management, research and planning (marep) forum: 23-24
TRANSCRIPT
1
Management, Research and Planning (MAREP) Forum:
23-24 November 2017
Unlocking and securing investments in the natural resource management sector
Working session
Old Mutual Hall, Kirstenbosch Botanical Gardens, Cape Town
Prepared by:
Malukhanye Mbopha, Alex Marsh
With inputs from members of
DEA Natural Resources Management programme
Note: The following report reflects the opinions and insights of an NRM service provider and invited organizations. These opinions do not necessarily reflect the mandate or position of NRM or DEA.
2
Table of contents Executive Summary: .................................................................................................................................. 5
Facilitator reflections: .................................................................................................................................. 5
Towards an action plan for funding natural resource management .................................................................. 6
1. Biodiversity Offsets / Biodiversity Stewardship .................................................................................. 7
2. Water value chain .......................................................................................................................... 8
3. Corporate financing ........................................................................................................................ 9
4. GreenClimate Fund ...................................................................................................................... 12
Workshop Proceedings: Day 1 .................................................................................................................. 13
Opening Session: Welcome and introductions ........................................................................................ 13
Opening remarks and plenary reflections ................................................................................................ 13
Resourcing the sector: Natural Resource Management Programmes Growing the Ecological Infrastructure (EI)
Sector ..................................................................................................................................................... 13
Addressing key questions ..................................................................................................................... 13
International Funding mechanisms: Scoping opportunities for the natural resource management sector ........... 14
Feedback from previous session on Green Climate Fund (GCF)............................................................... 14
Dr Christo Marais ............................................................................................................................. 14
Unlocking funding for catalytic change ................................................................................................... 15
Mr Michael Braack:........................................................................................................................... 15
SANBI’s Green Climate Fund Framework: unlocking access to GCF resources through SANBI .................. 15
Mr Michael Jennings: ........................................................................................................................ 15
TNC and Freshwater Conservation in Africa: Working for the benefit of communities & ecosystems ............ 15
Ms Louise Stafford: .......................................................................................................................... 15
Water Pricing Strategy: Unlocking funding for natural resource management through water sector tariffs ......... 16
Feedback on previous session .............................................................................................................. 16
Mr John Dini .................................................................................................................................... 16
Quantification Approaches for providing evidence to support realistic Water Resource Management charges
.......................................................................................................................................................... 16
Prof Graham Jewett ......................................................................................................................... 16
National Water Affairs, past, present and future ...................................................................................... 17
Mr Matome Mahasha ........................................................................................................................ 17
3
Corporate investments: resourcing the natural resource management sector through innovative corporate
investments and partnerships .................................................................................................................... 17
Unlocking Private Investment in NRM .................................................................................................... 17
Ms Jules Newton .............................................................................................................................. 17
On financial institutions and nrm investments .......................................................................................... 18
Ms Vanessa Otto-Mentz ................................................................................................................... 18
The Green Business Value Chain: Unlocking Micro Enterprise sustainability in the Green Economy ............ 18
Mr David Gardner: ............................................................................................................................ 18
The concept of Sustainability ................................................................................................................. 18
Mr Alexander Haw ............................................................................................................................ 18
The Green Business value Chain: Theory of Change .............................................................................. 18
Mr Thabo Thulare: ............................................................................................................................ 18
Working Session 1 ................................................................................................................................... 19
Workshop Proceedings: Day 2 .................................................................................................................. 20
Reflections and facilitated discussion ......................................................................................................... 20
Green Climate Fund (GCF): .............................................................................................................. 20
Water sector: ................................................................................................................................... 20
Corporate sector: ............................................................................................................................. 20
Biodiversity Offsets: Contextualising the opportunities, challenges and progress around biodiversity offsets in
South Africa ............................................................................................................................................. 20
Progress on the Overall Environmental Offsetting and Biodiversity Offsetting Policy finalisation process and
the proposed Offsetting Support Unit ..................................................................................................... 20
Mr Peter Lukey: ............................................................................................................................... 20
Biodiversity offsets in South Africa: opportunities and constraints -Things for NRM to consider .................... 21
Mr Jeffrey Manuel: ........................................................................................................................... 21
Conservation banking: The benefits to the NRM sector and how it might work ........................................... 22
Mr Dave Cox:................................................................................................................................... 22
Biodiversity Stewardship ........................................................................................................................... 22
How do we convince Private Landowners to invest in ecosystem services on their own land? ..................... 22
Ms Kerry Purnell .............................................................................................................................. 22
Tools to Securing Our Investment .......................................................................................................... 23
4
Ms Candice Stevens: ........................................................................................................................ 23
How Does Biodiversity Stewardship Function – Securing NRM Investment ................................................ 23
Mr Kevin McCann: ................................................................................................................................ 23
Working session 2 ................................................................................................................................ 24
Closure by Dr Christo Marais .................................................................................................................... 24
Annexure A: MAREP Programme .............................................................................................................. 25
Annexure B: NRM National Management, Research and Planning Forum ..................................................... 27
5
Executive Summary: The 3rd Management, Research and Planning Forum on unlocking resources for the natural resource management sector was held on the 23rd and 24th of November 2017 in the old Mutual Hall in Kirstenbosch Gardens. Focused around the water value chain, corporate investment, international funding opportunities, biodiversity stewardship and biodiversity offsets, the event built on a series of dialogues that have been emerging as being of central concern for the Department of Environmental Affairs’ (DEA) Natural Resource Management (NRM) Programmes and the natural resource management sector more broadly.
With limited government funds available to address the effective management – including rehabilitation and maintenance – of crucial ecological infrastructure that provides value to people and in view of the increasing risk that climate change and land degradation poses for the supply of ecosystem services, it has become of crucial importance to diversify funding streams for natural resource management.
The need to increase the resource base for natural resource management activities across the country has been an increasingly important issue for engagement over the past 3 years. The need to conduct strategic meetings focused around this range of issues was identified at the first National MAREP in November 2014. Since then, a number of MAREP Forums have been held in order to investigate and develop action plans for the implementation of a range of solutions around unlocking investments in natural resource management.
The MAREP brings together specialists in their field in order to deepen the understanding of decision makers in the sector in order to create action plans for specific streams of work. This MAREP built on identified thematic areas [that emerged from the February 2017 MAREP Forum], and through working groups came to a set of actions that are time bound and associated with individuals and institutions in order to progress in unlocking resources for the sector.
Four different action plans have thus been formulated by expert working groups and expounded upon within this report. These are:
Corporate investments: exploring how to develop stronger linkages with the private sector, particularly financial institutions and companies that are interested in sustainability in order to unlock disaster risk reduction aligned natural resource management activities and develop value chains for value added products.
Water value chain: establishing a series of action plans that speak to influencing water sector policy, participating in integrated catchment management and convening water sector engagements to ensure closer alignment between the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) and the Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS), catchment management agencies and other organisational bodies such as Irrigation Boards and Water User Associations.
International Funding Mechanisms: continue to support the finalisation of the fast tracked NRMP Green Climate Fund proposal.
Biodiversity Offsets (BO) and Biodiversity Stewardship (BDS): work intentionally to develop stronger linkages between these areas of work and the natural resource management sector. This will be through various mechanisms, such as funding the BO office within DEA, developing a concept note for a BDS focused small grants fund for improved natural resource management and security of investment in stewardship sites, and developing a set of maps that represent priority receiving areas for BO.
