Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA)

Climate Change Initiative

COMESA Region: Forest situation, value, prospects and strategy for its development

COMESA Secretariat PO Box 30051Lusaka ZambiaEmail: climatechange@comesa.int

October 2011

1. Background, Objectives and Rationale

1.1. The COMESA Treaty and Membership

1. The Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) is a regional organization of 19 sovereign African member States including Burundi, Comoros, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Rwanda, Seychelles, Sudan, Swaziland, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

2. COMESA was established in 1994 to replace the Preferential Trade Area for Eastern and Southern Africa (PTA), which had been in existence since 1981. The COMESA member States have agreed to promote regional integration through trade development and to cooperate in the development of their natural and human resources for the benefit of all their citizens.

1.2 Key Characteristics of COMESA Member states

3. The COMESA region is estimated to be home to more than 400 million people. The population is increasing at an average rate of 3% per annum. The 19 COMESA member States have a total land area of some 12 million square km (equivalent to 40% of Africa’s land mass), the largest geographical coverage of any Regional Economic Community in Africa.

4. Forty-two percent (42%) of the area is arable land, while 60% is endowed with rivers and lakes that could be jointly exploited for irrigation, fisheries, hydropower and water transport development. Agriculture is a priority sector, as it accounts for more

1

than 32% of COMESA’s gross domestic product and 65% of foreign exchange earnings, provides a livelihood to about 80% of the region’s labour force and contributes more than 50% of raw materials to the industrial sector.

5. Trade in timber and non-timber forest products is an important contributor to economic development through the revenue it generates for government and the income it provides to rural households. In select eco-regions, forestry is the highest income earning sector for rural households. While currently a largely uncaptured opportunity, trade in forest ecosystem services (carbon, water, biodiversity) has the potential to add new value to the sector. The impetus to expand trade and investment within the sector and growing contribution of extra-sectoral investments to deforestation highlights the need for appropriate policies for ensuring the sustainable utilisation of forest products and services. This is particularly true given that growth in trade in forestry and other sectors that affect forests can bring substantial social and environmental costs, which require the concerted attention of government.

6. Trade in a range of forest products from the COMESA region is already globally significant. Member countries are among the leading African exporters of timber and non-timber forest products. For example, the Democratic Republic of Congo is the fifth largest exporter of tropical logs, while Sudan’s share of global supplies of gum Arabic has exceeded 80%. Other member States are leading exporters in a number of high-value flavours and fragrances, medicinal plants, processed wood products and agroforestry crops.

1.3 COMESA Objectives, Mission and Vision

7. The COMESA Treaty, which sets the agenda for COMESA, covers a large number of sectors and activities. However, the fulfillment of the complete COMESA mandate is regarded as a long-term objective and for COMESA to become more effective as an institution, it has defined its medium-term priority as the Promotion of Regional Integration through Trade and Investment. Key areas targeted for investment and development in the COMESA treaty are agriculture, forestry and fisheries.

8. Article 3 of the Treaty specifies the following aims and objectives for COMESA:

(a) To attain sustainable growth and development of the member States by promoting a more balanced and harmonious development of its production and marketing structures;

(b) To promote joint development in all fields of economic activity and the joint adoption of macro-economic policies and programmes;

2

(c) To raise the standard of living of its peoples and to foster closer relations among its member States;

(d) To co-operate in the creation of an enabling environment for foreign, cross-border and domestic investment, including the joint promotion of research and adaptation of science and technology for development;

(e) To co-operate in the promotion of peace, security and stability among Member States in order to enhance economic development in the region;

(f) To co-operate in strengthening the relations between the Common Market and the rest of the world and the adoption of common positions in international fora; and

(g) To contribute towards the establishment, progress and the realization of the objectives of the African Economic Community.

9. COMESA’s vision is to create a fully integrated and internationally competitive and unified region in which people, goods, services and capital move freely. This is to be achieved progressively in stages through (a) the creation of a free trade area (FTA), followed by (b) a customs union with a common external tariff (CET), (c) a common market in which there is free movement between Member States of labour and capital as well as goods and services, and, finally, (d) an economic community with a single currency, common monetary and fiscal policies, and free movement of people including the right of establishment and the right of residence. The target is to complete this process by 2025.

10. The ultimate mission of COMESA is to endeavour to achieve over the long-term sustainable economic and social progress in Member States through increased cooperation and integration in all fields of development, particularly in trade, customs and monetary affairs, transport, communication and information, technology, industry and energy, gender, agriculture, environment and natural resources. This mission is consistent with and will contribute towards the long-term economic integration of African States set as a target in 1980 in the Lagos Plan of Action and Final Act of Lagos, and in the subsequent 1991 Treaty establishing the African Economic Community.

1.4 COMESA Mandate on Natural Resource Development

11. The role of the COMESA Secretariat is to take the lead in facilitating regional development and assist Member States to make the adjustments necessary for them to become part of the global economy.

12. Under Article 123 of the Treaty, COMESA Member States have agreed to cooperate in the management of natural resources in the following ways:

3

(i) Take concerted measures to foster cooperation in the joint and efficient management and sustainable utilization of natural resources within the Common Market for the mutual benefit of the member states through taking necessary measures to conserve their natural resources; management of their natural resources for the preservation of eco-systems and arrest environmental degradation; and adoption of common regulations for the preservation of shared land, marine and forestry resources.

(ii) Adopt common policies for the conservation and management of natural forests, industrial plantations and natural reserves; exchange information on natural forests and industrial plantations development and management; joint promotion of a common forestry practice within the Common Market; joint utilization of the forestry training and research facilities; adoption of common regulations for the preservation and management of catchment forests and the establishment of uniform regulations for the utilization of forestry resources in order to reduce the depletion of natural forests and avoid desertification.

13. In order to raise the competitiveness of the region’s agricultural and natural resources sector, COMESA has put in place a number of initiatives at different stages of implementation. These initiatives are in line with the aspirations of the COMESA Treaty, which seeks to promote cooperation and coordination of regional agricultural and natural resources policies, research and development, and resource exploitation.

1.5 The Comprehensive Africa Agricultural Development Programme and Environmental Action Plan

14. COMESA’s forestry activities are being implemented under two continental frameworks, namely, the Comprehensive Africa Agricultural Development Programme (CAADP) and the Environmental Action Plan (EAP) of the African Union’s New Partnership for Africa’s Development (AU/NEPAD). The overall goal of CAADP is to “Help African countries reach a higher path of economic growth through agriculturally-led development, which eliminates hunger, reduces poverty and food insecurity, and enables expansion of exports.”

15. CAADP is a growth-oriented agricultural development agenda, aimed at increasing agricultural growth rates by 6% per year and to create the wealth needed for rural communities and households in Africa to prosper. To achieve this goal, CAADP focuses its interventions in four key pillars to achieve measurable outcomes:

Pillar 1: Extending the area under sustainable land management and reliable water control systems;

4

Pillar 2: Improving rural infrastructure and trade-related capacities for market access;

Pillar 3: Increasing food supply, reducing hunger, and improving responses to food emergency crises; and

Pillar 4: Improving agriculture research, technology dissemination and adoption.

16. The overall objective of the EAP is to contribute to the improvement of environmental conditions in Africa for the achievement of economic growth and poverty eradication in the region.

2. Forestry Development in the Region: Importance and Constraints

2.1 Importance of the Forestry Sector 17. Agriculture, often referred to as including crops and livestock production, fisheries and forestry – is the major economic activity in most COMESA member countries, as it accounts for 32%of the COMESA region’s GDP, employs 80% of its labor force, and provides 50% of the raw materials for domestic industry. For most Member States, exports of agricultural commodities and products also comprise the main source of export earnings and as such the agricultural sector subsumes the economic contribution of forestry.

