Page0

Volume 1 Issue 3 September 2013

In this issue:

1. The Principles of Sustainable

Development in International Law

2. Interfacing Climate Change With

Local Governance In Lesotho

3. Leveraging Climate Finance For

Low-Emission And Climate-

Resilient Economic Development

4. Tackling Youth Unemployment

Through Adaptation To Climate

Change In Lesotho’s Agriculture

United Nations Development Programme - Lesotho

SOCIO-ECONOMIC Policy Brief

Climate Change / Environment Edition

Chief Editor Alka Bhatia

Panel of Editors Thuloane Tsehlo Limomane Peshoane Hoolo ‘Nyane Co-Editor Sets’abi Sets’abi

Design, Graphics and Compilation Thuloane Tsehlo

Views expressed in this paper are those of

the author and do not necessarily reflect

the views of the United Nations, the United

Nations Development Programme nor UN

member states

Page1

From the Chief Editor

Ms Alka Bhatia

Economic Advisor and Head of the Strategy and Policy Unit

his edition of the socioeconomic quarterly is set against the

backdrop of the special events at the UN General Assembly Session

focusing on the world’s future: the transition from the Millennium

Development Goals (MDGs) to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

An unprecedented inclusive process has culminated in the expression of

aspirations of the people of this world for a future they want-a holistic and

sustainable future, one that is capable of providing a progressive socio-

political, economic and environmental milieu.

The Rio+20 Conference held in June 2012 acknowledged the fact that

the gains in fighting poverty and disease ushered in by the MDGs are

fragile and may be reversed if inequality and environmental degradation

are left out of the development equation. Climate change is impacting

not only natural resources but economies and societies. The most recent

assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC,

2013) validates the finding that global warming over the past 60 years is

a result of human activity. The solution therefore also must also lie with

humanity. While an integration of social economic and environmental

objectives in a Post 2015 Development Agenda is warranted, the

transformation will occur only through a unified global action of

Governments, businesses, civil society and most importantly the people

themselves.

This is the central theme of this edition, which introduces the principles of

sustainable development and the legal framework supporting these; then

moves on to highlight the necessity of a robust response from local

governments, one which places local populations at the centre. There is

also a call for a paradigm shift in Lesotho to address the twin challenges

of food insecurity and employment

accruing from climate change.

Finally, we conclude by presenting

some opportunities to address the

challenge of climate change through

innovative financing.

We hope that you will find this

edition of the quarterly interesting

and informative and look forward to receiving your valuable feedback.

T

“Climate change is

impacting not only natural

resources but economies

and societies…

www.telegraph.co.uk

www.telegraph.co.uk

Page2

1. INTRODUCTION

Over the past twenty-five years the concept of

sustainable development has become an

overarching framework for socio-economic

development. Sustainable Development Goals

will merge with the post-2015 development

agenda and a high level political forum has

been established to further guide the world on

a sustainable path (The Future We Want,

2012).

The oft-quoted Brundtland report (Our

Common Future, 1987) defines sustainable

development as development that meets the

needs of the present without compromising the

ability of future generations to meet their own

needs. However, it was at the 1992 Rio

Conference on Environment and Development

that the concept began to take substantive

shape. In the context of the north/south divide

between developed and developing countries,

negotiators endeavored to accommodate the

right to development with the need to protect

the environment. Principles 3 and 4 of the Rio

Declaration on Environment and Development

(1992) reflect this compromise:

Principle 3

The right to development must be fulfilled so

as to equitably meet developmental and

environmental needs of present and future

generations.

Principle 4

In order to achieve sustainable development,

environmental protection shall constitute an

Ms Patrice Lucid | Programme Officer | Mining and Minerals Policy

The Principles of Sustainable Development in International Law

www.triplepundit.com

www.studentreporter.org

Page3

integral part of the development process and

cannot be considered in isolation from it.

The concept was further developed at the

World Summit on Sustainable Development

(2002), which declared three interdependent

and mutually reinforcing pillars of sustainable

development - economic development, social

development and environmental protection.

2. PRINCIPLES OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

There is growing recognition of sustainable

development as a general principle of

international law. The International Law

Associations New Delhi Declaration of

Principles of International Law relating to

Sustainable Development outlines seven

principles of sustainable development:

1. The duty of States to ensure sustainable

use of natural resources (sustainable

utilisation)

2. The principle of equity and the

eradication of poverty (inter and intra-

generational equity)

3. The principle of common but

differentiated responsibilities

4. The principle of the precautionary

approach to human health, natural

resources and ecosystems

5. The principle of public participation and

access to information and justice

6. The principle of good governance

7. The principle of integration and

interrelationship, in particular in relation

to human rights and social, economic

and environmental objectives

These principles are increasingly being cited in

international disputes before the International

Court of Justice (ICJ) and World Trade

Organization (WTO) and are informing the

development of innovative multilateral treaties

such as the Convention of Biological Diversity.

Closer examination of three of these principles

in the national context of Lesotho can further

demonstrate the guiding influence of

sustainable development principles.

1. Common But Differentiated Responsibility

(CBDR)

This principle encompasses the idea that whilst

all nations have a common duty to protect the

environment, their differing circumstances

necessitate different responsibilities.

The UN Framework Convention on Climate

Change (UNFCCC) explicitly endorses CBDR,

acknowledging the historic responsibility of

developed countries for climate change. This

acknowledgement was a highly innovative

approach at the time and ensured near

universal participation in UNFCC. Accordingly,

UNFCC Article 3 states that the developed

country parties should take the lead in

combating the adverse effects of climate

change.

Under UNFCC, developed countries have a

responsibility to assist developing countries to

adapt to climate change. In particular,

financial and technological resources must be

transferred to developing countries with special

consideration for the special needs and

circumstances of least developed countries and

landlocked countries. Initiatives such as the

Special Climate Change Fund and Green

Climate Fund channel finances from

developed countries in order that they meet

their obligations under CBDR.

Programmes such as UNDP’s Africa

Adaptation Programme implement CBDR in

Lesotho by transferring funds to mitigate and

adapt to climate change. Further, the UNFCC

Page4

Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development

Mechanism incentivizes the transfer of

technology and resources to Lesotho. Under

this unique mechanism, developed countries

can invest in sustainable development projects

in developing countries; this is of mutual

benefit as developed nations earn emission

allowances based on emission reductions

attributable to the project. Private sector

projects are also eligible to participate, for

example, the courier company DHL is currently

supporting the sale of energy efficient stove

cookers in Lesotho through this mechanism.