Facilitator reflections: Approximately 45 people gathered at the Management, Research and Planning (MAREP) Forum in Kirstenbosch Gardens in November 2017. The participants represented a group of people who are experts in their respective fields – from government decision makers, specialised consultants, non-governmental organisation (NGO) practitioners to natural resource management (nrm) sector implementers. Each invited participant was asked to attend in order to build of a body of knowledge that is being brought together for a specific purpose. The issues
6
that were dealt with were not abstract. They were not about commenting on policy or discussing general opportunities for financing within the sector on a broad scale. They were instead around the development of actionable plans – identified actions speaking to policy issues that are taking form as programmes of work which specific people and institutions have undertaken for time bound execution.
In terms of the identified thematic areas and working groups, the water pricing strategy is a series of workshops involving Catchment Management Forums and the Department of Water and Sanitation to explore unlocking the tariff across different tiers of the pricing structure and working explicitly into integrated catchment management. The biodiversity offsets dialogue is centred around a funded offset office in the Department of Environmental Affairs, an offset focused MAREP forum event and a process of tool development in the form of a mapping exercise led through SANBIs Planning unit. Our discussions around international funding included the reality of an appointed consultant and a series of meetings underway that is moving forward with a MAREP workshopped Green Climate Fund proposal that is looking to be fast tracked in early 2018.
It is now clear that over a period of three years we have built the capacity of this emergent Community of Practice to engage in constructive social process practice that has formed a platform for iterative and action orientated discussions within the natural resource management space. It is also clear that our discussions have developed to the point where there is a need for distinct thematic work streams to engage between MAREP engagements in order to maintain the enlivened discourses needed to unlock the resources needed.
2018 will see sector specific meetings conducted for Biodiversity offsets and the water value chain, and will involve extensive engagement with the Biodiversity Stewardship (BDS) CoP in order to ensure that NRMP and BDS work more closely together.
Towards an action plan for funding natural resource management
The main aim of the MAREP, themed: “Unlocking and securing investments in natural resource management” was to develop time-bound action plans with clearly identified task managers. The working groups were thematic and guided by the panel discussions. Below are the key practical next steps to be taken by designated people. These steps specify the work to be taken forward by assigned leaders taking into consideration the stipulated timeframes.
Please note: as the thematic areas under discussion vary widely in complexity, stages of development, lead facilitators and size of undertaking, the respective action plans vary in format.
Further note: where the identified actions result in the potential for DEA NRM to incur costs these actions will need further motivation and approval as per normal internal and contract management processes.
7
1. Biodiversity Offsets / Biodiversity Stewardship
Action Responsibility Timeframe
NRM and offsets
1. Host an offsets MAREP SANBI - Alex Marsh After the national offsets policy
has been published
2. Develop a map of priority offsets receiving areas. The drafting of the offset receiving maps to be conducted through closer alignment with NRM planning approaches, and at a fine-scale.
SANBI – Jeff Manuel 1st quarter of 2018
3. Pilot an offsets / NRM project – assess the current SIP projects that have been authorised, as well as
the compliance issues from environmental authorisations coming out of WG7, in order to select a
project that requires an offset. Where this offset is located, perform a catchment-wide planning
exercise, identifying areas to be secured as an offset, and those areas that need to be rehabilitated
and restored.
Provincial biodiversity planners By end of 2018
NRM and Biodiversity Stewardship
4. Development of an NRM small grants facility (R20, 000 – R50, 000), that secured biodiversity
stewardship sites could access to assist with natural resource management activities on their
properties. The micro incentive concept to be implemented by an existing entity (e.g. SANBI) and
managed from Operational Support and Planning (OSP) [for further discussion].
Mark Botha to work with Natasha Wilson to
draft a concept note (and to engage with Mike
Jennings (SANBI) around the possibility of a
small grants facility)
1st quarter of 2018
5. Explore the opportunity of strengthening the inclusion of biodiversity stewardship sites into the LUI
filters to enable the increased security of investment provided by biodiversity stewardship sites to be a
key filter for LUI applications.
Pamela Kershaw and Tapiwa Puling By end of 2nd quarter of 2018
6. The NRMP to be included as a representative on the National Biodiversity Stewardship Technical
Working Group, which meets twice a year, and is coordinated by SANBI. Invitation to be sent to
Tapiwa to attending the first TWG
Natasha Wilson and Tapiwa Puling 1st quarter 2018
8
2. Water value chain
Action Responsibility Timeframe
1. Ecological Infrastructure and Catchment Management Strategies:
• Include spatial and costing/budgeting component on EI in CMSs (using tools like MUCPs/MURPs where
appropriate)
• Engage with CMS development processes
• Engage with CMS enablers in W&S Bill
GEF6 [programme leader and EI
director], DEA NRM, CSIR, broader
NRM CoP in catchments where CMSs
being developed
March 2019
2. Participate in finalising Water & Sanitation Bill, National W&S Strategy, Master Plan, municipal funding models GEF6 policy advisor, DEA, WWF,
WRC, DWS (Matome Mahashe), FCG
As opportunities present
themselves
3. Clarify accounting treatment of EI as an asset that can be invested in by municipalities/water boards. Also clarify
operations and maintenance arrangements as “municipal service” in terms of the Municipal Systems Act
Water Fund [Louise Stafford], Mark
Botha, WWF, GEF6 [policy advisor]
March 2019
4. Participate in annual tariff setting consultations (WRMC) at WMA scale. Explore opportunities to use tariffs at bulk/retail
tiers for EI investment
DEA NRM regional programme
leaders, DWS (Matome Mahashe –
invitations & linking with ESR), WWF,
WRC, SANBI (Alex Marsh), FCG
As opportunities present
themselves
5. Participate in annual tariff setting consultations at WMA level & make the case for increase in WRMC in relation to
magnitude of costs. Explore opportunities to use tariffs at bulk/retail tiers for EI investment.
DEA NRM regional programme
leaders, DWS (Matome – invitations &
link to DWS ESR), WWF, WRC,
SANBI (Alex Marsh), FCG
As opportunities present
themselves
6. Engage with WUAs, IBs, WBs etc & identify opportunities to bring more of these into NRM implementation network &
unlock funding. To be Subject of future MaReP.
SANBI, DEA NRM By July 2018
7. Create clearing house for documents/information related to the water pricing & NRM work stream SANBI, WRC By end 2017/18 financial
year
9
3. Corporate financing
There is a dearth of marketing expertise that enables the enhanced promotion of Environmental Programmes work
into the corporate sector. Essentially those that work in the programmes understand the wealth of work that it is
being done but it’s not being communicated to those who can help unlock resources.
The language of business revolves around risk and the activities that need to be engaged in to minimise this risk.
One such risk that needs to be packaged adequately to the corporate sector is that of land management. Land
management can be packaged as good restoration work, the incentives inherent in the Biodiversity Stewardship
programme and these options should be communicated to key landowners.
There is now no such thing as a one size fits all strategy that is exercised in terms of target markets. The market
is fragmented in terms of its perspectives. Categories or segments of society care about different things and so
the response needs to be tailored to speak to these different perspectives.
Is certification, as an incentive, a tool to use to stimulate corporate involvement? This can be linked to risk and has
benefits to society but the sector should be aware of duplicating other efforts in the field.