18. Trade in timber from forests, woodlands and plantations provide income and employment, as well as revenue. Other, less-recognized forest values, however, often make more significant contributions to local livelihoods and the economy. As many as 300 million people in the COMESA region, most of them very poor, depend substantially on non-timber forest products for their subsistence and survival. Forests and woodlands supply medicinal plants, game, and specialty foods with high nutritional, economic and cultural value (honey, fruits, mushrooms, edible insects). At least 70-90% of household energy needs and construction materials for low-cost housing come from forests, and woodlands. Forests also provide a host of ecosystem services critical to urban and rural households, industry and the global community. Fresh water from forested catchments, for example, supports hydro-electric power generation and sustains human health.

2.2 Trade in Forest Products

19. Trade in a range of forest products from the COMESA region is already globally significant. In terms of timber production, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) is

5

the major tropical log exporter within COMESA and one of the top five exporters globally (after Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, Gabon and Myanmar)1, with China a major importer and re-exporter. The COMESA region is also a key supplier of non-timber forest products. For example, Sudan provides more than half of the global supplies of gum Arabic, with France the major importer and re-exporter. Ethiopia, Eritrea, Sudan and Kenya are leading exporters in a number of valuable flavours and fragrances (frankinsense, opopanax, myrrh). Sudan and Ethiopia are the world’s largest producers of Olabanum resins.

20. The COMESA region is also a significant exporter of “pygeum” medicinal bark from Prunus africana, harvested from mountain forests in Madagascar, Kenya, Burundi and DRC (with unmonitored trade starting in Ethiopia) to France and Italy. In addition, the COMESA region has coffee and tea as major agro forestry crops; and is a global leader in the production of vanilla (dominated by Madagascar) and ylang-ylang for perfumes (dominated by Comoros). Several COMESA members, notably Kenya and to a lesser extent Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe; are significant producers of woodcarvings. Until recently, few forestry policymakers were aware of the scale or economic value of this trade, which in Kenya involves 50,000-60,000 carvers generating around US$20 million per year2. Domestic markets for wood fuels (firewood and charcoal) provide an affordable source of energy for Africa’s poor while creating employment opportunities near urban centers.

2.2.1 Timber

21. Within the COMESA region there are four different country categories in terms of timber trade. Countries can be grouped by those that:

i. Export globally significant timber resources from the world’s second largest area of closed moist tropical forest and also have the largest area of miombo woodland in Africa, but where the forest industries are poorly developed and hampered by low levels of employment creation in the forest sector3, low productivity, illegal logging, conflict and few forest management plans (less than half of concessions surveyed). ( e.g. the Congo Basin in the

1 UN. 2007. Forest products annual market review. Geneva Timber and Forest Study Paper 22. Geneva and New York: United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE).2 Choge, S.K., Cunningham, A.B. & Ellery, W. 2005. Chasing the wooden rhino: The case of woodcarving in Kenya. In: Cunningham, A.B, Belcher, B & Campbell, B.M. (eds), Carving Out a Future: Tropical Forests, Livelihoods and the International Woodcarving Trade, Pp.31-42. London: Earthscan.3 Ruiz Pérez, M., de Blas, D.E., Nasi, R., Sayer, J.A., Sassen, M., Angoué, C., Gami, N., Ndoye, O., Ngono, G., Nguinguiri, J-C., Nzala, D., Toirambe, B. & Yalibanda, Y. 2005. Logging in the Congo Basin: A multi-country characterization of timber companies. Forest Ecology and Management 214:221-236.

6

Democratic Republic of Congo);

ii. Are Islands in the Indian Ocean, (Comoros, Seychelles, Mauritius, and Madagascar all of which are COMESA Member States); where most of the remaining forest has been cleared for agriculture or agro forestry and the remainder is globally significant, generating significant international funding support for forest conservation and restoration? As the world’s fourth largest island, Madagascar is an “outlier” in this group, not only due to its global conservation significance, but also as it continues to export some specialty timbers such as Blackwood (from endemic Dalbergia species), several of which are overexploited.

iii. Have only small areas of natural forest, often designated as Protection Forests (for their catchment values), Forest Reserves or national parks (due to their biodiversity values), remaining. Most occur within densely populated highlands (or in the case of Kenya, coastal lowlands). Forest stocks have been depleted by illegal logging and where there is extensive development of plantations (e.g. Eucalyptus). Most plantation timber is used nationally rather than for export. The above situation is predominant in Burundi, Ethiopia, Kenya, Swaziland, Malawi, and Rwanda.

iv. Have few closed canopy forests, but significant areas of miombo woodland such as is the case in Zambia and Zimbabwe . Stocks of valuable hardwoods such as Pterocarpus angolensis are dwindling, illegal logging is widespread and support for forest management needs to be strengthened through training and, as well the provision of financial and technical resources for the national forest administrations.

22. In all the four categories, it is notable that forest management plans are not adequately developed or implemented.

2.2.2 Non-timber Forest Products (NTFPs)

Plant-Based NTFPs

23. Trade in non-timber forest products (NTFPs) can be considered at two levels:

(i) International and regional trade (cross-border trade between COMESA Member States and neighbouring non-member countries) and

7

(ii) At local level, where NTFPs are crucial to household strategies in COMESA Member States where on average households live on income less than US$2 per day.

COMESA members are leading producers of the following categories of NTFPs:

(a) Colloidal gums from Acacia: Gum arabic, the best known natural gums (from Acacia Senegal and Acacia. seyal) is used in the food industry as a stabilizer; in soft drink syrups; for making gummy sweets (gum drops), chewing gums and marshmallows; in shoe polish and, in water-colour paints.

(b) Flavours and fragrances: The world World demand for flavours and fragrances – including flavour and fragrance blends, as well as essential oils and other natural extracts and aroma chemicals – is projected to increase 4.3% per year to $23.5bn in 2014 . COMESA is a leading producer of flavours from two sources. Firstly, indigenous trees shrubs in the plant family Burseraceae: (a) frankincense (gum olibanum) from Ethiopia, Eritrea, Sudan and to a lesser extent Kenya, with Somalia the only other producer at a global scale; (b) opopanax (Commiphora erythraea and Commiphora kataf) produced in North-east Kenya and eastern Ethiopia and, (c) myrrh (Commiphora myrrha) exported from Kenya and Ethiopia. Secondly, island states in the COMESA Region dominate trade in two cultivated products from trees introduced into the region: (a) ylang-ylang essential oils from Canaga odorata flowers (a tree introduced from Asia), where 80% of world supplies are produced by Comoros, with Madagascar also a producer; and (b) vanilla fruits (“pods”) from an orchid (Vanilla planifolia).

(c) African medicinal plants: Out of a global total of 422, 000 flowering plant species, over 50, 000 plant species are used for medicinal purposes, with an estimated 2,500 species of medicinal and aromatic plants traded worldwide. Most of these medicinal plants are still collected from wild sources4. Relatively few of these are African species, however, those important within the COMESA region are:

i. Pygeum (Prunus africana): The bark is harvested from montane forests of Kenya, Madagascar, Burundi and the DR Congo. Over the past 40 years, Prunus africana bark harvest has shifted from subsistence use to large-scale commercial use for international trade.

4 Schippmann, U., Leaman, D.J. & Cunningham, A.B. 2003. Impact of cultivation and gathering of medicinal plants on biodiversity: global trends and issues. Case study no. 7. In: Biodiversity and the Ecosystem Approach in Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. Proceedings of the Satellite event on the occasion of the Ninth Regular Session of the Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, Rome 12-13 October 2002. FAO, Rome. ISBN 92-5-104917-3. Available at: http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/Y4586E/y4586e08.htm#P1_0.