The principle of CBDR, however, falls short of

allocating liability, with developed countries

careful to avoid legal responsibility under

international law. For example, the Loss and

Damage Mechanism, whereby developed

countries will compensate developing countries

for climate change damage explicitly excludes

the word liability.

Finally, the principle of CBDR is cited as one of

the reasons why the world’s largest CO2

emitter, the USA, did not ratify the Kyoto

Protocol. The USA challenged the principle of

CBDR as large developing country economies

such as China and India were not bound by

the protocols strict emission reduction targets.

This is also likely to be a contentious issue in

the Post 2015 discussions.

3. SUSTAINABLE UTILISATION

This principle, which concerns the rational use

and conservation of natural resources, is

quickly gaining status as a general principle of

international law. It is particularly important in

relation to shared natural resources such as

watercourses.

The Lesotho Water Act 2008 embodies this

principle. Article 3 states that in carrying out

duties and functions under the Act, the Minister

and water management bodies shall take

account of and as far as practicable give effect

to the principle of sustainable utilisation. Other

applicable principles under the act include

intergenerational equity, polluter pays,

precautionary principle, public participatory

approach, equitable distribution and

integrated water resource management.

Recent efforts by the Government of Lesotho to

renegotiate the phase two agreement of the

Lesotho Highlands Development Project can

be seen as part of the broader principle of

sustainable utilisation. In the Case Concerning

the Gabčíkovo–Nagymaros Dam (1997) the

International Court of Justice highlighted the

need for states to negotiate in good faith

regarding their shared resources so that the

benefits are shared equally.

4. INTEGRATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

The integration of environmental

considerations and sustainability into economic

decisions and planning has become a

dominant policy consideration within

international development. For example, since

1989 all World Bank projects must be

screened for their potential environmental

impacts. It is no longer acceptable to pursue

economic development without regard to the

environment. Environmental considerations

must be integral to the planning process and

not simply an add on. The use of

Environmental Impact Assessment, as a tool for

integration, has been legislated for through the

Lesotho Environment Act 1998.

This integrated approach has also been

endorsed through Lesotho’s National Strategic

Development Plan, Towards an Accelerated

and Sustainable Economic and Social

Transformation, which will guide the country’s

sustainable development up to 2017.

Page5

The proliferation of the sustainability concept,

however, has raised questions regarding its

meaning and impact. Pallemaerts (Pallemaerts,

1992) argues that the ‘sustainable

development’ concept is simply a new way of

packaging the traditional ‘economic growth’

concept of development and is business as

usual in terms of responding to environmental

impact of modern production and

consumption patterns. Indeed the term

‘sustainable’ appears thirty six times in the

NSDP document, in the context of sustainable

investments, sustainable jobs, sustainable

livelihoods, sustainable tax and sustainable

growth. However, nowhere is the term defined,

nor is any integrated vision of human

development and environmental protection put

forward.

5. CONCLUSION

Although the content and scope of sustainable

development remains unclear within

international law, it continues to develop as an

emerging principle, with certain principles

gaining more recognition than others. For

example, the requirement to conduct

Environmental Impact Assessments for projects

having a transboundary impact has been

recognized as an obligation of general

international law. The status of other

principles, such as the precautionary

approach, remains strongly contested however.

For example, the EU has been unsuccessful in

pleading the precautionary principle to defend

its Genetically Modified Organism import ban

before the WTO.

For Lesotho, the principles of sustainable

development have had their greatest impact in

obligating the international transfer of

technical and financial resources in a spirit of

intra-generational equity. The broad references

to sustainability within the National Strategic

Development Plan further demonstrate the

policy effect at national level.

The growing body of international law and

state practice, as well as global political

leadership, indicates that the principles of

sustainable development will continue to

evolve into the future and provide overarching

legal governance to socio-economic

development.

REFERENCES

Rio +20 Summit on Sustainable Development

(2012). The Future We Want. [New York]

United Nations.

World Commission on Environment and

Development (1987). Our Common Future.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

World Conference on Environment and

Development (1992). Rio Declaration on

Environment and Development. [New York].

United Nations.

World Summit on Sustainable Development

(2002). Johannesburg Declaration on

Sustainable Development [New York]. United

Nations.

Case Concerning the Gabčíkovo–Nagymaros

Dam. (1997). ICJ Reports, 7.

Lesotho Government. (2012). “National

Strategic Development Plan 2012/13 –

2016/17: Growth and Development Strategic

Framework.” Ministry of

Finance and Development Planning

Pallemaerts, M. (1992). Pallemaerts, M.

‘International environmental law from

Stockholm to Rio: back to the future,’ 1 RECEIL

254.

Page6

1. INTRODUCTION

The upsurge in the effects of climate change

on human security in contemporary times has

been unprecedented (Shaw and Theobald,

2011). The irony of this phenomenon is that its

effects are chronic at local and rural levels yet

the buzz about it is at global level – very little is

done at local level. There is no gainsaying

that the people who rely on reduced supply of

wood for energy are rural populations; the

people who depend on drying wetlands are

local communities; the people who

unfortunately solely rely on now less

predictable patterns of rainfall for food

production are the local populations. Another

irony is that contributions to changes in

atmospheric composition varies significantly

between the big industries in the metropolitans

at the centre and small scale greenhouse

emissions activities taking place in the village,

yet the price for the changed climate is borne

disproportionately by local communities.

Thus, the response and adaptation

interventions have been much more

pronounced at global and national levels far

more than at sub-national levels. Even the

institutional and programmatic architecture for

the response to the scourge is very weak at

local level. Lesotho is no exception to this

global trend. While environmental protection

may be on the mandate of local authorities in

Lesotho, climate change, rather unsurprisingly,

is not so clearly articulated – let alone daily

programmatic activities on the subject. This

piece therefore contends that there is more that

can still be done to interface the scourge of

climate change with the activity of local

government in Lesotho thereby placing the

local populations at the epicentre of

adaptation and response fanfare.

Climate change and local government

It is now a truism on the stilts that climate

change is the single most gruesome challenge

confronting the world today. While at the dawn

of the 20th

century there was some uncertainty

about the emergence of the phenomenon on

the globe, it is now widely accepted that the

climate change is not only prevalent, but in the

parlance of the renowned British economist,

Nicholas Stern, it is ‘the greatest market failure

the world has ever seen’.

The world, found itself seized with the problem

of this magnitude arguably without a proper

global governance design to handle and

contain the phenomena of this nature. The

pervasive and prevailing international relations

theory and practice suggest that the general

global environmental governance is limited to

the global level (Betsill and Bulkeley, 2006).