A component of the message that is sent to corporates should comprise an understanding of their reliance on
natural resources. This reliance, however, is largely unquantified and does not take into consideration the whole
value chain. For example, the water value chain goes beyond just infrastructure – it also goes beyond the factory
fence – and is largely embedded in ecological services/infrastructure thinking that is more holistic. And so, if we
can demonstrate the systemic impact we can show why segments should care more about natural resources.
A big corporate player in the financial services sector was quoted as saying, “the social agenda is the business
agenda.” How does this sentiment play itself out in a) the relationship between people and planet and b) how do
we leverage this sentiment into the DNA of an organisation where we see it manifest as core strategies or, at the
least, in sustainability plans?
The agricultural sector is one that is very important in terms of focus on supply chains and efficiencies, for example:
if we had to spell out to them the links in the value chain, it may look something like this:
Currently there is no over-arching strategy. But, a suggestion was presented that will create a sub-group to
crack the strategy. And the strategy would need to take into consideration the following:
land fodder animals wood
10
Potential drivers of this project (task team) that were identified were:
Lehman Lindeque (UNDP)
Garth Barnes (DEA)
Thabo Thulare (TIPS)
Amanda Dinan (Fetola)
Azisa Parker (SANBI)
It was foreseen that this strategy would be embedded in a greater framework for engagement that would support
the following functions:
Awareness
Education
Value proposition per target market
Enable innovation and new participation from business sector
Stakeholder mapping exercise
Identify key message – aligned to GCF – and work within that platform
Supported by a communication plan and tools
This framework would require some key inputs that would be necessary to see it catalysed. These inputs were
articulated as follows:
Additional funding from a Green Climate Fund proposal
The mechanisms available for business to engage with to create the desired impact: need to be packaged
and accessible
o Tax incentives
o LUI incentives
o Funding mechanisms
o BEE compliance frameworks
o Offsets
Matched funding from corporate funding instruments (Financial Sector)
11
o Land degradation Neutrality fund UNCCD (investment in small business; farming business)
Clear articulation of risks and opportunities per sector
The group also discussed what it means to “bring” corporates into an ecological infrastructure mind-set. A strategy
that may enable this would be to look for where the corporate activity is, what forums are taking place and what
are they speaking about, what is being said in sustainability or, more pertinently, integrated, reports.
Broader involvement, particularly as it pertains to political support, was discussed. This discussion took on the
following shape:
Agree on spatial priorities – work has been done: putting it together needed
Focus areas?
Topics?
Sectors?
Align to national targets
Define, then present per catchment to all players
Key stakeholders per catchment: example Green-Cape work in Berg River catchment
Municipality risk management - engagement with local and district. Align Integrated Development Plans
(IDPs) with national priorities
Additional thoughts that the group had thereafter were:
Unlocking and aligning spend within the NRM world
Prioritization and visioning – aligned to the whole NRM sector – should be ecological infrastructure
prioritization
Parks Boards – need to involve them as well as stakeholder together with municipalities
Minister and Members of the Executive Committee (MINMEC) and Ministerial Technical Committee
Working Groups (MINTEC) within DEA possible avenue to coordinate this strategy
Private sector alignment is key
The group then proposed the following as a way forward:
Develop priority Natural Resource Management /Sustainable Land Management map for South
Africa National, Provincial and catchment-based) with priority focus areas/topics (UNCCP)
o Who is doing what – appoint consultant (possibility that UNNCP fund this piece of work)
o Rapid response guidance (E.g. Drought relief in W-Cape)
Appoint a steering committee to drive this process.
Who should be on steering committee:
o Carina Malherbe and Garth Barnes (DEA);
o Christine Colvin/Helen Gordon (WWF);
o Lehman Lindeque (UCCP);
o Jules Newton (AvoVision);
o Thabo Thulare (Green Cape);
o Amanda Dinan (Fetola);
o Azisa Parker (SANBI);
o Value added industry representative?
o Corporate representative
12
Task team to develop terms of reference to drive pieces of work
Develop communication and awareness tools
o Website, spatial maps, what’s being done etc
Mobilisation and communication strategy development
4. GreenClimate Fund
C4 EcoSolutions will be responsible for developing the SA Green Climate Fund (GCF) project on land rehabilitation
between November 2016 and October 2018. Project development will be guided by Department of Environmental
Affairs (DEA), South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI), and overseen by the Deutsche Gesellschaft
für Internationale Zusammenarbeit GmbH (GIZ).
The proposed SA GCF project will be centred around the following draft problem statement:
Climate change and elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide are degrading South Africa’s ecosystems. This
degradation is characterised by inter alia: i) increased densities of woody plants; 2) reduced infiltration of water
into soils and aquifers; 3) increased rates of soil erosion; and 4) increased frequencies and/or intensities of
wildfires. The net effect is a major reduction in the supply of goods and services from ecosystems, with severe
negative effects on the livelihoods of millions of vulnerable rural South Africans.
The overarching aims of the proposed SA GCF project are:
To facilitate detailed, cross-sectoral land-use planning in ecologically sensitive sites vulnerable to climate change across South Africa.
To facilitate the upscaling of existing ecosystem services-based industries and initiatives to increase climate change resilience of vulnerable communities.
To facilitate the country-wide upscaling of fire management initiatives to manage the increased threat of fire brought about by climate change, based on lessons-learned from the Fynbos Fire Project.
To ensure long-term sustainable management of land cleared/rehabilitated/restored under the Natural Resource Management and Expanded Public Works Programmes (DEA) through harnessing land-using incentives and a biodiversity stewardship approach.
To create an enabling environment for the establishment of value-added industries and alternative livelihoods in communities vulnerable to climate change.
Action Responsibility Timeframe
1. C4 Eco-Solutions to develop the project subject to guidance from DEA & SANBI
C4 Eco-Solutions November 2016 to October 2018
Conclusion
The four key themes of discussions and exchange of ideas focussed on international funding opportunities, corporate investment prospects, water value chain, biodiversity stewardship and biodiversity offsets. The established thematic groups will continue with identified actions necessary to achieve the overall goal of securing and unlocking Ecological Infrastructure investments. These groups are requested to undertake the stated responsibilities within stipulated timeframes. Feedback sessions will be held in the next Executive MAREP to update this community about the progress made and processes in place towards the fulfilment these actions.
13
Workshop Proceedings: Day 1
Opening Session: Welcome and introductions Dr Marais greeted everyone and noted that the last Executive MAREP was centred on “Unlocking and securing investments in the natural resource management sector”, and held to determine where we are and where we want to go as the natural resource management sector as a whole. He also noted that he would like to see the nrm sector renamed as the Ecological Infrastructure and Ecosystem Services sector. He reported that the DEA Director General had informed them about the latest cabinet meeting which confirmed that the Ecological Infrastructure and Ecosystem Services sector will not be getting more money from government. Therefore increased resourcing was dependant on nrm strengthening partnerships to develop the sector. ‘In February, there were 4 different themes identified, today’s sessions will follow up on them. This form of engagement is a long term investment, we need to be strategic, and you are here to help us define strategies to grow and develop the NRM sector’. Dr Marais asked delegates to introduce themselves, their organisations and briefly highlight their interest in Ecological Infrastructure investments. After a round of introductions he emphasised that most people used the word ‘water’ and ‘Ecological Infrastructure’ in their introductions - every industry is linked to water. He highlighted that it is crucial to partner closely with DWS, and that a new steering committee will facilitate the partnership between DEA and DWS.
