1 / 8

Scott Geller LTS International Ltd.

Linking National Forest Programmes with Poverty Reduction Strategies Namibia Case Study: Preliminary Findings. “Nfps for All” Workshop Directorate of Forestry & National Forest Programme Facility Swapokmund, Namibia 8 th May 2006. Scott Geller LTS International Ltd.

ros
Download Presentation

Scott Geller LTS International Ltd.

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Linking National Forest Programmes with Poverty Reduction StrategiesNamibia Case Study: Preliminary Findings “Nfps for All” Workshop Directorate of Forestry & National Forest Programme Facility Swapokmund, Namibia 8th May 2006 Scott Geller LTS International Ltd.

  2. Namibia’s key policy frameworks that influence forestry-poverty linkages Vision 2030 Medium Term Expenditure Framework National Development Plan 2-6 PRS & NPRAP MAWF Medium Term Plans Regional Development Plans Forestry Strategic Plan

  3. Linkages between macro-economic policy & forestry • Vision 2030 & NDP 2 provide a good diagnosis of forest sectoral contributions • PRS (1998) & NPRAP (2002) very little forestry thrust • FSP (1996) economic angle = environmental protection, local forest products, wildlife/ecotourism

  4. Preliminary findings: challenges (1) • Macro-policy coherence: disconnect between Vision 2030, National Development Plan, Regional Development Plans; ownership is limited in general due to top-down approach; unclear on where the NPRAP fits into the equation • Multi-sectoral coordination mechanisms: after 10 years no FSP Inter-Ministerial Committee or FSP Task Force; after 3+ years no National Forestry Council; limited DoF direct engagement with National Planning Commission; multi-stakeholder process for National Development Plan and Regional Development Plans not fully institutionalised; participation is costly

  5. Preliminary findings: challenges (2) • M&E arrangements & information pathways:Poverty Monitoring Strategy is very new; no formal sectoral review or assessment of FSP; National Forestry Inventory completed in 2003 as a baseline of forest info; National Household & Income Expenditure Surveys; Agricultural Census • Awareness & communications: forest sector has neither a positive nor negative image; regional specific with preference towards “woodlands” and not forestry; greater communication focus on environmental management instead of livelihood security; DoF core awareness capacity via HQ & field extension limited outside projects; more advocacy to develop political awareness is needed

  6. Preliminary findings: opportunities (1) • NDP 3 preparations (2007-2012): Mainstreaming environment in NDP 2 is key for NDP 3 preparations underway from mid-2006 using cluster / thematic approach; NPC calling for direct engagement with DoF (not ministry); bottom-up planning based on Regional Development Plans • New institutional set up: DoF under MAWF is an elevated status; new alliances; important to maintain the old alliances (MET); MAWF strategic planning process (2007-2030); Ministry of Finance shift to “programme budgeting”; policy related task forces & forums for forestry to engage = CBNRM, biodiversity, indigenous plants, bioenergy, etc…

  7. Preliminary findings: opportunities (2) • Integrated CBNRM approaches:Joined-up community forestry approaches with the conservancy approach & vice versa = direct income via NTFPs, wildlife management & tourism (important to manage expectations) • Multi-purpose tree planting:Proposed private sector jatropha investment of $150 million ($N2 thousand / month / household / 20 ha) = biodiesel & carbon benefits

  8. Preliminary findings: opportunities (3) • Decentralisation: DoF on the priority list after rural water supply – a “chicken before the egg” scenario with short-term risks & long-term benefits within framework of Regional Development Plans based on Regional Poverty Profile from the Participatory Poverty Assessment (2003-2006) • National forest accounting:DEA Environmental Economics Unit shows forestry’s asset value is higher than fish, minerals, wildlife = time to disseminate, raise political awareness & market forestry better

More Related