The key and direct payers are nation-states;

subnational spheres of governance do not

have a direct access to the stage. This has

therefore affected the newly emergent and

perplexing environmental threat – the climate

change. Although the devastating greenhouse

gases (GHGs), are emitted from some of the

world cities, the reality of the matter is that the

subject of climate change is fairly remote to

the discourse of local governance in general.

Little wonder therefore that some of the most

notable responses to the threat have been

pitched at the international level. There is

therefore credence to the questions of whether

subnational level response measures are

poised to bring any meaningful blow in this

battle.

Mr Hoolo ‘Nyane | Project Manager | Deepening Decentralisation

Programme

Interfacing climate change with local governance in Lesotho

Page7

That notwithstanding, there is a ground-swell

to the effect that while it is admitted that

nation-states have significant role to play in

regulating discipline at global level, at the

same time ‘countries will not be able to meet

the commitments contained in these

agreements without the assistance of city

governments’(Betsill, 2001). There is a myriad

of reasons why local and city governments

should be included in climate change response

( Dannevig, et al, 2012). Key amongst them is

the fact that majority of the world’s populations

live within the jurisdiction of subnational

authorities (Betsill, 2001). Consequently, a lot

of human activity that is deleterious to

atmospheric composition occurs within the

jurisdiction of subnational governments. Large

cities across the globe are the largest emitters

of the GHGs (OECD, 1995). Furthermore

cities or other subnational authorities, due

largely to the principle of subsidiarity, are best

placed to deal with energy and other policies.

Subsidiarity dictates that government services

should be delivered at the lowest level

possible.

2. DEMARCATING LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN LESOTHO

In order for us to comprehend the role that

has, or at least can be, played by local

government in Lesotho it is proper that we

demarcate this sphere. As it has been argued

elsewhere (Nyane, 2013), Lesotho is a unitary

state – which means there is one stream of

government. This design is based on the

Westminster design. In terms of the

constitution, other levels of government can be

established by the central government as and

when it deems necessary, and confer unto

them the powers it deems appropriate(S 106).

With the current dispensation ushered-in by the

constitution and the Local Government Act

(1997), Lesotho is decentralised through two

main modalities – devolution and de-

concentration. It is true that these have not

really taken definite shape. There are certain

political powers that have been taken to the

local level and there are those that are

retained by the centre but with some

administrative presence at the local level.

Therefore the country continues to maintain

both devolution and de-concentration.

Subnational authorities are found at two

spheres – district and community. For purposes

of climate change, it is important to note that

local governance in Lesotho currently does not

penetrate to the village level. At the district

level there are three types of authority. Firstly,

there is a District Council (DC) which is

composed of representation from community

councils. DC is not directly elected. Its political

head is the District Chairperson, and its

executive head is the District Secretary. The

country therefore has ten district councils

located in each of the ten districts of the

country. Secondly, there is another type – the

urban councils (UCs) which are directly

elected. Urban councils are located in ‘towns’.

Almost all the districts have towns. The districts

of Leribe and Maseru, however, do not follow

this rule because they two of the largest biggest

and most industrialised districts in the country.

Leribe has two UCs, Hlotse and Maputsoe

while Maseru has one UC in Semonkong and

a Municipality Council for Maseru City. The

political head of the UCs is the Chairperson

while the Municipality is headed by the Mayor.

For both the UCs and the Municipality the

chief executive is the Town Clerk. Thus

presently there are 11 UCs and one

Municipality. The third type at the district level

is the District Administrator (DA). The DA is not

politically accountable to the locally elected

structures. DA is the head of the de-

concentrated central government functions and

functionaries. There is a DA in each of the ten

districts of the country. They are accountable

to the Principal Secretary for the Ministry of

Local Government.

The other sphere, which is the lowest sphere of

governance in Lesotho, is the community

council (CC). CC is directly elected and its

political head is the Chairperson who is

indirectly elected while the chief executive is

the Community Council Secretary (CCS).

Initially there were 128 CCs but because of the

resource-pooling argument, they have been

reduced to 64 countrywide. The argument was

Page8

that when the councils are many, the resources

are spread too thinly thereby making

insignificant impact.

A councillor is elected by a cluster of villages

styled electoral divisions (ED). S/he does not

have stand-alone powers - the powers of the

council are discharged within the CC. This

therefore means that at the village level and at

the ED level there is no direct authority since

authority is vested in the community council

which is as big as the constituency, sometimes

even bigger. At the village level there are

chiefs who largely remain with the functions of

security, identification of villagers and the

enforcement of some cultural and traditional

practices and norms. Gazetted chiefs are ex

officio members of both the CCs and DCs.

They are represented by their peers elected by

the gazetted chiefs of the concerned

jurisdiction.

3. CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE REMIT OF LOCAL

GOVERNMENT IN LESOTHO

The vexed questions therefore would be

whether local authorities in Lesotho, across the

strata, have in their remit the power to handle

climate change matters and how climate

change responses can be interfaced with local

government in Lesotho.

The powers of local authorities both at district

and community level are statutory – they are

set out by the Local Government Act (1997). In

terms of the Act they have the power of

regulation, control and administration on

matters set out in the Schedules(s 5(1)).

Climate change is not specifically in the

functions articulated by the schedules. But

environmental protection generally is in the

schedules. It is no surprise that climate change

is not specifically articulated by the schedules

as one of the functions for local authorities.

The policy and regulatory framework in the

country is generally very weak (LMS, 2001).

Climate change is pretty much presumed to be

the environmental issue. Scant regard is given

to the fact that the phenomenon is multi-

isciplinary and generally very ruinous to

economies.

There is no gainsaying that most of the

vulnerabilities of the climate change are within

the remit of local authorities. For instance, in

Lesotho the gravest vulnerability is in the

agricultural sector where it is estimated that

about 85% of the households live in rural

areas, and well above 70% of those

households disproportionately depend on

agriculture for livelihood (LMS, 2001).

Moreover, rangelands are also vulnerable. The

future predictions are that

‘delayed precipitation under

climate change implies a possible

loss of nutritious climax grass

varieties, with serious consequences

for livestock productivity in a sub-

sector which contributes an average

55% to 65% of agricultural output

in any one year’ (LMS,2001).

This therefore suggests that the impact of

climate change is predominantly felt at rural

and local levels, especially where there is an

over-reliance on climate sensitive sectors of the

economy. Thus the response by local

authorities is critical. Although climate change

does not appear directly and specifically within

the mandate of the councils, it is hereby

argued that the authoritative provision in

section 5 of the Local Government Act (1997)

and the functions itemised in the schedules,

empower the authorities to deal with climate

change within their jurisdiction. In terms of

section 5, read with the schedules, authorities

have the powers of regulation, control and

administration on public health, water and

sanitation, natural resources, land allocation

to mention but just a few.

