly participatory manner and requires action from a multitude of stake-holders at all levels. A strong coordination framework through the NBSAP2 Steering Committee is in place to ensure that implementation is carried out in an integrated and harmonized manner, and to mainstream biodi-versity and NBSAP2 priorities into other sectors at all levels.
Under this strategic goal, the following stakeholders are targeted: • Traditional Authorities and local communities involved in the management and use of biodiversity and
other natural resources. • Research institutions to strengthen Namibian capacity in science, research and technology for im-
proved biodiversity and ecosystem management. • Government (Ministry of Finance and National Planning Commission), international community and
the private sector partners to mobilize resources for the effective implementation of NBSAP2.
The issue of capacity building, although prominent under this goal, is considered a cross-cutting element and has also been identified as needed under other thematic areas including environmental economics (section 1.2 in action plan), Institutional capacity for environmental management (section 2.1.2 in action plan), CBNRM (see sections 2.3 and 3.1 in action plan), biosafety, (see section 3.3.2 in action plan), and ABS (see section 4.2 in action plan).
4.5.1 Target 15: By 2020, Traditional knowledge and the innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities relevant to the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity are recognized, respected and promoted
Key Performance Indicators: • Biocultural protocols and practices of local communities documented according to mutually agreed terms • System(s) in place to protect and document traditional knowledge as a basis for research and development of commercial biodiversity products
Strategic Initiative:5.1.1 Promote the role of traditional knowledge, innovations and practices in the management and use of biodiversity
Traditional Authorities have a key role to play in the management of natural resources in Namibia with the Traditional Authorities Act of 2000 giving them the mandate to ensure that members of their communities use natural resources in a manner that conserves the environment and maintains ecosystems. Traditional knowl-edge, referring to the knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities relating to biodiversity, has also helped to preserve, maintain and increase biodiversity over centuries in Namibia. Tradi-tional knowledge has also played a key role in facilitating the development of new products from biodiversity and has helped scientists to understand biodiversity.
Thus, traditional knowledge of Namibian communities needs to be carefully harnessed and regulated so that these communities benefit to a greater extent from their biodiversity-related expertise. The development of
28 29
bio-cultural protocols; systems to protect and document traditional practices; the incorporation of traditional resource management approaches into school and tertiary curricula; and the further empowerment of Tradi-tional Authorities over issues of biodiversity are among the priority activities identified for implementation of NBSAP2.
4.5.2 Target 16: By 2022, knowledge, science base and technologies relating to bio-diversity and ecosystem management are improved and made relevant to political decision- makers
Key Performance Indicators:• Trends in the number of research papers published on biodiversity from PoN, UNAM and other academic research institutions• Trends in the number of research projects on biodiversity undertaken by state research institutions (Gobabeb TRC, Etosha Ecological Institute, NBRI, NATMIRC, DART, DoF) • Investment and partnerships in biodiversity-related research, technologies and infrastructure• Policy briefs from research findings relating to biodiversity
Strategic Initiatives:5.2.1 Promote and encourage research that contributes to the knowledge and understanding of Namibia’s biodiversity and ecosystems services and their values
5.2.2: Enhance national capacity in biosystematics to provide support to biodiversity conservation management
5.2.3: Foster international cooperation and opportunities for information exchange and support in the field of biodiversity at the regional and international level for mutual benefit
5.2.4 Develop the modalities of a possible science policy interface on environmental issues
Namibia’s National Commission on Research, Science and Technology (NCRST) was established in 2012 to coordinate, monitor and supervise research, science and technology and to provide policy guidance to the research, science and technology innovation systems in Namibia. It will also facilitate the establishment of the National Research, Science and Technology Fund.
The NCRST is represented on the NBSAP2 Steering Committee and, research, as a critical tool for the man-agement of biodiversity, will be promoted through the NCRST, in the following areas: • Monitoring of natural resources, including marine, forest and wildlife resources (with the full involve-
ment of communities) to guide sustainable utilisation; • Taxonomy to improve knowledge of unknown or little known species (including those which may be of
commercial use) such as microbial organisms, extremophytes, endophytes and marine organisms; • Product testing and quality assurance and standards development; • Innovation and the development of new biodiversity-based products; • Development of new adaptive approaches to fisheries and land management.
Modalities to communicate relevant research findings to policy-makers, through a science policy interface mechanism, will be explored during NBSAP2.
4.5.3 Target 17: By 2022, mobilization of financial resources from all sources has been increased compared to the period 2008-2012 to allow for the effective implementation of this strategy and action plan
30
Key Performance Indicators: • Volume of Domestic Funding per annum • Increase in the number of sources (including private sector)• Volume of Official Development Assistance (multi-lateral and bi-lateral)
Strategic Initiative:5.3.1 Develop and realise a comprehensive resource mobilization strategy for implementationof NBSAP2
Namibia is committed through NBSAP2 to implementing decision XI/5 of UNCBD COP11 in Hyderabad, India which called on governments to implement the following measures among others: • Identify and seek funding support from diverse sources including regional and international donor
agencies, foundations and, as appropriate, through private- sector involvement; • Establish strategic partnerships with other Parties and other Governments and with various organiza-
tions, regional bodies or centres of excellence with a view to pooling resources and/or widening op-portunities and possibilities for mobilizing resources from various sources;
• Identify and maximize opportunities for technical cooperation with regional and international organiza-tions, institutions and development assistance agencies;
• Ensure efficient use of available resources and adopt cost-effective approaches to capacity-building.
30 31
5. MONITORING AND EVALUATION FRAMEWORKA monitoring and evaluation framework was an important missing element in NBSAP1 and the potential mo-dalities of this framework were deliberated on in detail during the consultative process for NBSAP2. An appro-priate framework was considered necessary to track ongoing progress as well as the quality and impact of ac-tivities being undertaken by the various sectors to achieve the strategic aims and targets included in NBSAP2.
Monitoring and evaluation of NBSAP2 will form part of an ongoing, continuous and cyclical process to align the actions outlined in the NBSAP2 strategy to the long-term development framework of Vision 2030 and medium term NDPs. Monitoring and evaluation will report against the 17 targets included in NBSAP2, each of which is considered specific, measurable, attainable, relevant and time-bound (SMART). The indicators per activity will also be reported on as will the expenditure on the planned activities. This will help to reveal if scarce national resources are being effectively allocated and utilized.
During the NBSAP2 consultative process, it became clear that there is a lack of baseline data in many of the areas critical to biodiversity management. This presents a challenge to monitoring progress towards the achievement of the targets as set out in NBSAP2, and the establishing of reliable baseline data will be a key objective for the early years of NBSAP2.
The monitoring and evaluation of NBSAP2 will be coordinated by the newly established Division of Multi-Lateral Environmental Agreements under the MET, with support from the cross-sectoral NBSAP2 Steering Committee. The Division of Multilateral Environmental Agreements serves as Secretariat to the Committee, and provision has been made in the Terms of Reference of the Committee for it to support the monitoring and evaluation of NBSAP2. All of the activities prioritized in NBSAP2 are to be implemented by institutions repre-sented on the NBSAP2 steering committee, which should facilitate the process of coordination and monitoring and evaluation.
It is envisaged that the different key institutions represented on the NBSAP2 steering committee will report back to the committee and high level stakeholders on an annual basis in terms of their progress and chal-lenges with regard to achieving the targets and strategic goals of NBSAP2. The MET will take responsibility to compile these reports, which will provide a baseline on status of implementation, serve as a guide for future strategic planning, and contribute information towards Namibia’s national reporting to the CBD.
An independent mid-term evaluation of NBSAP2 will be undertaken in mid-2017. Progress in implementation will also be reported to the CBD through the 5th National Report in 2014, the 6th National Report in 2018 and the 7th National Report in 2022. A final independent evaluation of NBSAP2, to be undertaken in 2021, will provide information on Namibia’s contribution towards the achievement of the Aichi Targets as well as lessons and direction for the development of a third NBSAP.
32
6. T
HE
NAT
ION
AL
BIO
DIV
ERSI
TY A
CTI
ON
PLA
N
St
rate
gic
Initi
ativ
e In
dica
tive
Act
iviti
es
Bas
elin
e In
dica
tor(
s)
Lead
Pa
rtne
rs
Tim
e C
ost
N$
02
/201
3
Age
ncy
fr
ame
Stra
tegi
c G
oal 1
: Add
ress
the
unde
rlyin
g ca
uses
of b
iodi
vers
ity lo
ss b
y m
ains
trea
min
g bi
odiv
ersi
ty a
cros
s go
vern
men
t and
soc
iety
1.1.
B
y 20
20, a
t lea
st 7
5% o
f sur
veye
d ke
y ta
rget
gro
ups
know
the
mea
ning
of b
iodi
vers
ity a
nd c
an id
entif
y im
port
ant r
easo
ns fo
r bio
dive
rsity
con
serv
atio
n
Key
Per
form
ance
Indi
cato
r: R
esul
ts o
f sur
veys
for p
re-d
efine
d ta
rget
gro
ups
usin
g th
e B
iodi
vers
ity B
arom
eter
Too
l
1.1.
1 R
aise
pub
lic a
war
enes
s of
the
Con
duct
a s
urve
y (s
uch
as
No
base
line
info
rmat
ion
Bas
elin
e in
form
atio
n on
M
ET
NE
EN
20
14
mea
ning
and
val
ue o
f con
serv
atio
n B
iodi
vers
ity B
arom
eter
) of t
arge
ted
on b
iodi
vers
ity a
war
enes
s bi
odiv
ersi
ty a
war
enes
s
inst
itutio
ns
and
2019
45
0,00
0
of b
iodi
vers
ity a
nd w
ise
use
of
stak
ehol
ders
to a
sses
s le
vels
of
av
aila
ble
and
trend
s
biod
iver
sity
by
targ
et g
roup
s un
ders
tand
ing
of b
iodi
vers
ity in
mon
itore
d;
20
14 a
nd 2
019
1.1.
2 Pr
omot
e un
ders
tand
ing
and
Dev
elop
and
impl
emen
t edu
catio
nal
B
iodi
vers
ity C
lear
ing
Hou
se;
ME
T an
d N
EE
N
2013
cl
arify
val
ues
of b
iodi
vers
ity a
nd
prog
ram
s on
bio
dive
rsity
issu
es
M
echa
nism
ope
ratio
nal
MoE
in
stitu
tions
-2
022
2,00
0,00
0
deve
lopm
ent o
f pos
itive
att
itude
re
leva
nt to
Nam
ibia
Bio
dive
rsity
issu
es in
tow
ards
con
serv
atio
n an
d us
e of
cu
rric
ula;
bi
odiv
ersi
ty
Num
ber o
f tra
ined
envi
ronm
enta
l edu
cato
rs;
Num
ber o
f env
ironm
enta
l
ed
ucat
ion
cent
res
and
club
s;
C
eleb
ratio
n of
Bio
dive
rsity
Day
1.1.
4 R
aise
ade
quat
e fu
ndin
g to
B
udge
t for
act
iviti
es o
f bio
dive
rsity
Tren
ds in
fund
ing
from
all
ME
T N
EE
N
2013
15
0,00
0
faci
litat
e co
mm
unic
atio
n a
nd
and
inco
rpor
ate
in a
nnua
l bud
get o
f
sou
rces
tow
ards
bio
dive
rsity
inst
itutio
ns
-202
2
diss
emin
atio
n of
NB
SAP2
or
gani
zatio
n 1.
1.5
Prom
ote
inte
rnat
iona
l coo
pera
tion
Stre
ngth
en a
nd e
nhan
ce
N
umbe
r of n
ew in
tern
atio
nal
ME
T N
EE
N
2013
1,
000,
000
and
netw
orki
ng to
enh
ance
co
llabo
ratio
n, li
nkag
es a
nd
co
oper
atio
n ag
reem
ents
inst
itutio
ns
-202
2
com
mun
icat
ion
of th
e va
lues
of
netw
orki
ng a
mon
g st
akeh
olde
rs
on
bio
dive
rsity
aw
aren
ess
bi
odiv
ersi
ty c
onse
rvat
ion
and
invo
lved
in b
iodi
vers
ity a
nd
is
sues
su
stai
nabl
e us
e.
envi
ronm
ent r
elat
ed is
sue
1.2
By
2018
, bio
dive
rsity
val
ues
and
prio
ritiz
ed e
cosy
stem
ser
vice
s ar
e qu
antifi
ed, m
onito
red
and
mai
nstr
eam
ed to
sup
port
nat
iona
l and
sec
tora
l pol
icy-
mak
ing,
pla
nnin
g,
budg
etin
g an
d de
cisi
on-m
akin
g fr
amew
orks
K
ey P
erfo
rman
ce In
dica
tors
:
SE
A re
gula
tions
gaz
ette
d
Inte
grat
ion
of b
iodi
vers
ity is
sues
with
in N
DP
5
Inte
grat
ion
of b
iodi
vers
ity in
to s
ecto
ral,
regi
onal
and
loca
l pla
ns a
nd re
spec
tive
budg
etar
y al
loca
tions
32 33
St
rate
gic
Initi
ativ
e In
dica
tive
Act
iviti
es
Bas
elin
e In
dica
tor(
s)
Lead
Pa
rtne
rs
Tim
e C
ost
N$
02/2
013
A
genc
y
fram
e
1.2.
1 Co
ntex
tual
ize
and
appl
y bi
odiv
ersi
ty
Est
ablis
h an
d ca
paci
tate
cro
ss-
No
netw
ork
in p
lace
C
ross
-sec
tora
l env
ironm
enta
l M
ET
MAW
F, M
FMR
, 2
014
2,00
0,00
0
an
d ec
osys
tem
ser
vice
s va
luat
ion
sect
oral
env
ironm
enta
l eco
nom
ics
ec
onom
ics
netw
ork
in p
lace
MoF
, UN
AM
, -2
022
to
ols
to q
uant
ify a
nd m
onito
r the
ne
twor
k on
issu
es re
latin
g to
and
num
ber o
f tra
inin
g pr
o-
P
oN, N
SA
en
viro
nmen
tal,
econ
omic
and
ec
osys
tem
ser
vice
s an
d
gram
mes
and
peo
ple
train
ed
soci
al v
alue
of b
iodi
vers
ity
natu
ral r
esou
rce
acco
untin
g
Valu
ate
iden
tified
prio
rity
biod
iver
sity
N
atur
al R
esou
rce
Acc
ount
s: N
umbe
r of e
cosy
stem
ser
vice
s M
ET
MAW
F, M
FMR
, 201
4 5,
000,
000
an
d ec
osys
tem
ser
vice
s
Wat
er (1
997)
; Min
eral
s ev
alua
tions
MM
E, U
NA
M,
-202
2
(1
997)
; For
estr
y (2
005)
;
P
oN, N
SA
Wild
life
(200
9); T
ouris
m
(201
1)
P
rodu
ce a
nd d
isse
min
ate
annu
al
MC
A in
dige
nous
nat
ural
A
nnua
l rep
ort a
nd it
s M
ET
NAC
SO, M
AWF,
201
4 1,
200,
000
repo
rt on
bio
dive
rsity
-bas
ed
plan
ts in
form
atio
n bu
lletin
s,
diss
emin
atio
n to
key
MFM
R, M
TI,
-202
2
en
terp
rises
, inc
ome
and
empl
oym
ent
and
annu
al s
tate
of
deci
sion
-mak
ers
and
P
oN, U
NA
M,
op
port
uniti
es
cons
erva
ncy
and
the
gene
ral p
ublic
CS
Os
com
mun
ity fo
rest
s re
port
s1.
2.2
Inte
grat
e bi
odiv
ersi
ty a
nd
Pac
kage
and
sel
l the
eco
nom
ic
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
e A
ccou
nts
Brie
fings
on
econ
omic
cas
e M
ET
PoN
, UN
AM
20
15
300,
000
ec
osys
tem
ser
vice
s va
luat
ions
into
ca
se fo
r the
impo
rtan
ce o
f do
cum
ents
fo
r bio
dive
rsity
for k
ey d
ecis
ion
-202
2
deci
sion
-mak
ing
and
to d
evel
op
biod
iver
sity
to k
ey d
ecis
ion-
- mak
ers
a bu
sine
ss c
ase
for b
iodi
vers
ity
mak
ers
in a
n ea
sy-to
-
un
ders
tand
form
at
Mai
nstre
am b
iodi
vers
ity a
nd
Non
e B
udge
tary
allo
catio
ns fo
r M
ET
NP
C, M
oF,
2017
1,
000,
000
ec
osys
tem
ser
vice
s va
luat
ions
into
biod
iver
sity
in n
atio
nal a
nd
R
Cs
natio
nal a
ccou
ntin
g an
d re
gion
al
re
gion
al p
lans
pl
ans
and
budg
etin
g pr
oces
ses
Inco
rpor
ate
biod
iver
sity
Im
port
ance
of b
iodi
vers
ity
Bio
dive
rsity
prio
ritie
s in
M
ET
MAW
F, M
FMR
, 20
13
100,
000
co
nsid
erat
ions
and
opp
ortu
nitie
s in
to
inad
equa
tely
refle
cted
in
natio
nal,
regi
onal
, loc
al
M
LR, N
PC
, -2
022
N
DP
5 an
d th
e se
ctor
al p
lans
of
ND
P4 o
vera
ll as
wel
l as
in
and
sect
oral
pla
ns, a
nd
R
Cs,
LA
s
regi
onal
cou
ncils
, loc
al a
utho
ritie
s se
ctor
al p
lans
of o
ther
tre
nds
in fi
nanc
ial a
lloca
tions
an
d ke
y m
inis
tries
m
inis
tries
to
bio
dive
rsity
-frie
ndly
initi
ativ
es in
the
resp
ectiv
e pl
ans
1.3
By
2018
, sel
ecte
d in
cent
ives
for b
iodi
vers
ity c
onse
rvat
ion
and
sust
aina
ble
use
are
in p
lace
and
app
lied,
and
the
mos
t har
mfu
l sub
sidi
es a
re id
entifi
ed a
nd th
eir p
hase
out
is
initi
ated
Key
Per
form
ance
Indi
cato
rs:
•
Listofassessedsubsidiesandmeasurementofm
agnitudeofnegativeimpactonbiodiversity
•
Listofanalysedincentivesandmeasurementoftheirpotentialpositiveim
pactonbiodiversity
•
Environm
entalfiscalpolicyfra
mew
ork
1.3.