Opening remarks and plenary reflections Brief recap of journey to date and the planned outcomes and outputs of this event Programme overview and plenary reflections Sarah Polonsky presented a brief recap of MAREP journey to date. She indicated that MAREPs started in 2014. Over the years, there has been an emerging focus on prioritising follow up on identified actions in order for each MAREP to build on the ones before. MAREPs have been conducted on a national, regional and strategic/thematic basis. 3 National MAREPs have been conducted to date. Regionally focussed MAREPs have been conducted, such as Agulhas Biodiversity Initiative Regional MAREP and the Limpopo / Mpumalanga regional in 2017. The Social Ecological Systems (SES) was hosted in July 2016 to enable and allow conversations with stakeholders beyond NRM Key Performance Indicators (KPI). The International/Ecosystem Services Atelier MAREP resulted in 13 papers published. This was one of four Executive MAREPs. The Executive MAREP process has now developed four themes to identify and understand how to unlock investment and what changes are necessary to do. There has been much movement emerging from MAREP processes that are living in different ways across the sector.
Resourcing the sector: Natural Resource Management Programmes Growing the Ecological Infrastructure (EI) Sector
Addressing key questions Dr C. Marais presented the journey of managing Natural Resources dating back to 1945. In 1993 there was a realisation that budgets were being reduced. As a result, 2 decisions were taken: 1) Present the idea of NRM to local decision makers and 2). To approach “the rich north” for support in the battle against invasive alien plants and its impacts on biodiversity. He emphasized that nature is not for sale, but if we don’t put a value on it, people will not appreciate it. Realising the issue of poverty, NRM work ought to be mainstreamed into Economic Development.
He showed NRM budgets invested in EI since 1995, the current budget is R2, 1 billion. (Jobs created=271 700 and participants over last 4 years=57100). He noted that many people are benefiting and have benefited from NRM programme, but the NRM environmental outputs are not demonstrating sufficient gains. NRM needs money and resources, for example, 75 000 wetlands are degraded in South Africa, only 1200 have been rehabilitated. NRM needs to find ways of unlocking resources in the sector while create employment. There are some places to look for funds, but there is work to do in making an economic case to private land users/owners. Government agencies
14
are mainly involved in developing EI programmes, but there is an increasing interest within local authorities in the importance of EI. The National Water Resources Management Strategy is seen as an EPWP function, but emphasis should also be on the importance of EI. There are 3 reasons for investments: Profitability, Sustainability and Risk Reduction. Government will invest in the NRM sector because of our poverty eradication mandate, thus partnering with EPWP is beneficial.
‘People come first, we can feed society through EI restoration’.
NGOs will play a large and increasing role in poverty eradication. Dr. Marais suggested that in the future NGOs will play a much bigger role in the nrm space.
Reflections on the presentation:
Q: Relying on NGOs is a risk and if EPWP goes away, what is NRM’s plan B? A: NGOs bring a lot of energy, NGOs money is unlocked through LUIs, NGOs’ role is growing and SMMEs’ role is also growing exponentially. Q: How do you assist NGOs to develop capacity? A: Expertise in mapping, prioritization and support with extension officers. Managing natural resources is a societal concern, we need to think as a nation, not as a sector. DEA is not the only department responsible for unlocking potential funding streams for nrm. Q: The bigger challenge is poor intergovernmental relations and cooperate governance. Government is duplicating efforts at different levels. We need to bring the intergovernmental Relations Act into effect. Local government’s concern is service delivery, not NRM and addressing water responsibilities. A: Extension services have been neglected in the country, DEA is trying to find hosts to nurture interns through a mentorship programme. This is to build up expertise in the 1st year. It is necessary to take responsibility and ownership of the NRM sector. ‘If you want something to work, establish the champions, establish ownership…society is everyone’ there is a need to strengthen partnerships and take actions to promote cooperative governance. Waste is a key issue in water resources, Environmental Protection and Infrastructure Programmes (EPIP) doesn’t cover it completely. Improve partnerships to develop the sector, formal partnerships. Agreement has been signed between Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) and Department of Water and Sanitation to formalise the sector more than talking informally.
International Funding mechanisms: Scoping opportunities for the natural resource management sector
Feedback from previous session on Green Climate Fund (GCF)
Dr Christo Marais
In the last Executive MAREP, NRMP agreed to that there will a submission of a proposal to GCF. NRMP then obtained GIZ fund to develop a proposal, and developed a Terms of Reference. C4 was the successful bidder to develop that proposal and submit through SANBI as an accredited entity. This process is based on grant funding, and is designed to act as a catalyst. Four areas have been selected in the country. MAREPs inputs will be useful for the workshop on Monday the 27th November.
Questions/comments:
GCF is going to ask how this money has been used in a catalytic/transformative way. They need a clear plan detailing how to make use of the money and a business plan describing how to use funds in those 4 areas.
15
Unlocking funding for catalytic change
Mr Michael Braack:
Michael discussed the UNCCD Land Degradation Neutrality project within the framework of how to unlock further investments. NRM is trying to reverse degradation, and aims to attain neutrality. However, NRMP is not a magic bullet, and represents a small investment when looking at reversing degradation. ‘We are stuck at Reverse and end up not doing Reduce and Avoid. If we say the restoration of Ntabelanga is going to costs us a billion, the question is how we start looking at Reduce and Avoid’. Not talking to other partners becomes a challenge because we are trying to focus on reversing only. The primary focus is reversing degradation, not working with other departments that have the Reduce and Avoid responsibility/mandate. On monitoring: how can we use citizen science to start reporting in to the frameworks, through collecting and gathering the recent data? This baseline information is useful for resource mobilization. Eg: Ntabelanga Community erosion -to re-vegetate the land, one needs to source local trees. The main aim is to avoid erosion as opposed to reversing it. To source international funding, solid evidence is required. In addition, we need to link biomes, and the departments must know who is doing what, and where
The Department of Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) is useful in gully erosion, it is not about degradation but proper land management, DAFF is currently missing in our discussions.
SANBI’s Green Climate Fund Framework: unlocking access to GCF resources through SANBI
Mr Michael Jennings:
SANBI was nominated to be a national entity and was accredited in 2016. All Adaption Fund money has flowed through SANBI in South Africa, but the same will not be the case with GCF. SANBI is one of numerous accredited entities.
The GCF wants to see transformative change. Projects must be aligned with National Policies and respond to vulnerability. Any projects approved must reduce emissions and increase resilience. Project ideas must be innovative, enhancing livelihoods, local ownership and demonstrate the capacity for sustainable change at a landscape level.
Questions/comments:
Q: There are Social, Enviropreneurs and individuals doing recycling. Do they qualifying? A: These must be institutions, and demonstrate the potential to manage large budgets. (Financial capacity and institutional capacity are assessed).
TNC and Freshwater Conservation in Africa: Working for the benefit of communities & ecosystems
Ms Louise Stafford:
The Nature Conservancy (TNC) is still new in South Africa. It is a global institution and next year will open offices in SA to be able to do business. There are barriers in catchments, and municipalities can lead the way in unlocking these at a catchment level. Municipalities are timid to invest in catchments but there is potential. It is important to encourage cooperative governance upstream and downstream and bring the municipalities on board.
