.

Challenges and impacts of land use and

land use planning on ecosystem,

biodiversity, and people

Mohammed Said1,4,8

with contributions

Philip Osano1, 2, 3, Dickson Kaelo4 , Shem Kifugo1, Leah Ng'ang’a1, Florence Landersberg1,7, Norbert Heninger7,

Gordon Ojwang5, Patrick Wargute5, Lucy Njino5, Polly Ericksen1, and Jan de Leeuw6

1) International Livestock Research Institute; (2) Dept. of Geography, McGill University, Canada; (3) Africa Technology Policies Studies Network (ATPS); (4) Centre for

Sustainable Dryland Ecosystems and Societies (CSDES), University of Nairobi; (5) Department of Resource Surveys and Remote Sensing; (6) World Agroforestry Centre

(7) World Resource Institute and (8) ASAL Stakeholder Forum

Stakeholder Workshop on Sustainable Growth and Adaptation in the Arid and Semi-Arid Lands (ASALs)

of Kenya - 6th-7th November 2013, Nairobi. Workshop organized by IUCN and AWF

Outline

• The wealth of Biodiversity in Kenya

• Drivers of changes on biodiversity in the ASALs

• Biodiversity Conservation Kenya ASALs –

planning at county and country level

• Regional development in the ASALs – what are

the planning issues?

• Challenges and opportunities

The wealth of Biodiversity – species richness a) Mammals

b) Birds

c) Reptiles

Source: ACC Natural Capital

Major drivers of changes on biodiversity

Sala et al., 2000 – Global Biodiversity Scenarios for year 2100, Science

What is happening in Kenya Rangelands

1. Biodiversity loss – wildlife declined by

50-70% in ASALs in the period 1977-

2009 (Norton-Griffiths & Said 2010;

Western et al 2009)

2. High poverty rates in pastoral

communities

3. Initiative for communities to benefit

from wildlife revenue - Payments for

Wildlife Conservation (PWC)

4. Emergence of conservancies – more

than 160

Wildlife trends in the Kenya rangelands between

1970s and 2000s

Source: Natural Capital Atlas, DRSRS

Photos: Rob O’Meara, Sarah O’Meara

Source of Information: Olare Orok Conservancy Trust publication

Evolution of the Mara

Conservancies

Photo credit: Philip Osano

Shifts in Land Management in ASALs

Land Tenure

Communal

Privatized

Mobility

Open

Closed

Tourism

Benefits

Latent

Gone

Payments for Wildlife

Conservation (PWC) Land Lease

Lodwar

Marsabit

Garissa

Mombasa

NAIROBI

Nanyuki

Isiolo

Lodwar

Narok

100 0 100 200 Kilometers

I (humid)

II (sub-humid)III (semi-humid)

IV (semi-humid to semi-arid)

V (semi-arid)

VI (arid)

VII (very arid)

1990s

2000s

No data

N

ConservanciesEstablished

Evolution of conservancies in the Kenya Rangeland

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Numbers Cumulative

160

Source: ILRI 2012

Issues

1. Connectivity between

conservancies and protected

areas

2. Linkages between various

ecosystems, landscapes and

countries

Trends of wildebeest and sheep & goats in

the Mara Ecosystem

Source: Ogutu, Owen-Smith, Piepho and Said 2011

Source: DRSRS et al. in prep

Photos: Rob O’Meara, Sarah O’Meara

Source of Information: Olare Orok Conservancy Trust publication

Wildlife Density – herbivore

Species Richness – herbivore

Photo: Ron Beaton

Land tenure and policy changes in the Mara

• In 1911, the Maasai lost

about 60% of their best

land and pastures

• They were moved from

northern reserves to

southern reserves

• Land tenure is

changing from Group

ranches to private

ownership

• Subdivision as been

followed by land

intensification

• Since 2006 land around

the Mara have

consolidated to form the

conservancies

Status of Conservancies - 2010

Maasai Mara National Reserve

50 0 50 100 Kilometers

N

Names & Area (Ha)

1. Olare Orok (9,720)

2. Olkinyei (4,856)

3. Motorogi (5,466)

4. Mara North (30,955)

5. Naboisho (20,946)

Potential for PWC

1. Enoonkishu (6,566)

2. Lamek (6,860)

3. Ol-Chorro (6,879)

Source: ILRI, Dickson Kaelo, Philip Osano

Species Richness – herbivore

Potential for Payment for Wildlife Conservation in East

Africa Rangelands (incentive for managing land)

Photos: ILRI, Msoffe

Scenario – land use and wildebeest migration

Nairobi National Park and Athi –Kaputiei Ecosystem

Source: Lilieholm et al. 2013; Ogutu et al. 2013

Future – need long term planning

Celebrate Success

Institutional Requirements

The County Government Bill, 2012

Institution Guidelines

Vision 2030

Securing Wildlife Corridors

Vision 2030

Conservation

• Ensure that all wildlife ecosystems are fully protected

• Incorporate natural resource in national accounts

• Secure wildlife corridors and migration routes

Environmental planning and governance

• Upgrade capacity for enhanced geo-information

coverage and application

• Use of incentives for environmental compliance

• Connectivity of

conservation

areas both

dispersal and

wildlife

corridors

(Vision 2030)

• Conservation

of meta-

population

• Restoration of

degraded lands

and wildlife

Wildlife dispersal areas and corridors

MEMR

Strategic Impact Assessment

Planning at regional level

Examples

LAPSSET and Ewaso N’giro

The Lamu Port Southern Sudan-

Ethiopia Transport

Objective: Carry out analyses to

avoid and mitigate negative social,

economic or ecological impacts

resulting from the LAPSSET

corridor.