1 A
naly
ze e
xist
ing
and
iden
tify
Und
erta
ke a
sses
smen
t stu
dy o
n N
o st
udy
on in
cent
ives
In
cent
ives
ass
essm
ent s
tudy
M
ET
MAW
F, M
FMR
, 20
15
400,
000
po
tent
ial i
ncen
tives
to e
ncou
rage
ex
istin
g po
sitiv
e, n
egat
ive
re
port
anal
yzin
g in
cent
ives
MLR
, MM
E,
34
St
rate
gic
Initi
ativ
e In
dica
tive
Act
iviti
es
Bas
elin
e In
dica
tor(
s)
Lead
Pa
rtne
rs
Tim
e C
ost
N$
02/2
013
A
genc
y
fram
e
bi
odiv
ersi
ty c
onse
rvat
ion
and
and
pote
ntia
l inc
entiv
es
af
fect
ing
biod
iver
sity
MoF
, MTI
,
sust
aina
ble
use
and
disc
oura
ge
CS
Os,
PoN
,
activ
ities
that
impa
ct n
egat
ivel
y
U
NA
M
on b
iodi
vers
ity1.
3.2
Intr
oduc
e en
viro
nmen
tal t
axes
and
E
nviro
nmen
tal t
axes
and
levi
es
No
envi
ronm
enta
l tax
es
Num
ber o
f env
ironm
enta
l tax
es
EIF
ME
T, M
oF
2013
12
,000
,
levi
es a
nd m
arke
t-ba
sed
inst
ru-
intro
duce
d an
d co
llect
ed a
s an
d le
vies
in p
lace
an
d le
vies
; the
ir m
onet
ary
-202
2 00
0
m
ents
as
part
of
an E
nvir
on-
part
of w
ider
env
ironm
enta
l fisc
al
va
lue
and
thei
r rei
nves
tmen
t
men
tal F
isca
l Ref
orm
Fra
mew
ork
re
form
pro
gram
me
in
to e
nviro
nmen
tal s
usta
inab
ility
in
itiat
ives
Br
oade
n an
d ap
ply
fund
ing
sour
ces
EIF,
SG
P, N
edba
nk G
o To
tal s
pend
on
biod
iver
sity
EI
F S
uppo
rt 20
14
36,0
00,
fo
r the
con
serv
atio
n an
d su
s-
Gre
en F
und,
Gam
e co
nser
vatio
n an
d
proj
ects
and
-2
022
000
ta
inab
le u
se o
f bio
dive
rsity
for
Pro
duct
Tru
st F
und
sust
aina
ble
use
pr
ivat
e se
ctor
max
imum
effe
ctiv
enes
s
St
rate
gic
Goa
l 2: R
educ
e th
e di
rect
pre
ssur
es o
n bi
odiv
ersi
ty a
nd p
rom
ote
the
sust
aina
ble
use
of b
iolo
gica
l res
ourc
es
2.1
By
2022
, the
rate
of l
oss
and
degr
adat
ion
of n
atur
al h
abita
ts o
utsi
de p
rote
cted
are
as s
ervi
ng a
s ec
olog
ical
cor
rido
rs o
r con
tain
ing
key
biod
iver
sity
are
as o
r pro
vidi
ng
impo
rtan
t eco
syst
em s
ervi
ces
is m
inim
ized
thro
ugh
inte
grat
ed la
nd u
se p
lann
ing
K
ey P
erfo
rman
ce In
dica
tors
:
•ParticipatoryIntegratedRegionalLandUsePlanswithSEAapprovedbyCabinetfora
llRegions
•
Delineationofecologicalcorridors
•
Criteriaforkeybiodiversityareas
2.1.
1 St
reng
then
the
appl
icat
ion
of
Dev
elop
Inte
grat
ed L
and
Use
2
IRLU
Ps
com
plet
ed
Num
ber o
f IR
LUP
s M
LR
ME
T 20
22
12,0
00,
deci
sion
sup
port
tool
s fo
r P
lans
(IR
LUP
s) fo
r all
regi
ons
for H
arda
p an
d !K
aras
00
0
en
viro
nmen
tal m
anag
emen
t and
Reg
ions
pr
otec
tion
thro
ugh
impr
oved
la
nd a
nd re
sour
ce u
se d
ecis
ions
an
d la
nd u
se p
lann
ing
D
evel
op g
eo-s
patia
l too
l to
iden
tify
Land
scap
e le
vel
Are
a an
d lo
catio
n of
M
ET
MM
E, L
As,
20
16
36,0
00,
ke
y bi
odiv
ersi
ty a
reas
thro
ugho
ut
asse
ssm
ent c
ompl
eted
ke
y bi
odiv
ersi
ty a
reas
MFM
R, M
LR,
00
0
Nam
ibia
and
take
mea
sure
s to
fo
r Ero
ngo
Reg
ion
iden
tified
and
pro
tect
ed;
C
SO
s
enha
nce
thei
r pro
tect
ion
Num
ber o
f Im
port
ant B
ird
A
reas
; Im
port
ant P
lant
Are
as; W
orld
Her
itage
Site
s; a
nd G
eopa
rks
E
stab
lish
a rig
orou
s an
d ef
fect
ive
App
rox.
100
EIA
s N
umbe
r of E
MP
s be
ing
ME
T
2013
2,
500,
000
EI
A p
roce
ss b
acke
d up
by
impr
oved
pr
oces
sed
annu
ally
but
ad
here
d to
; Ins
pect
orat
e
-2
022
m
onito
ring
and
enfo
rcem
ent o
f lim
ited
capa
city
to e
nfor
ce
sub-
divi
sion
in p
lace
envi
ronm
enta
l man
agem
ent p
lans
E
MP
s w
ithin
DE
A a
nd n
umbe
r of
insp
ectio
ns c
arrie
d ou
t
34 35
St
rate
gic
Initi
ativ
e In
dica
tive
Act
iviti
es
Bas
elin
e In
dica
tor(
s)
Lead
Pa
rtne
rs
Tim
e C
ost
N$
02/2
013
A
genc
y
fram
e
C
arry
out
SE
As
on p
riorit
y is
sues
, S
EA
and
SE
MP
on
Num
ber o
f SE
As
and
ME
T
2013
2,
000,
000
and
impl
emen
t rec
omm
enda
tions
ur
aniu
m in
dust
ry, S
EA
s up
take
of t
heir
-202
2
th
roug
h S
trate
gic
Env
ironm
enta
l on
bio
fuel
s an
d on
re
com
men
datio
ns
M
anag
emen
t Pla
ns (S
EM
Ps)
IR
LUP
s fo
r !K
aras
and
th
roug
h im
plem
ente
d
H
arda
p S
EM
Ps
P
ublis
h na
tiona
l Int
egra
ted
Sta
te o
f IS
OE
R fr
om 2
004
Num
ber o
f nat
iona
l M
ET
NAC
OM
A,
2014
1,
000,
000
th
e E
nviro
nmen
t Rep
orts
(IS
OE
Rs)
ISO
ER
s pr
oduc
ed
BC
LME,
MAW
F, -
2022
on
a p
erio
dic
basi
s
M
FMR
, MLR
,
MM
E, C
SO
s,
PoN
, UN
AM
2.1.
2 St
reng
then
inst
itutio
nal c
apac
ity
Ope
ratio
naliz
e S
usta
inab
le
Mem
bers
of t
he
Num
ber o
f mee
tings
of
ME
T
2013
1,
000,
000
at
all
leve
ls to
pro
mot
e in
form
ed
Dev
elop
men
t Adv
isor
y S
usta
inab
le D
evel
opm
ent
Sus
tain
able
Dev
elop
men
t
-2
022
an
d in
tegr
ated
dec
isio
n-m
akin
g,
Cou
ncil
Adv
isor
y C
ounc
il A
dvis
ory
Cou
ncil;
and
harm
onis
ed p
olic
y fr
amew
orks
sele
cted
and
nu
mbe
r of b
iodi
vers
ity
an
d co
ordi
nate
d ac
tion
on is
sues
inau
gura
tion
held
-r
elat
ed in
terv
entio
ns
re
latin
g to
land
use
pla
nnin
g
Stre
ngth
en th
e In
tegr
ated
Coa
stal
IC
ZMC
est
ablis
hed
Num
ber o
f mee
tings
of
ME
T M
FMR
, RC
s,
2013
50
0,00
0
Zone
Man
agem
ent C
omm
ittee
ICZM
C; I
CZM
bill
ena
cted
LAs,
NAC
OM
A -2
022
(IC
ZMC
)
Est
ablis
h ex
pert
wor
king
gro
ups
on
Wet
land
s w
orki
ng g
roup
Fu
nctio
nal w
orki
ng g
roup
s M
ET
Sec
tora
l 20
13
250,
000
pr
iorit
y is
sues
iden
tified
in th
e an
d C
oast
al /
mar
ine
on b
iodi
vers
ity p
riorit
y is
sues
expe
rts
-202
2
NB
SA
P2
proc
ess
incl
udin
g en
dem
ic
bird
wor
king
gro
up
-ric
h ec
osys
tem
s, a
lien
inva
sive
spec
ies,
wet
land
s, e
nviro
nmen
tal
re
habi
litat
ion
and
bios
yste
mat
ics
S
treng
then
the
capa
city
of r
egio
nal
Tr
aini
ng p
rogr
amm
es
ME
T M
AWF,
20
13
450,
000
M
ET,
MAW
F, M
FMR
sta
ff an
d
for r
egio
nal s
taff
M
FMR
, MLR
-2
022
Com
mun
al L
and
Boa
rds
to
prom
ote
soun
d en
viro
nmen
tal
m
anag
emen
t 2
.2
By
2022
, all
livin
g m
arin
e an
d aq
uatic
reso
urce
s ar
e m
anag
ed s
usta
inab
ly a
nd g
uide
d by
the
ecos
yste
m a
ppro
ach
K
ey P
erfo
rman
ce In
dica
tors
:
•Stocksofcom
mercialfisheriesresourcesatsustainablelevelsasprovenbyscientificdata
•
MarineSpatialP
lanningforthegreaterBenguelaCurrentLargeMarineEcosystem
•
EcologicallyandBiodiversitySignificantA
reasidentifiedaswellasprotectionmeasures
•
Effe
ctiveMonitoring,Contro
landSurveillanceSysteminplaceforinlandaquaticre
sources
•
Incomegeneratedfro
maquacultureandmaricultureindustries
36
St
rate
gic
Initi
ativ
e In
dica
tive
Act
iviti
es
Bas
elin
e In
dica
tor(
s)
Lead
Pa
rtne
rs
Tim
e C
ost
N$
02/2
013
A
genc
y
fram
e
2.2.
1 En
sure
that
all
livin
g m
arin
e D
evel
op m
anag
emen
t pla
ns
Spe
cies
man
agem
ent
Num
ber o
f man
agem
ent
MFM
R
BC
C,
2013
1,
200,
000
reso
urce
s ar
e co
nser
ved
and
for v
ulne
rabl
e sp
ecie
s ba
sed
plan
s ex
ist
plan
s fo
r vul
nera
ble
mar
ine
EC
OFI
SH
, -2
022
ut
ilize
d su
stai
nabl
y ba
sed
on
on e
cosy
stem
app
roac
h
spec
ies
B
CLM
E-S
AP
ec
osys
tem
app
roac
h to
fish
erie
s to
fish
erie
s (E
AF)
prin
cipl
es
(EA
F) p
rinc
iple
s
Mon
itor t
he a
bund
ance
of
Sto
cks
of a
ll ke
y Tr
ends
in s
tate
of s
tock
s;
MFM
R
BC
C,
2013
3,
000,
000
co
mm
erci
al fi
sh s
tock
s an
d co
mm
erci
al
trend
s in
tota
l allo
wab
le
EC
OFI
SH
, -2
022
cr
usta
cean
reso
urce
s sp
ecie
s kn
own
catc
h
BC
LME
-SA
P
Mon
itor t
he im
pact
of e
nviro
nmen
tal
Oce
anog
raph
ic
Sta
te o
f the
Eco
syst
em
MFM
R
BC
C,
2013
1,
000,
000
fa
ctor
s on
hea
lth o
f mar
ine
surv
eys
Info
rmat
ion
Sys
tem
(SEI
S);
EC
OFI
SH
, -2
022
ec
osys
tem
s an
d fis
herie
s
Tren
ds in
mar
ine
troph
ic
B
CLM
E-S
AP
dist
ribut
ion
and
abun
danc
e
inde
x; s
ea s
urfa
ce
tem
pera
ture
; Sou
ther
n
Osc
illat
ion
Inde
x; D
isso
lved
ox
ygen
leve
ls
Impr
ove
mon
itorin
g, c
ontro
l and
M
onito
ring,
con
trol a
nd
Num
ber o
f fish
erie
s M
FMR
2013
6,
200,
000
su
rvei
llanc
e of
ille
gal fi
shin
g pr
actic
es
surv
eilla
nce
syst
em
obse
rver
s tri
ps; s
ea a
nd
-202
2
and
activ
ities
ex
ists
with
in M
FMR
ai
r pat
rols
; har
bor a
nd
fa
ctor
y in
spec
tions
; vio
latio
ns
repo
rted
by e
nfor
cem
ent o
ffice
rs
In
trodu
ce M
arin
e S
patia
l Pla
nnin
g M
SP
not
pra
ctis
ed in
M
SP
fram
ewor
k in
pla
ce
MFM
R
BC
LME
, 20
14
300,
000
(M
SP)
for i
nfor
med
and
coo
rdin
ated
N
amib
ia
and
func
tiona
l
ME
T -2
022
de
cisi
on- m
akin
g on
the
sust
aina
ble
us
e of
mar
ine
reso
urce
s
Iden
tify
EB
SA
s an
d en
hanc
e 1
MPA
cov
erin
g C
over
age
and
num
ber o
f M
FMR
M
ET
2014
40
0,00
0
cons
erva
tion
mea
sure
s in
thes
e 12
,000
km2
EB
SA
s
-2
022
ar
eas
Stre
ngth
en tr
ansb
ound
ary
Trea
ty s
igne
d fo
r the
M
anag
emen
t stru
ctur
es
MFM
R
BC
C
2013
15
0,00
0
man
agem
ent o
f mar
ine
reso
urce
s B
engu
ela
Cur
rent
Lar
ge
for t
he B
engu
ela
Cur
rent
-2
022
th
roug
h im
prov
ed re
gion
al
Mar
ine
Ecos
yste
m in
201
3 C
omm
issi
on in
pla
ce
co
oper
atio
n
2.
2.2
Ensu
re o
ptim
al u
tiliz
atio
n an
d S
treng
then
per
mit
syst
em,
Perm
it en
forc
emen
t sys
tem
R
educ
ed in
cide
nts
of il
lega
l M
FMR
N
AM
PO
L,
2013
30
0,00
0
cons
erva
tion
of in
land
aqu
atic
re
gula
tions
and
impl
emen
tatio
n in
pla
ce
fishi
ng
M
ET,
RC
s,
-202
2
reso
urce
s of
Inla
nd F
ishe
ries
Act
TAs
S
treng
then
tran
sbou
ndar
y fre
sh
Non
e in
pla
ce
Fish
erie
s w
orki
ng g
roup
M
ET
MFM
R
2013
20
0,00
0
wat
er fi
sher
ies
man
agem
ent
cr
eate
d in
TFC
A a
ctiv
ities
-2
022
(M
onito
ring,
con
trol a
nd s
urve
illan
ce)
R
evie
w th
e In
land
Fis
herie
s A
ct to
C
onse
rvan
cies
und
erta
ke
Am
endm
ent o
f the
Inla
nd
MFM
R
NAC
SO
, 20
14
1,00
0,00
0
stre
ngth
en c
omm
unity
-bas
ed
mon
itorin
g ac
tiviti
es b
ut
Fish
erie
s A
ct
M
ET
-201
8
36 37
St
rate
gic
Initi
ativ
e In
dica
tive
Act
iviti
es
Bas
elin
e In
dica
tor(
s)
Lead
Pa
rtne
rs
Tim
e C
ost
N$
02/2
013
A
genc
y
fram
e
m
anag
emen
t of w
etla
nds
and
are
not e
mpo
wer
ed b
y
fishe
ries
thro
ugh
cons
erva
ncie
s th
e In
land
Fis
herie
s A
ct
2.2.