In Kenya: the Upper Tana was Africa’s 1st Water Fund. It achieved the following: Over 50% reduction in sediment, up to 15% increase in annual water yields, up to US$ 3 million per year increased agricultural yield, etc).
16
Water Funds in South Africa: experimenting in Greater Cape Town, Ethekwini, and Nelson Mandela Bay through Living Lands. Current partners: DWS, Western Cape Government (WCG), City of Cape Town, WWF, SANBI. There are many challenges to be addressed, such as eradicating alien invasive plants, stopping sedimentation, optimising run-off, improving water quality and replenishing water sources. Usually municipalities do not think of the costs of Alien Invasive Plant (AIP) clearing.
A progress update: Memorandum of Understanding is signed, steering committee formed, community participation initialised. TNC works in the communities to promote capacity development in Africa. NRM is criticized for not always working in the right areas, thus funding will be raised to support prioritization. A big priority is to synergise the way work is done and to persuade municipalities to invest in EI.
Questions/Comments:
Q: Who funded the initiative, Water Fund? A: a range of interested stakeholders, including Coca Cola, Water Utility, Energy Producers. Q: How can Water Fund assist locals who source their water? A: Most countries have a decentralised water system. However, the Water Fund can’t install pipes for communities. It has been a challenge to get DWS on board. This process is ongoing
Water Pricing Strategy: Unlocking funding for natural resource management through water sector tariffs
Feedback on previous session
Mr John Dini
The discussants were Graham Jewett, Matome Mahashe and Mark Botha. The session drew continuity from the previous Unlocking Investments MAREP (Feb 2017). This discussion speaks to a vision for NRM in relation to the Water sector and intends to work towards 1 single long term and integrated plan. Each catchment is obliged to develop a plan – the Catchment Management Strategy is a critical tool to engage with role players across the water value chain. It is also a crucial component in enabling funding mechanisms to work.
Quantification Approaches for providing evidence to support realistic Water Resource Management charges
Prof Graham Jewett
Background on ongoing work to fund investment in Ecological Infrastructure (EI) was presented, covering the emerging policy framework for EI and Water and highlighting different charges in Water Pricing Strategy (WPS), Water Resources Management charge (WRMC), etc. In UMngeni River, the water costs 2 cents per cubic meter, in Lions River, it costs 52 cents per cubic metre. The UMngeni Catchment is in KwaZulu Natal inland. There is a massive demand in the catchment, and a massive population that means there is a rapid increase in water demand. The big plan for 2020 is to build uMkhomazi scheme. Quantifying water resources in the catchment through water accounting was addressed ‘We developed a base sheet on Water Accounting to quantify water and EI in the catchments through Hydrological Modelling and the cost of water from restored EI. We used to quantify how much was gained through eradication of invasive plants. In Lions River vs uMngeni River contribution to Bulk Water Sales (drought year): uMngeni River – R0.016 per m3 and Lions River – R0.52 per m3”. Graham concluded that quantification of hydrological gains and investment costs provides a basis for discussion around realistic WRMC and build on existing revenue streams – which may be less complicated than developing new funding streams.
17
Questions/Comments:
It is very important for the sector to be clear on water charges, users are worried about costs.
National Water Affairs, past, present and future
Mr Matome Mahasha
Dismantling DWS and DEA was a great mistake. There have been many changes since 1998, and this has made it difficult to implement water related policies. In 2012, DWS began to re-align its own organizational structures, including Water Users Associations (WUAs). DWS is going to decentralise and focus on being a regulator, not to play and referee simultaneously. In 2014, a decision was made to review and revise the National Water Act (NWA), this process is still on going, and is very slow. There is now a general consensus to ensure that there are good strategies wrt conservation, climate change, water allocations, etc. DWS is willing to work with other departments, Non-Governmental Organisations and other stakeholders and to partner with Catchment Management Agencies (CMA), Catchment Management Forums (CMF). DWS has finalised the National Water sanitation master plan.
Panel discussion/Comments/Questions:
CMAs can delegate certain functions to legitimate structures or Forums. (Forums with constitutions). There are rumours that the original 19 CMAs will be managed by 1 major CMA to master the governance system. Panel Discussions:
EI is able to work if there is a dependable venue. WRM Charges, budget decision makers don’t have EI at the back of their heads. We have to fix the following: There are opportunities in bulk water charges to recover EI funds, we have to convince municipalities that EI and Catchments are assets. We can quantify the amount of water that can be recovered through EI restoration, although regulatory services of EI can’t be easily quantified. Some municipalities can grant money to other organizations to do EI restoration work. The challenge is not having the EI charge used for other activities. With regards to Water Pricing Strategy-there is a need to develop a public inspection guide on how water tariffs are going to be determined. DWS uses a tick box exercise, public should know how water tariffs are charged or determined. The GCF is looking for a paradigm shift- Ecosystem based Adaptation (EbA) and the VAI will generate income. Do you see GCF as missing major piece? How would you convince GCF that you can spend money and achieve what you want to achieve? GCF wants to invest in something guaranteed to work. We can significantly increase those costs, the paradigm shift is to stop trying to sell the existence of catchments and their potential value, instead to try and do something to keep the catchments functional. Utilise communication forums: DEA, DWS and Water Users to grow the market, for example: Gamtoos, uMngeni and others could put money into their programmes and grow these entities. There is a new DWS strategy that requires engagement, NRM should support DWS in refining the strategy. Water users might be triple charged but it doesn’t guarantee more money more EI, there is a lot to be taken to working session.
Corporate investments: resourcing the natural resource management
sector through innovative corporate investments and partnerships
Unlocking Private Investment in NRM
Ms Jules Newton
What are the new places to get funding from? What are the conversations to have as a sector? Who are the right people to talk to? NRM ownership lies with everyone. The vision is to use a partnership-based approach.
18
Progress to date: WWF has been investigating financial instruments. Value Chain Mapping- ABSA is keen on investing in Catchments that provide Alien Biomass. The Green Business Value Chain will catalyse a strong Biomass Economy by stimulating demand for invasive biomass as an input into value-adding processes, which will accelerate the eradication of invasive biomass. That will enhance utilisation of and growth potential for SMMEs engaged in the Green Value Chain.
It is essential to understand the interplay between Social Need, Corporate Asset and Expertise and Business opportunities. There must be open opportunities for contractors in the Green Business Chain to create financial and social returns. On clearing biomass to convert to products - economists should start exploring opportunities. In this case, teams would clear aliens because they have to sell them.
On financial institutions and nrm investments
Ms Vanessa Otto-Mentz
The ‘Blame Game’ is very common amongst governmental institutions, national government, provincial, and municipal. Social problems cannot be solved without power. Action research is required. Insurance companies have had to pay huge amounts due to losses caused by floods and fires. NRM should partner with relevant friends from different industries to help with business development assistance. Be specific about your audience and understand the habitat you are working in – then design messaging accordingly. Leaders must also be strategists, engaging with and exploring new solutions. This entails participating in the strategy process and contributing to the organisation’s discourse in a manner that supports learning and forward momentum.
