Thomas Yatich, B. Swallow, J. Sang, M. Nyabenge,

1. Are PES-like Iniatives Realistic, Voluntary, Conditional and Pro-poor? Case of Nyando & Yala River Basin Thomas Yatich, B. Swallow, J. Sang, M. Nyabenge, World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF), Nairobi, Kenya Daniel Bundotich, Kenya Ministry of Agriculture, Anantha Duraiappah, and Makiko Yashiro, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Nairobi, Kenya 2ND World Congress in Agroforestry, United Nations Office, Nairobi

2. Outline • Why the concern on Nyando Yala River Basins? Why PES and PES-like? • What ICRAF and partners have done to address the challenges? • What are the community and partners iniatives • Evaluation of PES-like iniatives • Implications of the study • Invitation

3. Why the concern in Nyando and Yala? Why PES-like? • Why Nyando and Yala? • Land Use changes with implications on the state of Lake Victoria and its environmental services; • Land degradation & soil erosion(e.g. 1/3 of Nyando basin is heavily degraded) ; • Variation in the value of agricultural production • Potential impacts of climatic change and Variability • Why PES-like? • PES mechanisms are still incipient in Africa and in the sites that we are working in across East and West African Highlands • Learn lessons and experiences to inform design of prototype mechanisms

4. The Nyando and Yala basins of Kenya • Both about 3500 km2 • High poverty rates • Dense populations • Flooding in lower areas • Deforestation in upper areas • High rates of HIV / AIDS • Declining agriculture through 1990s • Both contrasting land tenure / settlement types

5. What is being done by ICRAF and Partners to address these challenges? • Undertaken Tradeoffs analysis among ecosystem services • Undertake a quick appraisal of PES and PES-like iniatives in the two basins • Facilitated policy dialogues • Boundary work analysis • Building a coalition to make the case for use of publicly funded PES for ecosystem restoration.

6. RUPES / PRESA time line 2008 2007 2009 2011 2010 1994 2006 2002 1998 First discussions with IFAD RUPES 1 began RUPES 1 Reporting; Development of RUPES II RUPES 1 implemented RUPES II implemented PRESA developed PRESA implemented Pan-tropical Scoping study Scoping Study papers published Transvic Project SVEM

7. Propoor Rewards for Environmental Services in Africa Goal: smallholder farmers and residents living in the highlands of East and West Africa benefit from fair and effective agreements between stewards and beneficiaries of ecosystem services. Objectives: 1. Foster workable environmental service agreements. 2. Catalyze policy support and private-sector participation in environmental service agreements 3. Community of Practice: Provide support to researchers, NGOs and government agencies interested in pro-poor rewards for environmental services in Africa

8. Sites

9. What have communities and partners undertaken? • Ecosystem-based livelihood systems aimed at meeting welfare goals • (e.g. food-for-work, flood control, spring protection, de-silting dams, • Iniatives aimed at compliance with the requirements of the National Environment Management Authority; • Ecosystem restoration initiatives e.g. soil erosion control measures spearheaded by LVEMP; • Fair Trade Initiatives e.g. the case of Eastern Produce Company Limited • Biodiversity protection iniatives by communities; • Community empowerment and exchange programs • Design and implementation of voucher systems • {Are these iniatives PES or PES-like? Are they conditional, voluntary, realistic, and pro-poor? }

10. PES-Like Initiatives Njaa Marafuku Kenya Muhoroni East Sub-location Widows and Orphans Group -Help in meeting the UNCCD objectives at the local level -Is pro-poor -Is a Ministry of Agriculture initiative

11. PES-Like Initiatives Compliance with envtal Management Chemomi Factory wetland -Developed because of initial conflicts with adjacent community -Seen as meeting good citizen requirements -Could provide opportunities for eco-labelling

12. PES-Like Initiatives Public programs for ecosystem restoration Food-for-work program -Other programs: De-silting dykes, clearing irrigation drains

13. PES-Like Initiatives On-farm improvements and potential to provide Ecosystem services Mr. Ruguts Farm

14. Criteria-indicator based Evaluation of PES-Like Initiatives

15. Realistic Conditional Voluntary Pro-poor

16. Realistic Conditional Voluntary Pro-poor

17. Implications of study 1. The four-point criteria and indicators are not satisfied by the iniatives, but there are opportunities to ‘tip the balance’ 2. Focus on welfare goals and can only be sustained if their welfare goals are realized; 3. There are opportunities provided for by the existing policy and legislative frameworks (MEAs and national-level policies and legislation

18. Opportunities for students and faculty to help us implement, assess and design our activities Fields: • Geography and land use systems • Links between land use and ecosystem services • valuation of ecosystem services • economics of alternative land uses and interventions • governance of natural resources and property rights • analysis of policy options and constraints • ex ante and ex post impact assessments • social, gender and equity effects of rewards for environmental services • business case for investment in environmental services

19. Follow-up • Please contact us to receive further information • Peter Minang-GRP 6 Leader: a.minang@cgiar.org • Thomas Yatich T.B. – Project Ag. Coordinator: t.yatich@cgiar.org • Vanessa Meadu – Communications Officer: v.meadu@cgiar.org • Miika Makela-Spatial Analyst: m.makela@cgiar.org • Joyce Kasyoki-Administrative Officer: j.kasyoki@cgiar.org • Catherine Kimengu: c.kimengu@cgiar.org PRESA project: http://www. presa.worldagroforestry.org Other ICRAF work on Compensation and Rewards for Environmental Services www.worldagroforestry.org/cres Rewarding Upland Poor for Environmental Services www.worldagroforestry.org/sea/networks/rupes