3 Pr
omot
e th
e su
stai
nabl
e C
ondu
ct a
n as
sess
men
t of
23 fi
sh fa
rms
in p
lace
A
quac
ultu
re M
aste
r Pla
n;
MFM
R
20
13
500,
000
man
agem
ent o
f the
aqu
acul
ture
vi
able
aqu
acul
ture
and
num
ber o
f via
ble
fish
farm
s
-2
022
an
d m
aric
ultu
re in
dust
ries
as
mar
icul
ture
farm
s an
d us
e
vehi
cles
for s
ocio
-eco
nom
ic
this
as
a ba
sis
to e
stab
lish
deve
lopm
ent
and
supp
ort fi
sh fa
rms
to
en
hanc
e fo
od s
ecur
ity a
nd ru
ral
de
velo
pmen
t
Stre
ngth
en c
ontro
l, m
onito
ring
and
Aqu
acul
ture
Act
N
umbe
r of a
quac
ultu
re a
nd
MFM
R
20
13
250,
000
eval
uatio
n of
aqu
acul
ture
and
mar
icul
ture
cen
tres
oper
atin
g
-2
022
m
aric
ultu
re a
ctiv
ities
to m
inim
ize
ac
cord
ing
to e
nviro
nmen
tal
the
envi
ronm
enta
l thr
eats
ther
efro
m
m
anag
emen
t pla
ns
Pro
mot
e th
e us
e of
indi
geno
us
N
umbe
r of a
quac
ultu
re
MFM
R
20
13
150,
000
spec
ies
for a
quac
ultu
re a
nd
an
d m
aric
ultu
re c
entre
s
-2
022
m
aric
ultu
re a
ctiv
ities
usin
g in
dige
nous
spe
cies
Impr
ove
the
surv
eilla
nce
of a
quat
ic
Exp
ort a
nd im
port
Aqu
atic
ani
mal
M
FMR
N
SI
2013
25
0,00
0
dise
ases
re
gula
tions
for a
quat
ic
dise
ase
labo
rato
ry
-202
2
di
seas
es2.
3 B
y 20
22, P
rinc
iple
s of
sou
nd ra
ngel
and
and
sust
aina
ble
fore
st m
anag
emen
t, an
d go
od e
nvir
onm
enta
l pra
ctic
es in
agr
icul
ture
are
app
lied
on a
t lea
st 5
0 pe
r cen
t of
all
rele
vant
ar
eas
K
ey P
erfo
rman
ce In
dica
tors
:
• S
tatu
s of
agr
icul
ture
and
rang
elan
d re
port
•
Implem
entedManagem
entP
lansforC
ommunityForests
Environm
entalImpactAssessm
entsandEnvironm
entalM
anagem
entP
lansforlargescaleagriculturaldevelopments
Changesinvegetative/landusecove
r2.
3.1
Stre
ngth
en s
ound
agr
icul
tura
l U
nder
take
EIA
s fo
r all
N
umbe
r of E
IAs
unde
rtak
en
ME
T M
AWF
2015
2,
000,
000
an
d ra
ngel
and
man
agem
ent
new
irrig
atio
n sc
hem
es u
nder
on g
reen
sch
eme
proj
ects
and
pr
actic
es w
hich
min
imiz
e th
e th
e G
reen
Sch
eme
Pol
icy
E
MP
s un
der i
mpl
emen
tatio
n
ne
gativ
e im
pact
s of
agr
icul
tura
l
/ liv
esto
ck p
rodu
ctio
n on
bi
odiv
ersi
ty a
nd e
cosy
stem
fu
nctio
ning
Pro
mot
e ap
plic
atio
n of
sou
nd
Nat
iona
l Ran
gela
nd
Sta
tus
of a
gric
ultu
re a
nd
MAW
F N
AU, N
NFU
, 20
13
150,
000
ra
ngel
and
man
agem
ent
Stra
tegy
and
Com
mun
ity-
rang
elan
d re
port
show
ing
M
ET,
MC
A,
-202
2
prin
cipl
es a
nd a
ctiv
ities
in a
ll B
ased
Ran
gela
nd a
nd
good
pra
ctic
e co
vera
ge
C
SO
s
re
gion
s an
d on
rese
ttlem
ent f
arm
s Li
vest
ock
Man
agem
ent
Pra
ctic
es u
nder
way
Fa
cilit
ate
the
incr
ease
d of
ftake
of
7.5%
offt
ake
rate
and
1.6
O
fftak
e ra
te a
nd tr
ends
in
MAW
F N
NFU
, MC
A,
2013
38
St
rate
gic
Initi
ativ
e In
dica
tive
Act
iviti
es
Bas
elin
e In
dica
tor(
s)
Lead
Pa
rtne
rs
Tim
e C
ost
N$
02/2
013
A
genc
y
fram
e
ca
ttle
in th
e no
rthe
rn c
omm
unal
m
illio
n ca
ttle
in th
e th
e ca
ttle
popu
latio
n in
the
C
SO
s -2
022
30,0
00,
ar
eas
to re
duce
pre
ssur
e on
the
nort
hern
com
mun
al a
reas
no
rthe
rn c
omm
unal
are
as;
00
0
reso
urce
bas
e
auct
ion
infra
stru
ctur
e
co
nstru
cted
and
num
ber o
f
auct
ion
even
ts
Pro
mot
e th
e in
crea
sed
adop
tion
100
farm
ers
train
ed o
n A
rea
cove
red
by a
nd n
umbe
r M
AWF
NN
FU, N
AB
, 20
13
2,00
0,00
0
of c
onse
rvat
ion
agric
ultu
re,
cons
erva
tion
agric
ultu
re
of fa
rmer
s en
gage
d in
CS
Os
-202
2
orga
nic
agric
ultu
re a
nd o
ther
th
roug
h de
mon
stra
tion
site
s;
cons
erva
tion
agric
ultu
re,
cl
imat
e re
silie
nt fo
rms
of a
gric
ultu
re
Nam
ibia
Org
anic
Ass
ocia
tion
orga
nic
farm
ing
and
drip
foun
ded;
sm
all s
cale
drip
irrig
atio
n
irrig
atio
n 2.
3.2
Impl
emen
t sus
tain
able
fore
st
Con
solid
ate
and
supp
ort t
he
32 c
omm
unity
fore
sts
Num
ber o
f com
mun
ity
MAW
F C
SO
s 20
13
500,
000
m
anag
emen
t pra
ctic
es in
exi
stin
g ex
pans
ion
of th
e co
mm
unity
fore
sts
gaze
tted
and
cove
red;
-2
022
an
d ne
w c
omm
unity
fore
sts
to
fore
st p
rogr
amm
e
num
ber o
f com
mun
ity
enha
nce
cons
erva
tion
and
fore
sts
finan
cial
ly s
elf-
sust
aina
ble
use
of b
iodi
vers
ity
suffi
cien
t; nu
mbe
r of
co
mm
unity
fore
sts
oper
atin
g
acco
rdin
g to
inte
grat
ed la
nd
use
plan
s
Dev
elop
and
impl
emen
t the
D
raft
fire
man
agem
ent p
lan
Num
ber o
f pla
nnin
g an
d lo
cal
MAW
F M
ET,
RC
s,
2014
55
0,00
0
Nat
iona
l Fire
man
agem
ent p
lan
le
vel fi
re m
anag
emen
t
LAs,
CFs
-2
022
im
plem
enta
tion
com
mitt
ees;
nu
mbe
r of "
plan
ned"
fire
s
man
aged
in li
ne w
ith th
e
Nat
iona
l Fire
Man
agem
ent P
lan
S
treng
then
the
capa
city
of t
he
N
umbe
r of a
rres
ts a
nd
MAW
F R
Cs,
LA
s,
2013
15
0,00
0
MAW
F, lo
cal c
omm
uniti
es a
nd
pr
osec
utio
ns fo
r ille
gal l
oggi
ng
TA
s, C
Fs,
-202
2
rele
vant
inst
itutio
ns to
car
ry o
ut
N
AM
PO
L
fore
st la
w e
nfor
cem
ent,
incl
udin
g
issu
ing
of p
erm
its, m
onito
ring,
ar
rest
s an
d fin
es
E
stab
lish
an a
ctio
n pl
an fo
r far
m
A
ppro
ved
actio
n pl
an
MAW
F C
SO
s 20
17
250,
000
fo
rest
ry (a
gro-
fore
stry
) and
affo
rest
atio
n / r
efor
esta
tion
2.3
.3
Incr
ease
com
mun
ity s
uppo
rt
Pro
vide
tech
nica
l and
5
com
mun
ity-b
ased
pro
ject
s N
umbe
r of v
iabl
e co
mm
unity
EI
F S
GP,
BM
CC
, 20
13
1,00
0,00
0
to
enh
ance
live
lihoo
d op
tions
fin
anci
al s
uppo
rt to
com
mun
ity
supp
orte
d by
EIF
in 2
012
-bas
ed b
iodi
vers
ity v
alue
NAC
OM
A,
-202
2
th
roug
h bi
odiv
ersi
ty-b
ased
ba
sed
ente
rpris
es s
o th
at
ch
ains
(bio
trade
)
CS
Os
en
terp
rise
s th
ey b
ecom
e lo
ng-te
rm
pr
ofita
ble
entit
ies
38 39
St
rate
gic
Initi
ativ
e In
dica
tive
Act
iviti
es
Bas
elin
e In
dica
tor(
s)
Lead
Pa
rtne
rs
Tim
e C
ost
N$
02/2
013
A
genc
y
fram
e
2.4
By
2022
, pol
lutio
n, in
clud
ing
from
exc
ess
nutr
ient
s, h
as b
een
brou
ght t
o le
vels
that
are
not
det
rim
enta
l to
biod
iver
sity
and
eco
syst
em h
ealth
and
func
tioni
ng
Key
Per
form
ance
Indi
cato
rs:
•
Com
pliancewithEnvironm
entalM
anagem
entP
lans(m
iningcompanies)
•
Trendsinwaterqualityinaquaticecosystem
s(dam
s,riversandRam
sarS
ites)
•
Presence/absenceofkeyindicatorspecies
•
Pollutionstandardsinplace,respectedandenforced
2.4.
1 M
onito
r and
man
age
leve
ls o
f B
ill o
n w
aste
man
agem
ent
Dra
ft bi
ll W
aste
man
agem
ent a
nd
ME
T LA
s 20
13
200,
000
po
llutio
n th
roug
h a
rang
e of
an
d po
llutio
n co
ntro
l ena
cted
pollu
tion
cont
rol A
ct
-202
2
effe
ctiv
e m
easu
res
and
impl
emen
ted
D
evel
op, m
onito
r and
enf
orce
Le
sson
s fro
m R
amat
ex
Soi
l, w
ater
, air
and
ME
T N
SI,
LAs,
20
13
350,
000
m
inim
um n
atio
nal s
tand
ards
on
soil,
an
d N
amib
ia C
usto
m
occu
patio
nal h
ealth
sta
ndar
ds
M
oHS
S,
-202
2
wat
er a
nd a
ir qu
ality
as
wel
l as
Sm
elte
rs c
ases
m
et b
y pu
blic
and
priv
ate
sect
or
M
oLS
W
oc
cupa
tiona
l hea
lth
U
pdat
e N
amib
ia's
gre
enho
use
gas
2 G
reen
hous
e ga
s 3r
d an
d 4t
h G
reen
hous
e M
ET
MoH
SS
, 20
20
430,
000
in
vent
ory
and
take
act
ion
to re
duce
in
vent
orie
s un
dert
aken
G
as In
vent
ory
M
ME
, MAW
F
G
reen
hous
e G
as e
mis
sion
s
U
nder
take
mea
sure
s to
min
imiz
e
Em
erge
ncy
com
mitt
ee in
pla
ce
LAs
ME
T, M
FMR
, 20
13
100,
000
th
e im
pact
s fro
m lo
cal p
ollu
tion
M
WT,
-2
022
in
stan
ces
such
as
oil s
pills
, har
mfu
l
NA
MP
OR
T
alga
l blo
oms
and
hydr
ogen
sul
phid
e
ev
ents
at t
he c
oast
2.4.
2 M
anag
e al
l for
ms
of w
aste
in a
n P
rofil
e an
d up
grad
e w
aste
N
one
Num
ber o
f was
te d
ispo
sal
LAs
ME
T 20
15
5,00
0,00
0
effe
ctiv
e an
d ef
ficie
nt m
anne
r to
disp
osal
site
s in
line
with
site
s up
grad
ed
redu
ce it
s ne
gativ
e im
pact
on
Sec
tion
5 of
the
Env
ironm
enta
l
th
e en
viro
nmen
t M
anag
emen
t Act
so
that
th
ey c
an d
eal w
ith a
ll w
aste
in a
n
envi
ronm
enta
lly s
ound
man
ner
D
evel
op a
nd im
plem
ent N
atio
nal
No
oper
atio
nal N
IPs
2 N
IPs
in p
lace
M
ET
LAs
2013
50
0,00
0
Impl
emen
tatio
n P
lans
(NIP
s) fo
r
-2
022
th
e S
tock
holm
and
Bas
el
Con
vent
ions
D
evel
op a
nd im
plem
ent E
nviro
nmen
tal
4 dr
aft E
MP
s fo
r coa
stal
N
umbe
r of t
owns
LA
s M
ET,
MO
HS
S,
2013
3,
800,
000
M
anag
emen
t Pla
ns (E
MP
s) fo
r all
tow
ns
impl
emen
ting
EM
Ps
M
AWF,
-2
022
ur
ban
area
s
MR
LGH
RD
Pro
mot
e in
crea
sed
adop
tion
of th
e
Volu
mes
of w
aste
recy
cled
LA
s M
ET,
RN
F 20
13
220,
000
"red
uce,
re-u
se a
nd r
ecyc
le"
an
nual
ly
-202
2
prin
cipl
e by
resi
dent
s an
d th
e pu
blic
and
priv
ate
sect
or
40
St
rate
gic
Initi
ativ
e In
dica
tive
Act
iviti
es
Bas
elin
e In
dica
tor(
s)
Lead
Pa
rtne
rs
Tim
e C
ost
N$
02/2
013
A
genc
y
fram
e
Inve
stig
ate
and
inst
all a
ltern
ativ
e
Num
ber o
f bio
-gas
dig
este
rs;
LAs
ME
T 20
13-
3,00
0,00
0
syst
ems
to m
ake
use
of s
olid
was
te
am
ount
of s
olid
was
te u
tilis
ed
2022
as
an
econ
omic
reso
urce
2
.5
By
2015
, Nat
iona
l rev
iew
of i
nvas
ive
alie
n sp
ecie
s in
Nam
ibia
from
200
4 is
upd
ated
(inc
ludi
ng id
entifi
catio
n of
pat
hway
s), a
nd b
y 20
18, p
rior
ity m
easu
res
are
in p
lace
to
cont
rol a
nd m
anag
e th
eir i
mpa
ct
Key
Per
form
ance
Indi
cato
rs:
•
UpdatedNationalR
eview
•
Managem
entP
lansim
plem
entedtocontro
lmostthreateningalieninvasivespecies
2.5.
1 D
evel
op m
echa
nism
s an
d m
easu
res
Upd
ate
the
Nat
iona
l Rep
ort
Nat
iona
l Rep
ort 2
004
Upd
ated
Nat
iona
l Rep
ort
ME
T M
AWF,
MFM
R, 2
015
180,
000
to
pre
vent
the
esta
blis
hmen
t and
on
Alie
n In
vasi
ve S
peci
es
P
oN, U
NA
M
intro
duct
ion
of a
lien
inva
sive
spe
cies
fro
m 2
004
an
d to
con
trol o
r era
dica
te e
xist
ing
alie
n in
vasi
ve s
peci
es
Ana
lyze
and
impl
emen
t
Ded
icat
ed p
olic
y or
M
ET
MAW
F, M
FMR
, 202
2 25
0,00
0
reco
mm
enda
tions
from
the
pr
ogra
mm
e on
alie
n in
vasi
ve
P
oN, U
NA
M
upda
ted
Nat
iona
l Rep
ort
sp
ecie
s; m
anag
emen
t pla
ns fo
r
in
vasi
ve s
peci
es; e
stab
lishm
ent
of
wor
king
gro
up o
n al
ien
in
vasi
ve s
peci
es2.
6 B
y 20
16, e
cosy
stem
s m
ost v
ulne
rabl
e to
clim
ate
chan
ge a
nd th
eir a
nthr
opog
enic
pre
ssur
es a
re id
entifi
ed, a
nd b
y 20
18, a
ppro
pria
te a
dapt
atio
n m
easu
res
are
deve
lope
d an
d
impl
emen
ted
in p
rior
ity a
reas
K
ey P
erfo
rman
ce In
dica
tors
:
•ReportonthevulnerabilityofN
amibianecosystemstoclim
atechangeandassociatedanthropogenicpressures
•
Evaluationofim
plem
entationofappropriatemeasures
2.6.