8

ii. Khat (or miraa) from Catha edulis: Farmers in Meru district, Kenya and in Harar, Ethiopia are the important producers.

iii. Iboga (Tabernanthe iboga): The roots of this potent psychotropic plant, found in Gabon, Cameroon and the DR Congo, are effective in the treatment of heroin, cocaine and amphetamine addiction, a use that may be increasingly important in the future5.

iv. Pepperbark (Warburgia salutaris and Warburgia. ugandensis), used to treat coughs, colds and opportunistic Candida infections is traded within the region and is used to produce a branded commercial product in South Africa.

(d) Speciality foods: trade in specialty foods including indigenous fruits (Cucumeropsis manii or mbika), dates (Phoenix dactylifera), edible greens (Gnetum), bush meat and edible caterpillars is significant in the region .

(e) Art and craft products: (woodcarvings and basketry). African basket-makers sell some of the world’s finest baskets and woodcarvings in both regional and international markets.

2.2.3 Bio energy

24. Bio energy is energy that comes from biomass. Traditional forms of Bio energy include fuel wood, charcoal, dung and crop residues, and are generally burnt directly with low efficiency. Modern forms of Bio energy convert biomass (organic residues and energy crops) into more versatile forms of energy such as electricity, liquid and gaseous fuels. Current interest in Bio energy in Africa is largely focused on liquid biofuels and their potential for ameliorating the economic consequences of rising oil prices and recurrent crises faced by power utilities and, raising revenue and household incomes. Yet Bio energy also encompasses age-old practices of using plant and animal by-products (wood, charcoal, crop residues, and dung) for household cooking and lighting. This section covers both of these dimensions of Bio energy.

2.2.4 Wood fuel

25. Reliance on traditional biomass energy is high in rural and urban areas of COMESA region accounting for between70 and 90% of total energy consumption in all countries but S. Africa. Even oil-rich sub-Saharan African countries continue to rely on

5 Mash, D.C., Kovera, C.A., Buck, B.E., Norenberg, M.D., Shapshak, P., Hearn, W.L., Sanchez-Ramos, J. 1998. Medication development of ibogaine as a pharmacotherapy for drug dependence. Annals of the NY Acadamy of Sciences 44:274-292.

9

biomass energy to meet the bulk of their household energy requirements6. While total consumption of fuel wood seems to be tapering off, use of charcoal is growing and it is estimated that the number of people relying on biomass for cooking and heating will increase from 583 to 823 million between 2000 and 2030. The negative health impacts from continued use of charcoal and fuel wood as well as the labor-intensive aspects of wood collection make this an important issue for women and children. It is noted that fuel wood and charcoal are also important sources of income as well as safety nets for rural and urban households. The production and marketing of wood fuel and charcoal is estimated at $5 billion per year in Zambia alone, employing more than 400,000 people. In view of the above, consideration at national level should therefore be given to promotion of energy saving technologies including stoves.

2.2.5 Bio fuels

26. Renewable forms of energy are perceived to constitute an important option for mitigating and abating the emissions of greenhouse gases, and interest is increasing both globally and regionally. A recent upsurge in global interest in plant-based fuels has been driven by new scientific evidence of the scope and economic impacts of global warming, by rising oil prices and desires to address energy security, and by recognition of the limited capacity of developing countries to meet their own liquid fuel needs. Many countries have formulated requirements that a percentage of the gasoline and / or diesel must be blended with bio fuels, a development that is expected to boost global demand for alternative fuels. The EU, for example, has released three different documents since 1996 setting ambitious targets for bio-energy use. Brazil already blends 20-25% ethanol in all gasoline, and has targeted a 5% blend of biofuel in all diesel by 2013. Nine states in India have 5% biodiesel requirement for diesel, with plans to increase the mix to 20% by 2020. Experiences also exist in the region with Malawi, Zimbabwe and Mauritius having had implemented similar measures. As Member States develop bio fuel programmes, care must be taken to limit the competition for the allocation of prime land between food crops and bio fuel feed stock production.

2.3 Ecosystem Services from Forests

27. In addition to forest products, forests supply a host of ecosystem services that are provided as ‘subsidies’ from nature. The most commonly recognised forest ecosystem services are carbon sequestration for global climate regulation, watershed functions (e.g. provision of regular flows of water and flood control are but two), biodiversity and

6 Karekezi, S. 1999. Access to modern energy: A view from Africa. In: Energy after the Financial Crisis, Energy and Development Report. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.

10

the aesthetic beauty of the landscape (which is linked to revenues from tourism). Forest ecosystem services generally go unrecognised in conventional economic accounting. These economic ‘externalities’ provide critical services to humanity, and there is a growing recognition of the need to place a value on them in order to ensure their protection. Valuing ecosystem services in the COMESA region could go a long way in ensuring sustainable forest management and the forestry sector’s contribution to economic development.

28. With growing scarcity, interest in the idea of paying others, such as communities on forested land, to provide environmental services on a sustained basis, is also growing7. The underlying principle of such payments for environmental services (PES) is that forests provide valuable positive externalities to off-site beneficiaries, but that these may not be taken into account by on-site landowners or users unless the beneficiaries pay for them. If the potential gains from forest conservation or restoration are large enough, the winners should be able to afford to compensate those on the land who, because they are being asked to adopt a non-preferred land-use practice, might be losing something. Beyond achieving the objectives of conservation proper, PES can potentially provide important additional and regular income flows, or other material and non-material benefits, for cash-poor forest-dwelling communities. PES schemes are therefore seen as having the potential to create “win-win” situations for people and the environment through conditional and voluntary ecosystem service markets.

2.3.1 Carbon Sequestration

29. Forests play a major role in climate change mitigation efforts because they contribute an estimated 20% of global carbon emissions. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is the primary mechanism for coordinating international action on the threat of climate change. The Kyoto Protocol is an agreement made under the UNFCCC which commits countries who ratify it to reduce their emissions of carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases, or engage in emissions trading if they maintain or increase emissions of these gases. As at August 2011; The Protocol, adopted in 1997 but only entering into full force in February, 2005, has now been signed and ratified by 191 states. The only remaining signatory that had not to have ratified the protocol is the United States of America. The first commitment period for emission reduction targets expires in 2012, and international talks began in May 2007 on a future climate change regime.

30. The two primary ways to affect net greenhouse gas emissions are to reduce the emissions by conserving existing carbon sources, or to increase sequestration by 7 Wunder, S. 2007. The efficiency of payments for environmental services in tropical conservation. Conservation Biology 21(1):48–58.

11

creation of carbon sinks. Current Kyoto mechanisms for achieving these targets include: joint implementation (JI) among Annex I countries8; and the clean development mechanism (CDM). The CDM is a Kyoto Protocol mechanism that allows Annex I Parties to purchase emission allowances (“certified emission reductions”) from projects in non-Annex I countries that reduce or remove emissions. While CDM credits may be generated from emission reduction projects or from aforestation and reforestation projects, in its current construct; has not delivered on its intended expectation in the COMESA region. As such, COMESA through the Biocarbon initiative envisages making contribution to the construction of a post Kyoto climate change regime that will reward Member States for their forests and woodlands conservation efforts.

2.3.2 Forests as Provider of Watershed Services

31. The COMESA region encompasses twelve of the nineteen major watersheds in Africa9 and almost the full spectrum of rainfall conditions of the African continent. It includes basins where all water from upstream is used downstream and river systems where at least some water reaches the oceans. In the first, water use is a ‘zero-sum game,’ where use along one part of the river reduces water availability downstream. In the second, total water use can still increase. The relationship between ‘supply’ and ‘demand’ differs between these two scenarios, and depends on the diversity of land uses, controls used by different Member States at different scales, and the hydrological status of critical watersheds.