The Green Business Value Chain: Unlocking Micro Enterprise sustainability in the Green Economy
Mr David Gardner:
Working for Water is a push programme, it requires a pull side. There is a need to create a demand for the products. NRM has cleared aliens, and needs to work on creating a market to enable biomass to flow. This requires critical thinking and investments to make it happen, and building the knowledge to assist in growing the sector. Unblocking the supply of money is essential, as is capacity development. SMMEs should be trained and assisted to engage in opportunities.
The concept of Sustainability
Mr Alexander Haw
Stakeholder engagement is key in ensuring sustainability, as such, it is a vital component of business practice and central to decision-making. NRM could partner with NGOs and incorporate ideas to make businesses based around better sustainability metrics. ‘How is sustainability going to develop our business? What are your needs and what are ours? NRM work should help us to reduce risk and make us competitive’. Know societal needs to help to unlock funding.
The Green Business value Chain: Theory of Change
Mr Thabo Thulare:
There is a recognition of the need to implement the 17 Global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Business, government and NGOs should collaborate towards the achievement of these SDGs. NGOs play a very useful role in the mobilisation of resources for development. Global trends show that some investors don’t engage with government, due to accountability concerns, hence they invest in NGOs. Some parastatals are not in a good shape, the Private Sector trusts NGOs more than governments. We can promote long lasting collaboration by bringing on
19
board the voice of government, foundations and corporates to guarantee accountability. Know how you get private sector to support SMMEs and deepen partnership. There are barriers inhibiting investments.
Questions and comments:
What if Biomass runs out? To create small businesses, how do you go about exploring markets? Stop looking funding for your business, start looking for customers for your business. To be economically viable, you need a reliable income. How can SMME schemes be linked to EI market? Response:
It is concerning that SMMEs are not growing in our country. Global Market needs high quality products and the local SMMEs are not well incubated. The quality of products is an issue and it affects access to markets. Funding seekers should know the habitat and the environment they will be working in. In enterprise development, one needs to know and get proper guidance and coaching. Define a suitable and unique approach when approaching investors.
Working Session 1 There was a call to move through to actions and define where to take the ‘unlocking investment’ conversation and who is going to take the lead. The working groups were guided by the panel discussions to establish the key next steps to be taken to achieve the overall objective of securing investments in NRM sector. This was the first of two working sessions. Outcomes are shared in the main body of the report.
20
Workshop Proceedings: Day 2
Reflections and facilitated discussion There were three sessions in day 1 Participants were asked to reflect on the thematic areas and/or what they wrote on their cards / shared with their peers:
Paradigm shift in EI: EI is an asset to sell. In human nature, municipalities believe that they will lose if they cut trees, but cutting a tree might be a gain. For EI as an asset to deliver optimally, it needs to be restored and renovated. The bar is low, to tap into municipal funding stream we have to demonstrate that EI is an asset, not a theoretical asset but a valued and tangible asset. The importance of maintaining as opposed to rehabilitating was reflected upon. More time should be spent on maintaining, not fixing what is broken. It is important to be realistic about how much water can be retained through clearing, but sometimes clearing can expose water resources to drought. There is enough evidence to prove that invasive trees impact on water resources, however, not all invasive plants have impact on water.
Groups were then requested to present from yesterday’s sessions:
Green Climate Fund (GCF):
GCF is a complex entity - it aims to change society. It requires projects to address climate change threats, drought, floods, etc. Applicants must explain how the project will address the threats and respond to the beneficiation of society. It is better to have private sector supporting the investment, than only EPWP. There must be other ways of funding the ecosystem services work.
Water sector:
There is a need to look at new opportunities in the revised National Water Act and look at Catchment Management Agencies as opportunities. The Minister will gazette the business case for the new WRM. GEF 6 is a vehicle for taking this work forward and it will start next year. Engaging with all 3 spheres of Water Pricing to understand how tariffs are set out is an essential step. DWS is obligated to engage with society to determine the costs of next year water tariffs. This opportunity should be taken advantage of.
Corporate sector:
The question is: developing a strategy for what? There is no strategy yet, a strategy must be set up with objectives in mind, bringing in corporate language. In July there will be a sub-working group which will get together corporate champions to do a strategic workshop to identify work to be done and how they need to be done. The single message is the creation of a momentum that will last. There is work to do in terms of collating inputs to have a clear idea on how to develop that strategy.
Biodiversity Offsets: Contextualising the opportunities, challenges and progress around biodiversity offsets in South Africa
Progress on the Overall Environmental Offsetting and Biodiversity Offsetting Policy finalisation process and the proposed Offsetting Support Unit
Mr Peter Lukey:
Discussions have been happening actively since February. There have been key challenges and barriers in biodiversity offsets. The sub-group (that met at the February Executive MAREP) set objectives at the beginning of
21
that dialogue. A capacity development sub-unit TOR was developed and completed. It has been presented to all the relevant working groups. The next step is to meet GIZ (to motivate for funding). Offsets provide an avenue for financing natural resource management and may play a role in securing natural resource management investment in the long term.
Immediate next steps developed in February: Development of an offset support unit within 18 months, Develop a motivation for the unit, Develop structure and / or capacity requirements and identify options for financing/resourcing.
With regard to offsets, avoidance is most desirable -an offset is the last alternative. There must be a discussion on how offsets can happen in the nrm sector. Significant improvements are needed for better implementation of on-ground management and research into the nature of offsets: Timely reporting and compliance with environmental conditions; ensuring approval conditions measure ecological outcomes; improving project planning for offsets; and including contingency and longer term planning in offset design is needed.
Questions and comments
Q: Can NRMP in Partnership with Biodiversity Offsets achieve the above recommendations? Is DMR opposed to offsets? A: Testing the recommendations can be conducted through a pilot, but this would require funding to demonstrate its feasibility. DMR opposes anything that threatens mining, and the allegation is that Biodiversity offsets delay mining. DRM feels that offset will increase a burden on small scale mining. However, small scale mining should still be responsibly conducted. The issue with DMR needs a political intervention.
Biodiversity offsets in South Africa: opportunities and constraints -Things for NRM to consider
Mr Jeffrey Manuel:
Biodiversity Offsets are: ‘the measurable conservation outcomes resulting from actions designed to compensate for significant negative residual impacts on biodiversity arising from project development after appropriate prevention and mitigation measures have been taken’. The mitigation hierarchy is the procedure that follows the process of assessment, mitigation and protection/restoration. The central tenets of biodiversity offsets are protection and appropriate management.
South Africa is 10 years ahead of other countries in terms of thinking about biodiversity offsets. Offsets offer the natural resource management sector the opportunity for strategic investment in properties and landscapes that are conservation priorities but not protected and effectively managed because of insufficient state support and landowner liability for control measures. In South Africa some offsets are not known because they are done behind closed doors. Offsets aim to protect the landscape and NRM aims to restore. There are still tough questions to address: do we maintain what is in decent condition or do we look at what is degraded? In Offset Banking: NRM can be an aggregator.
Questions
How do you monitor Biodiversity Offsets?
Have we thought of compliance in NRM? Comments and responses: Carbon Offsets do not usually get attention. There is an element of traceability in Biodiversity Offsets unlike Carbon Offsets. In Environmental Impact Assessment there is an issue of compliance. Environmental Authorities have capacity to monitor 5%. In US, they found out that over 60% of offsets have not been implemented. If Biodiversity Offsets and Biodiversity Stewardship could work more closely together there could be more resources, compliance
22
and monitoring and other opportunities. Biosecurity will stay with the department, DEA should sort that out internally to strengthen compliance. In future MAREPs, it would be useful to explore NRM and Offset compliance.