1 U
nder
take
vul
nera
bilit
y U
nder
take
a v
ulne
rabi
lity
and
Nat
iona
l V+A
ass
essm
ent
Ass
essm
ent S
tudy
with
M
ET
MAW
F, M
FMR
, 201
8 60
0,00
0
asse
ssm
ent a
nd d
evel
op
adap
tatio
n as
sess
men
t on
of b
iodi
vers
ity a
nd
adap
tatio
n re
com
men
datio
ns
N
ACO
MA
,
rele
vant
ada
ptat
ion
mea
sure
s pr
iorit
ized
eco
syst
ems
in
prot
ecte
d ar
eas
(201
0)
unde
r im
plem
enta
tion
B
CLM
E S
AP
to e
nhan
ce c
limat
e ch
ange
N
amib
ia
B
MC
C
re
silie
nce
of p
rior
ity e
cosy
stem
s
Stra
tegi
c G
oal 3
: Im
prov
e th
e st
atus
of b
iodi
vers
ity b
y sa
fegu
ardi
ng e
cosy
stem
s, s
peci
es a
nd g
enet
ic d
iver
sity
and
enh
ance
the
bene
fits
toal
l Nam
ibia
ns th
eref
rom
3.1
By
2018
, exi
stin
g te
rres
tria
l pro
tect
ed a
reas
(nat
iona
l par
ks) a
re c
onse
rved
, eff
ectiv
ely
and
equi
tabl
y m
anag
ed, w
ithin
an
ecol
ogic
ally
repr
esen
tativ
e an
d w
ell-c
onne
cted
sys
tem
,
and
by 2
020,
coa
stal
and
mar
ine
area
s, o
f par
ticul
ar im
port
ance
to b
iodi
vers
ity a
nd e
cosy
stem
ser
vice
s, a
re id
entifi
ed a
nd m
easu
res
for t
heir
prot
ectio
n in
itiat
ed
Key
Per
form
ance
Indi
cato
rs:
•
Approvedmanagem
entplansfora
llnationalparks
•
Managem
entE
ffectivenessofNam
ibia'sterrestrialprotectedareas(nationalparks)
40 41
St
rate
gic
Initi
ativ
e In
dica
tive
Act
iviti
es
Bas
elin
e In
dica
tor(
s)
Lead
Pa
rtne
rs
Tim
e C
ost
N$
02/2
013
A
genc
y
fram
e
•Trendsininvestmentintotheprotectedareanetwork
•
SustainableFinancingPlansforP
rotectedAreaSystem
•
Num
bero
fprotectedareaswithconnectivitycorridorsandmanagedbufferzones
•
Trendsinre
venueandem
ploymentgeneratedthroughtheprotectedareanetwork
3.1.
1 En
sure
that
all
prot
ecte
d ar
eas
are
All
stat
e pr
otec
ted
area
s 12
dra
ft m
anag
emen
t pla
ns
Num
ber o
f sta
te p
rote
cted
M
ET
KfW
, 20
14
150,
000
m
anag
ed u
sing
par
ticip
ator
y an
d m
anag
ed a
ccor
ding
to p
ark
ar
eas
bein
g m
anag
ed
N
ACO
MA
scie
nce-
base
d si
te p
lann
ing
man
agem
ent p
lans
(whi
ch
ac
cord
ing
to a
ppro
ved
pr
oces
ses
that
inco
rpor
ate
clea
r in
clud
e bi
odiv
ersi
ty ta
rget
s)
m
anag
emen
t pla
ns
biod
iver
sity
obj
ectiv
es, t
arge
ts,
appr
oved
by
ME
T
m
anag
emen
t str
ateg
ies
and
m
onito
ring
pro
gram
mes
C
ondu
ct a
nnua
l ass
essm
ents
of
NA
ME
TT R
epor
ts
NA
ME
TT s
core
s fo
r eac
h M
ET
NAC
OM
A
2013
80
0,00
0
the
man
agem
ent e
ffect
iven
ess
of
com
plet
ed in
200
4, 2
009
stat
e pr
otec
ted
area
-2
022
st
ate
prot
ecte
d ar
eas
usin
g th
e an
d 20
11
reco
rded
ann
ually
NA
ME
TT T
ool
D
evel
op a
nd im
prov
e co
nser
vatio
n In
cide
nt B
ook
Mon
itorin
g N
umbe
r of s
tate
pro
tect
ed
ME
T C
SO
s 20
13
100,
000
an
d m
onito
ring
syst
ems
in s
tate
S
yste
m e
xist
s ar
eas
usin
g th
e In
cide
nt
-202
2
prot
ecte
d ar
eas
B
ook
Mon
itorin
g S
yste
m
Fi
naliz
e an
d en
act t
he P
rote
cted
PA
WM
Bill
PA
WM
Act
M
ET
20
14
500,
000
A
reas
and
Wild
life
Man
agem
ent
(PAW
M) B
ill
Stre
ngth
en th
e m
anag
emen
t of
Two
TFC
As
man
aged
by
Trea
ty in
pla
ce fo
r Ion
a M
ET
KA
ZA
2013
2,
500,
000
ex
istin
g TF
CA
s an
d cr
eate
one
pe
rman
ent j
oint
aut
horit
ies
Ske
leto
n TF
CA
; Ass
essm
ent
P
roje
ct,
-202
2
addi
tiona
l TFC
A
of
man
agem
ent
K
fW, P
PF
ef
fect
iven
ess
of T
FCA
s;
Inco
me
gene
rate
d by
TFC
As
3.1.
2 En
hanc
e th
e in
fras
truc
ture
and
U
pgra
de th
e in
frast
ruct
ure
MC
A in
frast
ruct
ure
fund
ing
Ann
ual i
nves
tmen
t int
o M
ET
MC
A, K
fW,
2013
19
3,00
0
natu
ral r
esou
rce
base
of a
ll of
all
stat
e pr
otec
ted
area
s in
Eto
sha
Nat
iona
l Par
k an
d in
frast
ruct
ure
deve
lopm
ent
P
PF
-202
2 ,0
00
prot
ecte
d ar
eas
to m
ake
them
KfW
in n
orth
-eas
tern
Par
ks
in p
arks
thro
ugh
ME
T
at
trac
tive
dest
inat
ions
for t
ouri
sts
capi
tal b
udge
t and
an
d to
uris
m in
vest
ors
and
to
supp
ort p
roje
cts
impr
ove
the
wor
king
env
iron
men
t
for s
taff
P
rom
ote
prot
ecte
d ar
eas
as g
ood
none
W
aste
man
agem
ent p
lans
and
M
ET
MC
A, K
fW,
2013
2,
000,
000
pr
actic
e ex
ampl
es o
f bro
ader
sust
aina
ble
use
of a
ll
NA
M-P
LAC
E,
-202
0
envi
ronm
enta
l man
agem
ent a
nd
re
sour
ces
in th
e op
erat
ions
PP
F
eco-
tour
ism
des
tinat
ions
of p
rote
cted
are
as
3.
1.3
Con
solid
ate
inte
grat
ed p
ark
Eng
age
loca
l com
mun
ities
in
Dra
ft P
arks
and
Nei
ghbo
rs
Num
ber a
nd v
alue
of t
ouris
m
ME
T N
ACS
O
2013
24
0,00
0
m
anag
emen
t to
enab
le it
to
the
man
agem
ent o
f pro
tect
ed
polic
y ex
ists
, Con
cess
ions
co
nces
sion
s be
nefit
ting
-202
2
gene
rate
eco
nom
ic b
enefi
ts,
area
s an
d in
com
e-ge
nera
ting
are
curr
ently
aw
arde
d lo
cal c
omm
uniti
es
42 43
St
rate
gic
Initi
ativ
e In
dica
tive
Act
iviti
es
Bas
elin
e In
dica
tor(
s)
Lead
Pa
rtne
rs
Tim
e C
ost
N$
02/2
013
A
genc
y
fram
e
ta
ckle
hum
an w
ildlif
e co
nflic
ts
oppo
rtun
ities
ther
efro
m
an
d co
ntri
bute
to b
iodi
vers
ity
prot
ectio
n in
tegr
ated
into
the
wid
er la
ndsc
ape
S
usta
in 5
pro
tect
ed la
ndsc
ape
Con
stitu
tions
and
P
LCA
s vi
able
and
M
ET
CS
Os,
20
22
500,
000
co
nser
vatio
n ar
eas
(PLC
As)
co
llabo
rativ
e m
anag
emen
t fu
nctio
ning
afte
r the
end
NA
M-P
LAC
E
in
itiat
ed th
roug
h th
e M
ET
com
mitt
ees
esta
blis
hed
for
of N
AM
PLA
CE
Pro
ject
N
AM
PLA
CE
pro
ject
th
e 5
PLC
As
E
stab
lish
mec
hani
sms
for
3 co
rrid
ors
iden
tified
in
Num
ber o
f eco
logi
cal
ME
T C
SO
s, M
AWF,
20
13
250,
000
ec
olog
ical
con
nect
ivity
to li
nk
V+A
stu
dy o
f Nam
ibia
’s
corr
idor
s re
duci
ng
M
LR, T
As
-202
2
toge
ther
pro
tect
ed a
reas
and
P
rote
cted
Are
as to
fra
gmen
tatio
n an
d
to
redu
ce fr
agm
enta
tion
clim
ate
chan
ge
co-m
anag
ed
co
nser
vatio
n ar
eas
3.2
By
2016
, thr
eate
ned
and
vuln
erab
le s
peci
es li
sts
are
upda
ted
and
mea
sure
s im
plem
ente
d by
201
9 to
impr
ove
thei
r con
serv
atio
n st
atus
Key
Per
form
ance
Indi
cato
rs:
•
Num
bero
fSpeciesManagem
entP
lansunderim
plem
entation
•
Conservationstatusofthreatenedandvulnerablespecies
3.2.
1 En
hanc
e th
e m
anag
emen
t of
Dev
elop
and
impl
emen
t app
rove
d M
anag
emen
t pla
ns fo
r 2
Num
ber o
f app
rove
d M
ET
and
MFM
R,
2013
25
0,00
0
th
reat
ened
and
vul
nera
ble
spec
ies
man
agem
ent p
lans
/ po
licie
s pl
ant t
axa
and
2 w
ildlif
e sp
ecie
s m
anag
emen
t M
AWF
MY
NS
SC
, -2
022
a
nd im
prov
e th
eir c
onse
rvat
ion
for p
riorit
y sp
ecie
s an
d ta
xa
spec
ies
plan
s in
pla
ce
U
NA
M
stat
us
Ass
ess
and
perio
dica
lly re
view
the
1400
pla
nt ta
xa a
sses
sed
Reg
ular
ly u
pdat
ed li
sts
ME
T an
d
2013
15
0,00
0
stat
us o
f key
spe
cies
and
taxa
and
us
ing
IUC
N c
riter
ia
and
prog
ram
mes
for
MAW
F
-202
2
whe
re n
eces
sary
adj
ust t
heir
ra
re, e
ndan
gere
d,
cons
erva
tion
prio
rity
en
dem
ic a
nd v
alua
ble
spec
ies
C
onse
rve
and
asse
ss th
e ge
netic
Nat
iona
l Ger
mpl
asm
M
AWF
20
13
200,
000
di
vers
ity o
f cro
ps a
nd o
ther
maj
or
co
llect
ion
and
% o
f
-2
022
so
cio-
econ
omic
ally
val
uabl
e pl
ant
to
tal p
lant
s co
llect
ed
sp
ecie
s ex
-situ
Dev
elop
a g
ame
trans
loca
tion
Aro
und
5 00
0 he
ad o
f N
umbe
r of a
nnua
l gam
e M
ET
KfW
, NAC
SO
, 20
15
42,5
00
stra
tegy
, pro
cedu
res
and
deci
sion
w
ildlif
e tra
nslo
cate
d to
tra
nslo
cate
d; g
ame
M
CA
,
000
su
ppor
t too
ls fo
r tra
nspo
rtin
g ga
me
cons
erva
ncie
s an
d in
to
intro
duct
ion
tech
nica
l
NA
MP
LAC
E
in
to a
reas
of h
isto
ric ra
nge
prev
ious
rang
es
advi
sory
gro
up s
et u
p
3.
2.2
Stre
ngth
en th
e fr
amew
ork
Est
ablis
h a
natio
nal d
atab
ase
Inci
dent
Boo
k M
onito
ring
Nat
iona
l dat
abas
e M
ET-
PAS
S
20
14
500,
000
for l
aw e
nfor
cem
ent a
nd
on w
ildlif
e cr
ime
inci
denc
es
Sys
tem
use
d bo
th b
y ac
cess
ible
to c
once
rned
C
onse
rvan
cies,
-2
022
im
plem
enta
tion
with
rega
rd
and
offe
nder
s co
nser
vanc
ies
and
Par
k st
akeh
olde
rs
NA
MP
OL
to
the
illeg
al tr
ade
in fa
una
st
aff
an
d flo
ra a
nd d
eriv
ed p
rodu
cts
Pro
mot
e st
rong
par
tner
ship
and
N
o fo
rmal
par
tner
ship
Tr
aini
ng p
rogr
amm
es o
n M
ET-
PAS
S
20
14
760,
000
42 43
St
rate
gic
Initi
ativ
e In
dica
tive
Act
iviti
es
Bas
elin
e In
dica
tor(
s)
Lead
Pa
rtne
rs
Tim
e C
ost
N$
02/2
013
A
genc
y
fram
e
co
oper
atio
n be
twee
n re
leva
nt
arra
ngem
ents
bet
wee
n pr
iorit
y ar
eas
such
as
Con
serv
anci
es,
-202
2
law
enf
orce
men
t sta
keho
lder
s st
akeh
olde
rs
“crim
e-sc
ene”
trai
ning
; N
AM
PO
L,
(in
clud
ing
at re
gion
al le
vel)
and
jo
int l
aw e
nfor
cem
ent
MH
AI,
ND
F
faci
litat
e tra
inin
g pr
ogra
mm
e fo
r
mec
hani
sms
and
patro
ls;
all e
nfor
cem
ent d
epar
tmen
ts
re
gion
al c
oope
ratio
n on
in
clud
ing
loca
l com
mun
ities
wild
life
crim
e in
TFC
As
Dev
elop
mec
hani
sms
for r
epor
ting
No
rew
ards
sys
tem
N
ew m
echa
nism
s fo
r M
ET-
PAS
S
NA
MP
OL
2014
1,
000,
000
w
ildlif
e cr
ime,
rew
ards
for i
nfor
mat
ion
re
port
ing
wild
life
crim
e;
-202
2
and
revi
ew m
echa
nism
s fo
r
fine
amou
nts;
suc
cess
pr
osec
utio
ns a
nd a
ppro
pria
te
ra
te o
f pro
secu
tions
;
pe
nalti
es
tim
e pe
riod
for p
rose
cutio
n
S
treng
then
the
capa
city
of t
he
Num
ber o
f arr
ests
and
MAW
F N
AM
PO
L
2013
1,
000,
000
M
AWF,
loca
l com
mun
ities
and
pr
osec
utio
ns fo
r ille
gal
-2
022
re
leva
nt in
stitu
tions
to c
arry
out
lo
ggin
g
fore
st la
w e
nfor
cem
ent,
incl
udin
g
issu
ing
of p
erm
its, m
onito
ring,
arre
sts
and
fines
3.3
By
2020
, Gen
etic
div
ersi
ty o
f cul
tivat
ed p
lant
s an
d fa
rmed
ani
mal
s is
mai
ntai
ned
and
enha
nced
K
ey P
erfo
rman
ce In
dica
tors
:
•Stra
tegytodevelopandpromoteindigenouslivestockbreedsandcropvarietiesfora
doptionbylocalfarmers
•
Operationalinstitutionalframew
orkinplacetoim
plem
entandenforceBiosafetyActof200
63.
3.1
Mai
ntai
n an
d en
hanc
e th
e D
evel
op a
nd s
treng
then
D
raft
bill
on p
lant
Le
gisl
atio
n in
pla
ce to
M
AWF
CS
Os,
NA
B,
2013
25
0,00
0
gene
tic d
iver
sity
of l
ives
tock
ex
istin
g le
gisl
atio
n to
br
eedi
ng p
rote
ctio
n pr
otec
t the
gen
etic
div
ersi
ty
U
NA
M, P
oN,
-202
2
and
crop
spe
cies
thr
ough
pr
otec
t cul
tivat
ed p
lant
s (M
AWF)
of
cul
tivat
ed p
lant
s an
d
ef
fect
ive
in-s
itu a
nd e
x-si
tu
and
dom
estic
ated
ani
mal
s
farm
ed a
nim
als
cons
erva
tion
mea
sure
s an
d
the
safe
use
of b
iote
chno
logy
to
impr
ove
food
sec
urity
and
cl
imat
e re
silie
nce
of a
gric
ultu
re
Impr
ove
the
long
-term
con
serv
atio
n Fa
rm A
nim
al G
enet
ic
Cha
ract
eriz
atio
n of
M
AWF
NAU
, NN
FU
2013
2,
000,
000
of
indi
geno
us li
vest
ock
bree
ds
Res
ourc
es P
rogr
amm
e of
liv
esto
ck b
reed
s; n
umbe
r
-2
022
th
roug
h c
hara
cter
izat
ion
and
MAW
F an
d FA
O
of in
dige
nous
bre
ed li
vest
ock
in-s
itu a
nd e
x-si
tu c
onse
rvat
ion
impr
ovem
ent p
rogr
amm
es;
ex-s
itu c
onse
rvat
ion
of b
reed
s
Sup
port
the
NP
GR
C w
ith h
uman
Num
ber o
f ger
mpl
asm
M
AWF
PoN
, UN
AM
20
13
1,00
0,00
0
and
finan
cial
reso
urce
s fo
r the
colle
cted
and
cha
ract
eriz
ed
-202
2
cons
erva
tion
of in
dige
nous
cro
p
spec
ies
and
othe
r rar
e, th
reat
ened
and
usef
ul in
dige
nous
pla
nt s
peci
es.
