Kenya Forestry Research Institute (KEFRI), in collaboration with IIED, is implementing the project ‘Establishing a biocultural heritage territory to protect Kenya’s Kaya Forests’ in the Rabai Mijikenda community. Rabai sub-county forms part of the Coastal Forests global biodiversity hotspot, currently under threat. The project aims to conserve biodiversity and genetic resources in four sacred Kaya forests and across the landscape. It also aims to enhance livelihoods and establish a community institution for collective governance of the Rabai Biocultural Heritage Territory.
The mid-term project workshop brought together the community and key government agencies to review progress and challenges with establishing a collectively governed biocultural heritage territory in Rabai and develop strategies to address them.
While the amount of research on NBS is growing rapidly, there is a lack of evidence on community experiences of NBS design and implementation, particularly from low-income and informal settlements of African cities. This article adds new empirical evidence in this space through grounded analysis of NBS “niche” projects co-developed by intermediary organizations and communities in five sites across three settlements in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam. Findings are organized around four established NBS knowledge gaps: (1) NBS-society relations; (2) Design; (3) Implementation; (4) Effectiveness. We find that across the five studied sites, residents’ perceptions and valuation of urban nature has changed through processes of co-design and co-implementation, enabling community ownership of projects, and hence playing a crucial role in NBS effectiveness over time. The integration of gray components into green infrastructure to create hybrid systems has proven necessary to meet physical constraints and communities’ urgent needs such as flood mitigation. However, maintenance responsibilities and cost burdens are persisting issues that highlight the complex reality of NBS development in informal settlements. The cases highlight key considerations for actors involved in NBS development to support the replication, scaling up and institutionalization of NBS. These include the need to: (i) develop forms of engagement that align with co-production values; (ii) capture communities’ own valuation of and motivations with NBS development for integration into design; (iii) elaborate technical guidance for hybrid green-gray infrastructure systems that can be constructed with communities; and (iv) help define and establish structures for maintenance responsibilities (especially governmental vs. civil society) that will enhance the environmental stewardship of public spaces.
Healthy ecosystems such as forests and wetlands have a great potential to support adaptation to climate change and are the foundation of sustainable livelihoods. Ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) can help to protect and maintain healthy ecosystems providing resilience against the impacts of climate change. This paper explores the role of EbA in reconciling socio-economic development with the conservation and restoration of nature in Lake Victoria Basin, Kenya, East Africa. Using selected ecosystems in the Lake region, the paper identifies key EbA approaches and explores trade-offs and synergies at spatial and temporal scales and between different stakeholders. The research methods used for this study include site visits, key informant interviews, focus group discussions, participatory workshops and literature reviews. An analytical framework is applied to advance the understanding of EbA approaches and how they lead to synergies and trade-offs between ecosystem services provision at spatial and temporal scales and multiple stakeholders. Our results show that EbA approaches such as ecosystem restoration have the potential to generate multiple adaptation benefits as well as synergies and trade-offs occurring at different temporal and spatial scales and affecting various stakeholder groups. Our paper underscores the need to identify EbA trade-offs and synergies and to explore the ways in which they are distributed in space and time and between different stakeholders to design better environmental and development programmes.
Ecological infrastructure refers to naturally functioning ecosystems that deliver valuable services to people, such as filtered water and disaster risk reduction. With natural resources becoming scarcer, there is a growing interest in reinvesting in naturally functioning ecosystems in the form of ecological infrastructure, with the assumption that ecological infrastructure complements engineered infrastructure. In many low- and middle-income countries, ecological infrastructure interventions are seen as a key strategy to simultaneously alleviate poverty and improve ecosystem functioning. However, the socio-economic outcomes of ecological infrastructure investments remain poorly documented. We address this knowledge gap by synthesizing research (n = 53 cases) that analyses how ecological infrastructure investments affect ten different socio-economic dimensions, such as income and food security in low- and middle-income countries. We find that ecological infrastructure investments primarily lead to positive outcomes for short-term income and natural capital, whereas positive outcomes for other socio-economic dimensions are less frequently observed. Cases with a high degree of participant involvement in the early implementation of ecological infrastructure investments are significantly more likely to capture positive outcomes across a variety of socio-economic dimensions. Analogously, cases spanning multiple methods – rather than adopting either a qualitative or a quantitative approach – report positive outcomes across more dimensions.
The production of sufficient food for an increasing global population while conserving natural capital is a major challenge to humanity. Tree-mediated ecosystem services are recognized as key features of more sustainable agroecosystems but the strategic management of tree attributes for ecosystem service provision is poorly understood. Six agroforestry and tree cover transition studies, spanning tropical/subtropical forest zones in three continents, were synthesized to assess the contribution of tree cover to the conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Loss of native earthworm populations resulted in 76% lower soil macroporosity when shade trees were absent in coffee agriculture. Increased tree cover contributed to 53% increase in tea crop yield, maintained 93% of crop pollinators found in the natural forest and, in combination with nearby forest fragments, contributed to as much as 86% lower incidence for coffee berry borer. In certain contexts, shade trees contributed to negative effects resulting from increases in abundance of white stem borer and lacebugs and resulted in 60% reduction of endangered tree species compared to forest. Managing trees for ecosystem services requires understanding which tree species to include and how to manage them for different socio-ecological contexts. This knowledge needs to be shared and translated into viable options with farming communities.
