WATERSHED PES IN AFRICA FINDING SOLUTIONS THAT REDUCE TRADE-OFFS

IN LANDSCAPES

W O R L D A G R O F O R E S T R Y C E N T R E

Private sector and alternative financing for ES in PRESA sites

Site Direct private sector

ES beneficiary

Alternative financial

sources for ES incentives

Albertine Rift

- Uganda

Mini-hydropower dam Eco-certification of crafts and

honey

Ulugurus - Tz DAWASCO; Coca Cola

Usambaras -

Tz

Tanga City water

Company

Sasumua -

Kenya

NCWSC WSTF, Nature Conservancy,

World Bank Fund; Green

microfinance agency

Nyando River

Basin -

Kenya

No private sector buyer Public agencies: NEMA;

LVMP; World Bank Fund

Embu -

Kenya

KENGEN Nature Conservancy

Government Project:

TANRMP; World Bank Fund

Fouta Djallon

Guinea

Coyah Bottling Company Mining companies

W O R L D A G R O F O R E S T R Y C E N T R E

Low erosion rates from the

forest

High rates on some

agricultural areas, exceeding

11.2 tons/ha/year

Sediment sources in Sasumua

W O R L D A G R O F O R E S T R Y C E N T R E

Potential to improve water partitioning and reduce

soil erosion through landuse interventions

Landuse Surface

runoff (mm)

Base flow

(mm)

Water yield

(mm)

Sediment yield

(×103 tons/

year)

Base case 193 488 680 32.6

Contour farming 162 514 675 16.6

% change -16.1 +7.6 -0.7 49

Terracing 151 525 674 4.9

% change -21.8 +5.3 -0.9 85

Costs with PES

Costs without PES

CASE FOR PES: NAIROBI WATER COMPANY

Grassed waterway causing 20% reduction in

sedimentation

W O R L D A G R O F O R E S T R Y C E N T R E

ALIGNING ES DEMAND WITH SUPPLY

Sasumua conversations

We pay multiple levies to government

NCWC

That is small change

NCWC

PES can reduce sedimentation

Science

PES can make a strong business case – net savings

Science

We have no authority to increase tariffs

NCWC

We have no mandate

WSTF

We are willing to pay more

Nairobi City

We are willing to accept payment for improving land use

WRUA

We can provide improved quality

WRUA

We want more regular flows and quantity

Nairobi City

W O R L D A G R O F O R E S T R Y C E N T R E

Institutional structure for Catchment management

Current level of land management does not provide satisfactory watershed services

Farmers are not obligated to invest in conservation above legal and societal expectations

Optional community driven development (CDD) is available to CBOs and not individuals

WRMA OTHER SOURCES

WSTF

WRUAS

Catchment management plans

Water abstractor/

utility company

W O R L D A G R O F O R E S T R Y C E N T R E

Current insights from PES Research

CES: Commoditized Environmental Services

Direct interaction ES providers &beneficiaries

Recurrent monetary payments

COS: Compensating for

Opportunities Skipped

Recurrent payment for proxies

for

Accepting restrictions

Achievement of a condition

or effort

CIS: Co-Investment in

(landscape) Stewardship A flexible contract with broad

sanctions

Entrust resource management to

local communities

Based on management plan high

social capital

Rewards are too small and a broader outlook of PES mechanisms is necessary

W O R L D A G R O F O R E S T R Y C E N T R E

Looking forward

• Scaling from project-based to national level integration of PES

approaches into institutions and policies

• Increasing and ensuring sustainable private sector commitment

• Optimising business case for private sector investment

• Public-to-public PES in managing trans-boundary resources (e.g.,

Nile river; Congo forest etc.)