S
treng
then
pro
gram
mes
for t
he
Farm
Ani
mal
Gen
etic
N
umbe
r of c
rop
culti
vars
and
M
AWF
CS
Os
2013
7,0
00,0
00
44 45
St
rate
gic
Initi
ativ
e In
dica
tive
Act
iviti
es
Bas
elin
e In
dica
tor(
s)
Lead
Pa
rtne
rs
Tim
e C
ost
N$
02/2
013
A
genc
y
fram
e
di
strib
utio
n of
indi
geno
us li
vest
ock
Res
ourc
es P
rogr
amm
e liv
esto
ck b
reed
s w
ith
-202
2
br
eeds
and
dro
ught
-ada
pted
cro
p of
MAW
F an
d FA
O
tole
ranc
e to
abi
otic
stre
sses
cu
ltiva
rs to
loca
l com
mun
ities
adop
ted
by fa
rmer
s
Con
duct
an
awar
enes
s ca
mpa
ign
No
dedi
cate
d aw
aren
ess
Aw
aren
ess
cam
paig
n an
d M
AWF
ME
T, N
GO
s 20
15
600,
000
on th
e ut
ility
of i
ndig
enou
s liv
esto
ck
cam
paig
n th
e nu
mbe
r of s
take
hold
ers
br
eeds
and
dro
ught
-ada
pted
cro
p
reac
hed
cu
ltiva
rs, p
artic
ular
ly in
ligh
t of
cl
imat
e ch
ange
3.
3.2
Stre
ngth
en c
apac
ity a
n E
nhan
ce in
stitu
tiona
l cap
acity
B
iosa
fety
Act
of 2
006
Reg
ulat
ions
of t
he b
iosa
fety
N
BAC
2013
30
0,00
0
inst
itutio
nal f
ram
ewor
ks s
o th
at
to im
plem
ent a
nd e
nfor
ce th
e
act g
azet
ted;
Nat
iona
l
-2
022
th
ey a
re e
quip
ped
to im
plem
ent
natio
nal b
iosa
fety
fram
ewor
k
bios
afet
y co
unci
l ope
ratio
nal
an
d en
forc
e th
e pr
ovis
ions
of t
he
Bio
safe
ty A
ct o
f 200
6
Stre
ngth
en in
frast
ruct
ure
and
La
bora
tory
faci
litie
s in
N
BAC
2022
5,
000,
000
ca
paci
ty o
f key
sta
keho
lder
s to
plac
e an
d nu
mbe
r of
mon
itor a
nd m
anag
e th
e ris
ks
st
akeh
olde
rs tr
aine
d
as
soci
ated
with
the
hand
ling,
tra
nspo
rt, u
se, t
rans
fer a
nd
rele
ase
of li
ving
mod
ified
or
gani
sms
R
aise
pub
lic a
war
enes
s an
d
Aw
aren
ess
prog
ram
me
and
NB
AC
20
13
300,
000
re
gion
al in
form
atio
n sh
arin
g
stak
ehol
ders
reac
hed
thro
ugh
-202
2
on b
iosa
fety
issu
es
pr
ogra
mm
e; re
gion
al
co
oper
atio
n on
bio
safe
ty
Stra
tegi
c G
oal 4
: Enh
ance
the
bene
fits
to a
ll fr
om b
iodi
vers
ity a
nd e
cosy
stem
ser
vice
s
4.1
By
2022
, eco
syst
ems
that
pro
vide
ess
entia
l ser
vice
s an
d co
ntri
bute
to h
ealth
, liv
elih
oods
and
wel
l-bei
ng a
re s
afeg
uard
ed, a
nd re
stor
atio
n pr
ogra
mm
es h
ave
been
initi
ated
for
de
grad
ed e
cosy
stem
s co
veri
ng a
t lea
st 1
5 pe
r cen
t of
the
prio
rity
are
as
K
ey P
erfo
rman
ce In
dica
tor:
•AreaundersustainableCBNRMandbenefitstoinvolvedcom
munities
•
Enforcementofagreementsre
achedunderthedifferenttransboundarywatercom
missions
•
Implem
entationofIntegratedW
aterResourcesManagem
entP
lan
•
Areaofdegradedecosystemsandidentifiedpriorityareasfora
ction
•
Num
bero
frehabilitationandrestorationprogrammesandareacovered
4.1.
1 C
onso
lidat
e an
d fu
rthe
r In
crea
se th
e su
stai
nabi
lity
23 fi
nanc
ially
sel
f-suf
ficie
nt
Num
ber o
f fina
ncia
lly
ME
T
NAC
SO
20
13
200,
000
stre
ngth
en th
e of
inco
me
gene
rate
d co
nser
vanc
ies;
tota
l inc
ome
self-
suffi
cien
t con
serv
anci
es
-202
2
impl
emen
tatio
n of
the
by c
onse
rvan
cies
of
N$5
0 m
illio
n ge
nera
ted
C
BN
RM
Pol
icy
and
Prog
ram
mes
by c
onse
rvan
cies
in 2
011
P
rom
ote
sust
aina
ble
and
inte
grat
ed
48 c
onse
rvan
cies
ope
ratin
g N
umbe
r of c
onse
rvan
cies
M
ET
MAW
F,
2013
1,
200,
000
44 45
St
rate
gic
Initi
ativ
e In
dica
tive
Act
iviti
es
Bas
elin
e In
dica
tor(
s)
Lead
Pa
rtne
rs
Tim
e C
ost
N$
02/2
013
A
genc
y
fram
e
m
anag
emen
t by
cons
erva
ncie
s an
d ac
cord
ing
to m
anag
emen
t an
d co
mm
unity
fore
sts
with
NAC
SO
-2
022
com
mun
ity fo
rest
s in
line
with
pl
ans
inte
grat
ed m
anag
emen
t pla
ns
CB
NR
M p
olic
y
Im
prov
e qu
ota
setti
ng a
nd
Quo
ta s
ettin
g sy
stem
s in
D
ata
from
ann
ual g
ame
coun
ts;
ME
T N
ACS
O
2013
10
0,00
0
man
agem
ent s
yste
ms
acro
ss fo
r pl
ace
num
ber o
f quo
tas
allo
cate
d to
-2
022
w
ildlif
e re
sour
ces
so u
tiliz
atio
n is
cons
erva
ncie
s; in
com
e an
d
both
sus
tain
able
and
max
imis
es
em
ploy
men
t thr
ough
trop
hy
so
cio-
econ
omic
retu
rns
to
hu
ntin
g an
d ot
her w
ildlif
e us
es
co
nser
vanc
ies
S
uppo
rt co
nser
vanc
ies
to im
plem
ent
8 hu
man
live
s lo
st; 2
420
A
nnua
l ins
tanc
es o
f M
ET
NAC
SO
20
13
2,100
,000
th
e N
atio
nal P
olic
y on
Hum
an
inst
ance
s of
cro
p da
mag
e;
hum
an w
ildlif
e co
nflic
t;
-2
022
W
ildlif
e C
onfli
ct M
anag
emen
t 30
1 in
stan
ces
of li
vest
ock
Num
ber o
f con
serv
anci
es
loss
dur
ing
2010
-201
1 im
plem
entin
g hu
man
fin
anci
al y
ear
wild
life
self-
relia
nce
sche
me
4.1.
2 Fo
ster
the
impl
emen
tatio
n of
Fi
naliz
e th
e re
vise
d W
ater
W
ater
Res
ourc
es
M
AWF
20
15
200,
000
in
tegr
ated
wat
er m
anag
emen
t R
esou
rces
Man
agem
ent A
ct
Man
agem
ent A
ct a
nd
pl
ans,
incl
udin
g re
stor
atio
n an
d an
d es
tabl
ish
the
Wat
er
Wat
er a
nd S
anita
tion
prot
ectio
n of
cri
tical
wet
land
s an
d S
anita
tion
Adv
isor
y C
ounc
il A
dvis
ory
Cou
ncil
in p
lace
sy
stem
s, a
nd ta
king
into
acc
ount
tr
ansb
ound
ary
issu
es
Est
ablis
h an
d st
reng
then
bas
in
Four
Bas
in M
anag
emen
t N
umbe
r of b
asin
man
agem
ent
MAW
F C
SO
s 20
22
300,
000
m
anag
emen
t com
mitt
ees
for a
ll C
omm
ittee
s co
mm
ittee
s an
d ba
sin
desi
gnat
ed b
asin
s an
d im
plem
ent
m
anag
emen
t pla
ns o
pera
tiona
l
ba
sin
man
agem
ent p
lans
for e
ach
Mon
itor t
he q
uant
ity a
nd q
ualit
y of
W
ater
qua
lity
and
quan
tity
M
AWF
20
13
1,00
0,00
0
wat
er re
sour
ces
com
preh
ensi
vely
re
cord
s
-202
2
and
regu
larly
Par
ticip
ate
activ
ely
in tr
ansb
ound
ary
Nam
ibia
is s
igna
tory
to
Exa
mpl
es o
f reg
iona
l M
AWF
ME
T, C
SO
s 20
14
140,
000
riv
er c
omm
issi
ons
to im
prov
e re
gion
al
four
Riv
er C
omm
issi
ons
inte
grat
ion
in th
e
-2
022
co
oper
atio
n on
wat
er re
sour
ces
tra
nsbo
unda
ry m
anag
emen
t
man
agem
ent
of
rive
r bas
ins
S
treng
then
the
exis
ting
wet
land
s W
etla
nds
wor
king
gro
up
Wet
land
s gr
oup
in p
lace
M
ET
MAW
F, M
FMR
, 201
4 15
0,00
0
w
orki
ng g
roup
to im
prov
e th
e
and
outp
uts
mea
sure
d
PoN
, UN
AM
-2
022
pr
otec
tion
of th
reat
ened
wet
land
ha
bita
ts
Fina
lise
and
impl
emen
t the
Wet
land
s D
raft
wet
land
s po
licy
App
rove
d w
etla
nds
polic
y M
ET
MAW
F, M
FMR
, 201
4 25
0,00
0
P
olic
y
PoN
, UN
AM
-2
022
D
evel
op a
nd im
plem
ent m
anag
emen
t N
one
App
rove
d m
anag
emen
t pla
ns
ME
T M
AWF,
MFM
R 2
020
,200
,000
pl
ans
for i
mpr
oved
con
serv
atio
n of
in p
lace
for R
amsa
r Site
s;
N
amib
ia's
Ram
sar S
ites
da
ta o
n w
ater
qua
lity;
bird
46
Stra
tegi
c In
itiat
ive
Indi
cativ
e A
ctiv
ities
B
asel
ine
Indi
cato
r(s)
Le
ad
Part
ners
Ti
me
Cos
t N
$
02
/201
3
Age
ncy
fr
ame
coun
ts; r
esto
ratio
n pr
ogra
mm
e
fo
r Ora
nge
Riv
er M
outh
Cre
ate
addi
tiona
l Wet
land
P
roce
ss to
pro
clai
m th
e N
umbe
r of n
ew R
amsa
r Site
s M
ET
MAW
F, P
oN,
2013
2,
000,
000
C
onse
rvat
ion
Are
as
sect
ion
of th
e O
kava
ngo
UN
AM
, CS
Os
-202
2
at
Mah
ango
as
a R
amsa
r
S
ite u
nder
way
4.1.
3 U
nder
take
the
reha
bilit
atio
n C
arry
out
a d
etai
led
stud
y to
M
onito
ring
of d
egra
datio
n A
sses
smen
t stu
dy o
n M
ET
MFM
R, M
ME
, 20
15
1,00
0,00
0
and
rest
orat
ion
of la
nd d
egra
ded
asse
ss a
nd d
ocum
ent e
cosy
stem
s du
e to
min
ing
in N
amib
ex
tent
of d
egra
ded
ecos
yste
ms
M
AWF,
GTR
C
th
roug
h un
sust
aina
ble
land
th
at a
re d
egra
ded
and
prio
ritiz
e D
eser
t and
rese
arch
m
anag
emen
t pra
ctic
es a
nd
thos
e th
at n
eed
to b
e un
dert
aken
on
rest
orat
ion
esta
blis
h bi
odiv
ersi
ty o
ffse
ts
reha
bilit
ated
and
rest
ored
of
bio
dive
rsity
afte
r min
ing
th
roug
h G
TRC
D
evel
op re
habi
litat
ion
guid
elin
es
Reh
abili
tatio
n ac
tiviti
es in
R
ehab
ilita
tion
guid
elin
es;
MM
E
ME
T, C
oM,
2015
1,
500,
000
an
d be
st p
ract
ice
appr
oach
es fo
r m
inin
g ar
eas
in th
e aw
ards
sch
eme
for b
est
G
TRC
land
deg
rade
d by
min
ing
S
perr
gebi
et
prac
tices
app
lied
by
co
mpa
nies
Inve
stig
ate
the
pote
ntia
l for
N
one
Num
ber o
f bio
dive
rsity
M
ET
MM
E, C
oM,
2014
1,
800,
000
es
tabl
ishi
ng a
bio
dive
rsity
offs
et c
ases
in N
amib
ia
C
SO
s -2
022
of
fset
s sy
stem
in N
amib
ia
Fa
cilit
ate
the
sust
aina
ble
debu
shin
g N
atio
nal d
e-bu
shin
g A
rea
of la
nd d
e-bu
shed
M
AWF
ME
T, M
ME
, 20
13
1,00
0,00
0
of u
ndes
irabl
e bu
sh s
peci
es in
pr
ogra
mm
e an
nual
ly; e
mpl
oym
ent a
nd
C
SO
s -2
022
af
fect
ed a
reas
reve
nue
gene
rate
d th
roug
h
de
-bus
hing
; SE
A o
n ch
arco
al
in
dust
ry
4.2
By
2015
, nat
iona
l leg
isla
tion
givi
ng e
ffect
to th
e N
agoy
a P
roto
col i
s in
forc
e an
d by
201
8, f
ully
ope
ratio
nal t
o en
sure
that
ben
efits
are
fair
and
equi
tabl
y sh
ared
from
the
co
nser
vatio
n an
d su
stai
nabl
e us
e of
bio
dive
rsity
Ke
y Pe
rfor
man
ce In
dica
tor:
•
Acc
essi
on to
the
Nag
oya
Pro
toco
l
• G
azet
ting
of A
BS
nat
iona
l leg
isla
tion
and
regu
latio
n
• In
stitu
tiona
l arr
ange
men
ts in
pla
ce in
clud
ing
the
Com
pete
nt N
atio
nal A
utho
rity
and
Nat
iona
l Foc
al P
oint
(Gen
etic
Res
ourc
es a
nd T
radi
tiona
l Kno
wle
dge
Uni
t with
in M
ET)
, and
nat
iona
l
bi
opro
spec
ting
acco
unt w
ithin
EIF
•
Num
ber o
f AB
S a
gree
men
ts4.
2.1
Fina
lize
and
impl
emen
t the
A
cced
e to
the
Nag
oya
Pro
toco
l A
BS
Bill
N
agoy
a P
roto
col a
cced
ed to
M
ET
20
13
200,
000
pr
oces
ses
of a
cced
ing
to th
e an
d en
act a
nd im
plem
ent
an
d A
BS
Act
in p
lace
and
-2
022
N
agoy
a Pr
otoc
ol a
s w
ell a
s th
e na
tiona
l AB
S le
gisl
atio
n
unde
r im
plem
enta
tion
Acc
ess
to G
enet
ic R
esou
rces
and
Ass
ocia
ted
Trad
ition
al
K
now
ledg
e B
ill
E
stab
lish
Gen
etic
Res
ourc
es
Inte
rim B
iopr
ospe
ctin
g C
ompe
tent
Nat
iona
l Aut
horit
y M
ET
20
14
1,00
0,00
0
46 47
St
rate
gic
Initi
ativ
e In
dica
tive
Act
iviti
es
Bas
elin
e In
dica
tor(
s)
Lead
Pa
rtne
rs
Tim
e C
ost
N$
02/2
013
A
genc
y
fram
e
an
d Tr
aditi
onal
Kno
wle
dge
Uni
t C
omm
ittee
in p
lace
w
ithin
ME
T
E
stab
lish
the
Nat
iona
l N
o ac
coun
t N
atio
nal B
iopr
ospe
ctin
g M
ET
EIF
2016
50
,000
Bio
pros
pect
ing
Acc
ount
with
in E
IF
A
ccou
nt fu
nctio
nal w
ithin
EIF
P
rom
ote
awar
enes
s of
the
Reg
iona
l con
sulta
tions
and
N
umbe
r of a
war
enes
s M
ET
prov
isio
ns o
f the
AB
S A
ct a
nd
awar
enes
s un
dert
aken
on
even
ts a
nd s
take
hold
ers
2013
- 50
0,00
0
of b
iotra
de a
nd b
iopr
ospe
ctin
g AB
S bi
ll for
par
liam
enta
rians
re
ache
d
20
22
po
tent
ial
and
loca
l and
regi
onal
st
akeh
olde
rs
S
uppo
rt co
mm
uniti
es to
neg
otia
te
Agr
eem
ents
for
Num
ber o
f AB
S a
gree
men
ts
ME
T C
SO
s 20
13
300,
000
furt
her A
BS
agr
eem
ents
C
omm
ipho
ra a
nd M
arul
a,
-2
022
an
d ho
odia
4.2.