Even though ‘green’ options for addressing the impacts of climate change have gained in currency over recent years, they are yet to be fully mainstreamed into development policy and practice. One important reason is the lack of economic evidence as to why investing in ecosystems offers a cost-effective, equitable and sustainable means of securing climate adaptation, disaster risk reduction and other development co-benefits. This chapter presents a conceptual framework for integrating ecosystem values into climate-compatible development planning. Case studies from coastal areas of Kenya and Sri Lanka illustrate how such an approach can be applied in practice to make the economic and business case for ecosystem-based measures. It is argued that, rather than posing ‘grey’ and ‘green’ options as being necessarily in opposition to each other or as mutually incompatible, from an economic perspective both should be seen as being part and parcel of the same basic infrastructure that is required to deliver essential development services in the face of climate change
Decision making for the conservation and management of coral reef biodiversity requires an understanding of spatial variability and distribution of reef habitat types. Despite the existence of very high-resolution remote sensing technology for nearly two decades, comprehensive assessment of coral reef habitats at national to regional spatial scales and at very high spatial resolution is still scarce. Here, we develop benthic habitat maps at a sub-national scale by analyzing large multispectral QuickBird imagery dataset covering ~686 km2 of the main shallow coral fringing reef along the southern border with Tanzania (4.68°S, 39.18°E) to the reef end at Malindi, Kenya (3.2°S, 40.1°E). Mapping was conducted with a user approach constrained by ground-truth data, with detailed transect lines from the shore to the fore reef. First, maps were used to evaluate the present management system’s effectiveness at representing habitat diversity. Then, we developed three spatial prioritization scenarios based on differing objectives: (i) minimize lost fishing opportunity; (ii) redistribute fisheries away from currently overfished reefs; and (iii) minimize resource use conflicts. We further constrained the priority area in each prioritization selection scenario based on optionally protecting the least or the most climate exposed locations using a model of exposure to climate stress. We discovered that spatial priorities were very different based on the different objectives and on whether the aim was to protect the least or most climate-exposed habitats. Our analyses provide a spatially explicit foundation for large-scale conservation and management strategies that can account for ecosystem service benefits.
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to assess the potential for pastoral communities inhabiting Kenyan Masailand to adapt to climate change using conservancies and payments for ecosystem services. Design/methodology/approach – Multiple methods and data sources were used, comprising: a socio-economic survey of 295 households; informal interviews with pastoralists, conservancy managers, and tourism investors; focus group discussions; a stakeholder workshop. Monthly rainfall data was used to analyse drought frequency and intensity. A framework of the interactions between pastoralists’ drought coping and risk mitigation strategies and the conservancy effects was developed, and used to qualitatively assess some interactions across the three study sites. Changes in household livestock holdings and sources of cash income are calculated in relation to the 2008-09 drought. Findings – The frequency and intensity of droughts are increasing but are localised across the three study sites. The proportion of households with per capita livestock holdings below the 4.5 TLU poverty vulnerability threshold increased by 34 per cent in Kitengela and 5 per cent in the Mara site, mainly due to the drought in 2008-2009. Payment for ecosystem services was found to buffer households from fluctuating livestock income, but also generates synergies and/or trade-offs depending on land use restrictions. Originality/value – The contribution of conservancies to drought coping and risk mitigation strategies of pastoralists is analyzed as a basis for evaluating the potential for ecosystem-based adaptation.
Potential interactions between food production and climate mitigation are explored for two situations in sub-Saharan Africa, where deforestation and land degradation overlap with hunger and poverty. Three agriculture intensification scenarios for supplying nitrogen to increase crop production (mineral fertilizer, herbaceous legume cover crops—green manures—and agroforestry—legume improved tree fallows) are compared to baseline food production, land requirements to meet basic caloric requirements, and greenhouse gas emissions. At low population densities and high land availability, food security and climate mitigation goals are met with all intensification scenarios, resulting in surplus crop area for reforestation. In contrast, for high population density and small farm sizes, attaining food security and reducing greenhouse gas emissions require mineral fertilizers to make land available for reforestation; green manure or improved tree fallows do not provide sufficient increases in yields to permit reforestation. Tree fallows sequester significant carbon on cropland, but green manures result in net carbon dioxide equivalent emissions because of nitrogen additions. Although these results are encouraging, agricultural intensification in sub-Saharan Africa with mineral fertilizers, green manures, or improved tree fallows will remain low without policies that address access, costs, and lack of incentives. Carbon financing for small-holder agriculture could increase the likelihood of success of Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries programs and climate change mitigation but also promote food security in the region.