90% of LAPSSET corridor in ASAL

counties

LAPSSET corridor

Source: ILRI, WRI

Spatial multi-criteria evaluation:

process

What are the economic,

social and ecological

goals of the LAPSSET

corridor?

• Economic goal: maximize the connectivity with local livestock

markets

• Social goal: maximize poverty reduction

• Ecological goal: minimize impacts on water flows

What are the spatial

indicators to achieve

these goals?

• Economic indicator: minimize distance to local livestock markets

• Social indicator: minimize distance to areas with high poverty

incidence

• Ecological indicator: at least 10 km from key rivers and wetlands

What is the relative

importance of these

goals?

• Vision “equal”: economic goal=social goal=ecological goal

• Vision “ecological”: ecological goal>economic goal>social goal

Suitability maps

according to stated

criteria and weighting

• Suitability map with economic vision

• Suitability map with social vision

• Suitability map with ecological vision

Examples Stages

Source: ILRI, WRI

To build map

on slide 9

To build map

on slide 13

To build map

on slide 17

To build map

on slide 20

Source: ILRI, WRI

Economic goals of the

LAPSSET corridor

considered in the

analysis

- Maximize transportation of people

and goods

- Maximize economic opportunities

related to livestock and crops

- Maximize economic opportunities

related to tourism

- Preserve the watersheds important

for hydropower production

© KMC

© ILRI

© Lewa Wilderness

© ILRI

Livestock density

The corridor crosses areas with

high density of livestock.

Source: ILRI, WRI

Market infrastructure

Biggest markets of Northern Kenya

connected to the corridor. Not all

smaller markets connected.

Source: ILRI, WRI

+ (green in map): increased

economic activities all along the

corridor

- (red in map): potential impacts

on watershed that produces

electricity

Example of economic

suitability map

Source: ILRI, WRI

Ecological goals of the

LAPSSET corridor

considered in the

analysis

- Preserve ecosystems important for

their ecological functions (wetlands,

open water bodies, closed forests)

- Preserve biodiversity (flagship

species)

© Ewaso Lions © Winslow

© Ewaso Lions

Ecosystems important

for their ecological

functions

The corridor and associated

development overlap with

ecosystems important for their

ecological functions.

Source: ILRI, WRI

Flagship species

distribution

The corridor and associated

development interfere with the

habitat and corridor of wildlife, and

therefore with tourism.

Source: ILRI, WRI

- (red in map): Mitigate impacts on

ecosystems providing important

ecological functions (water quantity

and quality, soil erosion, carbon

sequestration) and on flagship

species and biodiversity in general

all along the corridor

Example of ecological

suitability map

Source: ILRI, WRI

© Japan Port Consultants Ltd.

© Siemens

Suitability maps portraying

an equal vision regarding

the economic, social and

ecological goals of the

LAPSSET corridor

Economic goals

=

social goals

=

ecological goals

+ (green in map): economic,

social and ecological goals

achieved

- (red in map): either

economic, social or ecological

goals not achieved

Suitability map for an

equal vision

Source: ILRI, WRI

Regional Analysis

Ewaso N’giro Ecosystem

Elephant density and movements, 1995-2010

Source: Ericksen et al. 2011

Tourism facilities in Laikipia, Samburu and Isiolo

Source: Ericksen et al. 2011

Plans

Need to see this in Kenya

Source: Ministry of Transport in Quebec

Challenges and Opportunities

• Policy and Blue Print - County Government Bill, 2012;

Vision 2030; East Africa Community; and others ….

• Expertise – need ecologist, land economist,

environmental engineers, sociologist and land use

planners at both national and county level

• Data – availability of data; data sharing (big problem);

spatial tools to integrate data; advance statistics and

econometric models

Acknowledgment

• International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI);

• Dept. of Geography, McGill University, Canada;

• Africa Technology Policies Studies Network (ATPS);

• Centre for Sustainable Dryland Ecosystems and Societies

(CSDES), University of Nairobi;

• Department of Resource Surveys and Remote Sensing

(DRSRS);

• World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF);

• World Resource Institute (WRI);

• African Conservation Centre (ACC)

• BEST - Ecosystem Service Poverty Alleviation (ESPA)

• ASAL Stakeholder Forum (ASF)

• ASARECA