2 Fa
cilit
ate
biop
rosp
ectin
g an
d S
uppo
rt th
e ex
pans
ion
of th
e IP
TT e
stab
lishe
d in
200
1;
Dev
elop
men
t of n
ew p
rodu
cts
IPTT
M
AWF,
ME
T,
2013
2,
000,
000
bi
otra
de a
ctiv
ities
in
indi
geno
us n
atur
al p
lant
In
dige
nous
Kno
wle
dge
and
mar
kets
; par
tner
ship
s
MTI
, MC
A,
-202
2
acco
rdan
ce w
ith le
gisl
atio
n pr
oduc
ts s
ecto
r to
enco
urag
e S
yste
ms
and
Tech
nolo
gy
with
the
priv
ate
sect
or
P
oN, U
NA
M,
va
lue
addi
tion,
sus
tain
able
Fo
od P
rogr
amm
e at
UN
AM
an
d A
BS
agr
eem
ents
BM
CC
,
ente
rpris
es a
nd th
e up
liftm
ent
N
ACS
O
of lo
cal c
omm
uniti
es
Est
ablis
h ap
prop
riate
rese
arch
N
o re
sear
ch fa
cilit
y R
esea
rch
faci
lity
in p
lace
; M
ET
MAW
F, N
CR
ST,
201
3 10
0,00
0
fa
cilit
ies
dedi
cate
d to
bio
trade
inve
stm
ents
, rev
enue
and
IPTT
, NB
RI,
-2
022
an
d bi
opro
spec
ting
em
ploy
men
t gen
erat
ed
P
oN, U
NA
M
th
roug
h bi
otra
de a
nd
biop
rosp
ectin
g
Stre
ngth
en c
apac
ity to
rese
arch
Li
mite
d N
amib
ian
Ded
icat
ed re
sear
ch
UN
AM
M
YN
SS
C,
2013
30
0,00
0
and
deve
lop
com
mer
cial
pro
duct
s kn
owle
dge
and
rese
arch
pr
ogra
mm
e in
pla
ce
M
AWF,
ME
T,
-202
2
from
mic
robi
al o
rgan
ism
s,
capa
city
fo
r the
se o
rgan
ism
s
MFM
R, P
oN
ex
trem
ophy
tes,
end
ophy
tes
and
mar
ine
orga
nism
s
Stra
tegi
c G
oal 5
: Enh
ance
impl
emen
tatio
n of
NB
SAP2
thro
ugh
part
icip
ator
y pl
anni
ng, k
now
ledg
e m
anag
emen
t and
cap
acity
bui
ldin
g
5.1
By
2020
, Tra
ditio
nal k
now
ledg
e an
d th
e in
nova
tions
and
pra
ctic
es o
f ind
igen
ous
and
loca
l com
mun
ities
rele
vant
to th
e co
nser
vatio
n an
d su
stai
nabl
e us
e of
bio
dive
rsity
are
re
cogn
ised
, res
pect
ed a
nd p
rom
oted
K
ey P
erfo
rman
ce In
dica
tor:
Bioculturalprotocolsandpracticesoflocalcom
munitiesdocum
entedaccordingtomutuallyagreedterm
s
System(s)inplacetoprotectanddocum
enttraditionalknowledgeasabasisforresearchanddevelopm
entofcom
mercialbiodiversityproducts
5.1.
1 Pr
omot
e th
e ro
le o
f tra
ditio
nal
Dev
elop
a m
echa
nism
to
No
mec
hani
sm i
n pl
ace
Mec
hani
sm d
ocum
entin
g M
ET
UN
AM
, PoN
, 20
16
2,00
0,00
0
know
ledg
e, in
nova
tions
and
m
aint
ain,
reco
gnis
e, p
rote
ct
an
d pr
otec
ting
tradi
tiona
l
TAs,
CS
Os
prac
tices
in th
e m
anag
emen
t an
d do
cum
ent t
radi
tiona
l
know
ledg
e
know
ledg
e re
latin
g to
48
St
rate
gic
Initi
ativ
e In
dica
tive
Act
iviti
es
Bas
elin
e In
dica
tor(
s)
Lead
Pa
rtne
rs
Tim
e C
ost
N$
02/2
013
A
genc
y
fram
e
an
d us
e of
biod
iver
sity
in d
iffer
ent
co
mm
uniti
es
Fa
cilit
ate
the
deve
lopm
ent o
f O
ndon
ga a
nd O
ukw
ambi
N
umbe
r of b
io-c
ultu
ral
ME
T TA
s, R
Cs,
20
14
250,
000
bi
ocul
tura
l pro
toco
ls w
ith lo
cal
tradi
tiona
l law
s do
cum
ente
d pr
otoc
ols
U
NA
M, P
oN
-202
2
com
mun
ities
to in
crea
se
aw
aren
ess
and
so th
at
co
mm
uniti
es c
an c
ontro
l the
erm
s an
d co
nditi
ons
unde
r whi
ch
loca
l res
ourc
es a
re a
cces
sed
Inco
rpor
ate
cust
oms,
pra
ctic
es a
nd
Non
e Is
sues
of t
radi
tiona
l M
oE
UN
AM
, PoN
, 20
15
1,00
0,00
0
tradi
tiona
l kno
wle
dge
in e
duca
tion
kn
owle
dge
in s
choo
l
cu
rric
ula
at p
rimar
y, s
econ
dary
and
tert
iary
cur
ricul
a
sc
hool
and
tert
iary
leve
ls
Em
pow
er tr
aditi
onal
aut
horit
ies
in
Trai
ning
doe
s no
t exi
st
Trai
ning
repo
rts
and
ME
T U
NA
M, P
oN,
2013
1,
000,
000
th
e ef
fect
ive
loca
l lev
el g
over
nanc
e
num
ber o
f TA
s tra
ined
NG
Os
-202
2
of b
iodi
vers
ity
Pro
mot
e m
echa
nism
s th
at fa
cilit
ate
Non
e R
egul
ar e
xcha
nge
fora
U
NA
M a
nd
ME
T, M
oE
2018
40
,000
th
e ha
rmon
isat
ion
of tr
aditi
onal
and
betw
een
reso
urce
man
ager
s P
oN
scie
ntifi
c kn
owle
dge
an
d sc
ient
ists
5.
2 B
y 20
22, k
now
ledg
e, s
cien
ce b
ase
and
tech
nolo
gies
rela
ting
to b
iodi
vers
ity a
nd e
cosy
stem
man
agem
ent a
re im
prov
ed a
nd m
ade
rele
vant
to p
oliti
cal d
ecis
ion-
mak
ers
K
ey P
erfo
rman
ce In
dica
tor:
•Trendsinthenumbero
fresearchpaperspublishedonbiodiversityfrom
PoN
,UNAMandotheracademicre
searchinstitutions
•
Trendsinthenumbero
fresearchprojectsonbiodiversityundertakenbystatere
searchinstitutions(G
obabebTRC,E
toshaEcologicalInstitute,NBRI,NAT
MIRC,D
ART,DoF
)
•Investmentandpartnershipsinbiodiversity-relatedre
search,technologiesandinfra
structure
•
Policybriefsfrom
researchfindingsre
latingtobiodiversity
5.2.
1 Pr
omot
e an
d en
cour
age
rese
arch
D
evel
op re
gion
al c
entre
s of
2
RC
Es
for K
hom
as a
nd
Num
ber o
f RC
Es
MoE
N
CR
ST,
PoN
, 7
by 2
018
10,0
00,
th
at c
ontr
ibut
es to
the
know
ledg
e ex
pert
ise
on s
usta
inab
le
Ero
ngo
UN
AM
, ME
T an
d 11
by
000
an
d un
ders
tand
ing
of N
amib
ia’s
de
velo
pmen
t in
each
regi
on
2022
biod
iver
sity
and
eco
syst
ems
se
rvic
es a
nd th
eir v
alue
s
Com
pile
and
syn
thes
ize
exis
ting
4th
Nat
iona
l Rep
ort t
o C
BD
Nat
iona
l Rep
orts
prin
ted
ME
T
2014
and
35
0,00
0
data
and
info
rmat
ion
on b
iodi
vers
ity
the
CB
D
and
wid
ely
dist
ribut
ed
2018
and
ecos
yste
ms
and
mak
e it
acce
ssib
le to
a w
ider
aud
ienc
e
E
stab
lish
a de
dica
ted
prog
ram
me
to
Youn
g P
rofe
ssio
nal
Num
ber o
f stu
dent
s su
ppor
ted
EIF
NC
RS
T, M
ET,
20
13
1,50
0,00
0
supp
ort t
ertia
ry le
vel N
amib
ian
Res
earc
h A
ssoc
iate
by
pro
gram
me
and
the
U
NA
M, P
oN
-202
2
stud
ents
with
rese
arch
on
Pro
gram
me
and
Sum
mer
nu
mbe
r of d
iffer
ent
biod
iver
sity
issu
es
Land
care
Pro
gram
me
prog
ram
mes
in p
lace
48 49
St
rate
gic
Initi
ativ
e In
dica
tive
Act
iviti
es
Bas
elin
e In
dica
tor(
s)
Lead
Pa
rtne
rs
Tim
e C
ost
N$
02/2
013
A
genc
y
fram
e
U
nder
take
and
con
tinuo
usly
upd
ate
Non
e Te
chno
logy
nee
ds
ME
T N
CR
ST,
fro
m 2
014
150,
000
a
tech
nolo
gy a
nd in
frast
ruct
ure
as
sess
men
t rep
ort a
nd
M
AWF,
MFM
R, -
2022
ne
eds
asse
ssm
ent f
or th
e
impl
emen
tatio
n of
PoN
, UN
AM
sust
aina
ble
man
agem
ent o
f
reco
mm
enda
tions
biod
iver
sity
Ass
ess
the
curr
ent c
apac
ity g
aps
A
sses
smen
t rep
ort a
nd
ME
T N
CR
ST, M
AWF,
201
5 18
0,00
0
in k
now
ledg
e an
d sc
ienc
e fo
r
impl
emen
tatio
n of
MFM
R, M
oE,
biod
iver
sity
con
serv
atio
n,
re
com
men
datio
ns
M
YN
SS
C,
ut
ilisa
tion
and
bene
fit -s
harin
g
PoN
,
and
feed
the
outc
omes
into
UN
AM
th
e cu
rric
ulum
5.2
.2
Enha
nce
natio
nal c
apac
ity in
E
stab
lish
a na
tiona
l wor
king
N
o bi
osys
tem
atic
s W
orki
ng g
roup
on
ME
T M
YN
SS
C,
2015
2,
500,
000
bi
osys
tem
atic
s to
pro
vide
gr
oup
on b
iosy
stem
atic
s w
orki
ng g
roup
bi
osys
tem
atic
s
NC
RS
T,
su
ppor
t to
biod
iver
sity
to
impr
ove
coop
erat
ion
U
NA
M,
co
nser
vatio
n m
anag
emen
t on
bio
syst
emat
ics
P
oN
Le
vera
ge in
crea
sed
inve
stm
ents
N
one
New
infra
stru
ctur
e in
clud
ing
MY
NS
SC
N
CR
ST,
ME
T,
2014
2,
000,
000
in
infra
stru
ctur
e an
d m
oder
n
a co
nser
vatio
n fa
cilit
y at
MAW
F,
-202
2
equi
pmen
t for
sto
rage
and
natio
nal m
useu
m a
nd
M
FMR
,
colle
ctio
n of
bio
syst
emat
ics-
mod
ern
equi
pmen
t for
PoN
, UN
AM
rela
ted
data
bios
yste
mat
ics
D
evel
op a
trai
ning
pro
gram
me
for
Non
e N
umbe
r of s
peci
alis
ts a
nd
MY
NS
SC
N
CR
ST,
ME
T,
2018
1,
700,
000
sp
ecia
lists
and
tech
nici
ans
to
te
chni
cian
s tra
ined
and
MAW
F,
ad
dres
s th
e sh
orta
ge o
f sta
ff
num
ber o
f tra
inin
g
MFM
R,
in
bio
syst
emat
ics
pr
ogra
mm
es u
nder
take
n
PoN
, UN
AM
Dev
elop
info
rmat
ion
tech
nolo
gy
Priv
atel
y-ru
n W
eb-b
ased
M
ET
MY
NS
SC
, 20
14
200,
000
sy
stem
s an
d da
taba
ses
to m
anag
e bi
osys
tem
atic
s da
taba
se
bios
yste
mat
ics
data
base
MAW
F,
an
d im
prov
e ac
cess
to b
iosy
stem
atic
MFM
R,
da
ta
P
oN, U
NA
M
Dev
elop
a d
edic
ated
pro
gram
me
for
K
now
ledg
e ba
se o
n U
NA
M
NC
RS
T,
2013
1,
000,
000
im
prov
ing
Nam
ibia
's k
now
ledg
e of
mic
robi
al d
iver
sity
MAW
F, M
ET,
-2
022
m
icro
bial
div
ersi
ty a
nd it
s po
ssib
le
de
velo
ped
M
FMR
,
uses
for d
evel
opm
ent
M
YN
SS
C
5.2.
3 Fo
ster
inte
rnat
iona
l coo
pera
tion
Stre
ngth
en c
oope
ratio
n TF
CA
s tre
atie
s an
d N
umbe
r of b
iodi
vers
ity-r
elat
ed
ME
T N
CR
ST,
20
13
800,
000
an
d op
port
uniti
es fo
r inf
orm
atio
n w
ith n
eigh
bour
ing
coun
tries
S
AD
C T
reat
y ex
ist
part
ners
hips
UN
AM
, PoN
, -2
022
ex
chan
ge a
nd s
uppo
rt in
the
field
an
d in
tern
atio
nal o
rgan
isat
ions
CS
Os
of
bio
dive
rsity
at t
he re
gion
al a
nd
on k
ey re
sear
ch a
reas
suc
h
inte
rnat
iona
l lev
el fo
r mut
ual
as e
cosy
stem
ser
vice
s an
d
bene
fit
valu
e ad
ditio
n
Stre
ngth
en N
amib
ia's
par
ticip
atio
n N
amib
ia is
sig
nato
ry to
N
umbe
r of M
EA
mee
tings
M
ET
20
13
1,00
0,00
0
in a
nd in
tegr
ated
impl
emen
tatio
n of
al
l env
ironm
enta
l ME
As
atte
nded
ann
ually
; rep
ortin
g
-2
022
50
St
rate
gic
Initi
ativ
e In
dica
tive
Act
iviti
es
Bas
elin
e In
dica
tor(
s)
Lead
Pa
rtne
rs
Tim
e C
ost
N$
02/2
013
A
genc
y
fram
e
M
EA
s re
late
d to
bio
dive
rsity
requ
irem
ents
to M
EA
s fu
lfille
d
5.2.
4 D
evel
op th
e m
odal
ities
of a
E
stab
lish
a sc
ienc
e-po
licy
po
ssib
le s
cien
ce p
olic
y in
terf
ace
to c
omm
unic
ate
S
cien
ce-p
olic
y in
terf
ace
ME
T N
CR
ST,
20
16
1,00
0,00
0
inte
rfac
e on
env
iron
men
tal
envi
ronm
ent-r
elat
ed re
sear
ch
P
oN, U
NA
M
is
sues
fin
ding
s to
pol
icy
and
de
cisi
on- m
aker
s5.
3 B
y 20
22, m
obili
zatio
n of
fina
ncia
l res
ourc
es fr
om a
ll so
urce
s ha
s be
en in
crea
sed
com
pare
d to
the
peri
od 2
008-
2012
to a
llow
for t
he e
ffec
tive
impl
emen
tatio
n of
this
st
rate
gy a
nd a
ctio
n pl
an
Key
Per
form
ance
Indi
cato
rs:
•
VolumeofDom
esticFundingperannum
•Increaseinthenumbero
fsources(includingprivatesector)
•
VolumeofOfficialDevelopmentA
ssistance(multi-lateralandbi-lateral)
5.3.
1 D
evel
op a
nd re
alis
e a
Ass
ess
base
line
leve
l of
No
com
preh
ensi
ve
Ann
ual r
esou
rces
allo
cate
d M
ET
EIF
2013
25
0,00
0
com
preh
ensi
ve re
sour
ce
finan
cial
reso
urce
s m
ade
base
line
to b
iodi
vers
ity m
anag
emen
t
mob
iliza
tion
stra
tegy
for
avai
labl
e fo
r bio
dive
rsity
thro
ugh
Gov
ernm
ent,
dono
r
impl
emen
tatio
n of
NB
SAP2
m
anag
emen
t
ag
enci
es a
nd p
rivat
e se
ctor
Inte
grat
e th
e co
sts
of
No
reso
urce
s al
loca
ted
Dom
estic
bud
geta
ry
MoF
N
PC
, ME
T 20
14
1,00
0,00
0
mpl
emen
tatio
n of
NB
SA
P2
al
loca
tion
tow
ards
-2
022
in
to th
e na
tiona
l bud
get a
nd
N
BS
AP
2 im
plem
enta
tion
lo
bby
for i
ncre
ased
ann
ual
co
ntrib
utio
ns
R
epor
t to
the
12th
Con
fere
nce
of
Non
e R
epor
t on
finan
cial
gap
s M
ET
20
14
1,00
0,00
0
Par
ties
(CoP
) to
the
CB
D o
n
and
prio
ritie
s in
NB
SA
P2;
Nam
ibia
's fi
nanc
ial g
aps
and
fu
ndin
g m
obili
zed
into
prio
ritie
s fo
r NB
SA
P2
pr
iorit
y ar
eas
impl
emen
tatio
n
D
evel
op n
ew a
nd re
vise
exi
stin
g E
xist
ing
inst
rum
ents
suc
h Vo
lum
e of
reve
nue
EIF
ME
T, M
oF
2013
1,
000,
000
m
arke
t-bas
ed e
nviro
nmen
tal
as p
erm
its a
nd p
ark
gene
rate
d an
d in
vest
ed
-202
2
reve
nue
stre
ams
for s
usta
inab
le
entra
nce
fees
th
roug
h ne
w a
nd re
vise
d
fin
anci
ng o
f bio
dive
rsity
prio
ritie
s
exis
ting
mar
ket-b
ased
in
stru
men
ts
50 51
7. FUNDING PLAN AND STRATEGY
A conservative estimate of the funding required to fully implement the strategy and action plan is N$ 494 mil-lion over the next nine years. The estimated costs of indicative activities is included in the last column of the Action Plan.