32. Rainfall is associated with hills and mountains, and these usually are forested. There is therefore an association between rainfall, forests and river flow, but the cause-effect relationship may well be the inverse of what is commonly perceived.

33. Forest cover can potentially influence a number of aspects of ‘watershed functions,’ such as:

Total water yield, or the proportion of rainfall making its way into streams and rivers; Buffering of peak rainfall events by providing temporary water storage; Infiltration and gradual release of groundwater during dry periods; Filter effects on rainfall and provision of high quality groundwater; and Protection of watershed integrity, reduction of landslide frequency and erosion.

8 These are the 36 industrialized countries and economies in transition listed in Annex 1 of the UNFCCC. While Annex I is often used interchangeably with Annex B of the Kyoto Protocol, the former are subject to non-binding commitments while the latter (29 emissions-capped industrialized countries and economies in transition) have legally-binding emission reduction obligations. 9 WRI classifies Africa’s watersheds into Nile, Qued Draa, Senegal, Niger, Volta, Lake Chad, Orange, Congo, Ogooue, Turkana, Jubba, Shaballe, Rufiji, Cuanza, Zambezi, Cunene, Okavango, Limpopo, Mania and Mangoky, with twelve of these in the COMESA region (see http://www.earthtrends.wri.org/maps_spatial/watersheds/africa.php).

12

Reduction in rate of siltation of water storage facilities such as dams

34. The impact of different land uses on each of these ‘services’ is highly variable and location-specific, generally requiring location-specific comparisons between natural forest and ‘alternative’ non-forest land uses before ‘forest services’ can be adequately assessed.

2.3.3 Biodiversity

35. Many of the world’s “jewels” of biodiversity are contained within COMESA countries and are more defined in flora biodiversity. These include:

(i) Congo Basin Forests: The Congo Basin Forests are the second largest tropical forest in the world after the Amazon. The majority of these forests are found within the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), a COMESA Member State. The other five countries comprising the Congo Basin are Cameroon, the Central African Republic, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea and the Republic of Congo. Further, it is estimated that DRC holds 12.5% of the world’s remaining tropical rainforest. The Congo Basin forests are of global significance due to the role they play in carbon sequestration and due to their species wealth and endemism, with many plant and animal species that exist nowhere else in the world. Still relatively intact, around 50% of these are under timber concessions and only 8% within protected areas, with a proportion poorly protected due to civil conflict.

(ii) Caesalpinoid Woodlands: A significant part of Africa’s complex of Caesalpinoid woodlands (wet and dry miombo, mopane, Itigi-Sumbu thicket, Cryptosepalum dry forests and Baikiaea woodland) occurs within the COMESA region. The largest area is of miombo woodland, covering about 3 million km2 extending across South-central Africa from Tanzania and the Democratic Republic of Congo through Angola, Zambia and Malawi, to Zimbabwe and Moçambique, which have significant stock of hardwoods, including the world’s most valuable timber (African Blackwood (Dalbergia melanoxylon), worth US$20,000 per m3, but over-exploited in all COMESA countries (the major stocks being in Mozambique and Tanzania non COMESA Countries). The most threatened of the Caesalpinoid woodland ecoregions are the Itigi-Sumbu thicket, and Baikiaea woodlands.

(iii) Indian Ocean Island Forests: The last remaining forests of Indian Ocean islands are all endangered due to clearing for agricultural use, and the

13

effects of introduced species. Exceptions do exist in Island states like the Seychelles where approximately 40% of land area is under protection.

(iv) Ethiopian and East African Montane Forests: These forests occur as “forest islands” above 1500 metres above sea level, are considered critical/endangered, and are therefore a global conservation priority.

(v) Mangrove Ecosystems: Mangrove forests are located along the Red Sea coast from Ageig up to Halaeb, and along the coast of several eastern African countries most of them COMESA Member States such as Eritrea, Kenya, and Djibouti. They are also found in Tanzania. They provide important habitat for migratory bird species as well as coastal protection functions.

(vi) Northern Zanzibar-Inhambane Coastal Forests. These forests, also endangered, are still unsustainably exploited for hardwoods for the woodcarving industry, and support a thriving cross-border trade between Kenya and Tanzania.

(vii) Forests of the Sudan Nile Ecosystem: The riparian/riverine Acacia nilotica forests growing on floodplains along the Blue Nile and tributaries and along the White Nile, under management plans since 1935, protect the Nile and regulate its water system.

The challenge is that at a global scale, it is in Africa where most plant species will go extinct, mainly as a result of increasing demand due to rapid population growth and agricultural expansion. Although the large forests (the Congo basin, miombo and mopane woodlands) are relatively intact, this is not the case with remnant forests of Indian Ocean islands COMESA members or the montane forests of Ethiopia and East Africa, which are seriously endangered.

36. Biodiversity conservation needs to be taken into account in production landscapes for several reasons. Firstly, biodiversity is threatened by Invasive species both alien and domestic. Secondly, COMESA countries are not only signatories to the Convention on Biodiversity (CBD) but also contain many of the world’s most critically important forests for biodiversity conservation. Thus, conservation of globally important biodiversity can offer COMESA Member States important opportunities for revenue generation.

2.4 Constraints

14

37. While such wealth of natural resources provides important opportunities for expanded trade in the forestry sector and for forestry-driven economic development, a number of challenges hinder efforts to capture this opportunity. Firstly, lack of management plans and secondly, trade barriers and governance challenges currently undermine the ability to harvest the economic potential of the sector on a sustainable basis. At a global scale, illegal logging costs governments at least US$10 billion per year in lost revenue alone while depressing global timber prices and reducing the perceived value of the sector. Lastly, inefficiencies in conversion of forest products further reduce the contribution of forests to local livelihoods.

38. Increased demand for natural resources from the global community, in particular emerging economic powers in Asia, is increasingly placing strains on forests and local and national institutions managing them, compromising their ability to ensure forest resource exploitation is sustainable and leads to concrete economic gains for society. Increased pressure over timber in areas with weak governance has resulted in revenue losses of up to 96% in some places and further undermines future economic development opportunities. The region also faces challenges in managing the growing impact of extra-sectoral investments (e.g. agricultural cash crops, biofuels, mining) on forests due to the strong sectoral focus of investments and planning.

39. Governance reforms, innovative new strategies and multilateral cooperation may, however, provide partial solutions to these challenges while also contributing to economic development. Emerging markets for environmental services may help to reconcile development and conservation interests in some situations, provided the necessary support is given to secure tenure rights and assist land users (often forest dependent communities) to bear the costs of accessing information, organising themselves and making the investments required to capture this market. 40. Forest tenure reforms designed to devolve rights and responsibilities to rural communities are sweeping across Africa, creating new opportunities for the poor to secure benefits from forestry. However, complementary investments in farmer economic and organizational capacity and public institutions (such as a shift from a regulatory to service orientation) are required to help rural communities capture these opportunities. A global upsurge in interest in biofuels is also creating new opportunities in the forestry sector; however, adequate planning and monitoring systems are required to ensure investments in biofuels are not overly costly to the environment, to rural people or to national economies.

41. Lack of land use/land use capability plans that explicitly provide management prescriptions and reduce conflicts in management and decision making over forests and forest products.

15

3 Development of Forestry Strategy 3.1 Strategy Development Process

42. A Regional stakeholder workshop was held in April 2008 in Lusaka, Zambia, to generate a draft strategy for forestry in the COMESA region. Presentations and group discussions were broken down into three major elements, which also help to shape the draft Strategy:

(a) ELEMENT I: Raising the profile of the forestry sector

(b) ELEMENT II: Sustainable trade in forest products and services

(c) ELEMENT III: Regional cooperation

43. A follow-up workshop in August 2009:

(i) Solicited additional input from a broader range of stakeholders (Ministries of Agriculture, Finance and Trade; partner organizations and civil society);

(ii) Distilled from these recommendations areas in which COMESA can add the most value as a regional economic community;

(iii) Prioritized those recommendations that are most urgent for a large number of member states; and

(iv)Produced a final draft Strategy for forwarding on for approval by the COMESA Council of Ministers.