Despite the apparent lack of policy guidance

on how local government can deal with

climate change issues, some initiatives have

been tested. The United Nations Trust Fund

for Human Security (UNTFHS) Project

undertook to increase capacity for protecting

livelihoods by adapting to and mitigating the

Page9

effects from climate change in focus areas in

Lesotho. The UNTFHS Project targeted people

who have been most severely affected by

climate change induced drought in the most

vulnerable agro-ecological zones of Lesotho.

The initiative used the integrated approach

whereby the capacity of decision makers in

these District and Community Councils was

enhanced in order to identify and incorporate

adaptation priorities into local development

plans, aiming to mitigate the effects of climate

variability and change.

The integrated approach is good to emphasise

the multifaceted nature of climate change, but

with the weak planning framework that is

currently prevalent within the local governance

discourse, the approach might confuse rather

than support the planning process within local

councils. Thus, a separate Agenda of climate

change for local authorities might be

necessary.

Clearly this would put an additional strain on

the already meagre resources at local level,

but at least it will be monitorable and

measurable. In that event therefore, access to

additional fiscal resources is going to be

necessary. This funding can be provided

“across the board” or on a more targeted or

“asymmetric” fashion - providing earmarked

financing to local governments (LGs) in areas

that are especially vulnerable like agriculture

(UNCDF, et al, 2010). According to UNCDF,

et al (2010) various fiscal incentives can also

be used to promote local government

adaptation measures. These may include top-

up or block grants tied to demonstrated

progress in adapting routine local activities to

climate change challenges. Such measures

provide LGs with real incentives to apply CC

knowledge and skills acquired through

capacity building.

4. CONCLUSION

Despite the longstanding theory of

international relations which places the

transnational issues within the realm of nation-

states, it is increasingly becoming clear that the

response to climate change should also go

subnational. This is due largely to the fact that

a lot of human activity that perpetuates the

phenomenon of climate change occurs within

the subnational sphere. Secondly, a lot of

vulnerability is experienced at this level. The

contention is that despite the many structural

challenges of local government in Lesotho, the

organogram and the competences of local

authorities as articulated in the constitutive Act

(1997) are adequate for initiating the basic

climate change response. While integrated

approach to climate change planning is good

to emphasise the multi-disciplinary nature of

the scourge, there is still a need for the climate

change Agenda at local government in

Lesotho. This would clearly need an innovative

financing plan which could even provide

incentives for local authorities.

REFERENCES

Betsill,MM. 2001. ‘Mitigating Climate Change in

US Cities: opportunities and obstacles’. Local

Environment, Vol. 6: 4, pp 393–406

Betsill, MM and Bulkeley, H. 2006. ‘Cities and the

Multilevel Governance of Global Climate

Change’. Global Governance, Vol 12, 2; pp

141-159

Dannevig, H et al. 2012. ‘Implementing

adaptation to climate change at the local level’.

Local Environment: The International Journal of

Justice and Sustainability, Vol 17:6-7, pp 597-

611

GoL. 1997. Local Government Act (as amended),

Act No. 6

Lesotho Meteorological Services and Ministry of

Natural Resource, 2001. Climate Change in

Lesotho: A Handbook for Practitioners. LMS and

MoNR.

‘Nyane, H. 2013. ‘Lesotho Bracing for the Second

Wave of Decentralization’. Socio Economic Policy

Review. UNDP-Lesotho Vol 1: 2

Shaw, K & Theobald, K. 2011. ‘Resilient local

government and climate change interventions in

the UK’. Local Environment: The International

Journal of Justice and Sustainability, Vol 16:1,

pp1-15

OECD. 1995. Urban Energy Handbook: good

local practices .Paris, OECD.

UNCDF, UNDP AND UNEP. 2010. Local

Governance and Climate Change: A Discussion

Note. UNCDF, UNDP AND UNEP

Page10

1. INTRODUCTION

While changes to our climate are consequences

of changes in the composition of the

atmosphere, the impacts are on natural

resources, societies and economies. These

changes to our climate, which are mostly

happening as a result of human activities, would

continue for centuries even if emission

concentrations were to be stabilized (IPCC,

2007). Some of the projected climate change

impacts for Africa by year 2020 and towards end

of the 21st

century predict the following

scenarios:

….in some countries, yields from rain-fed

agriculture could be reduced by up to 50%.

….cost of adaptation could amount to at least 5

to 10% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

….an increase of 5 to 8% of arid and semi-arid

land in Africa is projected under a range of

climate scenarios (IPCC, 2007).

It is also alarming to note that eighty percent

(80%) of Lesotho`s population depends on rain-

fed agriculture (DOE, 2002) yet predicted

climate change scenarios for Lesotho indicate

that in addition to extreme events expected, there

will also be a shift and shortening of the rainy

season (LMS,2000). Again, taking into

consideration that Lesotho in 2011 lost about

3.2% of its GDP within a few months due to

floods that occurred during December 2010 to

January 2011 (DMA, 2011), and the fact that

only 9% of Lesotho`s land surface is arable

(DOE, 2002), then the question is what will be

Mr Limomane Peshoane | Climate Change Specialist

Leveraging Climate Finance for Low-Emission and Climate-Resilient Economic Development

Page11

the magnitude of impacts due to climate change

in Lesotho by the year 2020 and towards end of

21st

century?

The fact of the matter is that Lesotho, like other

developing countries, has to address climate

change as priority. Thus, the objective of this

article is to give an overview of some

opportunities to address impacts of climate

change in the developing countries. In order to

achieve this objective, the article first looks at

some existing funding resources that developing

countries including Lesotho are eligible to access

in order to climate-proof their developments.

Secondly, it reviews how African least developed

countries are accessing some of the existing

climate change funds, and mechanisms that

countries can put in place to facilitate their

access, and monitoring of such resources.

2. EXISTING AND NEW CLIMATE FINANCING TO ADDRESS

CLIMATE CHANGE IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES.

It is evident that climate change poses threats to

development. However, there are already

existing and new opportunities to support

implementation of interventions geared for

addressing climate change. These opportunities

include several existing climate finance flows that

developing countries including Lesotho can

access to ensure lower emissions. However, it is

also important their developments are both

climate resilient and to note the different forms of

climate financing such as grants and loans

(UNDP, 2011). They are tied with preconditions

for accessing them, and their sustainability

differs. It is also worthy to recognise that climate

finance is a result of the on-going international

negotiations under United Nations Framework

Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

Developing countries` position is ensuring

among others that developed countries scale up

climate finance significantly from current levels,

make it more accessible and sustainable, but

most importantly that it is provided as additional

grants on top of the usual Official Development

Assistance (ODA).