These figures refer only to these specific activities but not to the ministerial operational budget framing them.
Inadequate funding levels are a major impediment to effective national biodiversity conservation and can severely affect the attainment of set targets. Unfortunately conservation spending baseline data is difficult to collate and incomplete in many countries. Namibia is no exception. It is therefore vital that activities are under-taken to quantify the relative adequacy of the levels of Namibian’s conservation finance.
It is also important that such baseline assessment adequately carry out a gap analysis of the level of under-funding in biodiversity conservation. Pointers can be derived from previous estimates of the MET’s Strategic Plan which had annual spending need for implementation close to three times higher than the average budget appropriations of the MET’s Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF). Rough estimates during the NB-SAP I period depicts government spending accounting between 65%-75% of total biodiversity funding on average, whilst donor aid covered the remaining 25%. This underpins the strategic importance of donor aid in ensuring optimal conservation funding in Namibia and in narrowing funding gaps.
Leveraging on ensuring the diversification of sources of funding as a strategy is also very important. This should ensure that domestic spending is aided by donor spending, private philanthropy and conservation trust funds. Finally innovative forms of financing should also be explored to ensure that appropriate economic in-struments and financing mechanisms are identified and utilised. The utilisation of such economic instruments and financial mechanisms should be driven by their practicality in implementation as well as their congruency with the broader economic, political and social and equity dynamics of the country.
8. REFERENCES1. Convention on Biological Diversity (2007): Mainstreaming biodiversity into sectoral and cross-sectoral
strategies, plans and programmes. Montreal, Canada.
2. Convention on Biological Diversity (2011a): Ensuring stakeholder engagement in the development, implementation and updating of NBSAPs. Montreal, Canada.
3. Convention on Biological Diversity (2011b): Getting political support for NBSAP and financing its im-plementation. Montreal, Canada.
4. Convention on Biological Diversity (2011c): Setting National Biodiversity Targets, making use of the CBD’s Framework for the 2010 Biodiversity Target. Montreal, Canada.
5. Dalal-Clayton B. and Bass S. (2009): A Guide to Environmental Mainstreaming. International Institute for Environment and Development. London, United Kingdom
6. National Planning Commission (2012): National Development Plan 4. Windhoek, Namibia
7. Ministry of Environment and Tourism (2012): Draft Access and Benefit Sharing Bill. Windhoek, Namibia
8. Ministry of Environment and Tourism (2007): Environmental Management Act. Windhoek, Namibia
52
9. National Planning Commission (2004): Namibia’s Vision 2030. Windhoek, Namibia
10. Loots S. (2005): Red data book of Namibian plants. National Botanical Research Institute. Windhoek, Namibia
11. Mendelsohn J., Jarvis A., Roberts C., and Robertson T. (2003): Atlas of Namibia: A Portrait of the Land and its People. Published for the Ministry of Environment and Tourism by David Philip Publish-ers, Cape Town, South Africa.
12. Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry (2012): National Rangeland Management Policy and Strat-egy. Windhoek, Namibia.
13. Ministry of Environment and Tourism (2001): National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan 2001-2010. Windhoek, Namibia.
14. Mendelsohn J. (2006): Farming Systems in Namibia. RAISON Publishers, Cape Town, South Africa.
15. Ministry of Environment and Tourism (2006): SPAN Project Document. Windhoek, Namibia.
16. Ministry of Environment and Tourism (2006): Vital signs of Namibia 2004. An Integrated State of the Environment Report. Windhoek, Namibia.
17. Ministry of Environment and Tourism (2011): Fourth National Report to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Windhoek, Namibia.
18. Ministry of Environment and Tourism (2011): Namibia Protected Areas Landscape Initiative Project Document. Windhoek, Namibia
19. Ministry of Environment and Tourism (2012a): Namibia’s National Report to the United Nations Com-mission on Sustainable Development. Windhoek, Namibia
20. Ministry of Environment and Tourism (2012b): Managing Natural Resources for Sustainable Develop-ment in Namibia – Moving towards a Greener Future. Windhoek, Namibia.
21. Ministry of Environment and Tourism (2013): The Ecological, Social and Economic Implications of Private Game Parks and Private Nature Reserves in Namibia. Windhoek, Namibia.
22. Namibia Nature Foundation (undated): Poster: Endemics of Namibia. Windhoek, Namibia.
23. National Planning Commission (2012): Namibia 2011 Population and Housing Census report. Windhoek, Namibia.
24. National Planning Commission (2011): National Accounts 2001-2010. Windhoek, Namibia.
25. National Planning Commission (2006): Third National Development Plan 2007/2008-2011/2012 – Vol-ume I and II. Windhoek, Namibia.
26, Prip C. and Gross, T. (2010) Biodiversity planning. An assessment of National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans. United Nations University. Yokohama. Japan
27. Southern African Development Community (2007) Regional Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. Gaborone, Botswana.
28. Simmons R.E. and Brown C.J. (in press) Birds to watch in Namibia: red, rare and endemic species. National Biodiversity Programme, Windhoek, Namibia.
29. World Travel and Tourism Council (2012): Travel and Tourism Economic Impact 2012 – Namibia. Lon-don, United Kingdom.
52 53
Annex 1: LIST OF INTERVIEWED STAKEHOLDERS PERSON DESIGNATION EMAIL AREA OF INTEREST 1. Colgar Sikopo Director, Parks and Wildlife Management [email protected] Protected areas
2. Teo Nghitila Environmental Commissioner [email protected] NBSAP priorities
3. Kenneth Uiseb Deputy Director Of Natural Resources [email protected] Wetlands Management
4. Pierre du Preez Chief Conservation Scientist [email protected] Conservation of rare species
5. Bronwyn Currie Chief Biologist [email protected] Fisheries
6. Garca D'Almeida Director of Resource Management [email protected] Fisheries
7. Kevin Roberts Chief hydrologist (aquatic ecologist) [email protected] Wetlands
8. Lydia Horn Crop researcher [email protected] Crop genetics
9. Emmanuel Nafele Deputy Director: Rural Development [email protected] Rural develop- Coordination ment
10. Seth Eiseb Curator of Mammals at National [email protected] Biosystematics Museum of Namibia
11. Vincent Mughongora Technician: Invertebrates [email protected] Biosystematics
12. Elmo Thomas Deputy Director: Research Science [email protected] Science and and Technology education
13. Japhet Iitenge Director: Disaster Risk Management [email protected] Natural disasters
14. Emilia Amuaalua National Development Advisor [email protected] Mainstreaming
15. Dr Martha Kandawa-Schulz Deputy Dean, Faculty of Science [email protected] Biotechnology and biosafety
16 Dr Elsabe Julies Department Biological Sciences [email protected] Training and capacity building
17 Absalom Kahumba Department Animal Sciences [email protected] Livestock genetics
18 Martha Naanda Head of Energy and Environment [email protected] Mobilisation of Programme resources
19. Shirley Bethune Snr Lecturer, Nature Conservation [email protected] Wetlands
20. Michael Sibalatani NAM-PLACE Project Coordinator [email protected] Promotion of Incentives
21. Chris Weaver Director of Worldwide Fund for Nature [email protected] Wildlife protection (WWF)
22. Dave Joubert Expert on Invasive Alien Species [email protected] Invasive alien species
23. Antje Burke Consultant [email protected] Rehabilitation
24. Lazarus Kairabeb Secretary General of Nama Traditional [email protected] Traditional Leaders Association knowledge
54
Ann
ex 2
: ALI
GN
MEN
T O
F N
BSA
P2 W
ITH
TH
E C
BD
STR
ATEG
Y (2
011-
2020
) AN
D A
ICH
I TA
RG
ETS
CB
D S
trat
egic
Pla
nSt
rate
gic
Goa
ls a
nd T
arge
ts S
trat
egic
Goa
l A: A
ddre
ss th
e un
derl
ying
cau
ses
of b
iodi
vers
ity lo
ss b
y m
ains
trea
min
g
bio
dive
rsity
acr
oss
gove
rnm
ent a
nd s
ocie
ty
1.
By
2020
, at t
he la
test
, peo
ple
are
awar
e of
the
valu
es o
f bio
dive
rsity
and
the
step
s th
ey c
an ta
ke to
con
serv
e an
d us
e it
sust
aina
ble
2.
B
y 20
20, a
t the
late
st, b
iodi
vers
ity v
alue
s ha
ve b
een
inte
grat
ed in
to n
atio
nal a
nd
loca
l dev
elop
men
t and
pov
erty
redu
ctio
n st
rate
gies
and
pla
nnin
g pr
oces
ses
and
are
bein
g in
corp
orat
ed in
to n
atio
nal a
ccou
ntin
g, a
s ap
prop
riat
e, a
nd re
port
ing
syst
ems.
3.
B
y 20
20, a
t the
late
st, i
ncen
tives
, inc
ludi
ng s
ubsi
dies
, har
mfu
l to
biod
iver
sity
ar
e el
imin
ated
, pha
sed
out o
r ref
orm
ed in
ord
er to
min
imiz
e or
avo
id n
egat
ive
impa
cts,
and
pos
itive
ince
ntiv
es fo
r the
con
serv
atio
n an
d su
stai
nabl
e us
e of
bi
odiv
ersi
ty a
re d
evel
oped
and
app
lied,
con
sist
ent a
nd in
har
mon
y w
ith th
e C
on-
vent
ion
and
othe
r rel
evan
t int
erna
tiona
l obl
igat
ions
, tak
ing
into
acc
ount
nat
iona
l so
cio-
eco
nom
ic c
ondi
tions
.
4.
By
2020
, at t
he la
test
, Gov
ernm
ents
, bus
ines
s an
d st
akeh
olde
rs a
t all
leve
ls h
ave
take
n st
eps
to a
chie
ve o
r hav
e im
plem
ente
d pl
ans
for s
usta
inab
le p
rodu
ctio
n an
d co
nsum
ptio
n an
d ha
ve k
ept t
he im
pact
s of
use
of n
atur
al re
sour
ces
wel
l w
ithin
saf
e ec
olog
ical
lim
its.
Str
ateg
ic G
oal B
: Red
uce
the
dire
ct p
ress
ures
on
biod
iver
sity
and
pro
mot
e su
stai
nabl
e u
se
5.
By
2020
, the
rate
of l
oss
of a
ll na
tura
l hab
itats
, inc
ludi
ng fo
rest
s, is
at l
east
ha
lved
and
whe
re fe
asib
le b
roug
ht c
lose
to z
ero,
and
deg
rada
tion
and
frag
men
-ta
tion
is s
igni
fican
tly re
duce
d.
6.
By
2020
, all
fish
and
inve
rteb
rate
sto
cks
and
aqua
tic p
lant
s ar
e m
anag
ed a
nd
harv
este
d su
stai
nabl
y, le
gally
and
app
lyin
g ec
osys
tem
- bas
ed a
ppro
ache
s, s
o th
at o
verfi
shin
g is
avo
ided
, rec
over
y pl
ans
and
mea
sure
s ar
e in
pla
ce fo
r all
depl
eted
spe
cies
, fish
erie
s ha
ve n
o si
gnifi
cant
adv
erse
impa
cts
on th
reat
ened
sp
ecie
s an
d vu
lner
able
eco
syst
ems
and
the
impa
cts
of fi
sher
ies
on s
tock
s, s
pe-
cies
and
eco
syst
ems
are
with
in s
afe
ecol
ogic
al li
mits
.
7.
By
2020
, ar
eas
unde
r agr
icul
ture
, aqu
acul
ture
and
fore
stry
are
man
aged
sus
-ta
inab
ly, e
nsur
ing
cons
erva
tion
of b
iodi
vers
ity.
8.
B
y 20
20, p
ollu
tion,
incl
udin
g fr
om e
xces
s nu
trie
nts,
has
bee
n br
ough
t to
leve
ls
that
are
not
det
rim
enta
l to
ecos
yste
m fu
nctio
n an
d bi
odiv
ersi
ty.
9.
B
y 20
20, i
nvas
ive
alie
n sp
ecie
s an
d pa
thw
ays
are
iden
tified
and
pri
oriti
zed,
pri
or-
ity s
peci
es a
re c
ontr
olle
d or
era
dica
ted,
and
mea
sure
s ar
e in
pla
ce to
man
age
path
way
s to
pre
vent
thei
r int
rodu
ctio
n an
d es
tabl
ishm
ent.
Nam
ibia
’s N
BSA
P2St
rate
gic
Goa
ls a
nd T
arge
ts S
trat
egic
Goa
l 1: A
ddre
ss th
e un
derl
ying
cau
ses
of b
iodi
vers
ity lo
ss b
y m
ains
trea
min
g
bi
odiv
ersi
ty a
cros
s go
vern
men
t and
soc
iety
1.1
By
2020
, at l
east
75
per c
ent
of s
urve
yed
key
targ
et g
roup
s kn
ow th
e m
eani
ng o
f bio
di-
vers
ity a
nd c
an id
entif
y im
port
ant r
easo
ns fo
r bio
dive
rsity
1.
2 B
y 20
18, b
iodi
vers
ity v
alue
s an
d pr
iorit
ized
eco
syst
em s
ervi
ces
are
quan
tified
, mon
i-to
red
and
mai
nstre
amed
to s
uppo
rt na
tiona
l and
sec
tora
l pol
icy-
mak
ing,
pla
nnin
g,
budg
etin
g an
d de
cisi
on-m
akin
g fra
mew
orks
1.
3
By
2018
, sel
ecte
d in
cent
ives
for b
iodi
vers
ity c
onse
rvat
ion
and
sust
aina
ble
use
are
in
plac
e an
d ap
plie
d, a
nd th
e m
ost h
arm
ful s
ubsi
dies
are
iden
tified
and
thei
r pha
se o
ut is
in
itiat
ed
Non
e
Str
ateg
ic G
oal 2
: Red
uce
the
dire
ct p
ress
ures
on
biod
iver
sity
and
pro
mot
e th
e su
stai
n
able
use
of b
iolo
gica
l res
ourc
es
2.1
By
2022
, the
rate
of l
oss
and
degr
adat
ion
of n
atur
al h
abita
ts o
utsi
de p
rote
cted
are
as
serv
ing
as e
colo
gica
l cor
ridor
s or
con
tain
ing
key
biod
iver
sity
are
as o
r pro
vidi
ng im
por-
tant
eco
syst
em s
ervi
ces
is m
inim
ized
thro
ugh
inte
grat
ed la
nd u
se p
lann
ing
2.
2 B
y 20
22, a
ll liv
ing
mar
ine
and
aqua
tic re
sour
ces
are
man
aged
sus
tain
ably
and
gui
ded
by th
e ec
osys
tem
app
roac
h
2.
3 B
y 20
22, P
rinci
ples
of s
ound
rang
elan
d an
d su
stai
nabl
e fo
rest
man
agem
ent,
and
good
en
viro
nmen
tal p
ract
ices
in a
gric
ultu
re a
re a
pplie
d on
at l
east
50
per c
ent
of a
ll re
leva
nt
area
s
2.4
By
2022
, pol
lutio
n, in
clud
ing
from
exc
ess
nutri
ents
, has
bee
n br
ough
t to
leve
ls th
at a
re
not d
etrim
enta
l to
biod
iver
sity
and
eco
syst
em h
ealth
and
func
tioni
ng
2.5
By
2015
, Nat
iona
l rev
iew
of i
nvas
ive
alie
n sp
ecie
s in
Nam
ibia
from
200
4 is
upd
ated
(in
clud
ing
iden
tifica
tion
of p
athw
ays)
, and
by
2018
prio
rity
mea
sure
s ar
e in
pla
ce to
cont
rol a
nd m
anag
e th
eir i
mpa
ct
54 55
CB
D S
trat
egic
Pla
nSt
rate
gic
Goa
ls a
nd T
arge
ts
10.
By
2015
, the
mul
tiple
ant
hrop
ogen
ic p
ress
ures
on
cora
l ree
fs, a
nd o
ther
vul
ner
abl
e ec
osys
tem
s im
pact
ed b
y cl
imat
e ch
ange
or o
cean
aci
dific
atio
n ar
e
m
inim
ized
, so
as to
mai
ntai
n th
eir i
nteg
rity
and
func
tioni
ng.