3.2Objectives of Strategy

The overall objective of the strategy is to elevate the forestry sector within the COMESA region in terms of contribution to local, national and regional economies through improved integration and trade.

44. As envisioned, the strategy will aim at achieving the following specific objectives:

i. To improve the productivity of the forestry sector and its real and official contribution to the economy;

ii. To capture the economic potential of forestry through support to small-scale forest enterprises, investment promotion in value-adding industries, and sustainable forest management;

16

iii. To support regional understanding and proactive management of the impacts of expanded trade on forests and local livelihoods through cross-sectoral research and planning, policy harmonization and regional cooperation;

iv. To improve policies, planning frameworks and monitoring for sustainable forest management and trade; and

v. To strengthen capacity of institutions managing and governing forests.

3.3Elements of the Strategy

45. The strategy has three main elements: (I) Raising the profile of the forestry sector; (II) Sustainable trade in forest products and services; and (III) Regional cooperation in forestry.

3.3.1 ELEMENT I

Raising the Profile of the Forestry Sector

46. This area focuses on raising the profile of the forestry sector at national and regional levels by capturing the sector’s value to the economy; enhancing forestry sector participation in poverty reduction strategies; enhancing regional participation in international processes affecting the sector; and managing the costs and benefits of expanded investment in forestry and related sectors.

FOCUS AREA A

Capturing the Sector’s Value to the Economy

47. Considering that:(i) The contribution of the forestry sector to the national economy is often grossly

undervalued due to failure to capture one or more of the following:

17

Contributions of non-timber forest products to the GDP;

Contributions of forest environmental services to other sectors and the GDP;

Contributions of forest products and environmental services to local livelihoods; and

Pathways for Illegally traded forest products;

48. The value of the forestry sector to the economy may be further underestimated due to the classification of forest products in trade under other sectors (manufacturing, agriculture, etc); and

49. Value lost from illegal logging alone is significant, amounting to approximately US$ 10 billion per year globally and further depressing timber prices by between 7 and 16%;

Planned Action

50. COMESA Secretariat and Members States will undertake the following:

(i) Develop a cost-effective instrument incorporating indicators that can be utilized across Member States to capture the full value of the sector.

(ii) Support Member States to institutionalize use of the instrument. The instrument should help to capture:

Forest environmental services such as biodiversity, carbon, watershed functions (supply, quality, sediment load, flood control), microclimatic amelioration, and tourism revenue linked to the aesthetic value of forests;

Non-timber forest products in trade; Local livelihood values of forests (food, fuel, medicine, etc.); and Value lost through illegal trade (timber, charcoal, high-value non-timber

products).

(iii) Mobilize resources to enable Member States to assess existing systems used to capture information about the sector’s value to the economy (including which information is collected, and how), and assess how these can be built upon and complemented to capture the full value of the sector.

(iv)Mobilize resources to pilot the application of the instrument in selected Member States based on different forest types.

18

(v) Support Member States to lobby at higher levels (AU Summits, UN bodies) for greater commitment and investment in the sector by government and investors.

FOCUS AREA B

Forestry Sector Contribution to Poverty Reduction Strategies and CAADP Compacts

51. Considering that:

(i) Forestry is often conceptualized with “conservation” and not with “development”;

(ii) The definition of agriculture does not always include forestry, causing the forestry sector to be overshadowed by the agricultural sector in its contribution to poverty reduction strategies;

(iii) Recognizing the economic value of natural resources can, under the right circumstances, contribute to their sustainable management; and

(iv)There is a strong need for a multi-sector approach to policy, planning and practice in natural resource management to avoid duplication and create synergies;

(v) Cross cutting issues of gender, HIV/AIDS, youth, people with disabilities are of relevance and importance to sustainable management of forests

Planned Action:

52. COMESA Secretariat and Members States will undertake the following:

(i) Facilitate the mainstreaming of forestry into national level CAADP Compacts and poverty alleviation strategies, so that the sector’s contribution to the economy, local livelihoods and other sectors (agriculture, mining, energy, water) feature more prominently in these plans. Attention should be given to:

The definition of agriculture, which should include forestry; The sector’s contribution to development (not just environmental protection);

19

The sector’s economic contribution to other sectors (e.g. through provision of forest products, Bio energy, water and other environmental services); and

How national forestry programs may benefit from their linkage to CAADP.

(ii) Mainstream the data derived from Members States’ application of the forest valuation instrument for full accounting of the sector into macro-level economic development processes and documents (e.g. PRSPs, national MDGs, and National Development Plans);

(iii) Lobby donor support for the realization of COMESA Forestry strategy objectives including the implementation of the AU-CAADP Companion Document on forestry;

(iv)Coordinate research and inter-governmental / inter-ministerial dialogue to raise awareness on the linkages between forestry and other sectors, and to encourage high-level commitment to cross-sectoral planning.

FOCUS AREA C

Regional Participation in International Processes

53. Considering that:

(i) African perspectives are under-represented in international negotiations due to the cost of staying engaged, the imbalanced playing field (negotiation skills rarely receiving explicit attention, and the framing of positions being inadequately supported by research and advisory infrastructures), thereby undermining effective negotiation in support of national interests; and

(ii) The “African voice” in international negotiations is often undermined through insufficient articulation of shared positions;

Planned Action:

54. COMESA Secretariat and members states will undertake the following:

(i) Facilitate research and analyses leading to an improved understanding of the types of challenges that require stronger negotiating power within the sector,

20

(ii) Provide a platform for Member States to have a greater voice in shaping international processes and patterns of trade and investment affecting forests. This should include:

Support to the development of a common position on forestry issues; Leveraging increased finance to the region and sector nationally and

internationally; Support capacity building in negotiation skills for effective engagement in

international processes as well as leveraging financial support for Member States’ participation in such processes and implementation of international agreements.

(iii) Mobilize resources to enable Member States’ readiness in harnessing the potential of carbon markets (afforestation / reforestation, and avoided deforestation) in support of sustainable forest management and improved livelihoods.

(iv)Coordination of the functions of institutions and individuals working on climate change mitigation and adaptation, including research, information sharing and capacity building and ensure as far as possible that such activities are closely aligned with the Africa Biocarbon Initiative.

FOCUS AREA D

Managing Trade-offs of Trade and Investment in Forestry and Related Sectors

55. Considering that:

(i) Converting natural resource wealth into meaningful economic development for Africans has proven to be a significant challenge for many African countries;

(ii) Rapid growth of economies in Asia, increased allocation of agricultural land and crops to biofuels, and the effects of climate change have contributed food shortages and rapid increases in commodity prices, helping to fuel a global “scramble” for land and natural resources throughout the continent;

(iii) Increased investment in extractive and land-based commodities often comes at a cost to forests and local livelihoods, creating the following challenges for decision-makers:

21

Managing trade-offs of investments that are harmful to forests and local livelihoods, but important to the national economy (e.g. mitigating negative impacts, improving local benefits);

Deciding whether to liquidate large areas of forest for reinvestment in other sectors (e.g. smallholder agriculture, biofuels) or to manage forests for long-term sustainability;

Deciding whether to expand plantation forestry to generate revenue and strengthen the industry, or minimize expansion of plantations to conserve limited water resources;

Deciding whether to invest in processing capacity, and how much, for timber – given concerns about wastage from outdated machinery, sustainable harvest and staying globally competitive; and

Whether to manage forests for timber or non-timber forest products;

(iv)These decisions often pose challenges to decision-makers, for whom sustainable use of natural resources is often of secondary importance to fostering economic development;

(v) Communities do not always gain a commensurate share of benefits deriving from forests, and the social and political processes through which trade-off decisions made are often given limited consideration;

(vi)Major foreign investments and trade-off decisions affecting forests are largely negotiated outside the sector, where forestry actors have a small voice;

(vii) Information on trade-offs, when it exists, is often unavailable to decision-makers who need it most; and

(viii) There is a critical need for information on experiences in Member States and the continent on how such trade-offs are being managed, and the outcomes of these decisions.