While climate finance is still one of the key issues

under the UNFCCC negotiation process, it is

also worth noting achievements of this process in

trying to establish sustainable sources for climate

financing. One of the milestones of the

UNFCCC negotiations is a decision made in

2001 to establish a Least Developed Countries

Fund (LDCF), which is aimed at funding

development and implementation of National

Adaptation Programmes of Actions on climate

change (NAPAs). The objective of NAPAs is to

identify urgent and immediate priority adaptation

needs towards addressing climate change in

Least Developed Countries (LDCs) (UNFCCC,

2001).

Following establishment of LDCF, another

decision was made in 2008 to establish another

fund; Adaptation Fund (AF). This fund is aimed

at financing concrete projects and programmes

for countries which are parties to the Kyoto

Protocol (UNFCCC, 2008), and Lesotho is party

to both UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol (LMS,

2000).

In 2010, UNFCCC negotiations led to other

important decisions (Cancun agreements) where

developed countries pledged to scale up climate

finance by year 2020 and a Green Climate

Fund (GCF) was established to disburse pledges

estimated at $100 billion per year by 2020 to

developing countries to support them in

mitigating climate change and adapting to its

impacts. This is one of the prospective

sustainable climate financing sources for both

adaptation and mitigation projects and

programmes. Under the adaptation window,

GCF will fund NAPAs already developed by

LDCs and National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) yet

Page12

to be developed by all developing countries,

which will be more comprehensive in addressing

medium to long term adaptation priorities. GCF

will also fund Nationally Appropriate Mitigation

Actions (NAMAs) in developing countries under

its Mitigation window.

Therefore, it is worth noting that UNFCCC

negotiation process has at least led to

establishment of sources of funding that are

accessible to developing countries, in addition to

other sources including bilateral support on

climate change.

3. READINESS FOR CLIMATE FINANCE

While there are existing and new sources to

finance interventions towards climate change,

countries must be ready to access such climate

financing effectively and be able to utilise it in a

transformational way (UNDP, 2011). Climate

finance “readiness” is defined as:

“the capacities of countries to plan for, access,

deliver, and monitor and report on climate

finance, both international and domestic, in ways

that are catalytic and fully integrated with

national development priorities and of the

MDGs” (UNDP,2011).

Since impacts of climate change differ in

magnitude from one geographical location to

another, it is the responsibility of each country to

put in place necessary instruments which will

facilitate the “readiness” to climate finance.

Some of the common instruments are policies,

strategies and legislature, just to mention a few.

Fortunately, developing countries, particularly

LDCs already have some experiences regarding

barriers to access climate finance effectively and

these experiences can provide a basis for

deciding on the right instruments to put in place.

As at June 2013, forty-seven (47) LDCs

including Lesotho had prepared their NAPAs and

some had started implementing their NAPA

projects. Lesotho prepared its NAPA in 2006

and managed to access funding under LDCF for

its first NAPA project in June 2011 and is

currently in a process of accessing more LDCF

funding for other NAPA projects (GEF, 2013).

This implies that, it took Lesotho about six years

to prepare a project and to secure funding for its

implementation. This is not a unique challenge

to Lesotho but a common challenge to most

LDCs. Since establishment of LDCF, it is only 4

countries (Liberia, Ethiopia, Benin and Tanzania)

out of Twenty-four (24) African LDCs that

managed to submit and secure LDCF funding to

implement at least two projects from their

respective lists of projects identified in their

NAPAs. Again, out of these African LDCs only six

(6) managed to prepare projects worth more

than $4 million (figure1). One of the key

challenges for LDCs to access available LDCF is

lack of capacity (the know-how) to prepare and

submit project documents for funding (UNEP,

2007).

“It is evident that climate change poses

threats to development. However, there are

already existing and new opportunities to

support implementation of interventions

geared for addressing climate change...”

“While there are existing and new sources

to finance interventions towards climate

change, countries must be ready to access

such...”

Page13

Figure 1: AF and LDCF Funding Approvals for projects implementation in 24 African LDCs as of September 2013

Looking at the Adaptation Fund (AF), only four

(4) African LDCs managed to submit projects and

successfully secure funding for implementation

under this particular fund (figure1). It is also

important to note the AF provides more flexibility

for eligible countries to access the fund. Unlike

LDCF, which countries access through multi-

lateral agencies including UN agencies, the AF

puts countries in the driving seat to access and

manage funds. For AF funding, countries can

also access funds through their accredited

National Implementing Entities (NIEs). The GCF

was designed based on AF model, as this model

seemed to be preferred by many developing

countries as it provides flexibility of direct access,

which allows countries to have a direct access to

funds. Therefore, establishment of GCF in

addition to existing LDCF and AF, further

highlight the importance for LDCs including

Lesotho to ensure that they increase their access

and absorption capacity for existing and future

climate finance.

Furthermore, looking at a number of countries,

particularly LDCs, and the rate at which they are

accessing both LDCF and AF, it is clear that as

much as LDCs including Lesotho are most

vulnerable to impacts of climate change, they

have to strengthen their capacities to maximise

their access to existing and new climate finance

sources.

It is imperative for developing countries to put in

place necessary plans, strategies and policies

such as their National Adaptation Plans (NAPs),

National Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs)

and/or Low-Emission Climate-Resilient

Development Strategies (LECRDS), to address

climate change, but it is also crucial to put in

place mechanisms to coordinate and monitor

climate finance. One aspect, which developing

countries have to take into consideration when

trying to establish their climate finance

coordination mechanisms due to an increased

number of and scaled up funding sources, is to

ensure that they have the right institutional and

financial mechanisms in place to access and

allocate these available resources efficiently

towards their national development priorities

(UNDP, 2011). There are already mechanisms

other developing countries have already started

exploring such as National Implementing Entities

(NIE), National Climate Funds and Multi-Donor

Trust funds. These mechanisms are established

taking into consideration country specific context

hence are nationally driven and owned. Their

main goal is to facilitate collection of funding

from different channels of climate finance,

0 2 4 6 8

10 12 14

LIB

ERIA

ETH

IOP

IA

BEN

IN

TAN

ZA…

TOG

O

SEN

EGA

L

UG

AN

DA

BU

RK

IN…

MA

UR

I…

ZAM

BIA

RW

AN

DA

BU

RU

ND

I

DR

C

SIER

RA

…

MA

LI

DJB

OU

TI

LESO

THO

SOU

TH …

GU

INEA

…

MO

ZA…

NIG

ER

ERIT

RIA

SOM

ALI

A

CH

AD

LDCF FUNDS ALLOCATED FOR PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION

AF FUNDS ALLOCATED FOR PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION

$ m

illio

ns

Page14

coordinate and blend them together and account

for them (UNDP, 2011).