Str
ateg
ic G
oal C
: Im
prov
e th
e st
atus
of b
iodi
vers
ity b
y sa
fegu
ardi
ng e
cosy
stem
s, s
peci
es a
nd g
enet
ic d
iver
sity
11
. B
y 20
20, a
t lea
st 1
7 pe
r cen
t of t
erre
stri
al a
nd in
land
wat
er, a
nd 1
0 pe
r cen
t of
coas
tal a
nd m
arin
e ar
eas,
esp
ecia
lly a
reas
of p
artic
ular
impo
rtan
ce fo
r bio
dive
r-si
ty a
nd e
cosy
stem
ser
vice
s a
re c
onse
rved
thro
ugh
effe
ctiv
ely
and
equi
tabl
y m
anag
ed, e
colo
gica
lly re
pres
enta
tive
and
wel
l con
nect
ed s
yste
ms
of p
rote
cted
ar
eas
and
othe
r eff
ectiv
e ar
ea-b
ased
con
serv
atio
n m
easu
res,
and
inte
grat
ed in
to
the
wid
er la
ndsc
ape
and
seas
cape
s
12.
By
2020
, the
ext
inct
ion
of k
now
n th
reat
ened
spe
cies
has
bee
n pr
even
ted
and
thei
r con
serv
atio
n st
atus
, par
ticul
arly
of t
hose
mos
t in
decl
ine,
has
bee
n im
-pr
oved
and
sus
tain
ed.
13
. B
y 20
20, t
he g
enet
ic d
iver
sity
of c
ultiv
ated
pla
nts
and
farm
ed a
nd d
omes
ticat
ed
anim
als
and
of w
ild re
lativ
es, i
nclu
ding
oth
er s
ocio
-eco
nom
ical
ly a
s w
ell a
s cu
ltura
lly v
alua
ble
spec
ies,
is m
aint
aine
d, a
nd s
trat
egie
s ha
ve b
een
deve
lope
d an
d im
plem
ente
d fo
r min
imiz
ing
gene
tic e
rosi
on a
nd s
afeg
uard
ing
thei
r gen
etic
di
vers
ity.
Str
ateg
ic G
oal D
: Enh
ance
the
bene
fits
to a
ll fr
om b
iodi
vers
ity a
nd e
cosy
stem
ser
vice
s
14.
By
2020
, eco
syst
ems
that
pro
vide
ess
entia
l ser
vice
s, in
clud
ing
serv
ices
rela
ted
to w
ater
, and
con
trib
ute
to h
ealth
, liv
elih
oods
and
wel
l-bei
ng, a
re re
stor
ed a
nd
safe
guar
ded,
taki
ng in
to a
ccou
nt th
e ne
eds
of w
omen
, ind
igen
ous
and
loca
l com
m
uniti
es, a
nd th
e po
or a
nd v
ulne
rabl
e
15.
By
2020
, eco
syst
em re
silie
nce
and
the
cont
ribu
tion
of b
iodi
vers
ity to
car
bon
stoc
ks h
as b
een
enha
nced
, thr
ough
con
serv
atio
n an
d re
stor
atio
n, in
clud
ing
rest
orat
ion
of a
t lea
st 1
5 pe
r cen
t of d
egra
ded
ecos
yste
ms,
ther
eby
cont
ribu
ting
to c
limat
e ch
ange
miti
gatio
n an
d ad
apta
tion
and
to c
omba
ting
dese
rtifi
catio
n.
16
. B
y 20
15, t
he N
agoy
a Pr
otoc
ol o
n A
cces
s to
Gen
etic
Res
ourc
es a
nd th
e Fa
ir an
d Eq
uita
ble
Shar
ing
of B
enefi
ts A
risi
ng fr
om th
eir U
tiliz
atio
n is
in fo
rce
and
oper
a-tio
nal,
cons
iste
nt w
ith n
atio
nal l
egis
latio
n S
trat
egic
Goa
l E: E
nhan
ce im
plem
enta
tion
thro
ugh
part
icip
ator
y pl
anni
ng, k
now
ledg
e
m
anag
emen
t and
cap
acity
bui
ldin
g
17.
By
2015
, ea
ch P
arty
has
dev
elop
ed, a
dopt
ed a
s a
polic
y in
stru
men
t, an
d ha
s co
mm
ence
d im
plem
entin
g an
eff
ectiv
e, p
artic
ipat
ory
and
upda
ted
natio
nal b
io-
dive
rsity
str
ateg
y an
d ac
tion
plan
.
18.
By
2020
, the
trad
ition
al k
now
ledg
e, in
nova
tions
and
pra
ctic
es o
f ind
igen
ous
and
loca
l com
mun
ities
rele
vant
for t
he c
onse
rvat
ion
and
sust
aina
ble
use
of b
iodi
ver-
sity
, and
thei
r cus
tom
ary
use
of b
iolo
gica
l res
ourc
es, a
re re
spec
ted,
sub
ject
to
natio
nal l
egis
latio
n an
d re
leva
nt in
tern
atio
nal o
blig
atio
ns, a
nd fu
lly in
tegr
ated
Nam
ibia
’s N
BSA
P2St
rate
gic
Goa
ls a
nd T
arge
ts
2.6
By
2016
, eco
syst
ems
mos
t vul
nera
ble
to c
limat
e ch
ange
and
thei
r ant
hrop
ogen
ic
sure
s ar
e id
entifi
ed, a
nd b
y 20
18 a
ppro
pria
te a
dapt
atio
n m
easu
res
are
deve
lope
d an
d im
plem
ente
d in
prio
rity
area
s S
trat
egic
Goa
l 3: I
mpr
ove
the
stat
us o
f bio
dive
rsity
by
safe
guar
ding
eco
syst
ems,
spe
cies
and
gen
etic
div
ersi
ty
3.1
By
2018
, exi
stin
g te
rres
trial
pro
tect
ed a
reas
(nat
iona
l par
ks) a
re c
onse
rved
, effe
ctiv
ely
and
equi
tabl
y m
anag
ed, w
ithin
an
ecol
ogic
ally
repr
esen
tativ
e an
d w
ell-c
onne
cted
sy
stem
, and
by
2020
, coa
stal
and
mar
ine
area
s, o
f par
ticul
ar im
port
ance
to b
iodi
vers
ity
and
ecos
yste
m s
ervi
ces
are
iden
tified
and
mea
sure
s fo
r the
ir pr
otec
tion
initi
ated
3.
2 B
y 20
16, t
hrea
tene
d an
d vu
lner
able
spe
cies
list
s ar
e up
date
d an
d m
easu
res
impl
e-m
ente
d by
201
9 to
impr
ove
thei
r con
serv
atio
n st
atus
3.
3 B
y 20
20, G
enet
ic d
iver
sity
of c
ultiv
ated
pla
nts
and
farm
ed a
nim
als
is m
aint
aine
d an
d en
hanc
ed
Str
ateg
ic G
oal 4
: Enh
ance
the
bene
fits
to a
ll fr
om b
iodi
vers
ity a
nd e
cosy
stem
ser
vice
s
4.1
By
2022
, eco
syst
ems
that
pro
vide
ess
entia
l ser
vice
s an
d co
ntrib
ute
to h
ealth
, liv
eli-
hood
s an
d w
ell-b
eing
are
saf
egua
rded
, and
rest
orat
ion
prog
ram
mes
hav
e be
en in
itiat
ed
for d
egra
ded
ecos
yste
ms
cove
ring
at le
ast 1
5 pe
r cen
t of
the
prio
rity
area
s
4.
2 B
y 20
15, n
atio
nal l
egis
latio
n gi
ving
effe
ct to
the
Nag
oya
Pro
toco
l is
in fo
rce
and
by
2018
, ful
ly o
pera
tiona
l to
ensu
re th
at b
enefi
ts a
re fa
ir an
d eq
uita
bly
shar
ed fr
om th
e co
nser
vatio
n an
d su
stai
nabl
e us
e of
bio
dive
rsity
Str
ateg
ic G
oal 5
: Enh
ance
impl
emen
tatio
n of
NB
SAP2
thro
ugh
part
icip
ator
y pl
anni
ng,
kno
wle
dge
man
agem
ent a
nd c
apac
ity b
uild
ing
Not
app
licab
le
5.
1 B
y 20
20, T
radi
tiona
l kno
wle
dge
and
the
inno
vatio
ns a
nd p
ract
ices
of i
ndig
enou
s an
d lo
cal c
omm
uniti
es re
leva
nt to
the
cons
erva
tion
and
sust
aina
ble
use
of b
iodi
vers
ity a
re
reco
gnis
ed, r
espe
cted
and
pro
mot
ed
56
CB
D S
trat
egic
Pla
nSt
rate
gic
Goa
ls a
nd T
arge
ts
an
d re
flect
ed in
the
impl
emen
tatio
n of
the
Con
vent
ion
with
the
full
and
effe
ctiv
e pa
rtic
ipat
ion
of in
dige
nous
and
loca
l com
mun
ities
, at a
ll re
leva
nt le
vels
.
19.
By
2020
, kno
wle
dge,
the
scie
nce
base
and
tech
nolo
gies
rela
ting
to b
iodi
vers
ity,
its v
alue
s, fu
nctio
ning
, sta
tus
and
tren
ds, a
nd th
e co
nseq
uenc
es o
f its
loss
, are
im
prov
ed, w
idel
y sh
ared
and
tran
sfer
red,
and
app
lied.
20
. B
y 20
20, a
t the
late
st, t
he m
obili
zatio
n of
fina
ncia
l res
ourc
es fo
r eff
ectiv
ely
impl
emen
ting
the
Stra
tegi
c Pl
an 2
011-
202
0 fr
om a
ll so
urce
s an
d in
acc
orda
nce
with
the
cons
olid
ated
and
agr
eed
proc
ess
in th
e St
rate
gy fo
r Res
ourc
e M
obili
za-
tion
shou
ld in
crea
se s
ubst
antia
lly fr
om th
e cu
rren
t lev
els.
Nam
ibia
’s N
BSA
P2St
rate
gic
Goa
ls a
nd T
arge
ts
5.
2 B
y 20
22, k
now
ledg
e, s
cien
ce b
ase
and
tech
nolo
gies
rela
ting
to b
iodi
vers
ity a
nd e
co-
syst
em m
anag
emen
t are
impr
oved
and
mad
e re
leva
nt to
pol
itica
l dec
isio
n- m
aker
s
5.
3 B
y 20
22, m
obili
zatio
n of
fina
ncia
l res
ourc
es fr
om a
ll so
urce
s ha
s be
en in
crea
sed
com
-pa
red
to th
e pe
riod
2008
-201
2 to
allo
w fo
r the
effe
ctiv
e im
plem
enta
tion
of th
is s
trate
gy
and
actio
n pl
an.
56 57
Rel
evan
t Ref
eren
ce P
oint
in N
amib
ia’s
NB
SAP2
2.
1; 2
.2; 2
.3; 2
.5; 3
.1; 3
.2; 3
.3; 4
.1; 4
.2; 5
.2
1.
1; 2
.3; 2
.6; 3
.2; 3
.3; 4
.1; 4
.2; 5
.2
1.
2; 2
.1; 2
.2; 2
.3; 2
.5; 3
.1; 3
.2; 3
.3; 4
.1; 4
.2; 5
.2
3.
1; 4
.1
2.
3; 3
.1; 3
.3; 4
.1
St
rate
gic
Are
a 2:
Bio
dive
rsity
-Bas
ed C
omm
unity
Liv
elih
oods
2.
3; 3
.1; 4
.1
2.
2; 2
.3; 3
.1; 3
.3; 4
.2
2.
3; 4
.2; 5
.1; 5
.2
2.
3; 2
.6; 3
.1; 3
.3; 4
.1; 4
.2
St
rate
gic
Are
a 3:
Eco
nom
ic D
evel
opm
ent a
nd B
iodi
vers
ity
2.
2; 2
.3; 3
.1; 3
.3; 4
.2; 5
.1; 5
.2
2.
1; 3
.1; 3
.2
2.
2; 2
.3; 3
.1; 3
.3; 4
.2; 5
.1; 5
.2
N
one
1.
2
Ann
ex 3
: ALI
GN
MEN
T O
F N
BSA
P2 W
ITH
TH
E SA
DC
REG
ION
AL
BIO
DIV
ERSI
TY
STR
ATEG
Y A
ND
AC
TIO
N P
LAN
(B-S
AP)
SAD
C R
egio
nal B
-SA
P
St
rate
gic
Are
a 1:
Bio
dive
rsity
Gov
erna
nce
1.
1 E
ffect
ive
biod
iver
sity
man
agem
ent p
olic
ies
and
legi
slat
ion
1.
2 S
yner
gies
and
the
effe
ctiv
e im
plem
enta
tion
of M
EA
s an
d R
egio
nal E
nviro
nmen
tal
Pro
toco
ls
1.
3 Fu
nctio
nal i
nstit
utio
nal f
ram
ewor
ks fo
r bio
dive
rsity
man
agem
ent
1.
4 Im
prov
emen
ts in
the
TFC
A G
over
nanc
e Fr
amew
orks
1.
5 Fo
ster
ing
Equi
ty a
nd B
enefi
t -S
harin
g fro
m B
iodi
vers
ity
St
rate
gic
Are
a 2:
Bio
dive
rsity
-Bas
ed C
omm
unity
Liv
elih
oods
2.
1 C
onso
lidat
ion
of C
BN
RM
2.
2 D
iver
sific
atio
n of
Com
mun
ity B
iodi
vers
ity- B
ased
Liv
elih
ood
Opt
ions
2.
3 D
evel
opm
ent o
f the
Med
icin
al P
lant
s se
ctor
2.
4 C
limat
e C
hang
e R
esili
ent B
iodi
vers
ity- B
ased
Liv
elih
oods
St
rate
gic
Are
a 3:
Eco
nom
ic D
evel
opm
ent a
nd B
iodi
vers
ity
3.
1 D
evel
opm
ent o
f nat
ural
reso
urce
- bas
ed e
nter
pris
es
3.
2 B
iodi
vers
ity- B
ased
Tou
rism
3.
3 B
io T
rade
and
Div
ersi
ficat
ion
of E
cono
mic
Act
iviti
es
3.4
Bio
dive
rsity
Cer
tifica
tion
Sch
eme
3.
5 M
ains
tream
bio
dive
rsity
into
regi
onal
and
nat
iona
l dev
elop
men
t pla
ns
58
SAD
C R
egio
nal B
-SA
P
3.
6 Fa
cilit
ate
the
deve
lopm
ent o
f a c
ompr
ehen
sive
Pay
men
t for
Eco
syst
ems
Ser
vice
s sc
hem
e fo
r the
Reg
ion
St
rate
gic
Are
a 4:
Bio
dive
rsity
Man
agem
ent S
yste
ms
4.
1 B
iodi
vers
ity In
vent
ory
and
Mon
itorin
g
4.
2 Ef
fect
ive
Pro
tect
ed A
reas
Man
agem
ent S
yste
ms
4.
3 P
rom
otio
n of
CB
NR
M a
s a
Bio
dive
rsity
Con
serv
atio
n To
ol
4.
4 R
ehab
ilita
tion
and
Res
tora
tion
of d
egra
ded
ecos
yste
ms
4.
5 C
onse
rvin
g A
gric
ultu
ral B
iodi
vers
ity
4.
6 P
reve
ntio
n, C
ontro
l and
Man
agem
ent o
f Inv
asiv
e A
lien
Spe
cies
St
rate
gic
Are
a 5:
Bio
dive
rsity
and
Clim
ate
Cha
nge
5.
1 B
iodi
vers
ity a
nd E
cosy
stem
s Vu
lner
abili
ty A
sses
smen
t
5.
2 M
anag
ing
biod
iver
sity
for c
limat
e ch
ange
ada
ptat
ion
and
miti
gatio
n
5.
3 C
apac
ity B
uild
ing
for C
limat
e C
hang
e A
dapt
atio
n
St
rate
gic
Are
a 6:
Bio
dive
rsity
, Ene
rgy
and
othe
r dev
elop
men
t ini
tiativ
es
6.
1 M
anag
ing
the
Impa
cts
of th
e B
io- f
uels
Indu
stry
on
Bio
dive
rsity
6.
2 P
rom
otin
g B
iodi
vers
ity- F
riend
ly C
harc
oal S
ecto
r
6.
3 C
atal
ysin
g S
usta
inab
le E
nerg
y D
evel
opm
ent
6.
4 P
rom
ote
appr
opria
te m
itiga
tion
met
hods
and
saf
egua
rds
in in
frast
ruct
ure
deve
lopm
ent
Rel
evan
t Ref
eren
ce P
oint
in N
amib
ia’s
NB
SAP2
1.
2; 5
.3
St
rate
gic
Are
a 4:
Bio
dive
rsity
Man
agem
ent S
yste
ms
2.
1; 2
.2; 2
.3; 3
.1; 3
.2; 4
.1; 5
.2
3.
1; 4
.1
2.
3; 3
.1; 4
.1
2.
3; 4
.1
2.
3; 3
.3
2.
5
St
rate
gic
Are
a 5:
Bio
dive
rsity
and
Clim
ate
Cha
nge
2.
6
2.
3; 2
.4; 2
.6; 3
.3
N
one
St
rate
gic
Are
a 6:
Bio
dive
rsity
, Ene
rgy
and
othe
r dev
elop
men
t ini
tiativ
es
N
/a
2.
3; 4
.1
N
/a
2.
4
58 59
74 Namibia’s Second National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan
Namibia’s Second National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan 75
REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIAMinistry of Environment and Tourism
Department of Environmental AffairsMinistry of Environment and Tourism
Private Bag 13346Windhoe Namibia
Tel + 264 61 284 2701Fax: +264 61 240 339
www.met.gov.na