Planned Action

56. COMESA Secretariat and Members States will undertake the following:

(i) Mobilize resources for the development of a framework for assessing (anticipating and monitoring) the full economic, social and environmental impacts of trade agreements and investments affecting forests. This should include:

22

A balanced assessment of trade-offs, namely the benefits (revenue, job creation, infrastructure, local livelihood benefits) and costs (social, economic and environmental) of investments;

Financial and technical support to Member States in adapting the framework and mainstreaming its use; and

Mechanism for the incorporation of the framework into national decision-making processes.

(ii) Provide technical support to Member States to incorporate into national

Environmental Impact Assessment procedures instruments for full environmental accounting so as to clearly reflect the value of forest products and services that may be lost through the introduction of new investments.

(iii) Carry out research and analyses to support improved understanding and governance of the trade-offs in the forestry sector, namely:

Investing in value-added processing of timber vs. realizing quick gains using existing (often obsolete and wasteful) infrastructure for log transformation;

Increasing income through expanded processing capacity vs. sustainable forest management;

Liquidating large amounts of forest for reinvestment now vs. managing forests for long-term sustainability (e.g. harvesting and damages not exceeding regrowth);

Allocating land for agriculture vs. keeping or reverting it to forests; Production and processing of NTFPs vs. timber; and Managing forests for environmental service protection (biodiversity, water)

vs. timber production.

(iv)Lobby for improved governance in the forestry sector in the form of:

Institutional frameworks and incentive structures to attract investment; Mechanisms for maintaining processing capacity well under the Annual

Allowable Cut of Tree- AAC (e.g. no more than 70% of the out-put of round logs);

Minimum level of indigenous ownership of forest-based industries, to enhance sustainability of the industry as well as reinvestment of revenues in the national economy; and

Institutional arrangements ensuring equity in decisions taken regarding how to manage trade-offs.

23

(v) Support research and analyses that would lead to improved understanding and governance of the trade-offs associated with alternative uses of forest land (including biofuel development). This should include:

Support to assessing the trade-offs associated with competing uses of forest land (agriculture, irrigation/hydropower, biofuels);

Facilitating an improved understanding in the forestry sector of who are the effective decision-makers on land-use and investments within Member States, key decision criteria and the extent to which trade-offs are currently recognized and managed, so that information and sensitization can directly address these key decision makers;

Commissioning a comparative study of the social and environmental outcomes of declaring a permanent forest estate; and

Facilitate the adoption of good practice and harmonization of regulatory and incentive frameworks.

(vi)Support the Analysis of global trends affecting forests, including policies, investments and market trends, in support of anticipatory planning and decision-making; and

(vii) Engaging decision-makers at multiple levels in discussions about alternative development directions (future scenarios) and their implications for the economy, sustainability identification of major decision-making processes common to several Member States and requiring evidence to support policies and investment decisions, and to support these processes.

(viii) Lobby and influence political support for cross-sector coordination to minimize the negative effects of trade and investment in diverse sectors on forests and livelihoods, and to support corporate social responsibility (e.g. beneficial partnerships with government agencies and communities).

(ix)Support concrete efforts to utilize findings from trade-off analysis to better manage land and forest for the long-term benefit of society, namely by:

Ensuring that the results of trade-off analyses are actively used to ensure that communities gain a commensurate share of the benefits derived from forests;

24

Raising awareness on the need for information of use to cross-sectoral decision processes, and the consequences of failing to communicate forestry-related information to other sectors;

Supporting the inclusion of forestry-related information in the information systems used by other sectors, so as to raise awareness of cross-sectoral linkages and the importance of forests to the economy;

Providing tools to Member States and supporting their efforts to monitor progress in managing trade-offs in diverse commodities affecting forests; and

Ensuring information is made publicly available, as well as actively fed into key decision processes within Member States.

3.3.2 ELEMENT II

Sustainable Trade in Forest Products and Services57. This section focuses on applying lessons of the past to foster sustainable management and trade of forestry products in the COMESA region. Further, it looks as how the emerging markets for environmental services (carbon, water, biodiversity) may help to reconcile development and conservation interests in the COMESA region. FOCUS AREA A

Support to forest based enterprises

58. Considering that:

(i) Forest dependent communities need both incentives (market opportunities, rules governing forest use) and services to enable them to manage forests sustainably;

(ii) Forest dependent communities cannot compete with wealthier actors in capturing market opportunities without additional support, including low-risk forms of credit (given their limited capacity to invest and to bear risk); technical support (for value addition, forest monitoring and governance, negotiation and advocacy); and support to local organizational capacity (to enable them to achieve economies of scale, reduce transaction costs of accessing information and markets, and manage forests sustainably);

(iii) COMESA has mandate to increase investment in small and medium enterprises (SMEs);

25

(iv)To date, attempts to support SMEs in the forestry sector have been isolated, often lack an integrated approach to service provision, and have often met with limited success (e.g. effective credit, sustainability of local organizations, value addition);

(v) There is limited awareness in the region of the resource base (stocks of timber and non-timber forest products), trends in trade, market opportunities and commodity prices, undermining the ability to capture opportunities, penetrate markets or negotiate favorable prices; and

(vi)Forestry sector SMEs predominantly operate in the informal sector: the actors are largely unknown, there are no “champions” for their cause, they are left out of national development strategies and thereby face problems getting the necessary support (e.g. credit, information), and markets are not well developed (e.g. underdeveloped processing capacity);

Planned Action

59. COMESA Secretariat and Members States will undertake the following:

(i) Facilitate the assessment of small and medium-scale forestry enterprises (SMEs), the resource base upon which they depend and trends in trade, so that an effective strategy to support SMEs in capturing greater value from the sector (timber, NTFPs and environmental services) may be developed.

(ii) Support the development of a framework for supporting SMEs derived from a solid analysis of experience10, to support the design of effective support strategies for:

The provision of low-risk forms of credit to SMEs (including innovative funding mechanisms which link funding agencies to organizations already providing credit to forestry SMEs effectively);

Supporting the internal governance of cooperatives and producer associations for benefit sharing and sustainable management of the resource;

Enhancing local value capture from forestry; Giving a bigger voice to small-scale enterprises at the national level; and Fostering community-corporate partnerships of mutual benefit.

10 This might include a literature review, identification of “success stories” in member states and lessons learnt, and further research into the factors contributing to successful outcomes.

26

(iii) Support a common understanding of the appropriate role of government in supporting more widespread benefits to local communities from forestry within community and state property and from private sector investments.

(iv)Support Member States and relevant organizations in the use of the framework to design improved policies and support services to SMEs (e.g. market information, credit, infrastructure, technical support, strengthening of producer organizations and negotiating skills). Provide platforms for diverse actors to convene, share experiences and network (e.g. buyer-seller meetings, commodity exchanges).