4. CONCLUSION

Most of the developing countries, including

Lesotho, already have experiences in

implementing adaptation and mitigation projects.

Lessons learnt from adaptation activities can

provide crucial information for reviewing and

upgrading their NAPAs. Again, these lessons

learnt including NAPA implementation provide a

useful basis for the country to develop its NAP for

funding under GCF to address its medium to

long-term adaptation priorities. For countries like

Lesotho, which are not net emitters, climate

change mitigation projects and programmes

already implemented in sectors such as in

renewable energy have demonstrated the

importance of mitigation interventions in terms of

improving livelihoods of communities and

creating jobs. Therefore it is crucial for LDCs

including Lesotho to identify and develop their

NAPs and NAMAs in order to facilitate access to

climate finance earmarked for both adaptation

and mitigation but most importantly to put in

place necessary mechanisms to enable maximum

access and absorption of climate finance.

REFERENCES:

Flynn, C. (2011), Blending Climate Finance

Through National Climate Funds, UNDP, New

York, A.K. Office Supplies (NY)

Glemarec, Y. (2011), Catalysing Climate

Finance:A Guidebook on Policy and Financing

Options to Support Green, Low-Emission and

Climate-Resilient Development, UNDP, New

York, A.K. Office Supplies (NY)

Vandeweerd,V, Glemarec, Y and Billett,S. (2012)

Readiness for Climate Finance: A framework

for understanding what it means to be ready to

use climate finance. Available through

http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/li

brarypage/environment-

energy/low_emission_climateresilientdevelopm

ent/-readiness-for-climate-finance/. [Accessed

12 September 2013]

IPPC, 2007: Climate Change 2007: Synthesis

Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II

and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

[Core Writing Team, Pachauri,R.K and

Reisinger, A. (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva,

Switzerland, 104 pp.

Least Developed Countries Expert Group. 2012.

National Adaptation Plans. Technical

guidelines for the national adaptation plan

process. Bonn: UNFCCC secretariat. Bonn,

Germany. December 2012. Available at

http://unfccc.int/NAP.

Mokuku, C, Lepono, T and Mokuku, M. (2002),

Lesotho Second State of the Environment

Report, Ministry of Tourism, Environment and

Culture, Maseru, Lesotho

GEF.gef_projects_funding. Available from

http://www.thegef.org/gef/gef_projects_fundin

g [Access 12th September 2012]

DMA. (2011), Lesotho Post Disaster Needs

Assessment. Access through

http://www.preventionweb.net/files/globalplatf

orm/entry_presentation~lesothopresentationwr

ct03.pdf on 12 September 2013

Adaptation Fund. https://www.adaptation-

fund.org/about

http://unfccc.int/cooperation_and_support/finan

cial_mechanism/least_developed_country_fund

/items/3660.php

Joana Talafré, J. (2007), Terminal Evaluation of

the UNEP GEF Projects: Enabling Activities for

the Preparation of a National Adaptation

Programme of Action (NAPA). Accessed

through

http://www.unep.org/eou/Portals/52/Reports/

Annex_18-Interim_Report.pdf on 12 September

2013

Page15

1. INTRODUCTION

Food insecurity and youth unemployment are

two key development challenges facing

Lesotho’s economy. The ramifications of

climate change are likely to exacerbate both

challenges, if a ‘no-action’ path is taken.

Lesotho’s population is predominantly rural,

with 72 per cent of the population living rural

areas (BOS, 2011). Agriculture is, therefore,

an important livelihood activity for a significant

proportion of Lesotho’s population despite the

fact that overall productivity of the sector and

its contribution to the country’s GDP remain

very low. Agriculture, in Lesotho, is intrinsically

interconnected with weather and climate.

Crop production in Lesotho is largely rain fed

with less than 1 per cent of the country’s

arable land under irrigation. Disruptions in the

predictability of rainfall pattern and significant

increases in temperature are therefore widely

expected to result in major disruptions in levels

of agricultural production and by extension

food security and employment in the sector.

This article suggests the need for a paradigm

shift in addressing the problems pertaining to

agriculture and employment accruing from

climate change. This article is sub-divided into

four sections; the first section provides a

situation analysis with respect to Lesotho’s

climatic conditions and expected changes,

national food security situation, and youth

unemployment as key development challenges

facing the country; the second section looks at

climate change and promotion of youth

employment in the context of Lesotho; the third

section provides an overview of youth

Mr Setšabi Setšabi | Project Coordinator | Empowering Youth for Development

Tackling Youth Unemployment through Adaptation to Climate Change in Lesotho’s Agriculture

Fao Lesotho , 2011

uth.tumblr.com

www.flickr.com

Page16

entrepreneurship in Lesotho as an employment

generation strategy through adaptation to

climate change in agriculture; and the fourth

and the concluding section contains

recommendations

2. SITUATION ANALYSIS

Lesotho has a temperate climate which is

largely influenced by its latitudinal location

(between 28o

S and 31o

S) and topography.

Annual precipitation is highly variable, both

temporally and spatially, ranging from 500

mm/year to 1200 mm/year most of which is

received during the summer months, from

October to March. The highest mean annual

rainfall, of approximately 1 200 mm/year

occurs in the north eastern Drakensberg

mountains and the lowest averaging about

500mm/year in the Senqu River valley, while

the remainder of Lesotho receives about 600–

1000 mm per year (FAO, 2011).

Temperatures are highly variable, ranging from

–10°C to 30°C largely depending on the

ecological zone. Global climate change

scenario models generally predict that

Lesotho’s climate will become warmer by 1.0 –

2.0o

C, and that precipitation will diminish

between 50mm and 200 mm, by 2050

depending on the ecological region (ibid). In

the shorter term, droughts, floods, frost, hail,

storm winds, heat waves, cold snaps are likely

to become more common (FAO, 2011). These

changes are likely to have major ramifications

on agricultural output and national food

security if a ‘business as usual’ path is taken.

The declining average rainfalls combined with

increasing average temperatures are likely to

decrease soil moisture through both

evaporation and evapotranspiration thereby

increasing plant stress and reducing overall

yields (Selvaraju, 2012). Adaptive measures

need to be taken in the agricultural sector to

mitigate both the short-term and long term

effects. It is in the process of effecting these

changes that it is envisaged that youth

employment opportunities may be created if

the process is well planned and well

implemented.