Conservation banking: The benefits to the NRM sector and how it might work
Mr Dave Cox:
Dave provided an example of biodiversity offset implementation in practice – by focusing on Spring Grove Dam. Specialists were tasked to develop offsets criteria for the implementation of the dam. The primary focus was planning and mapping. A costing was conducted to see how much it would cost to run it over 30 years (R23 M)
Offsets Banking system: There are benefits of Banking over ad hoc Offsets. They include avoidance of the delay of offsets coming into effect and the establishment of consistency across projects.
Specific benefits for NRM and stewardship:
Additional revenue source across all sectors - not just water
Address shortfall in wetland rehabilitation compared with alien clearing (not affected by person day restrictions).
Access to sites other than those where reliance purely on landowner willingness i.e. ability to account for opportunity cost and secure larger areas.
Secure investments – major shortcoming of NRM to date.
Resources for long term management.
Landscape approach - solidified through plan (fire + wetland+ grassland, river restoration and integrated management)
Questions
How would you ensure the R23M is delivered? How is the money going to be managed? Do you think offset is ‘baked’ enough to be presented to GCF? What are the mechanisms of getting the money back to NRMP / nrm? Comments and responses R23 million seems to be a lot, but in mining R23 million is not a large amount. It is presented as a capital cost - R23 million over 30 years is insufficient to manage a property. NRM is rehabilitating wetlands, this is an opportunity for NRM to recover costs of rehabilitation. The challenge is around securing the offset. NRM money should be used as a catalyst - to unlock the investments. If NRMP wants to get that money, there is a Player /Referee issue to be clarified. Offsets are abused, the process can be open to abuse through dubious offsets. In Ntabelanga, NRMP waited for developers to make a request and the money came through EPWP. A Biodiversity Offset unit within DEA can look at the use of an implementing entity to take Biodiversity Offset recommendation and make a case.
Biodiversity Stewardship
How do we convince Private Landowners to invest in ecosystem services on their own land?
Ms Kerry Purnell
There are many landowners keen to become involved in the Biodiversity Stewardship programme but the lack of capacity (in terms of BDS practitioners) is a challenge. Farmers say they farm with veld not sheep. There are volunteers, but there is limited assistance. The Table Mountain Fund supports the Western Cape with small grants. They thus support the provincial BDS programme. We need more of such facilities in order to meet targets.
23
Questions and comments
How to most effectively link with NRMP to have a proactive engagement?
Are land owners coming in for short terms or long terms?
How is section 37 D communicated?
What is the administration burden in tax processes?
Is there a high profile Catchment Strategy for Catchments?
How do you approach the issue of land ownership? Responses: Land owners are mainly committed in long terms. NRM is targeting the correct areas and successful bidders will be working in priority areas. BDS maps (PAES) are useful for NRM because where we both target is based on priority areas. NRM should have a proactive model, to indicate what needs to be done and where. NRM must specify on priority maps whether they want to clear aliens or to do rehabilitation. It would be helpful to have a series of Catchment Management Strategies which indicates what needs to happen. Section 37 D gives land owners an incentive and provides assistance to land owners. Administration burdens are experienced in declaration processes due to poor relationships amongst authority offices. BDS is trying to work with landowners who are environmentally passionate more than profit driven. NRM needs to have a conversation to establish and have a strategy for every catchment. WWF is trying to look at landscape approach to integrate and bring together NGOs and government approaches. BDS has been designed to focus on Private and Corporate lands. BDS has been centred between Conservation Agencies and NGOs, and there is a rich partnership, but there is a need to find innovative solutions to strengthen these partnerships further.
Tools to Securing Our Investment
Ms Candice Stevens:
Candice spoke about securing natural resource management investment through Biodiversity Stewardship: A national policy perspective for financial sustainability and strengthening the NRM value offering. Tax is about security of investment. The tax incentive under discussion has been designed to benefit biodiversity. A clause in the old version of 37 D didn’t work due to technicalities and as a result National Treasury was approached to give the approval for an amendment. Section 37 D now works well (approved December 2016), and allows the land owners to deduct the value of land when the property is declared. NRM should overlay the BDS maps [PAES] and look at economically viable sites on long and short terms. There is an opportunity for NRM to secure investment.
Questions/comments
Q: Do you think enough is done to encourage landowners to buy in? A: There are components that hinder section 37 C, we need to redesign section 37 C, to allow landowners to deduct management plan costs from income.
How Does Biodiversity Stewardship Function – Securing NRM Investment
Mr Kevin McCann: The BDS mechanism secures land and is useful for NRM as it contributes to the rural economy. Its objective is to conserve and manage biodiversity priority areas through voluntary formal agreements with landowners. BDS offers many options to landowners, but not every piece of land qualifies for BDS. Over the last decade, BDS has been the most effective mechanism for protected area expansion. There are formally declared lands through BDS, but there are still some under negotiations. 823 787 hectares have been declared.
Positive challenges in implementing biodiversity stewardship:
24
Biodiversity Stewardship works – need to celebrate that over 800,000 hectares have already been secured through this process, which is driven through landowner commitment and reduces the costs of management. Benefit to landowners – assistance with management resources to motivate landowner involvement. Scale – to commit to Protected Area (PA) expansion, land reform and building a biodiversity economy, things should be done at a scale (financial and human capacity) and at speed – linkages with the Wildlife economy, NRM, EPIP, etc can enable this. Opportunities for NRM
BDS is a rigorous process and could allow security of the NRM investment (legal agreements, long-term conservation management, and management plan). It could lead to significant contribution to the rehabilitation of ecological infrastructure within PAs and support alternative opportunities/businesses within the Green Economy. Question/comments
Q: BDS only began last year in Limpopo, in only 1 project area, why? A: It didn’t start last year; that was the declaration, it is a long process to declare.
Working session 2 The established groups (plus the extra that bundled BDS and Biodiversity Offsets together) were asked to enter back in to working groups and develop an action plan for implementation that is time--bound and person/institution specific.
All working session groups were asked to give structured feedback in the form of time-bound action plans for their thematic focal areas
[see pages 7-12]
Closure by Dr Christo Marais Christo thanked Alex Marsh, Tanya Layne and Malukhanye Mbopha for organising the Executive MAREP. He thanked Sarah Polonsky for inspiring him. He wished to expand the MAREP to include Project coordinators in the future. The idea of the MAREP is good because it provides a space for progress and continuity of engaging with ideas. With regards to working groups: the proposal information is needed for Monday. They must be prepared for GIZ and that is one of the key take away from the MAREP process. With regard to BO and BDS, institutional arrangements must be in place. There are many investment opportunities in the water sector. For corporate, Value chain development can be linked with NRM VAI. He indicated that the Executive MAREPs are a valued space by his NRMP staff because it allows space to engage with current, innovative thinking.