FOCUS AREA B

Ensuring Sustainability in the Context of Expanded Trade

60. Considering that:

(i) Secure resource tenure / rights, strong institutions (State or community-based), incentive and regulatory strategies, capacity to monitor and adapt, and political-economic stability are fundamental ingredients to sustainable forest management;

(ii) The viability of community forests is undermined by insecure rights to forest resources, the higher perceived value of agriculture relative to forestry in some locations11, and the tendency for public institutions to place emphasis on their regulatory rather than service functions;

(iii) The viability of state forests is undermined by community resentment over the loss of customary rights to the resource, petty corruption and poor regulation of access (high levels of encroachment, “open access”), and the forest area under state control is often much larger than that which can be effectively managed with existing budgets;

(iv) The viability of private sector tenure is often undermined by the failure of government to manage the environmental and social costs (through management plans and monitoring), and failure to secure community-corporate partnerships of mutual benefit;

11 A value which is influenced not only by the inherent value of timber and non-timber forest products, but by the taxation of forest products (extraction, transport), the limited value addition, failure to capture the value of forest ecosystem services (e.g. absence of payments for carbon sequestration or watershed functions) and the absence of services (e.g. credit, technical support).

27

(v) In many countries, State-managed production forests are where regulation has been weakest and forests are most degraded, and where opportunities exist to improve both local livelihoods and sustainability through community-based approaches;

(vi) Revenue generated from natural forests are seldom ploughed back into forest management, undermining sustainability;

(vii) There is an untapped opportunity in fostering multi-actor models to forest ownership and governance, where diverse actors (government, private sector, communities, civil society) have complementary roles, rights and responsibilities; and

(viii) Policy and legal frameworks which spell out in unambiguous terms the rights, responsibilities and mode of participation of different actors in the management of different categories of forest are a necessary pre-condition to sustainable forest management;

Planned Action

61. COMESA Secretariat and Members States will undertake the following:

(i) Facilitate the identification of best practices for sustainable management under different forest types and formulate principles and guidelines for sustainable forest management. Analysis should highlight:

Those forest tenure and management systems in which sustainable forest management efforts are effective and ineffective; and

Alternative institutional arrangements for enhancing the sustainability of forests which are poorly regulated, including the identification of areas where standing forest has value to local livelihoods and could be sustainably managed through support to strong and representative local institutions.

(ii) Encourage Member States, through various platforms, to allocate adequate resources for regulatory functions in conservation forests under state

28

control, and return a reasonable percentage of the revenue generated by the forest for forest management.

(iii) Support analysis to better understand illegal practices which are leading to unsustainable forest management, and use this information to develop and pilot innovative mechanisms for governing forest product flows (with attention to identification of “win-win” situations – community access to the resource, economic benefit for the state, and forest resource investment).

(iv)Assist Member States to secure clear, equitable and enforceable rights to forest resources (whether communal, public or private) to strengthen incentives for sustainable forest management.

(v) Encourage and strengthen the capacity of local institutions to use their forest tenure rights to their benefit by strengthening local organizational capacity to access markets (e.g. carbon) and manage their forests equitably and sustainably.

(vi)Strengthen the capacity of forestry sector support organizations within Member States to address threats to local livelihoods and sustainable forest management resulting from extra-sectoral trade and investment.

FOCUS AREA C

Trade Risk, Illegality and Corruption

62. Considering that:

(i) The ability of one Member State to sustainably manage high-value forest products and endangered species depends on policies and practices in neighboring countries, and cooperation in regulating trade;

(ii) Good regulatory policies in one country may cause industries to go elsewhere (where regulations are weak), creating a disincentive for good governance; and

(iii) Mechanisms for holding private sector and government actors accountable to public interests in the forestry sector are often weak (e.g. absence of transparent reporting of revenue and how revenue is used);

Planned Action

29

63. COMESA Secretariat and Members States will undertake the following:

(i) Support Member States to enhance gains and minimize losses from foreign investment through regional cooperation in harmonizing policies and controlling illegal cross-border trade in high-value and endangered forest products. Efforts should include:

Establishment of documentation systems or “paper trails” that will help to monitor cross-border movement of forestry sector products; and

Harmonization of documentation and regulatory systems to avoid the establishment of unnecessary trade barriers.

(ii) Support the identification of markets willing to pay a premium for sustainably sourced products, “fair” trade and forest ecosystem services that can help bear the costs of forest governance, and support efforts to give these markets preferential trade status. Efforts should include:

Developing a compendium of credible investors in the forest sector (i.e. companies willing to re-invest in replacement planting) and markets for sustainably harvested forest products; and

COMESA to work with governments to develop capacity to set up good tariffs and process to ensure higher returns from SFM and fair trade.

.(iii) Develop frameworks and mechanisms for full disclosure of revenues from the

forestry sector, including requirements that companies fully disclose forest product flows and revenue.

(iv)Encourage Members States to set up mechanisms for enabling greater participation of ordinary people and low-income households in forest product trade.

(v) Facilitate development of methods for promoting open and transparent forms of pricing and trading, e.g. public auctions.

3.3.3 ELEMENT III:

Regional Cooperation in Forestry

30

64. This section focuses on regional cooperation for attracting investments for adding value to forestry products in trade; for the joint management of trans-boundary resources; and for achieving synergies and economies of scale in research and knowledge sharing.

Focus Area A: Investments in Value Addition

65. Considering that:

(i) Disproportionate value is often captured by foreign relative to national actors, and by national companies and traders relative to local actors;

(ii) For recognized markets in forest products, value is largely captured elsewhere;

(iii) A host of forest products and forest ecosystem services have not yet captured their true value;

(iv)Regulatory frameworks and services enabling actors in the region to penetrate preferential markets (e.g. certified and organic products, fair trade) and retain benefits from innovations (e.g. intellectual property rights) are poorly developed; and

(v) Technical capacity, support services and regulatory frameworks for participating in the carbon market are weak in the region, undermining capacity to derive benefit from emerging markets for forest ecosystem services;

Planned Action

66. COMESA Secretariat and Members States will undertake the following:

(i) Seek to expand inter-regional and international demand for NTFPs, timber and environmental services through identification of new markets and promotion of novel products and uses to enhance the value of forestry relative to other land uses. Support efforts to link expanded trade to improved governance of the resource to ensure local livelihoods needs are met and forests are managed sustainably.

31

(ii) Promote and support regional and international markets for fair trade and organic products and enable Member States to compete in such markets, as a complementary measure to national forest law enforcement and governance efforts. Support in the development and application of guidelines for the production of fair trade and organic products to compete on such markets. Explore the possibility of developing regional certification and fair trade guidelines for NTFPs and timber (quality standards for production, collection, processing and trade). Support the provision of information on markets, giving preferential treatment to markets for fairly traded, certified and organic products.

(iii) Encourage Member States to develop and foster an investment climate that encourages investment in the production, processing and development of timber and non-timber forest products.

(iv)Mobilize investments for the greater participation of local communities at all levels of the marketing chain.

(v) Facilitate access to low-risk forms of credit that enables producers to diversify into new products and markets.

(vi)Facilitate provision of information to Members States to enable them respond to emerging opportunities related to product demand, recent research and the latest development in the sector..

(vii) Support, organize and provide access to regional and international trade fairs (to promote new products and allow for the exchange of ideas).

(viii) Provide clear standards, guidelines and minimum requirements for regional trade, to enable Member States to retain value and manage resources sustainably without hindering trade and investment.

(ix)Undertake research into market development for products that have potential to capture “win-win” opportunities for enhanced value, local livelihoods and sustainability.

(x) Recommend a framework for supporting Intellectual property rights, copyrights and royalties from new products in the sector for adoption by Member States.

32

(xi)Recommend guidelines for investors, as well as information on the products, producers and markets for adoption by Member States.

(xii) Encourage Member States to support the processing of products (not just raw materials) through:

(a) Capacity building and investment in support of local-level processing;(b) Support to research, development and promotion of new technologies;

and(c) Support to product diversification to prevent over-saturation of both

regional and international markets and risks associated with market fluctuations.