The overall performance of Lesotho’s

agricultural sector has at best been precarious

with serious implications on food security.

Lesotho’s arable land is estimated at 279,773

hectares which comprises 9 per cent of the

total land area. The bulk of the country’s

agricultural production is undertaken on family

owned smallholder farms where the average

farm size is 1.3 hectares with only 11 per cent

of farming households owning more than 3

hectares of land (Mphale, 2002). The five

principal crops grown in the country comprised

maize, sorghum, wheat, beans and peas, with

maize being the most dominant crop. In the

2011/12 summer cropping season maize was

cultivated on 68 per cent of the total land

under cultivation (BOS, 2013). Recent

assessments by the Disaster Management

Authority indicated that 725,520 people

(38.3% of the population) would be in need of

food aid in 2012/13. The impact of the

national food crisis on the youth, in Lesotho

has been equally substantial where 34.2 per

cent of youths have two or less meals a day,

29.8 per cent have two or more meals a day

comprising only papa (the local maize based

staple food), and 24.1 per cent never have any

protein food in their daily diet (MGYSR and

UNDP, forthcoming).

3. CLIMATE CHANGE AND PROMOTION OF YOUTH JOBS IN

AGRICULTURE IN LESOTHO

AMCEN (2011) defines climate change

adaptation as the process of undertaking

changes in processes, practices, and structures

to moderate potential damages or to benefit

from opportunities associated with climate

change. Adaptation therefore aims at reducing

Page17

vulnerability of communities, regions, and

nations to climate variability, and promoting

sustainable development. Using adaptation to

climate change in agriculture as an

opportunity to address youth unemployment in

Lesotho is important for two major reasons.

Firstly, youth comprise 38.9% of Lesotho’s

population of approximately 1.9 million

people (BOS, 2011). This translates to

750,468 individuals. The youth unemployment

rate is estimated at 35% (MGYSR and UNDP,

2012). Further 54.7% of youths seeking

employment, have been doing so for more

than 1 year (ibid). Such a situation creates a

major challenge given the fact that youth

unemployment is a major contributor to

national poverty. Moreover, it is a potential

contributor to national instability as the

growing numbers of unemployed youths

become restless. Youth unemployment is also

a national waste of resources given that youth

in Lesotho, like in many other parts of the

world, have on average acquired more years

of education than any other generation before

them.

Secondly, agriculture is not a generally

favoured sector by the youth in terms of career

ambitions. Globally, farmers are an

increasingly ageing population as youth

continue to seek ‘better’ opportunities in other

sectors. Statistics provided by BOS (2008)

indicated that an average of 60 per cent of

employed youths were engaged in agriculture

with 16.5 percent employed in this sector in

urban areas and 71.2 per cent in rural areas. This is not surprising in the context that 72 per cent of

youths reside in rural areas. The same report nonetheless indicates that earnings from this sector were

comparatively lower than other sectors as indicated in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Gross Earnings of Youth across Major Economic Sectors

Source: BOS, 2008

The data presented in Figure 1 indicates that

the modal earning (44.1%) in the agricultural

sector is in the M0 – M299 per month income

group. The national poverty line is estimated

at M242.62 per month (Allwine et al. 2013)

which would suggest that a significant

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Per

cen

tage

Earnings

Agriculture, Hunting and Forestry

Mining and Quarrying

Manufacturing

Construction

Retail and Trade

Page18

proportion of youth in this modal group are

actually living in poverty. The data on monthly

earnings in agriculture further indicate that

86.8 per cent earn gross incomes of less than

M1000 per month. Comparative analysis

across the sectors indicates that the modal

monthly earnings is highest in the mining and

quarrying sector where the earnings are in the

M2,999 – M4,999 per month income group.

In the other sectors of manufacturing,

construction and retail the modal earnings are

in the M500 – M999 per month income

group. The differentials in potential earning

between the various sectors is probably the

reason for the tendency of youths to leave the

agricultural sector in search of higher earnings

in other sectors.

4. YOUTH ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN LESOTHO: AN

OVERVIEW

Youth entrepreneurship can be an important

driver of economic development through

fostering growth, job creation, technology

adoption and innovation as well as poverty

alleviation. For a large number of Africa’s

unemployed or discouraged youth, productive

entrepreneurship offers not only an opportunity

to build sustainable livelihoods, but also a

chance for integrating themselves into society

and working themselves out of poverty. Youth

entrepreneurship is nonetheless not a panacea

to youth unemployment. In 2011 there were

an estimated 4,185 registered enterprises in

Lesotho (MCA-Lesotho, 2011) most of which

(94.3%) were either small or micro enterprises

(employing 9 people or less). Only 30% of

business enterprises in Lesotho are managed

by youth (MCA-Lesotho, 2011). Furthermore,

the majority of enterprises managed by youth,

were in the retail sector (88.4%), 8.3% were in

the service sector, and 3.3% in manufacturing

(MCA-Lesotho, 2011). The agricultural sector

still largely remains undeveloped in terms of

considering it to be a business. Only 25% of

the business managers who are youth have

tertiary education which means than 75% had

high school education or less (MCA-Lesotho,

2011).

5. ADAPTATION TO CLIMATE CHANGE IN AGRICULTURE

Despite the obvious challenges to agriculture

and food security that are being imposed by

climate change, there is a growing realisation

that there are also vast opportunities that are

arising, particularly in Africa’s agricultural

sector despite its below par performance. The

thinking along this line is perhaps best

captured in the box below.

Box 1: Turning Green to Gold

After years of being overlooked, there is little

doubt that agriculture and agribusiness are now

being considered more seriously as a source of

economic growth in Africa. At the current rate of

global population growth given the fact that

arable land worldwide cannot be expanded,

many experts are predicting that food will

become more valuable than oil [own emphasis]

in the decades to come. Africa is the only region

with tracts of unexploited or underused arable

land…. By opening up virgin farmland and

improving African yields through better

techniques, the continent could become a net

exporter of agricultural produce. Experts say

African agribusiness could be worth $1 trillion by

2030… The opportunities are endless… there is

huge untapped potential in terms of unused land;

plentiful manpower and good growing

conditions. The benefits… include greater food

security; rising exports; and more paid jobs (Ford,

2013, pp. 20, 21).