25
Annexure A: MAREP Programme Management, Research and Planning (MAREP) Forum: 23-24 November 2017
Unlocking and securing investments in the natural resource management sector Working session
Old Mutual Hall, Kirstenbosch Botanical Gardens, Cape Town Day 1: 23 November 2017
09:00-10:00 Registration and Tea Chair
10:00-10:15 Welcome and introductions Dr C. Marais, Chief Director, DEA NRM Programmes
10:15-11:00 Opening remarks and plenary reflections Ms Sarah Polonsky Strategic Support: DEA: NRM Brief recap of journey to date and the planned outcomes and outputs of this event Programme overview and plenary reflections
Ms Alex Marsh NRM Coordinator, SANBI
11:00-12:00 Resourcing the sector Dr C. Marais Addressing key questions
Ms Sarah Polonsky Strategic Support: DEA: NRM
12:00-13:00 International Funding mechanisms: Scoping opportunities for the natural resource management sector Discussants:
Dr Christo Marais - feedback from previous session on GCF Mr Michael Braack
Operational Support and Planning, DEA: NRM Unlocking funding for catalytic change
Mr Michael Jennings Strategic Grant Manager, SANBI SANBI’s GCF funding framework: unlocking access to GCF resources through SANBI
Ms Louise Stafford Director: Water Fund, South Africa: The Nature Conservancy
Ms Sarah Polonsky Strategic Support: DEA: NRM
13:00-14:00 LUNCH & NETWORKING
14:00-15:00 Water Pricing Strategy: Unlocking funding for natural resource management through water sector tariffs Discussants:
Mr John Dini: feedback on previous session Prof Graham Jewett:
Director CWRR, UKZN Matome Mahasha,
Chief Social Scientist, Institutional Oversight Directorate, DWS Mr Mark Botha
Conservation Strategy, Tactics and Insight
Mr John Dini Research Manager: Water Governance Water Research Commission
15:00-15:15 COFFEE & NETWORKING
15:15-16:15 Corporate investments: resourcing the natural resource management sector through innovative corporate investments and partnerships Discussants:
Ms Jules Newton: Feedback on previous session Panel discussion:
Ms Vanessa Otto-Mentz Head: Group Strategy Unit, Santam Ltd
Mr David Gardner Green Business Value Chain
Ms Jules Newton CEO, Avocado Vision
26
Mr Alexander Haw Sustainability and Environmental Manager, Massmart
Mr Thabo Thulare Green-Cape /TIPS. Atlantis Green-Tech Special Economic Zone (SEZ)
16:15-17:15 WORKING SESSION 1 Facilitator
17:15-17:45 Plenary feedback Facilitator
18:00-19:00 CANAPE DINNER, MOYO ALL
Day 02: 24 November 2017
08:00-09:00 Reflections and facilitated discussion Chair
09:00-10:00 Biodiversity Offsets: Contextualising the opportunities, challenges and progress around biodiversity offsets in South Africa Discussants:
Mr Peter Lukey: feedback on previous session Chief Policy Advisor: DEA
Mr Jeffrey Manuel: Director: Biodiversity Information Management, SANBI Opportunities and constraints in implementing biodiversity offsets
Mr Dave Cox: Principle Scientist, INR A case study on restoration based biodiversity offsets in South Africa
Mr Mark Botha Conservation Strategy, Tactics and Insight
10:00-10:30 COFFEE & NETWORKING & GROUP PHOTO
10:30-11:30 Biodiversity Stewardship: A vehicle for resource mobilization and securing investments in natural resource management - drawing linkages through NRM Land User Incentives. Discussants:
Ms Kerry Purnell Project Manager, Wilderness Foundation Africa A Case study: Biodiversity Stewardship and restoration in practice
Ms Candice Stevens Policy and Advocacy Programme Manager, Birdlife South Africa Securing natural resource management investment through Biodiversity Stewardship. A national policy perspective for financial sustainability and strengthening the NRM value offering.
Mr Kevin McCann Director, Conservation Outcomes How does Biodiversity Stewardship function and relate to natural resource management?
Ms Alex Marsh NRM Coordinator, SANBI
11:30-13:30 Working session 2 Facilitator
13:30-14:30 LUNCH & NETWORKING All
14:30-15:30 Feedback on action plans
All working session groups will give structured feedback in the form of time-bound action plans for their thematic focal areas
Facilitator
15:30 Thanks, Evaluation & Closure Dr Christo Marais
Chief Director, DEA NRM
27
Annexure B: NRM National Management, Research and Planning Forum Evaluation Form
The evaluation process intended to assess the MAREP to understand its impact on participants identify areas of improvement. It intended to measure the value added by the facilitation methods, content and its relevance to the audience. It also aimed to identify significant partners to be invited in further gatherings of this nature. This evaluation allowed the MAREP attendees to recommend mechanisms to improve the MAREP programme and experience.
1.
2.
3.
NRM practitioner
20%
Corporate 27%
Researcher 6%
DEA partner organisation
20%
Consultant7%
Non-governmental organisation
20%
Nature of attendance
NRM practitioner Corporate
Researcher DEA partner organisation
Consultant Non-governmental organisation
37%63%
Overall satisfaction with the content of the programme
Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor
Excellent56%Very Good
44%
Overall satisfaction with the venue
Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor
28
4. Facilitation process
The facilitation process was received as enabling a rich space for engagement. It prompted thinking beyond the ordinary, especially how to bring innovation to inform NRM. The facilitation process was open to robust discussion and information sharing and it managed to pull together key outputs and action points. The action plan approach at the end of the MAREP was received well. It was well-paced but time management was a challenge due to long comments.
5. Ways to improve Executive MAREP programme and experience
The standard of the forum was perceived as high and it would be useful to sustain the current level of engagement by remaining very practical and less theoretical. This entails the continuation of discussions to get to practical actions and next steps. However, bringing more business orientated programmes/projects would be essential and allocate more time on feedback and progress made in the discussion groups to avoid having the same discussions and to focus on building iterative dialogue. Feedback can be focussed on the next steps/actions and not whole debate. Bringing national departments: Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries; Science and Technology; Rural Development and Land Reform; Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, South African Local Government Association; Agricultural Research Council; Mineral Resources and more DEA colleagues would make the programme more engaging. Tables with more power plugs for laptops was suggested.
6. The most striking lessons learnt from the forum
The tax incentives in stewardship session provided new insights, as well as the potential charges in the water pricing strategy. Collective efforts, passion and the need to find innovative solutions regarding funding opportunities and capacity development were key take away lessons. The urgency of integrating water, ecological and environmental land-use issues to holistically manage and protect/develop natural resources was also a highlight. The shift in thinking with regards to private sector funding being unlocked for investment into Ecological Infrastructure (EI) and the urgent need for proactive prioritization by DEA to guide private sector investment was noted.
7. Any new strategic partnerships for future
Water security-Global Environmental Fund 6 partnership.
Strengthening South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI), Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) ongoing partnership with Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS) is critical
Landscape approach and Green Climate Fund (GCF)
8. Strategic stakeholders to engage with and invite to future events:
Water User Associations (WUA)
Community leaders
National departments: Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries; Science and Technology; Rural Development and Land Reform; Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, South African Local Government Association; Agricultural Research Council; Mineral Resources.
More corporate representatives, business partners, investments, insurance 9. Any comments on future conference locations, topics, speakers or general suggestions regarding Executive MAREP Forums
Kirstenbosch is perfect and is a great venue. No need to change venue
Strengthening Catchment Management Forums
Need to keep closer tabs on outcomes that emerge