(xiii) Support Member States in the development of cooperatives and collection centres to assist local communities to access markets competitively.

(xiv) Support Member States to leverage additional funding from forest environmental services, including carbon and biodiversity through improved support services, infrastructure and information. This might include the promotion of environmentally and socially sound tourism to tap into growing markets for “fair” tourism.

(xv) Explore with other regional organizations the most appropriate means to provide timely capacity building to support Member States in effectively engaging with emerging Payment for Environmental Services and carbon trading opportunities. This will include assistance in understanding markets and regulatory requirements; supporting the establishment of baselines; supporting effective monitoring of changes in carbon stocks; supporting the development of systems for effective distribution and governance of payments (so local land users continue to have incentives to invest in trees); and ultimately, promotion of appropriate policies and investments.

FOCUS AREA B

Trans-Boundary Resource Management

67. Considering that:

33

(i) There is a mutual dependency among neighboring States in achieving national conservation objectives (e.g. controlling invasive alien species and disease, controlling illegal trade in forest products, river basin management);

(ii) Illegal cross-boarder trade in forest products is poorly monitored and understood, and forestry inadequately mainstreamed into river basin management initiatives;

(iii) Existing policies and regulations are often poorly enforced and harmonized;

(iv)The costs and benefits of engaging in collective natural resource management initiatives differ by Member State (as a function of political stability, their ability to invest, and their ability to gain), requiring careful negotiation of solutions for mutual benefit; and

(v) A host of sub-regional organizations and initiatives on trans-boundary natural resource management provide an opportunity for strengthening trans-boundary initiatives;

Planned Action

68. COMESA Secretariat and Members States will undertake the following:

(i) Support the mainstreaming of forestry into joint river basin management programmes to support priority watershed functions of member states (e.g. flood control, siltation, water supply or quality) while meeting rural livelihood needs in catchment areas.

(ii) Improvement and harmonization of policies for joint management and protection of forest reserves and forest dependent wildlife along boundaries of Member States including such measures as fire management.

(iii) Recognize, support and promote the work of sub-regional organizations and other mechanisms for trans-boundary resource management (TBRM).

(iv)Spearhead the development of a framework for TBRM which can provide a basis for the formulation of bilateral treaties governing sustainable forest management.

34

(v) Work with Member States to control the trans-boundary spread and management of invasive species as well as pests and diseases affecting the forests in line with international instruments that member states have ratified.

(vi)Support and encourage Member States to understand where law enforcement is weak and how it affects forests and livelihoods; enforce current laws; and harmonize those policies contributing to negative trans-boundary effects among adjacent states.

(vii) Invest in the development of a monitoring strategy for the illegal movement of forest products, including a peer review mechanism, and encourage Member States to adopt it.

(viii) Set up a Clearing House Mechanism on forest products and trade, consisting of communication channels, assessment studies and early warning systems.

(ix)Support the establishment of knowledge exchange and capacity building programmes for Member States on trans-boundary Natural Resources Management   (NRM)

Focus Area C: Research and Knowledge Sharing

69. Considering that:

(i) The current value of research is undermined by failure to link research to real policy concerns, the tendency to shed light on only one angle of a complex problem, limited efforts to translate research findings into policy-relevant language, limited attention to “downstream research” (research on how to implement policies and recommendations) and limited efforts to use and synthesize what is already known;

(ii) The deficiencies in research contribute to the perception that research is expensive, undermine public funding for research and contribute to the inability to capture emergent opportunities conditional on strong research inputs (e.g. carbon finance);

35

(iii) Policy makers also have some responsibility, given that their unwillingness to pay for research may carry a political cost (e.g. use of consultants funded and selected by others) and they must be proactive in communicating their information needs;

(iv)Regional cooperation represents an opportunity for enhancing the benefits from any given research investment (by creating economies of scale), providing a broader perspective on an issue (through regional comparison) and can facilitate identification of “best practice” and policies that work;

(v) Research has a role to play in policy and strategy implementation, in the form of monitoring and evaluation and feedback into policy design and implementation, a function that is rarely put to use;

(vi)There is a need to shift away from conventional research topics to more strategic questions – for example those that go beyond biophysical research to take a systems perspective, or those enabling policy-makers to move away from reactionary toward more anticipatory decision-making (e.g. scenario analysis, early warning systems); and

(vii) There is a need to harness the existing financial and human capacity of universities, regional institutions and networks to meet more strategic information needs for diverse end users (policy-makers, practitioners, smallholder forest industries);

Planned Action

70. COMESA Secretariat and Members States will undertake the following:

(i) Actively draw on available capacity and institutions (such as AFORNET, ANAFE, RUFORUM, FANRPAN and others) in the region in implementing the Strategy, considering existing areas of expertise and ability to translate research findings into policy-relevant language.;

(ii) Facilitate the production of “State of Forests” and “State of the Industry” reports every 3 to 5 years;

(iii) Avoid the common pitfall of implementing only those research agendas associated with external funding agencies and their consultants;

36

(iv)Support demand-driven, forward-looking and adequately funded research (such as on trends analysis and early warning systems) to enable proactive planning and avoid the tendency of perpetually reacting to latest crises;

(v) Facilitate fora where research results are presented to a wider audience, including policy makers and civil society, in a regular manner both within and between countries. Regular sharing of research on regional trade in the sector, value chains, forest condition, etc. is of critical importance to COMESA Member States;

(vi)Facilitate access to and flow of information on emerging issues or opportunities in the region, which may also be needed by other end users, e.g., for supporting smallholder forest industries and practitioners;

(vii) Facilitate prioritization of research in order to answer more strategic questions and harness the existing financial and human capacity to meet more strategic information needs (e.g. through MOUs with universities, advanced research institutes and centres of excellence);

(viii) Assist in capacity assessment, to identify deficiencies in current research, and for putting in place regional or sub-regional mechanisms to address research gaps;

(ix)Develop innovative means to fund policy-relevant research (for now focused on biophysical research rather than larger “systems”-type questions), to support the transition from research being under-valued and under-funded to research as an integral part of national innovative systems funded by government and other stakeholders. Use networks to fund research of regional character; and

(x) Undertake stocktaking as a starting point on all the key focus areas discussed, as part of its strategy on research and knowledge sharing.

4. Implementation Modalities of the Strategy

COMESA, in partnership with the Member states and other developmental partners, will work to implement this strategy and attain its objectives. The initial activity will be to build financial and technical capacity within the COMESA Secretariat to coordinate the Strategy. In this regard, COMESA will mobilize resources to set up a dedicated unit

37

within the COMESA Secretariat to mobilize resources; coordinate the contributions of partner organizations in the implementation of the Strategy; and monitor and evaluate progress.

Acronyms

AAC: Annual Allowable Cut  of Trees AFORNET: African Forest Research NetworkANAFE: African Network for Agriculture, Agroforestry and Natural Resources EducationAU: the African Union.CAADP: The Comprehensive Africa Agricultural Development Programme CDM: Clean development mechanism CET: The Common External Tariff COMESA: The Common Market for Eastern and Southern AfricaCBD: The Convention on Biodiversity EAP: The Environmental Action Plan EU: The European UnionFANRPAN: Food Agriculture, Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network FTA: Free Trade Area GDP: Gross Domestic ProductNEPAD: The New Partnership for Africa’s Development

38

RUFORUM: the Regional Regional Universities Forum for Capacity Building in Agriculture Forum NRM: Natural Resources Management  NTFPs : Non-timber Forest Products NTFPsPES: Payments for Environmental Services PTA: the Preferential Trade Area for Eastern and Southern AfricaSFM:SMEs: Small and medium enterprises UNFCCC: The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

39