The realisation of Africa’s agricultural potential

to feed the continent and beyond as well as

create jobs for the youth will nonetheless

require a massive paradigm shift in thinking

about agriculture and the nature of support

that is required. The scope of the challenge of

climate change adaptation and mitigation

entails raising the productivity in the

agricultural sector in order to increase overall

agricultural output and incomes, and meeting

Page19

the demands of more sustainable

development. Whilst there is recognition of

various strategies of engaging the youth in

strategies of adaptation to climate change

through employment, this article focuses on

their engagement through entrepreneurship.

Generally speaking, there are 5 broad

strategies to create youth employment in

sustainable agriculture and green jobs:

1. Addressing the policy environment on youth

employment;

2. Interventions that focus on promoting the

employability of youth;

3. Matchmaking and mediation interventions

that facilitate information exchange between

youth labour supply and demand;

4. Youth employment through public works;

5. Youth entrepreneurship.

At the moment there are serious gaps in all

these strategies in Lesotho. First, of all there is

no comprehensive policy on youth employment

in Lesotho. In 2011, UNDP together with the

Ministry of Gender and Youth, Sports and

Recreation developed the ‘National Action

Plan on Youth Employment 2011/12 to

2015/16’ in an attempt to address this void.

The contents of the action plan were validated

in a national workshop yet the document still

awaits formal adoption by Cabinet which

would signal its implementation. That

notwithstanding, the document gives very

limited attention to youth participation in

agriculture as a means of generating youth

employment. This is further compounded by

the lack of a National Climate Change

Adaptation Strategy despite the development

of several technical papers looking at the

problem (FAO, 2011; Gwimbi, et al, 2012).

Secondly, interventions focusing on youth

employability, match-making and mediation

intervention in the agricultural sector have

been very limited mainly due to the fact that

the sector remains largely undeveloped as

characterised by its subsistence orientation and

low incomes by many of those working in this

sector. Thirdly, the promotion of youth

employment through rural public works, often

locally referred to as ‘fato-fato’ in the local

vernacular, has been very popular. These

projects have focused on adaptation to climate

change though activities that include the

construction of conservation dams,

rehabilitating gullies, constructing roads that

enable remote communities to be reached

during environmental disasters and community

afforestation. Whilst significant numbers of

youth employment opportunities have been

created through this approach, they are

generally not sustainable since the projects are

often short-term and youths are employed on a

rotational basis of about three months to

maximise employment.

The entrepreneurship approach to employment

creation through adaptation to climate change

in agriculture largely remains a path not taken

in Lesotho. Entrepreneurship in agriculture

entails a number of critical elements. Firstly,

there needs to be a shift in the national

perception of agriculture being merely as a

survival strategy of the rural poor to thinking of

agriculture as an opportunity for viable

businesses. As noted above, the dominant

approaches to adaptation to climate change

have largely been through government led

initiatives. The focus on youth

entrepreneurship shifts the focus to youth led

development initiatives. Several global best

practices in such an approach are already

available including, involvement of youth in the

development of new varieties of plants that are

better able to withstand the changed climatic

conditions through seedling propagation

enterprises. Secondly, there needs to be a shift

Page20

in thinking about agriculture as an activity for

producing only food for consumption. Here

the cue needs to be taken from Sen’s

entitlement theory that argues that food

security is not just a result of food produced

but from the totality of means of acquiring

food. These include the ability to purchase

food. In this context there can be a focus on

high value products that are produced not

necessarily for local consumption but for

export and the returns from which can be used

for food.

6. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The thinking around youth entrepreneurship in

adaptation to climate change therefore

represents a major paradigm shift in thinking

about youth employment in Lesotho. Such

support should entail (i) not only promoting an

entrepreneurial culture among young people,

but also linking it to the significance of

agriculture in development and as a sector that

in the future will be more important than oil

production as argued by Ford (2013); (ii)

including entrepreneurial education on

agriculture in the school curricula; (iii)

improving the administrative and regulatory

framework for agricultural development by the

youth (iv) improving access to financing for

agricultural development initiatives undertaken

by the youth; (v) improving access to

information on entrepreneurial opportunities in

agricultural adaptation to climate change and

(iv) Improving business assistance and

development services for entrepreneurial

agricultural ventures by the youth (Schoof, and

Amina Semlali, undated).

REFERENCES

AMCEN, (2011), Guidebook, Addressing Climate

Change Challenges in Africa: A Practical Guide

Towards Sustainable Development. Accessed

from

Bureau of Statistics (BOS), (2008), 2008 Lesotho

Integrated Labour Force Survey: Maseru: Bureau

of Statistics.

Chemnitz, C., and Heike Hoeffler, H., (2011),

“Adapting African Agriculture to Climate

Change”, Rural 21 International Platform, Vol.

01, pp 32 – 35.

DMA, (2012), “Lesotho Food Security and

Vulnerability Monitoring Report”, Lesotho

Vulnerability Assessment Committee, September

2012

FAO, (2011), “Strengthening Capacity for Climate

Change Adaptation in Agriculture: Experience

and Lessons from Lesotho”, Rome: FAO.

Ford, N., (2013), “Turning Green to Gold: Putting

Business into Agriculture”, African Business, Vol.

47, No. 400, August/September 2013, pp. 20 –

27.

Gwimbi, P., Hachigonta, S., Sibanda, L.M., and

Thomas, T.S., (2012), “Southern African

Agriculture and Climate Change: A

Comprehensive Analysis – Lesotho”, December

2012 .

MGYSR and UNDP, (Forthcoming), 2012 Lesotho

Youth Empowerment Survey.

Mphale, M.M., (2003), Lesotho Food Security

Issues Paper for Forum for Food Security in

Southern Africa. Accessed from

http://www.odi.org.uk/publications/4600-food-

aid-drought-lesotho-food-security - 08 June,

2013.

Schoof, U., and Semlali, A., (Undated) “Youth

Entrepreneurship Measures to overcome the

barriers facing youth”, Children & Youth Unit,

Human Development Network, The World Bank.

Selvaraju, R., (2012), “Climate Risk Assessment

and Management in Agriculture” in FAO/OECD,

(2012), Building Resilence for Adaptation to

Climate Change in the Agriculture Sector:

Proceedings of a Joint FAO/OECD Workshop,

23 – 24 April 2012. Rome: FAO and OECD.

“Food insecurity and youth

unemployment are two key development

challenges in Lesotho’s economy …

Page21

For further information, please contact:

| Ms Alka Bhatia | Economic Advisor and Head of the Strategy and Policy Unit | alka.bhatia@undp.org |

| UNDP Lesotho Country Office | 3rd Floor UN House | United Nations Road | Maseru | Lesotho |

Tel: +266 2232 3790 | Fax: +266 2232 0042 |

Volume 1 Issue 3 September 2013